How to id a European kaskara blade?

[Mefidk]

Hi folks - I wonder if anyone can help with an opinion on this?

I recently obtained two kaskara that's with what look like trade blades, but I am unsure whether they are or not. I've seen very similar swords described as both trade blades and locally made, so I wonder if there is any way to nail this down?

One blade is pretty good, the other seems almost identical in size (87 & 86 cm long respectively), and form but is in pretty poor condition. The hilt on that one was loose so I've removed ready for cleaning and to see the tang. Both blades bear the often discussed 'comet' mark but no other marks are present. The fullers are very similar, wide, shallow and not perfectly executed. This makes me think that they are locally made, but the steel quality seems to be higher than those of the locally made swords of the region that I own. I wondered if the tang could give any clues since we don't normally get to see this? The tang does not seem specifically designed to fit the hilt, being held in place by green cloth padding as can be seen on one of the pictures, so more or less any shape would have done (I guess).

Thoughts and pointers on this gladly received - at the moment I'm 50:50, low quality trade blade: locally made, so even a leaning would be good

Chris

[Jim McDougall]

These are most interesting, especially as they are of the same type blade with profile, fuller and length, yet the contrast in condition is dramatic.
The first in an almost deeply pitted condition with the second in the more familiar refurbished condition and reptilian grip , both swords having this curious marking. The marking visible on the refurbished kaskara seems almost drawn on, I cant make out the mark on the badly corroded one.

These type blades seem to be 'Kasallawi' of modern make, with steel used often from recycled steel such as springs etc. The curious mark which in previous discussions is often suggested to represent a native interpretation of a 'flaming grenade' or the fly markings of the Kull family of makers c.1847-60....however later was suggested to be possibly a comet. Also, these marks are found on Tuareg swords far to the west and not typically on kaskara until relatively modern times. One kaskara carrying this mark was recorded around 1961 in Egypt in a presentation.

The mark seems to be more modern than the copies of European marks and it would seem earliest descriptions of it occur with various Tuareg chiefs during the 1916-17 Kaocen Revolt when several of these were captured during battle (Briggs, 1965, Plate XX; swords of Raidera, Adembar and Rabadine). It seems to have been recognized as early as c.1878 (lineage of the Adembar sword).

The considerably poor condition of the one sword of the pair seems to be in paradox with the apparant reasonably modern period which is indicated by the character of these blades and the mark. Possibly one was left in a relatively unprotected out building while the other was refurbished?

[Mefidk]

Many thanks Jim - your explanation fits well and goes a long way to explain why I was unsure about these. I was under the impression that these were 1880-1900, so I had not thought of more modern steel. It is very difficult however to see the difference between this and trade blade steel in terms of quality. Flexibility seems pretty much the same as a trade blade, so I suspect it is not leaf-springs but something else. I've attached a couple of pictures of a takouba that I believe is made from leaf-spring steel. It has rather a different feel to the blade (more rigid) and a more course structure to the steel (although this is a difficult thing to appreciated from pictures)

As to the different conditions of the blades I suspect you are right about storage. These came in from the same source as the probably 14thC takouba currently being discussed on the forums. Two teleks also came with these, both rusted into the scabbards, the scabbard from the rusty kaskara is in pretty small pieces, possibly as a result of removing the blade. I think that some of these got wet at some point in the not too distant past, and the takouba was lucky not to be one of these. So on the plus side I would say that there are two types of oxidation present on all of these - new and old. The old looks like nice black patina (you can also see this on pics of the crocodile hilted one, under the langet), the new is fresh and active rust. I guess that patina could have developed over the last 50 or 60 years, if that is the age we would put on these, and that the better kaskara was cleaned whilst the other was left untouched?

[Jim McDougall]

You're quite welcome Mefidk, and I very much appreciate your detailed response. It is interesting to know more on the provenance on these and the assemblage of weapons which were included in this apparantly diverse lot.
I spent some time going through the outstanding paper written by Ed Hunley in 1984 and in the archives here, "Sword and Knife Makers of Kassala", which was interestingly actually a precursor to the 1987 work of Graham Reed ("Kaskara from Northern Darfur, Sudan", JAAS, Vol.XII #3).

Hunley wonderfully describes the edged weapon industry which was apparantly all but dormant largely in Sudanese regions until around the 1960s. The description of the use of automotive springs as material for blade making is well covered, and it would seem there were numerous sources for stock including the railroad yards in Atbara for example. It is fascinating that these productions of weapons, though modern, are very much in the old traditions from the times of the Mahdiyya and the Sudanese are understandably proud of thier heritage.

The curious marking of this geometric 'comet' shape remains a bit of a puzzle and despite the suggestions that it is some kind of interpretation of the fly or 'doll' markings is in my impression a bit far fetched. Even in the most Picasso-esque interpretation to me this shape does not allude to either.
I am not convinced that the shape is toward cosmological lore either, so it would seem another symbolism is the source. Whatever the case, it seems to be a relatively late development and not particularly indicative of a European source.

With my admittedly deficient understanding of metallurgy and relying on photos rather than actual handling of these weapons it is hard to make reliable judgement so I appreciate your accurate detail in describing these blades. As we agree, it seems one of these swords from similar period of production ended up in compromised situation and was exposed to conditions lending to its deterioration. It may have been among other miscellanea in one of the shed type buildings Ed Hunley describes in the suq area in Kassala, or similar situation, but apparantly static for some time in that place.

I have always understood that of course depending on the workman and perhaps various factors in production, many of these native blades can be quite flexible. As you note the spring steel can typically be pretty rigid. There seem to be a number of weapons produced as well from sheet steel and these have again different characteristics in the corrosion and effects in the blades.

Thank you again for posting these, and the excellent questions. Its great to return to the study on these North African swords and have the opportunity to learn more on them from these kinds of examples.

All the best,
Jim

[Iain]

Hi Chris and Jim,

As someone who doesn't think these are particularly modern time for me to chime in.

Ed will be able to better answer this but my impression from discussions before was that well formed cross guards were often a good indication of age. The guard of the croc kaskara here, in particular does seem of a higher than usual quality when compared to a Kassala product. In particular note the ends, which are not as flat as the usual Kassala examples.

Turning to the blades I do not believe these are car springs or sheet steel. I could very well be wrong but the appearance from photos and Chris' notes seem to back this up. Particularly the coarseness of the steel and the corrosion patterns.

Due to this I think both are at least early 20th century? Again, I am far from expert but these do not correspond well with tourist bring backs from the last 40 years or so, at least in my recollection.

The mark is of course another kettle of fish! I am also not particularly convinced it is derived from a European mark and find the comet theory potentially compelling, obviously what is needed is for someone on the ground to confirm that. I obviously need to reread Briggs as I completely forgot he mentions this mark!

All the best,

Iain

[Mefidk]

Just a couple more thoughts about these swords. I mentioned that I thought the tang might give a clue. The rusty blade with deep patina came in wooden hilt with a very worn grip. There is distinct evidence that this is wear and not water damage. The wood itself is old dry and fragile. What I think might be significant is that the hilt did not utilise an iron peg passing through the tang, which according to this thread http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13638 is the purpose of the hole. So my thought it that this has been re-hilted at some time, but if so how did this happen and the current hilt get into this state if the blade is only 50 years old? I also noticed that the blade itself has been sharpened and shows a distinct narrowing in the fiths 3 & 4 from the hilt - again not something I'd expect to see on a young sword that as been left in an outbuilding.

I think the key issue here is the 'comet'. Do we really know that this was not found on kaskara before 1960? The marks themselves are deeply inscribed. I've rubbed gently at the rust with a scotch-brite pad and I can now see that there is a difference in the marks between the two blades. The rusty blade mark is not identical e.g. that if we imagine the mark is a figure carrying a staff or flag, then the flagstaff on the other mark extends quite a way above the head of the figure in the rusty version and barely at all on the clean version. There is a difference in the rectangular mark at the top of the head too. I've tried to capture this and the blade wear in the pictures below - but more cleaning will be needed to bring the mark out clearly. To help I've traced the marks visible from this angle. The cross-hatching visible on the clean blade is also present on this blade but it requires a different angle of light to bring it out.

Another possibility is that the mark has been added to an earlier blade, but I don't know whether this is likely. Not all trade blades seem to carry stamps though, and not all have been added to by native stamps, so perhaps this is possible but unlikely.

So I agree with Jim that more research on what this mark means and where and when it came from is needed, but I'm not yet convinced that these swords are a young as suggested.

Great fun trying to figure this out though

Chris

[Jim McDougall]

Chris and Iain, thank you so much for these straightforward observations and for the great explanations along with them. It is great to engage in these kinds of discussions where we exchange views and ideas regardless of polarity, as it is a total learning experience.
I must say that after reviewing earlier posts, notes and rereading through Briggs I am compelled to agree that these two kaskara may very well be much earlier in the 20th century. It seems likely the clearly more recently refurbished example is of the same blade type as the heavily aged one, the elliptical one third blade length channel from blade root is similar on both though I dont believe exact.
What steers me away from European origin for these blades is the lack of forte block. In looking at some other examples of blades which were apparantly of Solingen origin and intended for export such as those by Clauberg and Peres, these typical had such ricasso blocks and were marked. There were likely however blades unmarked, but I believe would have been configured similarly.

I am glad the patinated blade is shown with tang exposed, and this blade has the same aperture and shape as the Peres type blades. What is puzzling of course is that there is no block ricasso, so it seems we may presume native make for these. The same type fuller appears on the unusually hilted swords apparantly from Tunisian Berber regions.

I think we may look toward blades entering North Africa post Khalifa and during the Condominium. While it seems doubtful that any weapons producing in occupied Sudan of course was unlikely, however Darfur and these regions remained loosely outside British control with Ali Dinar emplaced as the sultan and the region essentially autonomous.These regions were very much as a frontier and more associated with Saharan and Berber tribal activity than with the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan as I have understood. There were even Tuareg factions as far as El Fasher, and it would seem contact through Tunisian regions Berbers might well have brought blades in .

In those Tunisian regions the Senussi Brotherhood was quite prevalent, a Sufi following to which Ali Dinar also belonged. The Senussi were in the years toward WWI apparantly aligning with Ottomans and the Germans in the developing Great War. This development was key in the final situation for Ali Dinar who was declared outlaw by the British and killed by them in 1916.
It would seem that in this period, blades may well have been coming in through Tunis and through Berber and Senussi headed Darfur and adjacent regions. It would seem that native bladesmiths may have duplicated blades and possibly adapted interpretations of German markings.

It seems these might be from this period to the years following, and probably produced in remote regions outside the controlled regions in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. I am not sure how much we should rely on the crossguards on the refurbished examples as these were so often refurbished, and often parts may have been interchanged. The obviously intact well aged example though may give a good view of early guards. In Ed Hunleys work, he notes that guards were fabricated in four pieces pre-1940 when the single piece forged guards were developed.

The 'comet' mark seems to be copied almost perfectly on the rehilted blade from that on the aged and worn one (note even the two 'jots' in the orb).
In Briggs (p.81) he notes that Nickel had suggested this may have been some stylized image of the 'flaming grenade' from the 'doll' figure of Peter Mumm and used by Weyersbergs in the 19th century. I can see the similarity to the fly image from the doll and the Milanese mark, but cannot see even a Picasso like potential with these 'comet' figures.

The only comet used by German makers was that of the Schimmelberg group mid 19th c and later which has a star type symbol with crescent like 'tail' and 6 other stars......this does not have the separated tail which is implied by these geometric devices.

It should be noted that these geometric devices were found on the blades of Tuareg chiefs from the Tuareg rebellion in 1916-17 and had apparantly been in use for some time. As noted the Tuareg factions did have contact with Darfur as well as into the regions into Libya and Tunisia as previously mentioned, and perhaps this symbol cross diffused into 'kaskara' parlance via that venue.