Yemeni sword

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Beautiful photos of Yemeni swords
There is of course absolutely no evidence of Bukharan influences.
This discussion was all made up on the forum based on nothing...

We would have to define Bukharen influence. Is there a distinctly Bukharen character which was confined to those specific regions? As far as I have understood the Persian dynamic in such influences affected many cultures and regions throughout the Middle East, India (particularly Mughals), Central Asia and more.
The point has been that influences which influenced Bukhara may well have shared and been diffused in Yemeni designs as well.
I was once told, 'weapons have NO geographic boundaries' in discussions with an authority on Bukharen arms, and in which a sabre (of similar form to shashka) could not be determined either Uzbek or Afghan. There were elements in character of both, so classification was pretty much a toss up.

I consider the observations in the discussions on these swords as all relevant and far from being based on nothing. In fact all of the content is pertinent data toward the remarkably difficult determination of the history and development of these weapons. Classifications and historical determinations of influences may not always be finite, but reasonable plausibility is a worthwhile outcome.

[Kubur]

Hi Guys,

As always I was too short! Let me add some facts:

First as Ariel said these swords don't appear in eastern collections... strange.

Second about the pommel and even the hilt, well you can compare the pommel to any dome or minaret from North Africa to Persia and India.
The ribbed domes are not specific to Central Asia. It's easy to check, you have plenty of books on architecture.

Third Yemeni in Bukhara, since the Arab conquest Yemeni are all over the place from North Africa up to India and even China! They were very influencial in religious studies. So Yemeni in Bukhara is not exceptional and not a proof that they brought back some swords to Yemen.

Fourth spiral design is found also on Ottoman scabbards and spiral banding on Indian swords most of the time to wrap up some textiles. So there is no proof that Bukharen invented this design...

Last two men who are not newbies commented these swords as yemeni, Robert Hales and Robert Elgood (he says Hijazi).
And yes I agree with you swords have no geographic boundaries and I like this discussion. The last example is really cool, from Solingen to India and ending up in Yemen...

[Jim McDougall]

You're right Kubur, this is a fun, and challenging discussion.
I think the case for these spherical pommel, shouldered or flared guard integral with grip swords being Yemeni is of course well known.
However, I don't think that it has been implied that somehow a Bukharen sword was brought back to Yemen, and suddenly all the Yemenis wanted such 'Bukharen' swords.

The point desperately trying to be made here is that this form of hilt was widely adopted THROUGHOUT the Dar al Islam, and examples in Bukhara, as well as through CENTRAL ASIA reflect the same styling.

While many of these examples are indeed Yemeni, they did not hold an exclusive patent on the design, and as often occurs, the influences did apparently diffuse via trade, diplomatic and other channels throughout regions from Arabia, the Middle East and Central Asia.

To reiterate, Bukhara was not the SOURCE of the designs, but ONE of the many regions which in varying degree adopted them.

In "Arts of the Muslim Knight" (ed. Bashir Mohammed) I attach three examples which show the collared hilt and spherical pommels and are identified as Central Asian and from 9th century. These are remarkably similar to the 'Yemeni' examples ; the Auctions Imperial example identified as 19th c. Bukharen; and others.

In "Two Swords from the Foundations of Gibraltar" by David Nicolle, the attached plate (#28) shows a bronze sword as late 10th, early 11th c. from a shipwreck and it is noted to likely be from Armenia or Azerbijian.
In the same article, a sword with remarkably similar style hilt is shown as Roman, 2nd c. AD.

So my question is, is it possible that the styling of these hilts developed from a quite ancient form or group of similar hilt features, became popularly known, and were adopted in numerous cultural spheres ?

So we are not saying that these hilts or affectations come FROM Bukharen influence, only that Central Asia apparently SHARED them, just as Yemen did.

[Kubur]

Thank you Jim for your precise and so well documented response as always

To your question

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

is it possible that the styling of these hilts developed from a quite ancient form or group of similar hilt features, became popularly known, and were adopted in numerous cultural spheres ?

IMHO I'll say yes of course.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=mamluk

[Iain]

These hilt styles, often made with cast parts and a "cuff" extension over the blade are part of a larger family with roots in central Asia. Similar hilts can be seen on reliefs documented in Bishapur and dated to the reign of the Sasanian ruler Shapur I (241-272). I have seen some speculation there may be a Chinese influence but I have not ever seen anything convincing on that front.

Regardless, by the 9th century, this general form can be encountered throughout the Byzantine Empire as well, including areas of influence like Ukraine and Bulgaria.

As has been already pointed out on this thread, within the Islamic world the form also became widespread including within Mamluk arms. The basic form typically sees a metal cylindrical grip, often multi-faceted, a separate pommel and a narrow guard, often with a "cuff". The components are often secured with brazing.

These are an important overarching form which sees regional variations from central Asia, to Europe to Africa. The Yemeni examples are of course simply a long-surviving branch within the family tree.

[ariel]

Is the " Omani battlesword" a member of the same Central Asian family or a traditional double-edged straight sword of pre-Islamic/early-Islamic "Aravian" weapon? Did straight early Egyptian Mamluk swords with bulbous pommels come from Bukhara ( Khiva, Samarkand etc)?

[TVV]

Originally Posted by Iain

Regardless, by the 9th century, this general form can be encountered throughout the Byzantine Empire as well, including areas of influence like Ukraine and Bulgaria.

Byzantine influence on Bulgaria is undeniable in almost all aspects of culture, especially after the conversion to Christianity in 864 AD. However, when it comes to arms and armor it was usually the Eastern Roman Empire adopting the weapons and tactics of its neighbors and enemies, many of which at one point or another found themselves in the armies of the Basileus as mercenaries.

Here is the sword from the Malaya Pereshchepina burial, associated with Khan Kubrat of Great Bulgaria before Danube Bulgaria was formed. The hilt is basically a tube made of gold, with the ring pommel typical of earlier steppe swords. It is very much a "cuff" hilt design.

Back to the topic, from Al Kindi we know that Yemen was a major sword producing center at the height of the Abbasid power - in fact, he considers the Yemeni blades superior to pretty much all others. Unfortunately he does not give detailed descriptions of the hilts, but the way the blade size and shapes are described they are very close to the older Omani saifs. Yemen's relative isolation explains why an archaic broadsword form may have survived there longer than anywhere else, along with perhaps areas in North Africa where the saif badawi and its derivatives made it to the 20th century.

In contrast, Central Asia was anything but isolated, and its arms evolution much more rapid, with the saber becoming the dominant form by the 10th-11th centuries, if not even earlier.

[ariel]

Double posting, sorry.

[Iain]

Originally Posted by TVV

Byzantine influence on Bulgaria is undeniable in almost all aspects of culture, especially after the conversion to Christianity in 864 AD. However, when it comes to arms and armor it was usually the Eastern Roman Empire adopting the weapons and tactics of its neighbors and enemies, many of which at one point or another found themselves in the armies of the Basileus as mercenaries.

Agreed, my point was simply that in a broader sense, these hilts were being found within these areas. One was even discovered in Poland a few years ago.

Returning a little closer to Yemen, similar hilts also turned up in Dongola, from the Makuria kingdom, clearly depicted in murals. I'm attaching an example here. The form is extremely similar right down to heavily engraved metalwork on the guard.

I see no reason to doubt a Yemeni attribution, these swords very much fit into a pattern of hilts found in the region for a thousand years.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by TVV

Byzantine influence on Bulgaria is undeniable in almost all aspects of culture, especially after the conversion to Christianity in 864 AD. However, when it comes to arms and armor it was usually the Eastern Roman Empire adopting the weapons and tactics of its neighbors and enemies, many of which at one point or another found themselves in the armies of the Basileus as mercenaries.

Here is the sword from the Malaya Pereshchepina burial, associated with Khan Kubrat of Great Bulgaria before Danube Bulgaria was formed. The hilt is basically a tube made of gold, with the ring pommel typical of earlier steppe swords. It is very much a "cuff" hilt design.

Back to the topic, from Al Kindi we know that Yemen was a major sword producing center at the height of the Abbasid power - in fact, he considers the Yemeni blades superior to pretty much all others. Unfortunately he does not give detailed descriptions of the hilts, but the way the blade size and shapes are described they are very close to the older Omani saifs. Yemen's relative isolation explains why an archaic broadsword form may have survived there longer than anywhere else, along with perhaps areas in North Africa where the saif badawi and its derivatives made it to the 20th century.

In contrast, Central Asia was anything but isolated, and its arms evolution much more rapid, with the saber becoming the dominant form by the 10th-11th centuries, if not even earlier.

This is the 'Pereshchepina' sword written on in " On The Principles of Reconstruction of the Pereshchepina Sword" by Z. Lvova and A. Seminov
in "Arkheologicesksya Sbornik" Vol. 26, 1985.
It was discovered in what is described as a burial vault near Poltava in Ukraine, however no human remains were apparently found.

While this is believed to have been a gift from Byzantium to Khan Kubrat, it is interesting that the ring pommel style is remarkably similar to these featured on Chinese cavalry swords of Sui dynasty (589-628AD) and T'ang dynasty (618-906AD) well known in LoYang, Honan province, China.
The Pereshchepina sword appears 7th century and has Greek inscription.
Stephen Grancsay in 1930 wrote that there were examples of ring pommel swords with gilt hilts in these Chinese contexts (I do not have access to the article presently).

I would think this suggests the kind of diplomatic interchange across these territorial boundaries in which various elemental styles and features were diffused over vast distances and over long periods of time.

While this example IS in a Russian museum (Hermitage, St.Petersburg), therefore presumably viable as an example in this discussion, it reflects more the influences of the east and the Steppes in hilt features more than the 'cuff' design on hilts we are reviewing.
It is a fascinating example, and one that I have long considered intriguing among these swords well described in "The Long Sword and Scabbard Slide in Asia", Trousdale, Smithsonian, 1975).

Thank you Teodor for adding this here, it is great to see again!

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Thank you Jim for your precise and so well documented response as always

To your question



IMHO I'll say yes of course.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=mamluk

Thank you Kubur!
Iain thank you for entering on this, and for well illustrating that the elements and features on this form and its variants were broadly represented throughout many regions and cultural spheres over many centuries.
The key point we can take away here is that a direct link or an identifiable line of specific influence between the forms of different areas is not typically possible. This is especially the case where no linear chronological examples with provenance are extant which show such development.

Ariel, in my opinion, the Omani battle swords (sa'if Yemani) are certainly members of the same family of these type swords with the 'cuff' being a most notable feature.