Salaams all ~ A full flex test has been carried out and the sword is declared stiff ... thus it is not a dancing sword blade refit ... but in fact a real Omani Battle Sword.. :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

If this was purchased in 1990 why aren't you ascribing the same attribution of recent merger of parts as you've done with many blades of a similar nature fitted to the newer style hilt.

Salaams Iain, Because I have looked long and hard at the components i.e. The Blade, The Hilt and the Scabbard and have decided that they are all correct for this style. Obviously the hilt needs little further discussion even though the quillons are broken off...The Scabbard is correct .... That leaves the blade.

There aren't any European marks on it like Solingen or other strikes and the 3 markings appear to be Islamic. The Lion, the circular stamp and the Star of Solomon being either makers, owners or locally applied. Even if the animal stamp/ engraving is after a European mark (perhaps the Passau wolf) it is clearly applied in Arabia.

Purchase date has nothing to do with age and so far as I can see this has little comparison to the dancing blade conundrum nor refits of that blade to other hilts...The entire business of dancing swords and hilt switching is almost totally unrelated to the Old Omani Battle Sword but naturally coming from Muttrah Souk it got my full attention from the fake/blade and hilt switchover angle. Quite literally in or up to about 1990 few people considered the older weapon and they could be got for almost nothing. It is only in the last few years that people have realised their worth even though their provenance has been wrongly attributed down the ages as 16th, 10th, Portuguese and recently of the Saladin type. At Forum I believe we have placed this weapon correctly from the first Imam of Oman period of 751 a.d. and unchanged until today.


I have had a bend test conducted by a very savvy technically excellent individual (I am in possession of the bend test diagrams) and am satisfied it is stiff in all respects.. even though it has 3 short fullers (some have fullers some don't) it is in my view an Omani Battle Blade and since I have probably handled more of these than any other person thus I think I have a good idea of what is and what is not correct for type; Its the real deal.

The only other blade of note that I know of cross fitted to an Old Omani Battle Hilt is the Solingen example clearly stamped SOLINGEN crossed with an Old Omani Battle Sword hilt in Muttrah by a known hilt switch workshop a few years ago.. but that is well recorded here by me on Forum and I even know the current owner. There is a blade at #36 which is peculiar in that it seems to be a battle blade on a dancing hilt and though interesting it is still under revue though as soon as I can get to Rostaq I will attempt to solve that mystery..

Regarding the sword here; I know the store from which this weapon came and although it closed some years ago I have photographs of it and the store owners owners who were well known. They had no reputation as hilt switchers. The owners of this weapon are also known to me.

Please advise if you think I am missing something here as amongst the Forums most esteemed members there are few with the expertise such as yours in this field and your knowledge is much admired.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

I had previously submitted a very stiff fighting blade in what you describe as dancing sword dress but it was dismissed... :shrug:
I have handled others too.... :shrug:

Are you now suggesting there is a known type because you have handled one.... :shrug:

Gavin

I have no idea to which thread or post you refer but if you would like to quote the specific post I will answer your question and if required I will point to the reasons.

I cannot understand your second point for surely you know from handling scores of weapons exactly what the characteristic feeling is of a correct form for a certain mark. I have handled many Omani Battle Swords ... probably 50 by now including the museum exhibits in the UAE and Omani National Museums. I have personally been involved in putting together a collection of more than 20 such weapons for a private collector over the past 2 decades. One of my Omani Battle Swords is in the Tareq Rajeb Museum in Quwait. I still own a handful of them and am currently appraising one from Rostaq and another with a friend from a Pacific Island !

What part of familiarity and experience am I further supposed to exhibit? I have virtually rewritten this weapons history ... and placed its pedigree correctly as 751 ad but if there is something I have missed do feel free to comment with references and I will gladly look into it. :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

I don't have the blade in hand so I'll refrain from comments regarding the origin of the blade. Suffice to say I'd consider it a wolf and of a style I've seen before.

As I've mentioned in the past, the attributions to the 16th century, typically in an auction house setting relate to the specific item up for sale and are, on a piece by piece basis quite potentially correct.

I've also mentioned I think you use the 751 date a bit too often - unless you are seriously suggesting this particular example dates to that period. ;) Otherwise let's not go back down the rabbit hole regarding the dating of the form. :)


It's always good when you know some of the background on a piece although unfortunately that doesn't preclude the parts having been assembled at a later date than the origin of either the hilt or the blade. Still, if a physical inspection of the piece has left you confident of the parts that's a good thing. As I mentioned above, I haven't had it in hand and thus won't comment on that aspect.

I'll bow out for the time being of the thread, I'd say a hunt around regarding the blade marks (particularly the wolf) will give you a pretty good idea of the age of this piece and I wish you all the best in tracking them down. the variety present on this blade is interesting and some may have been applied at differing times.

Cheers,
Iain

Salaams Iain ~ It is interesting that you have seen the animal style before and was one of the primary reasons I posted it... to see if anyone recognised this design...If you say you recognise this as a wolf.. then wolf it is.

Regarding design timeline ... I have seen the 16th C paperwork promulgated by various auction houses on swords of this type .. It never made any sense to me, therefor, I started researching and formatted a comparison with the Abbasiid as a baseline using the Topkapi sword. I have made a fair case to point the history at the first Imam period in Oman .. The probable birthdate ...at 751 ad. That is the design date but by no means the birthdate of all Omani Battle Swords.. The birthdate is a sliding scale between then and now.... or more likely then and a point in the 18th/19th Century. Swords were produced along this date line and like many other weapons in the region because they worked and were respected ... they froze in design.

Personally (though I cannot prove it) I think it is equivalent to an Heraldic/ Religio Symbolic Weapon and in itself quite unique. It is, I believe, the Ibaathi Sword. In a similar way the dancing sword is The Busaidi Sword. One marks a religious form... the other an entire dynasty.

There are still areas to explore not least an explanation as to where it was produced and the relevance to its nickname Sayf Yemaani (Hadramaut or perhaps the enclave in Izki near Nizwa called Yemen?)

The latest craze in Muscat is to suggest that this weapon is of Saladin provenance which is laughable and without proof.

Finally and again...thanks for the heads-up on the Wolf mark.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Hi Ibrahiim,

While I am well aware of your ideas regarding the source of the sword design, I think quoting the 751 date continuously does more harm than good. It gives the impression you are attributing these swords to that period. There is sadly, not a single provenanced example dating to that period among these weapons. While it may have roots in that period, it is a large leap to conclude it did not change at all during the centuries. I think it is quite possible some elements of the design due date back that far, but on the evidence available, i.e. not archaeological. It's difficult to extrapolate that much further.

I'd be interested as to what dating you would place on some of the examples you've shown. By that I mean the overall piece not just the blades which can perhaps be a older than the hilts in some cases.

All the best,
Iain

Hat...Hey Presto... White Rabbit.
 

Salaams Iain, The design date of 751 AD marks just that... Note that there is not a single sword from the period Abbasiid save the few examples in the Topkapi and of the Umayyad dynasty prior to that ?... there are none at all. At no point have I suggested swords are present from that period but what I do say is the design did not change.

What may be an indicator on age is the appearance of blade inscriptions and stamps and perhaps the fullers which may not have been on the very early blades. Dots on the blade may be an earlier indicator. General wear is an indicator ... however none of these is very accurate. Some later editions have tubular grip whereas the proper grip is octagonal taken from the Abbasiid style etc etc. Generally because few Ethnographic Arms anywhere exist from much before 1600.. except rusted bits or remnants we tend to look at the brackets 1550 to 1850 or thereabouts. Thus existing Omani Battle Swords probably occur in that timeframe though of course with a design pedigree stretching back much further.

To show another example of design freeze simply look at three other examples of this (quote is backed up by the late Anthony North in his book Islamic Arms and Armour)... observe the freeze in the Abu Futtila, The Khanjar and since its inception in 1744 the Omani Dancing Sword. In Arabia unlike other parts of the world ... once a weapon was accepted, essentially, it did not change in design.

I conclude that the Old Omani Battle Sword was developed from the Abbasid see #1 for my comparison and that it is a Heraldic / Religious design .. The Omani Ibaathi Sword with the birthdate 751 AD and thenceforth essentially unchanged. It would of course be nice if someone were to dig up a grave with an original in it...but except for one known later example from a tomb in Jebel Akhdar there are none ... perhaps because the tradition of burying such artefacts with the dead was not the style here... in fact it was forbidden.

This is the Omani Ibaathi insignia weapon and was used in the "Funoon" before being superceded in 1744 by the Omani dancing sword to celebrate the pageant and for the Busaidi Dynasty. The Funoon goes back to the beginning of the Omani Ibaathi period marked by the selection of the first Imam Ibn Julanda in...wait for it...751 AD. The weapon didn't appear later out of fresh air... it had a purpose ... it was Heraldic. Everything about it is Islamic but more so the hilt which is nowhere else to be found in the Islamic world... why? Because it is Omani Ibaathi ... totally unique... and the major reason for its DESIGN FREEZE... and of course as the Old Omani Battle Sword. :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

I ATTACH A NOTE; VERY BRIEF ON IMPORTANT DATES OF EARLY OCCUPATION OF OMAN.

After its conversion to Islam, Oman was ruled by Umayyads between 661–750, Abbasids between 750–931, 932–933 and 934–967, Qarmatians between 931–932 and 933–934, Buyids between 967–1053, and the Seljuks of Kirman between 1053–1154.

Hi Ibrahiim,

Without going into too much depth because this is mainly about how you are presenting your theory: I think your case could be stated more simply and perhaps with less potential for confusion.

This type of Omani sword has dated examples from as early as the ___ century. (I'm not sure what the earliest example with provenance is, perhaps the grave find you mentioned). Stylistically it likely takes influence from Abbasid designs, which were introduced into the region in the mid 8th century. The form closely resembles these early period swords and seems to have changed little from them. It has a tradition as a heraldic symbol within the Omani Ibaathi tradition which may account for the longevity of the form in Omani culture. Most extant examples likely date from the 17th to early 19th centuries.

I think in the absence of hard evidence, e.g. archaeology, dated examples etc. it's important to leave things just a little open ended. After all, it's impossible to be sure, although you've constructed a sound theory to explain this particular form.

Just intended as constructive comments and I hope you'll take them that way. :)

Salaams ~ Im sure you are right. However, the discussion developed and developed and as each bit of the puzzle lined itself up a lot of the previous guesswork on dates seemed to disintegrate. What was a game changer was the Funoon... The Pageants... and further the fact that between Ibaathi Islam kicking in... and the end of Omans occupation by foreign powers it seemed we needed logic to deduce where in the phases of occupation did this weapon slide in? So here are the occupiers and a logical conclusion;

Umayyads between 661–750,
Abbasids between 750–931, 932–933 and 934–967,
Qarmatians between 931–932 and 933–934,
Buyids between 967–1053,
Seljuks of Kirman between 1053–1154.
Portugal about 1490... to 1650

The weapon is clearly Islamic in design (see #1 for its detailed comparison with the Abbasid at Topkapi) The finger, thus, points at that period..mid 8th C.

There is absolutely no way that it could be anything other than Ibaathi...in the same way that it couldn't be Portuguese..They hated each other. In fact I stress that it must have been used against the Abbasiids (actually garrisoned in Buraimi where I live..) because Oman had accepted The Ibaathi style and the Abbassiid were trying to batter it out of them! They hated each other also !

It seems that the date of the first Immam is key since the tie up to the Abbasid sword matches that time period and coupled with the Funoon it looks more likely. If I am right about the Heraldic/Religious nature of the sword then surely the date of the inception .. and the first Imam are underlined.

However, as you say we just dont know for sure. What we can do is continue peeling back the layers of uncertainty and hopefully one day someone will dig one up from the Mid 8thC.

I realise it is a quantum leap for people to see this sword across so many centuries and unchanged from the original mid 8thC design but that is my hypothesis. :shrug:



Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams~So that members who have not been previously sent to sleep by my long missives at Kattara for Comment (Actually an excellent resource and well worth the effort to read up) I include from there my potted history of Oman so that all windows of possibility related to external influence on the Omani Battle Sword design can be explored. (I've done it but I may have missed something therefor please feel free to double check) Here it is...with some pointers added by me. Where these refer to important dates on swords etc I have underlined, bracketed and added red colour.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote. "In 751AD Ibadi Muslims, a moderate branch of the Kharijites, established an imamate in Oman. Despite interruptions, the Ibadi imamate survived until the mid-20th century. (It is this point in time that my hypothesis places the origin for the design of the Old Omani Battle Sword.)But Oman was nonetheless conquered by several foreign powers, having been controlled by the Qarmatians between 931–932 and then again between 933–934.Between 967 and 1053, Oman was part of the domain of the Iranian Buyyids, and between 1053 and 1154, Oman was part of the Great Seljuk empire.

In 1154, the indigenous Nabhani dynasty took control of Oman, and the Nabhani kings ruled Oman until 1470, with an interruption of 37 years between 1406 and 1444.

Muscat was taken by the Portuguese on 1 April 1515, and was held until 26 January 1650, although the Ottomans controlled Muscat between 1550–1551 and 1581–1588. In about the year 1600, Nabhani rule was temporarily restored to Oman, although that lasted only to 1624, when fifth imamate, which is also known as the Yarubid Imamate ensued.. The latter recaptured Muscat from the Portuguese in 1650 after a colonial presence on the northeastern coast of Oman dating to 1508. The Yarubid dynasty expanded, acquiring former Portuguese colonies in East Africa and engaging in the slave trade. By 1719 dynastic succession led to the nomination of Saif ibn Sultan II. His candidacy prompted a rivalry among the ulama and a civil war between the two major tribes, the Hinawi and the Ghafiri, with the Ghafiri supporting Saif ibn Sultan II. He assumed power in 1748 after the leaders of both factions had been killed in battle, but the rivalry continued, with the factionalization working in favor of the Iranians, who occupied Muscat and Sohar in 1743.

The Iranians had occupied the coast before—indeed the coast was often the possession of various empires. These empires brought order to the religious and ethnic diversity of the population of this cosmopolitan region. Yet the intervention on behalf of an unpopular dynasty brought about a revolt. The leader of the revolt, Ahmad ibn Said al Said, was elected sultan of Muscat upon the expulsion of the Persians. The position of Sultan of Muscat would remain in the possession of the Al Said clan even when the imamate of Oman remained out of reach.

The Al Said clan became a royal dynasty when Ahmad ibn Said Al Said was elected imam following the expulsion of the Iranians from Muscat in 1744. (At this point the flexible Omani Dancing Sword appeared designed specifically for pageant and march past and review of/by tribal infantry before the Ruler.)Like its predecessors, Al Said dynastic rule has been characterized by a history of internecine family struggle, fratricide, and usurpation. Apart from threats within the ruling family, there was the omnipresent challenge from the independent tribes of the interior who rejected the authority of the sultan, recognizing the imam as the sole legitimate leader and pressing, by resort to arms, for the restoration of the imamate.

Schisms within the ruling family were apparent before Ahmad ibn Said's death in 1783 and were later manifest with the division of the family into two main lines, the Sultan ibn Ahmad Al Said (r. 1792–1806) line controlling the maritime state, with nominal control over the entire country; and the Qais branch, with authority over the Al Batinah and Ar Rustaq areas. During the period of Sultan Said ibn Sultan Al Said's rule (1806–1856), Oman cultivated its East African colonies, profiting from the slave trade. As a regional commercial power in the 19th century, Oman held territories on the island of Zanzibar off the coast of East Africa, the area along the coast of East Africa known as Zanj including Mombasa and Dar es Salaam, and until 1958 in Gwadar (in present-day Pakistan) on the coast of the Arabian Sea. But when the British declared slavery illegal in the mid-19th century, the sultanate's fortunes reversed. The economy collapsed, and many Omani families migrated to Zanzibar. The population of Muscat fell from 55,000 to 8,000 between the 1850s and 1870s. Most of the overseas possessions were seized by the United Kingdom and by 1850 Oman was an isolated and poor area of the world.

Late 19th and early 20th centuries

When Sultan Sa'id bin Sultan Al-Busaid died in 1856, his sons quarreled over the succession. As a result of this struggle, the empire—through the mediation of the British Government under the Canning Award—was divided in 1861 into two separate principalities: Zanzibar (with its East African dependencies), and Muscat and Oman.

The death of Sa'id bin Sultan in 1856 prompted a further division: the descendants of the late sultan ruled Muscat and Oman (Thuwaini ibn Said Al-Busaid, r. 1856–1866) and Zanzibar (Mayid ibn Said Al-Busaid, r. 1856–1870); the Qais branch intermittently allied itself with the ulama to restore imamate legitimacy. In 1868 Azzam ibn Qais Al-Busaid (r. 1868–1871) emerged as self-declared imam. Although a significant number of Hinawi tribes recognized him as imam, the public neither elected him nor acclaimed him as such.

Imam Azzan understood that to unify the country a strong, central authority had to be established with control over the interior tribes of Oman. His rule was jeopardized by the British, who interpreted his policy of bringing the interior tribes under the central government as a move against their established order. In resorting to military means to unify Muscat and Oman, Imam Azzam alienated members of the Ghafiri tribes, who revolted in the 1870–1871 period. The British gave Imam Azzam's rival, Turki ibn Said Al-Busaid, financial and political support. Turki ibn Said succeeded in defeating the forces of Imam Azzam, who was killed in battle outside Matrah in January 1871.

Muscat and Oman was the object of Franco-British rivalry throughout the 18th century. During the 19th century, Muscat and Oman and the United Kingdom concluded several treaties of friendship and commerce. In 1908 the British entered into an agreement of friendship. Their traditional association was confirmed in 1951 through a new treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation by which the United Kingdom recognized the Sultanate of Muscat and Oman as a fully independent state.

During the late 19th century and early 20th century, the sultan in Muscat faced rebellion by members of the Ibadi sect residing in the interior of Oman, centered around the town of Nizwa, who wanted to be ruled exclusively by their religious leader, the Imam of Oman. This conflict was resolved temporarily by the Treaty of Seeb, which granted the imam autonomous rule in the interior Imamate of Oman, while recognising the nominal sovereignty of the sultan elsewhere.

The conflict flared up again in 1954, when the new imam led a sporadic 5-year rebellion against the sultan's efforts to extend government control into the interior. The insurgents were defeated in 1959 with British help. "The Buraimi Confrontation" and "The Jebel Akhdar Campaign". The sultan then terminated the Treaty of Seeb and eliminated the office of the Imam. In the early 1960s, the Imam, exiled to Saudi Arabia, obtained support from his hosts and other Arab governments, but this support ended in the 1980s. Zanzibar paid an annual subsidy to Muscat and Oman until its independence in early 1964.

In 1964, a separatist revolt began in Dhofar province. Aided by Communist and leftist governments such as the former South Yemen (People's Democratic Republic of Yemen), the rebels formed the Dhofar Liberation Front, which later merged with the Marxist-dominated Popular Front for the Liberation of Oman and the Arab Gulf (PFLOAG). The PFLOAG's declared intention was to overthrow all traditional Persian Gulf régimes. In mid-1974, the Bahrain branch of the PFLOAG was established as a separate organisation and the Omani branch changed its name to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Oman (PFLO), while continuing the Dhofar Rebellion".Unquote

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams All ; Note to Forum.
See http://www.omanisilver.com/contents/en-us/d363.html for a similar animal mark. The write up, however, is very suspect/wrong...mixing dancing swords and battle swords.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Ibrahiim,

I commend you on your passion and tenacity, however, you still have not left room for swords of the 19th century straight Oman type that you call dance swords that carry fighting blades.
When will you explore the type that look (By your accounts) as dancing swords but are of a fighting and practical nature.
They cannot be dismissed and your formula can not be absolute without their inclusion. I find your reluctance in the past to acknowledge the type and pursue the types bought to your attention as a little misleading within the given formula you present for they are present in the world and antiquity and must have their place.

Gavin

Salaams SwordsAntiqueWeapons ~ Thank you for your comments on my tenacity and passion.

Ok, swords of the 19th C straight, Omani. I will add "Long Hilt." The only sword that fits this criteria is the Omani Dancing Sword which entered service in about 1744 with the Busaidi Dynasty. You could call this sword Heraldic.. well almost since its idea was to give praise by march past...tribal surge past in revue order in front of the ruler and of course in the traditions (The Funoon) and at weddings where it was danced with and used in the mimic fight already discussed and in depth at Kattara for Comments.

There isn't another one. What does occur is a red sea blade(and a few others) cross mounted with an Omani long hilt and more than likely done since 1970 in Muttrah Souk Muscat. A lot of these blades came up from Sanaa. I was speaking to a dealer just the other day from Salalah and I got from him 4 Yemeni Saudia swords on what I would call backyard workshop produced hilts done in Sanaa. These blades come from Ethiopia and some, if not all, are German. No doubt many blades of a Red Sea nature were cross hilted ... I estimate there are several thousand in the world sold through Muscat and Salalah, sourced in Sanaa, which fit that description.

To me it is like cross hilting a Japanese sword on a Norwegian hilt... so I ask you is it thus a Japanese sword or Norwegian?

No self respecting Omani would buy an Omani Straight sword which does not vibrate like mad! These blades bend almost double and spring straight immediately but...(please I know about bendy blades and their fantastic fighting prowess but these are different) they bend because of their "buzz in the air" ability..with a flick of the wrist. Thats why they buy them. They laugh at blades on dancing swords that don't bend.

The fighting sword is the Omani Battle Sword. :shrug:

( To keep it tight I dont mention curved swords here but there are Omani Kattara and Shamshiirs)

Please do show me any Omani Sword and I will classify it as below. :shrug:

1. Omani Battle Sword.
2. Omani Dancing Sword.
3. Omani Shamshiir.
4. Omani Kattara.
5. Tourist.
6. Another classification I haven't yet thought of ! :D


Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

You have mail :-)

Salaams all Note to Forum; Post #2 at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=17556 describes the now known route of such blades; many originally 19th C German/European, sold to Ethiopia thence to Yemen(Sanaa) and Saudia and on to Salalah and Mutrah Souks which have appeared spuriously on Omani long hilts and sold to visitors/tourists as Omani swords. It is difficult to know where to slot this mixed up weapon since it is not of the family Omani Battle Sword nor is it an Omani Dancing Sword (The Straight Sayf).

It is however placed here for reference and carries the warning that an Omani long hilted straight sword with a blade that is not flexible must immediately be looked at as a potential fake and likely to be mismatched from a Red Sea variant.

Workshop in Muttrah have been identified as having created probably thousands of such mix ups since 1970. Many workshops are defunct but some remain. None of these swords appear to be absorbed into the Omani local market because;

"the dancing sword must be a certain style and able to bend often almost double since that is the criteria for the 1744 flexible dancing style continuing to be made locally today in Ras al Khaimah and Salalah and pre 1970 by wandering gypsy groups all over Oman".

I have included this post here and on Omani Dancing Swords... so that library is correctly served.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams all; Note to Forum; To Reset The Clock ! :shrug:

The Omani Battle Sword "Sayf Yamaani"

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

The Omani Buckler ~ The Terrs Shield.
 

Salaams Note to Forum... Thick hide shield known here as Terrs and used originally with the Omani Battle Sword and given to the straight pageantry sword for status purposes. Variously said to have come from Rhino, Buffalo, Hippo or sea animal possibly the Dog Of The Sea (Walruss) hide :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams; Note to Library. The British Museum exhibit...The Omani Battle Sword. Which they appear to call a dance sword (which it isn't).
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi :shrug:

Salaams Ibrahiim,

First of all: Happy New Year! Now then, I've really enjoyed this thread very much, and I liked your discussion with Iain regarding this issue.

Regarding the photos of those Omani swords, their shape, features, etc all date back to c. 600 CE ; not just 751 CE. In fact, I believe 751 CE would be TOO PRUDENT.

However, I still need to know the dimensions of the blades: whether in length, breadth, and thickness...along with the full weight of these swords minus their scabbards.

Any other info regarding these swords shall be highly appreciated, Sir.

Thanks a lot in advance.

Ahmed Helal Hussein

Salaams Ahmed..Happy New Year !!

The Saif Yemaani ~ I agree with the earlier date of 600 but it was difficult enough to wean people off the idea that these were either Portuguese or wildly ranging in age between about the 10th and 19th Century !! :) I will weigh up my own sword and let you have the statistics. In addition I thought it worth simply tying the sword to a specific date in Omani history though obviously it could easily be prior to that date. I was looking for a link as a religious iconic weapon..

Please note my comparison with the Abasiid sword though done only from photographic records from Topkapi. I chose 751 because it was the start date of Omans Ibaathi religion and the date of the first Imam. I think I noted that this figure was tentative and could easily be before that... but clearly with an Islamic Hilt the date could easily be as you note. Weight is 0 point 9 of a kilogram without scabbard and 1 point 1 kilogram with scabbard. Width at throat is 4 point 7 centimetres and blade length is 66 point 5 centimetres. The Hilt measures 14 point 3 cms with a cuff of 2 point 2 centimetres at the throat.

The measurements are from the weapon at #35.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Thanks a lot for the info, Ibrahiim! The dimensions of the sword you've mentioned clearly reveals that it was an infantryman's sword; not a horseman's. It also wasn't for use against fully armored opponents.

Yes, you were correct to say that there were likes of this sword before the Abbasid period. You see: There are no differences between the Arab swords of the late pre-Islamic era, and those Arab swords referring to al-Rashidun era, and those of the Umayyad era, and those of the Abbasid era; except in the decorations, and the calligraphy style. Add to that the many cheap swords that were manufactured locally and were forged from locally made crucible steel; starting from the Umayyad period.

Had I seen your work on the Omani War Sword (Sayf Yamaani) before earning my masters degree, my dissertation would've come out more valuable than it did. The hilts of those Omani War Swords are priceless; not to mention the blades.

It's really a pleasure reading and studying your work on this extremely important topic! Thanks a lot, Ibrahiim!

Ahmed Helal Hussein

Salaams Ahmed ~ Thank you for your great post. Most encouraging. I shall try to find a few more Sayf Yamaani before it is too late... :)
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams Ibrahiim,

I said nothing but the truth; no flattery here nor any compliments. You've done a great job so far, and yes, my greed regarding the subject makes me audaciously ask you for more information, pictures, examples, etc. Keep up the great work, Sir! Worthy to note is that my specialization; along with yours, do complete the field of the study of Arab swords. Great job so far, Ibrahiim...more and more, please!

Thanks a lot in advance!

Ahmed Helal Hussein

Whoops! I meant "do complete EACH OTHER in the field of Arab swords". Sorry for the typing error!

Salaams All~ The Al Ain Museum has a great collection of antiquities (and a particularly extensive and excellent section dedicated to archeology of the region... brilliantly carried out by the French Team)

In the weaponry section a display of "various types of swords"...and there amongst the different types is an Omani Battle Sword (Sayf Yamaani, 3rd from top) in this case adorned with 2 silver buttons at the cross guard and a silvered pommel. From memory I think it has a dot at the tip...last time I stood in front of that case was 1988.

The line up looks like Kattara, Quaddara, Sayf Yamaani, and some sort of Flysa.

Captured for posterity ... below.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi. :shrug:

Salaams all Note to library see http://www.omanisilver.com/contents/en-us/d363.html where a Voc Dutch ship on visiting Oman ...A comment by Padttbrugge a Dutchman is very interesting.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

The Royal Sayf Yamaani; The Omani Battle Sword.
 

:shrug: This is a scoop!

Salaams All ~
I have searched high and low for a picture of H.M. Sultan Qaboos, the current Ruler with an Omani Battle Sword... and had all but given up... Readers may recall the sketch of Sultan Bargash with such a weapon in the late 19th C. I believe this picture is from about 1975.

Here is the Royal Hilt (see #8 also)...in worked silver with gold accoutrements to the scabbard. The Hilt is a derivative of the Omani Royal Khanjar hilt style designed by Sheherazad...in about 1850 by a wife of a previous Sultan.(she also designed the Turban shown here). Thus the battle sword achieved Royal recognition and with its special hilt it takes its honourable place in history.

Members may remember that the Omani Dancing Sword invented after the start of the current ruling Dynasty in 1744, was designed in broadsword form, with a conical hilt from the slavers curved Kattara sword, with sharp edges and a round tip like this weapon. In addition the Terrs shield was given over to the dancing sword from its place with this Battle Sword as a mark of respect and for the traditions and pageants (The Funun).

The Battle Sword blade is very rigid, wing shaped by cross section (not flat), razor sharp on both edges and in its ancient form often without fullers. The tip is rounded not pointed as the main technique, using a small buckler shield (Terrs) was for speed work , slashing and chopping. :shrug:

Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams All~ It is the sword above that Padttbrugge a member of a Dutch Ship which visited Muscat in 1672/3 describes down to fine detail of the scabbard and blade...The blade described as heavy and rigid..or not flexible...and of broadsword style. :shrug:

Private Collection; Sayf Yamaani.
 

The Omani Battle Sword...Sayf Yamaani...Suggesting a make location of Hadramaut.

I will try to post larger format... The single sword to right of group is a three dot at the throat blade and one at the tip. On the group picture the right hand weapon also has 3 dots at the throat... perhaps the dots indicate a superior maker...In the case of that sword it is silvered about the hilt ...in rather crude form and in an effort to give the sword the appearance of the Royal Hilt please see #8...from the style brought in by Said The Great (or his wife Sheherazad) All the blades are thick and non flexible with rounded tips...ideal for slash and chop behind a fast shield action ...shield (Terrs) is shown.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Ibrahiim thank you for posting these examples, and it is good to see this thread again and recall the great traction here in discovering more on these swords, their origins, and perspectives on the relationships in the developed forms.
The factor of the triple dots and single toward the tip on the blades is one of those mysterious conundrums in the study of these and a number of other forms that though often evident, is yet to be explained. The strategic placement of these suggests of course some sort of symbolic, perhaps even talismanic application which we can only surmise.

These 'battle swords' as we determined, while used in Omani regions indeed seems to often have been with notable Yemeni associations mostly for the blades, in many cases trade types having entered the southern Arabian peninsula from the west.

I can not get it clear what your pictures shows Ibrahiim, as I cant blow them up, but if I understand Jim correctly there are three dots at the beginning of the fuller, and three dots at the end of the fuller - is that correct?
If this is so, then it is seen on Indian blades as well.
Jens

Salaams Jens Nordlunde Yes the pictures I have battled with but I will get better pictures of these and the rest of a mixed Arabian Swords numbering perhaps 150 plus weapons..These came in on the phone...The 3 dots are just 3 inches in front of the guard on the blade at the throat . Occasionally only one dot...and I have seen 2 in the same position. A single dot can also be seen at the tip...about half an inch from the end.
I have it that these were to either mark a superior blade or made by a superior craftsman. There is always the possibility as noted by Jim above that these were talismanic ...The single dot being illustrative of the centre of the universe and the talismanic association with the geometric figure 3. There are interestingly three beads dangling from the end of sets of Islamic prayer beads said to prevent the devil climbing up....
I experimented with microsoft word and copying the pictures and placing on word then just expand the single blade and the three dots become visible... untill I can get better pictures...
I note that we have few pictures of these dots, however, at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=Omani+Swords there is a good 3 dot example on what was a snapped blade and kindly posted by Michael Blalock at #61.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Jens, exactly what I was thinking of, the placement of these three dots at key spots on the blade, I think it was tulwars at the terminus of a fuller, also at key points on the blade (I always thought of point of percussion etc.).
Naturally the thought is toward the trimurti (trinity) but again, only surmised.

With the Arab blades, it seems (per Yucel) that these gold filled holes in the blade were for good fortune or perhaps protection to the swordsman. It is unclear on the numbers as they seem to range from one to several, as well as the location on the blade.

What is interesting is that in North Africa, the most western sector of this trade network of blades, seems to have adopted the placement of filled holes with yellow metal as seen in a number of examples from Sudan into the Sahara. I need to find my notes as well as rechecking Yucel.

While not of course the main topic of this thread, which pertains to the sayf Yemeni overall, as always attending to certain subtopics like this can sometimes provide clues in the diffusion of blades and symbolic elements revealing contact and interaction between cultures.

Salaams Jim ...I saw a reference on this sword style where it indicates, I Quote"...According to David Alexander, one of the leading experts on Islamic arms and armour where he describes a related sword in the Nasser D.K Khalili Collection in the book "The Arts of War" by David Alexander, swords of this type were used in Oman and the Gulf area from 1000 A.D. until the17th-18th century and can be seen in early Arab paintings such as a miniature in a copy of the Maqamat of al-Hariri..."Unquote, however, I couldn't find the painting...of the miniature....

I don't altogether agree with the 18th C since we know the sword was in use after that as it is seen in a sketch of Sultan Bargash and in fact with the current Ruler ...in use certainly in the later case in its Royal Hilt form. Perhaps the reference above suggests that its use in wars was of those dates but there is no proof that it stopped being used after the 18th C.

I also question its start date as 11 th Century as it is not tied to anything ...and in which case simply would need to have appeared from nowhere? The earlier date is far more logical being tied to the former Abassiid style seen at the Topkapi and coincides with the first Imam of Oman Ibn Julanda in 751 ad... though my thought is that if it has origins in a Sword of the Prophet it may well be from around 600 ad...and certainly not the late appearance 400 years after....out of the blue...so to speak! In short I suggest that this weapon is by its very nature an Iconic Islamic Battlesword whos design stretches back to the 7th Century after which it froze...design wise until the mid 19th C when its hilt was redesigned with a Royal Hilt (but by no means in all cases) and even appears today as such...see earlier post at #69.

Could this weapon have been either introduced in 630 ad when Oman was converted en masse ...or by the exiled from Iraq Jabr Ibn Zayd who died in 711 ad and was a great leader from Nizwa region.....or by the first Imam of Oman in 751 ad ~I leave those questions penciled in the margin.

I remind readers that the absence of weapons in graves follows the tradition that items were and are not buried with bodies(in this case regrettably!) thus no sword has yet been found in a burial site save one apparently that was unearthed in Jebal Akhdar a few hundred years ago...

See an astonishing example with cartouche (I couldnt decipher) at http://www.trocadero.com/101antiques...tem747179.html Note the octagonal hilt and pommel as well as the three holes in the hilt...and the detail of zig zag decoration vvvvvvv on the cuff. Help is requested for a translation of that.

So that students of Islamic Arms and Armour can more easily see the relevant references I include from the above website Quote" REFERENSES:Askeri Museum Istanbul Turkey.inv.nos.2382 and 7620; for the latter see Alexandr 1985,no75 and Fig.4;other examples include Topkapi Sarayi Museum ,Istanbul,no1/2765;Wallace Collection, London England ,no1796;The Metropolitan Museum of Art,New York,no1987.43;and Splendeur des armes orientales 1988,no11 and Elgood, 1994,nos 2.13 and 2.15..MEASUREMENTS: The overall length is 87.7 cm (34 ½ in). Width of the blade at the widest point: 5.4 cm (2 1/16 inches)"Unquote.

As a finishing note please consider the name ...Sayf Yamaani. Omani names for weapons stuck... never changed... for example the Omani long gun.. Abu Futtila...thus in the naming of this sword Sayf Yamaani could this be an indicator for origin of manufacture; Hadramaut in Yemen.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Comparison with Abassiid and Omani Battle Swords...
 

Salaams All..Please see #1.

I wrote at #1 of a comparison with swords from Topkapi...and with the Omani Battle Sword "The Sayf Yamaani" that this thread discusses. Here are examples of those Topkapi weapons. So far as I am aware there are no weapons of Umayyid type ~these are Abassiid. I place Omani Battle Swords for reference..or others on this thread may be considered.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Hi Ibrahim,

During the 19th c., they call Abbasi swords all the Persian swords, now called shamshir. The swords of the Tokapi museum are probably from the 16th c.
But I agree with you, the Omani sword is a pure medieval shape.

Best,
Kubur

Maqamat al Hariri.
 

Salaams All,

Please see Maqamat(Stories of Arabia) of al-Hariri on video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ud5nsWykhM and by moving the bar to 25:04 see the Omani Battle Sword around 1,000 years ago !!

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi :shrug:

Salaams Kubur,

Sword Dates. Not according to some of the most respected Islamic Sword specialists in the world they aren't. Try 8th or 9thC. I'm glad, however, that you agree on the medieval shape of The Sayf Yamaani..which is why I considered the two forms most carefully ...see #1.

Note; The Abbasid historical period lasting to the Mongol conquest of Baghdad in 1258 is considered the Islamic Golden Age. The Islamic Golden Age was inaugurated by the middle of the 8th century by the ascension of the Abbasid Caliphate and the transfer of the capital from Damascus to Baghdad.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.