African (?) knife

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Yvain

I've seen somewhat similar daggers described as "moorish daggers" with no further information (http://www.africanarms.com/gallery?m...m-mali-39-2-cm).

Wolf-Dieter is wrong in this case, the shown dagger is clearly a Faca de Ponta. The scabbard is also very typical for a FdP.

[Sajen]

Can you show a picture from the bolster like this?

[Ian]

I agree with Sajen. Very much a Spanish-style knife with a South American hilt. Most likely from Brazil. The blade profile is a little different from the common 20th C versions of the faca da ponta, but it may be an older historical form. Trade between Spanish colonies was common, and of course such trade was the norm between Spain and its colonies. That such knives ended up in northern and western Africa is quite understandable.

[Yvain]

Thanks! 🙂



So most likely a South American knife with a West African sheath? That's quite a travel for a knife!



Here is a picture of the bolster :

[Tim Simmons]

A Spanish knife from the Spanish Sahara. 1880 something to mid 20th century.

[Yvain]

Adding a picture of the back of the sheath, it has a Mandingo flavor to it in my opinion

[Martin Lubojacky]

Also the fastening of the belt loops somehow reminds Mali .....

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

1880 something to mid 20th century.

Hello Tim,

First date I would agree, second is too late. Late date around 1910 would be my guess.

Regards,
Detlef

[Sajen]

Hello all,

I am not sure if the scabbard is West African work. Could even be a replacement scabbard from South America.
Many West African knife scabbards have a wooden core so far I have seen.

Regards,
Detlef

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Yvain

Here is a picture of the bolster :

Yes, very similar. It's somewhat typical.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Ian

I agree with Sajen. Very much a Spanish-style knife with a South American hilt. Most likely from Brazil. The blade profile is a little different from the common 20th C versions of the faca da ponta, but it may be an older historical form. Trade between Spanish colonies was common, and of course such trade was the norm between Spain and its colonies. That such knives ended up in northern and western Africa is quite understandable.

I think Ian’s explanation might be the most “Occam-ish”. Spanish cutlers made S. American style knives and exported them to Brazil. Having found a degree of demand in NW Africa, they expanded their export to an easily reachable nearby market.
That would also explain African scabbards with African suspension cords : scabbards are perishable components and can easily be made locally.

Instead of postulating chancy occurence of parallel development or something similar we can explain the appearance of same or very similar features of “Brazilian” and “NW African” knives by business decisions of the manufacturers. Similarly, some minor differences in the construction might be easily compatible with different manufacturers having preferred export targets.

Globalization did not start yesterday.

[RobT]

ariel,

I certainly believe that Ian's proposal is plausible but I ask you to consider these two arguments.
One, there is not one shred of concrete evidence to prove conclusively that the three blades in African sheaths are of Spanish origin. There are no blade stamps. All we do have is a suite of characteristics that are shared by North African and Spanish knives alike.
Two, the most visible elements on knives and swords are the sheath and the hilt. As such, the styling of these elements invariably reflects the culture of the wearer. For example, many koummya blades were made in Europe but the hilts and the sheaths were made in Africa. Takouba and Tulwar are just two more in a large array of examples of sometimes European blades with always native hilts and sheaths.
With argument two in mind, I find it strange that North Africans would accept a hilt not precisely of their culture. I also find it strange that any European cutlers would bother to supply hilts or sheaths when they could just export the blades alone (a la koummya, etc). This is especially true when one considers that non-culturally correct hilts and sheaths might be a negative selling point.

Sincerely,
RobT

[ariel]

Originally Posted by RobT

ariel,

I certainly believe that Ian's proposal is plausible but I ask you to consider these two arguments.
One, there is not one shred of concrete evidence to prove conclusively that the three blades in African sheaths are of Spanish origin. There are no blade stamps. All we do have is a suite of characteristics that are shared by North African and Spanish knives alike.
Two, the most visible elements on knives and swords are the sheath and the hilt. As such, the styling of these elements invariably reflects the culture of the wearer. For example, many koummya blades were made in Europe but the hilts and the sheaths were made in Africa. Takouba and Tulwar are just two more in a large array of examples of sometimes European blades with always native hilts and sheaths.
With argument two in mind, I find it strange that North Africans would accept a hilt not precisely of their culture. I also find it strange that any European cutlers would bother to supply hilts or sheaths when they could just export the blades alone (a la koummya, etc). This is especially true when one considers that non-culturally correct hilts and sheaths might be a negative selling point.

Sincerely,
RobT

All true. And, certainly, their scabbard are not Spanish. But the African "locals" could have made " local" scabbards just like in the Moroccan koummya story. And even Spanish scabbards ( if those were provided with the dagger), when they were damaged or just worn out, replacement with "local" scabbard was an inevitability.

Under no circumstance do I insist on the veracity of that "export story". But I think it is so simple and so reminiscent of other African stories ( takouba, gurade, shotel, kaskara, koummya, nimcha) that it may just be plausible. I, for one, think that it might be true, but other scenarios also may be possible. Occam was not 100% correct in each and every case:-)

[RobT]

ariel,

The examples you list (takouba, gurade, shotel, kaskara, koummya, nimcha [tulwar and firangi can be added to the list]) to support the "export theory" are all representative of the point I am trying to make. In all these cases, we define the items by their hilts and sheaths not the blades. A tulwar blade may be from an English model 1840 cavalry saber but we still call it a tulwar because of the native made hilt. The same can be said of the firangi which may have a Italian rapier blade but will have a Hindu basket hilt. A good number of koummya blades were especially made in Europe for export to Africa but I defy anyone to find any koummya with a European made hilt and sheath. Regardless of who made the blade, if the hilt and sheath are a visible part of the wearer's costume, virtually without exception those elements will be native made (and it's a good thing too, because were that not the case, we would have a heck of a time figuring out where a lot of our stuff comes from). Why then should it be any different for the three knives under discussion? Why would the Spanish go to the effort to supply hilts (and possibly sheaths originally) for export to cultures that didn't want them?

Sincerely,
RobT