Zanzibari (?) Saif for Comment

TVV · 20th June 2018, 06:05 PM

Jim,

Thank you for the thorough response. In Buttin's plate XXX, a I find it interesting that while the vast majority of weapons are clearly Arab in form, for example the khanjars/jambiya, in the top two corners there are a few nimchas (safe to call them that based on blade characteristics) with hilts, which are generally associated with Algeria. On the same plate one can also observe a few Syrian kindjals, which further demonstrate the Caucasus influence in Arabia in the late 19th century.

On the subject of Caucasus weapons, the best author and expert currently, at least in my opinion, is Kirill Rivkin. I am yet to start reading his book on Caucasus Arms, as I am still finishing his work on the development of the Eastern Saber, but he mentions that the shashka arose as a lighter, shorter version of the earlier sabers as a result of the requirements of mountain warfare and skirmishes, characterized by long distance sniping and rapid close quarters melees. Therefore one did not really need a long and curved saber, but a shorter, straighter blade, easier to deploy and maneuver during hand to hand fighting.

In the sword I posted above, the blade is indeed shorter and almost straight. There are however no marks on it whatsoever. We know that Caucasians assigned a huge importance to markings, and even had blade terminology based on the markings present - Gurda, Abbas Mirza, Ters Maimal, Kaldam, etc. I have to believe markings were important in Oman and its colonies as well, based on the blades that clearly show local attempts at copying them, as found on the conical hilt Omani saifs and kattaras. So it seems a little bizarre that this blade, with three narrow fullers and one wider one, mimicking earlier Eastern European blades, would be left unmarked.

Regards,
Teodor

20th June 2018, 06:05 PM	#38
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,660	Jim, Thank you for the thorough response. In Buttin's plate XXX, a I find it interesting that while the vast majority of weapons are clearly Arab in form, for example the khanjars/jambiya, in the top two corners there are a few nimchas (safe to call them that based on blade characteristics) with hilts, which are generally associated with Algeria. On the same plate one can also observe a few Syrian kindjals, which further demonstrate the Caucasus influence in Arabia in the late 19th century. On the subject of Caucasus weapons, the best author and expert currently, at least in my opinion, is Kirill Rivkin. I am yet to start reading his book on Caucasus Arms, as I am still finishing his work on the development of the Eastern Saber, but he mentions that the shashka arose as a lighter, shorter version of the earlier sabers as a result of the requirements of mountain warfare and skirmishes, characterized by long distance sniping and rapid close quarters melees. Therefore one did not really need a long and curved saber, but a shorter, straighter blade, easier to deploy and maneuver during hand to hand fighting. In the sword I posted above, the blade is indeed shorter and almost straight. There are however no marks on it whatsoever. We know that Caucasians assigned a huge importance to markings, and even had blade terminology based on the markings present - Gurda, Abbas Mirza, Ters Maimal, Kaldam, etc. I have to believe markings were important in Oman and its colonies as well, based on the blades that clearly show local attempts at copying them, as found on the conical hilt Omani saifs and kattaras. So it seems a little bizarre that this blade, with three narrow fullers and one wider one, mimicking earlier Eastern European blades, would be left unmarked. Regards, Teodor