Originally Posted by A.alnakkas

What about this type?

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=3864

Originally Posted by LPCA

Hello Stu,

Yes, you're right. It is very difficult today to have a final decision on the origins of Moroccan or Arab Zanzibari Nimcha. That is why this subject is open and no door can not be truly closed.

Take the case of this Nimcha from Oriental Arms. I trust Adni of Aïfa when he described it as Zanzibari. Yet its profile and its guard are those of a Moroccan nimcha while its protection is typical of a Zanzibari nimcha .

I got in Algiers in 1962 (independence of Algeria) in stocks of the French Army a number of weapons that were taken of war in 1830. Among them, a Moroccan nimcha used by defenders of Alger. This shows that different types of weapons were circulating well throughout the Maghreb.

Now, armed Algerian troops ensured the protection of convoys of traveling pilgrims each year to Mecca. Possible that the Moroccan nimcha of an Algerian soldier has inspired a Yemeni pilgrim who then placed an order in Zanzibar. Why not?
This is how travel perhaps influences.

Regards Louis-Pierre

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

NOT Magreb. The Magreb (Moroccan) has the dropping quillons and no D "guard"
Stu

Originally Posted by A.alnakkas

What about this type?

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=3864

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Eid Mubarak! Salaams from Buraimi !! Kind regards from the entire team !! We hope you are well . Actually we hope you get a chance to pop over to the Tareq Rajeb Museum in Kuwait as they have a brilliant collection of Arabian Arms and even an old Omani Original Kattara from me years ago. I looked at the link you post and sure enough it is Yemeni. It is my advice that The Yemeni Nimcha is a style in its own right as are the Magrebi, Algerian, Saudia, Zanzibari and Sri Lankan versions. The Yemeni Nimcha.

Regards Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Sorry I do not agree as to Yemeni for this. Artzi attributes this to Zanzibar, although not conclusively, and I believe with the knowledge he has it is likely to be correct. I have never ever seen any reference to a "Yemeni Nimcha", with a hilt even remotely resembling this style. Any Yemeni swords I have seen, either "in the flesh" or in books are like the attached pic and are called Sayf.

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Sorry I do not agree as to Yemeni for this. Artzi attributes this to Zanzibar, although not conclusively, and I believe with the knowledge he has it is likely to be correct. I have never ever seen any reference to a "Yemeni Nimcha", with a hilt even remotely resembling this style. Any Yemeni swords I have seen, either "in the flesh" or in books are like the attached pic and are called Sayf.

Originally Posted by TVV

This may sound sacrilegious, but even Artzi, despite having forgotten more about swords than I will ever know, can be wrong sometimes. For example, there is a sboula that he attributed to Zanzibar, despite it being a Maghrebi weapon.

I am attaching a picture of a (rather ugly) hilt, which I believe is Yemeni in origin. The blade is Ethiopian, and we know that a lot of Ethiopian swords were imported in Yemen, because of their rhino hilts. The hilts were reworked to be used on jambiyas, while the blades were rehilted, sometimes in a very crude manner.

I acquired the sword from an Egyptian gentleman residing in Saudi Arabia, but the hilt style is unlikely to be Saudi, and I have to assume that it must have been imported there from a neighboring country. Again, Yemen makes a lot more sense than Zanzibar.

I do therefore believe that the hilts of this style with a straight grip, an a vestigial quillon are Yemeni and later, probably dating back to the middle of the 20th century.

Your sword Stu, on the other hand, has a slightly bent grip and its hilt looks to be of earlier and much nicer manufacture. Obviously, the above observations do not apply to it.

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Sorry I do not agree as to Yemeni for this. Artzi attributes this to Zanzibar, although not conclusively, and I believe with the knowledge he has it is likely to be correct. I have never ever seen any reference to a "Yemeni Nimcha", with a hilt even remotely resembling this style. Any Yemeni swords I have seen, either "in the flesh" or in books are like the attached pic and are called Sayf.

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Hi Louis-Pierre,
Its great to have you posting on this! and your work on these sa'if has been one of my best resources for research. It has been a long time ago, but represents some of the best research compiled on these swords to date outside the standard references, i.e. Elgood and Buttin.

I agree that this example with stout, short blade of hanger/cutlass type blade would suggest maritime use as you have well pointed out. The hilt form is really interesting and seems to derive, or at least compare to quillon arrangements and in degree, hilt styles of North Italy as early as the end of the 16th century. The earliest example of this style hilt seems to be found in a sword of stated North African style from the period of Murid III (1574-95), well placing it in the Ottoman sphere ("The Silver Dragon and the Golden Fish", David Alexander, p.235, fig. 7).

As appears in Buttin ("Catalogue de la Collection d'Armes: Europiennes et Orientales of Charles Buttin", 1933, #1004) the exact hilt style and motif is seen as well as apparantly in ivory, shown as 'Arab, 17th century". The interesting highly stylized and blockish quillon terminals are also present.

It appears that this hilt style must have become highly favored and like many ethnographic hilt forms, perpetuated over long periods. Even in cases where other hilt forms intercede, often revivalist inclinations result in returning to the much revered old styles. This makes it difficult of course in establishing reliable chronological development patterns in many of these sword forms.

The term nim'sha, as has often been pointed out, by its alluded etymology to an Arabic term referring to 'short sword', has often, actually most typically, been misapplied to most of these sa'if from the Maghrebi versions to many of these hilt forms which have full size blades, yet still called 'nimsha'. It seems that the term itself, like many of the terms referring to many sword forms (katar, kaskara, kilij, tulwar, paluouar et al) falls into the colloquial 'collectors' glossary, in which they have apparantly been derived from unclear misinterpretations or broad assumptions. Some of these seem purely contrived, such as with the fanciful term 'scimitar' which appears more the product of literary convention than any reliable etymology.

Returning to this sword, the reference to it being of Zanzibar production brings it in parallel to the familiar sa'ifs of similar hilt form, but with the extended 'D' type ring projecting from the crossguard, presents an interesting conundrum. I have yet been unable to find any reference that unequivocally designates these sa'if with open ringed crossguard extensions or traverse bar to Zanzibar. I have only heard this conjecturally aside from in "Islamic Weapons:Maghreb to Moghul" (A. Tirri, 2003) in which Tirri claims on p.79, "...in Zanzibar, documentary evidence identifies an extensive edged weapon manufacturing center during the 19th and early 20th centuries".
In the Buttin catalog (op. cit. examples 996-1004) of the entire array of these ringed guard sa'ifs are designated as "Arab' and to the 17th and 18th centuries. It is clearly noted that thier characteristic rings also derived from North Italian hilt systems.

Unfortunately Mr. Tirri does not cite the source for the 'documentary evidence' which would have been most helpful. Another dilemma involving 'Zanzibar' weapons are the 'H' shaped (baselard form) short swords termed 'Zanzibar swords' , which designation derives from Sir Richard Burton's 1885 "Book of the Sword". In this case Burton (p.166, fig.183) actually perpetuated an original error in Auguste Demmens 1877 reference where he misidentifies the weapon as a Zanzibar weapon (p.416, #100). Charles Buttin (op.cit, p.270) cites this error in detail, and clarifies that the weapon is in reality the Moroccan form known as s'boula and these seem to have traversed the trade routes via Sekkin and into Zanzibar.

The diffusion of these weapon forms through these trade routes, both maritime as well as trans-Saharan caravans in indisputable. The broad identification as 'Arab' is probably most applicable in most cases where sound provenance is not attainable in my opinion.

I would very much like to know if anyone knows of any documented evidence assigning the ring hilted sa'if form to Zanzibar in specific, and to thier production there. In the case of Muscat (this coastal region of Oman was the actual trade operation), thier connection to thier Sultanate in Zanzibar offers more tangible assessment of 'Zanzibar' to this cutlass as it is hard to say which location actually produced the weapons...both were ports of call receiving large quantities of trade blades.

As earlier mentioned, there are potential cases for Hyderabad in India, via the Malabar trade route also plied by these dhows. These type hilts are known in India as well, in what degree unclear, but it is known that here swords were produced for Hadhramaut in the Yemen. The so called Zanzibar sa'if, while unclear if actually produced in Zanzibar were indeed destined for Yemen, so it would appear these hilts may have been produced at several locations, while it remains certain that they were present throughout the Arab trade sphere.


All best regards,
Jim

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Absolutely excellent entry Ibrahiim, and good comparison of decorative style of Zanzibari material culture applied on this sa'if hilt of 'nimcha' style. In this case we have compelling evidence comparatively suggesting this sword to have been produced in Zanzibar.
It is interesting to note that the 'D' ring guard feature which has been claimed to be a characteristic of these swords produced in Zanzibar is notably absent.

As I noted in a concurrent thread on Zanzibar nimchas, in rechecking the Buttin reference shown, all of these examples shown (#996-1002) are classified as "Arab' and from 17th into 18th centuries.

Originally Posted by blue lander

It's fascinating to see all the stylistic variations of nimchas and saifs out there. In looking through all the recent threads on the subject, it appears that they always have falling quillions above and below the blade. Which makes sense from a functional point of view.

Here's some photos of what looks like a very crude nimcha with the falling quillions on the sides of the blade rather than above and below. It's from an auction I didn't win. In fact I didn't even bid on it since it's too homely even for my low standards. Is this a known variation on the nimcha/saif? Apologies for posting such an ugly sword in a thread with such beauties

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Blue Lander ~ I think you will find that Nimcha variants of this form... I mean with somewhat "flimsy hilt and guards" are a mark of the less well manufactured work coming from the Yemen .. Im not sure if the slump in quality was because of the exit in and after 1948 by Jewish craftsmen but I am aware of a huge rehilting network (Sanaa) taking blades from everywhere and anywhere... mainly Ethiopian; see example at #67 ..from 1970 ..and doing a cheap rehilting makeover often removing better hilt material for the Jambia market (Rhino) and replacing with mediocre hilts displaying very poor hilt metalwork..

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Nothing to do with the departure of the Jewish as these were (mainly) silversmiths.

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

In response to Blue Lander (post #75), while this is indeed a crude munitions grade weapon, with hilt in 'nimcha' style, I would point out that the telling point is that langet style foldover on the guard. This feature is characteristic on the shellguard 'cutlass' type sabres which have been shown as Spanish colonial of Caribbean and primarily South American origin.

The same feature is seen on espada's with flat, striated shells on their guard also known Spanish colonial, and of 18th century.

I would say these swords, noting they all have the characteristic hand nock in the grip, are well connected to this wide spectrum of colonial swords which have these features and trade blades and which includes the Spanish regions of Morocco.

This is an excellent example of how these often humbly regarded weapons help us in better understanding the historical scope of these regions, and the true purpose of the study of ethnographic weapons.

Turning to the well supported notes on Jewish craftsmen Ibrahiim has added, I would like to add that in Ethiopia that the Falashas , better known as Beta Israel, were the craftsmen who furbished weapons for the Amharic rulers and were of course essentially of the Jewish faith. In Morocco, the craftsmen producing arms were often Jewish, though I cannot recall their name. Many of these craftsmen accompanied trans Saharan caravans with the Hajj Pilgrims which travelled through these Ethiopian regions, which included Harar , the bustling entrepot which was key in Red Sea trade and on the way to Arabian destinations.

This is of course a most brief description only touching on the complexity of these networks and how extensively Jewish artisans were involved in many areas of material culture crafts, which extended far beyond simply silver work and jewelry. They were also prevalent in all manner of decorating and furbishing arms, their skills clearly covering North Africa, and into Arabia from their long ancestry in these in Andalusian Spain.

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

I think that the word CRAFTSMEN used by both Jim and Ibrahiim confirms what I was trying to say on my reply above. The lack of quality work in the subject sword hilt to my mind is not what a Jewish CRAFTSMAN would turn out.
Stu

Originally Posted by blue lander

Thank you Jim and Ibrahiim for providing context on that sword. I ended up not bidding on that one because I thought the fullers looked uneven. I assumed it was some indiginous imitation of a European blade. The seller had another sword that looks to be from the same source. It bears no resemblance to a nimcha, but I'm posting it here in case it sheds some light on their common origin.

Originally Posted by blue lander

What do you make of the guard on the sword I posted? It's round like a dha but it seems to have the same thumb "knob" that you'd see on an European cavalry degen.

Originally Posted by blue lander

Thank you Jim and Ibrahiim for providing context on that sword. I ended up not bidding on that one because I thought the fullers looked uneven. I assumed it was some indiginous imitation of a European blade. The seller had another sword that looks to be from the same source. It bears no resemblance to a nimcha, but I'm posting it here in case it sheds some light on their common origin.

Originally Posted by blue lander

No, it must have ended weeks ago. I don't think anybody bought it though.