swords of Mohammed, but what about...

[Rivkin]

I've heard numerous stories about swords of Mohammed, mostly about Zulfakar, but when reading hadith it seemed quite clear to me that Mohammed died from a sword or bow (for it says "he died because his armor was fixed by a jew") ? The death of Mohammed unfortunately was the subject islamic teachers avoided to teach me, so I'm quite ignorant on this, but is this weapon appear in any way referenced in islamic literature ?

[Radu Transylvanicus]

* Caveat Emptor : I have a feeling this could easily turn the wrong direction if we dont stick strictly to the armorial science !

[erlikhan]

Rivkin, Muhammed was not killed at all. He got old and died at age 62. And Zulfikar was not Muhammed's sword. It was Ali's sword, who was Muhammed's relative, and became Caliph(leader of Muslems) sometime after Muhammed's death. He was assasinated by an Arab from an opponent group called "Harici". By a poisonous sword as far as I remember. I dont know anything about the armor-Jew point.
regards

[Jens Nordlunde]

I agree very much with Radu, I think it is best left where we are now.

Jens

[Andrew]

I'm happy to leave this thread open provided the topic can be discussed appropriately.

To do that, Rivkin, you might consider providing a source for your premise.

[Rivkin]

Ok, I'm sorry if I insulted anyone - probably I just misunderstood something:
"Hadith 4:165 'Aisha:
Allah's Apostle died while his (iron) armor was mortgaged to a Jew for thirty Sas of barley."

Sorry if I misunderstood the meaning. Concerning Zulfakar - I always thought Ali got it from Mohammed.

[M.carter]

Originally Posted by Rivkin

I've heard numerous stories about swords of Mohammed, mostly about Zulfakar, but when reading hadith it seemed quite clear to me that Mohammed died from a sword or bow (for it says "he died because his armor was fixed by a jew") ? The death of Mohammed unfortunately was the subject islamic teachers avoided to teach me, so I'm quite ignorant on this, but is this weapon appear in any way referenced in islamic literature ?

Hello All, This is my first post over here, so be kind ,

Anyway, this sword was not Ali's, it belonged to Muhammad, it was given to Ali later, at the battle of the ditch when Muhammad strapped it on Ali before he went out to duel with Amro ibnu Abd-Widd.

Concerning the sword itself, it was not called Zulfikar, it is properly called 'Thulfiqar', which is the proper arab pronounciation. The shape of the blade is not known for certain. We are sure that this sword had a straight blade and probably was double-edged (as were all the arabian swords of the period), unlike the new Arabian style swords (the sabers). Some historians say that the tip of the blade was bifurcated, thus called 'Thulfiqar'. Other historians put it like this, as the pre-islamic term 'Mufaqar' (which is absolutely the same as 'Thulfiqar') means a blade with fullers, they say that the blade of 'Thulfiqar' must have had some special and/or strange kind of fullers. A minority of historians say that this sword had wavy edges (something like a keris...?) thus called 'Thulfiqar' (Note: 'Fiqar' means parts, segments, portions etc.)

One thing is known for certain, this sword was lost along with many other famous swords during the Mamluk rule period, as many famous Mamluke generals and warriors weilded swords that had belonged to Muhammad or his companions and passed them down to their families ( Sultan Rukn-El-Deen Baibars Al Bundaqari weilded Umar ibn-Khattab's (the 2nd caliph in Islam) sword, 'Thul-wishah' at the battle of Ayn-Jalut).

Phew! Hope this helps

[Andrew]

Hi Mike! Nice to see you here.

Excellent first post, thanks for the insight. It is invaluable to have another member who speaks and reads Arabic on the forum.

Have you had the opportunity to get to the Topkapi and see the collection up close and personal?

[Jim McDougall]

Mike,
Outstanding!! Thank you for this excellent explanation on the extremely important details concerning the early history of Islam.
It is really great to see you posting here! Looking forward to your valuable input on the weaponry of Arabia and for your perspective on the often delicate discussion of matters pertaining to the Islamic Faith.
Best regards and welcome!!
Jim

[M.carter]

Thanks Andrew, Jim for the warm welcome.

Unfortunately no Andrew, I havent had the opportunity to go see those swords in Topkapi, but I shall look to it that I make a trip there, I always wonder what these swords are doing in Turkey anyway?! They should be in somewhere like Mecca or Madina in S.Arabia.

[Rivkin]

Well, Ottoman empire did more or less control Mecca till late XVIII century..

[M.carter]

Yes but Mecca was independant in rule from the Ottomans, the Bani Hashim (Sharifs) ruled it since the fall of the Abbasid Empire until Ibn Saud banished Sharif Hussein from Mecca, but that still doesnt explain why these swords shouldnt be found in Mecca, which is the holiest site for Muslims, not Istanbul.

[nechesh]

Where is that ol' "Spear of Destiny" anyway? I thought i had it laying around here somewhere.

[Lee]

Well, many of the contents (such as the Arabic inscribed group of European swords) of the Mamluke's Alexandria (Egypt) Arsenal went to Constantinople (now Istanbul), probably in, if I remember correctly, the 16th century when the Ottomans prevailed over the Mamlukes in Egypt. So, if the Mamluke elite had these precious heirlooms in their possession at the time, it stands to reason that they may have found their way into Ottoman hands as trophies and holy relics.

[Rivkin]

Spear of Destiny I think is in Nuremberg.

I don't know the history of Mohammed's swords but every single religious artefact I've ever seen has one of the following sotries:

"Spear of Destiny"

The artefact was "discovered", usually by a saint or important warlord through having it's location revealed to him/her in a dream.

"Staff of Moses"

Once, the discoverer of the artefact was visited by a stranger (usually an old man), who claimed to be the last of the bloodline of the guardians of the ..., which was given to his great-grand-grand-father by ... himself. Now he transfers the ownership of the item to the "discoverer".

The latter ones sometimes mixes with the first one, by asserting that great-grand-grand was the saint from the story number one.

Now Mohammed lived relatively close to us (in time), so _one_ of these swords can be the real one. The rest mostly likely appeared all around the Ottoman Empire.

P.S. Did they do Y-chromosome genetics on Saeds ?

[ariel]

Mike,
Welcome to the Forum! We absolutely need a member with your fund of knowledge and expertise.
And.... please feel free to be irreverent: everybogy here has an unbruisable ego and a good sense of humor.
Join the club!

[nechesh]

Rivkin, i'm glad you picked up on my sarcasm. Even 1400 yrs. ago is quite a long time. What actual proof do we have that any of the swords of Mohammed were ever really his swords at all? Hard to believe the gold and jeweled encrusted one saw any battles. I would think that a few generations past the death of Mohammed it might be very advantagious for a powerful Islamic leader to be able to produce one the "swords of the prophet" to strenghten his hold on power. Forgive me if i am speaking blasphamy here, but can we really be certain of anything, or are the swords of Mohammed purely a matter of faith?
As for the "Spear of Destiny", i was keeping it right next to that grail thingy....now where DID it get to?

[Rivkin]

In general relics tend to survive quite well in isolated monasteries and island nations - that brings an interesting question - how old do you think is a japanese emperial sword ?