Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi
Salaams. This thread will go in the direction of research and knowledge discussion and debate and thus occasionally something surprising may unfold...
We are not tied to one simple view but are open minded and able to consider freely the oblique angles... thats what the forum is about no? There is more than one approach here so why dont you broaden yours (or not) and look at the far bigger picture... and the solution to your basic question of whether of not the hilt was wrapped in leather, cloth or something else will inevitably evolve... but more importantly the relative place that this weapon has in the family of Red Sea weapons .. will out.
I just wrote to Swedegreen the thread originator and said "As you can see the your thread is current again. What I believe is key to the discussion is your excellent picture of swords and scabbards at # 1 in particular the lower sword with what I would call a simple securing mechanism between the scabbard and the hilt which as part of the scabbard slides inside the long cuff. I think this is indicative of the whole lot being made at once as a deliberate all in one sword".
The original post is key... That's where we need to look...and to research.
You never know it could be important !
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.
|
Salaams ~ Note to Forum. The technique of covering the hilt in leather is multi faceted ..
1. It provides a much sturdier hilt.
2. The anti slip, good grip qualities of leather make it an excellent material.
3. Leather was in plentiful supply from goat, cow, camel and occasionally other tallismanic materials like wolf, hyena and fox.
4. Lastly the habit of covering iron with leather was used to negate the devil/evil link of Iron coming into direct contact with the skin. Iron was seen as attracting evil.
#1 shows how the scabbard was completed in worked leather and it would be easy to imagine that a hilt would be more susceptible to destructive wear thus all that's left is the metalic hilt... in most cases Iron though some with partial other metals in places perhaps the result of a running repair.
The museum plaque probably holds little factual evidence (as usual) Pro active information and detail on Museum exhibits is laughable at best and I would imagine it says something like "Arabian Red Sea swords," however, that is not to write off an aproach on potential information...Anything goes on that quest !
More to the point is the construction of the hilt showing that the style is in line with the technique of the Omani Battle Sword Hilt with Pommel not attached to tang though the two parts of the hilt appear welded unlike the Omani Hilt which is riveted over a wooden insert core. The pommel unlike the Omani Hilt is very crude as are the what look like remnants of quillons which are in fact incorporated into the cuff. Occasionally the cuff has the weird long window like addition which could be to enable a stuck sword to be freed or used in the role of quillons to twist an opponents blade out of his grip. The whole hilt appears as a monumental religious based iconic shape..with a number of potential provenances including African. It could even be a mass produced militia sword.
The full implications need to be examined as it may be a separate as yet unidentified type. Its provenance needs a full airing and any links to other regional variants should be carefully considered.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.