Kattara for comments

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Zutooti (or Ztut or Zutoot)

Auxiliary Omani Sword Makers !

The anthropology of Gypsies in Oman and surrounding areas is apparently, as yet, undocumented. Their contribution to knife and sword making though slight is an intriguing factor in that study. They wandered around doing various tasks including tinning and repairs of brass and copper utensils, dishes and coffee pots. They had extraordinary knowledge of herbal medicines and were entrusted with minor operations such as circumcission. Like their counterparts who entered Europe via the Ottoman territories they saw gaps in the local market and as tinkers managed to make a living even where neccessary becoming small holders and farmers.

They could turn their hands to most things and were famous cannon makers and soldiers for the Ottomans. But who were they and what was their position in Omani society?

They may be Indian though it is still being researched and since that is where Gypsies originated (see notes below)...They are described only verbally as there are no actual records. Dark skinned, unruly, generally dirty, unkempt and of no known religion and using a peculiar unintelligible language. They came and went..They stole everything or so it was claimed. Their status was probably as low as it could be in society. Lower than slaves in days gone by. They married only within their own "sect". Allowing a Ztut into ones family would invariably result in daily arguement and fighting. The Ztut were an underclass yet were tolerated, however, with suspicion. Ztut did herbal cures and specialised in wild honey collecting. They knew music and could dance. Some of the girls were stunningly beautiful but regarded as untouchable regarding intermarriage. It appears that a househole would have a few slaves and perhaps a few Ztut under their umbrella but of the 2 Ztut were lower in the pecking order. Ztut were much more loosely attached thus could be expected to vanish overnight. Very odd?

These days they still exist but have retained the attachment of wariness and suspicion in society but still do tinker tasks. It would be very rude (adding to the difficulty in research) to walk up and say you are a Ztut I want to ask you some questions...I have discovered that they still have amazing knowledge of herbal remedies.. they still do wild honey collecting and still potter about doing metalwork. In the old days before 1970 they were very much part of the old Omani fabric where their role in limited sword making cannot be ruled out.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Notes; Unashamedly I attach almost entirely the brilliant work of Stephanie G. Folse sfolse@du.edu from University of Denver for reference and interesting reading.


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

Tracing the history of a non-literate culture

Linguists compare Gypsy languages to historical languages; they look at words borrowed from other languages and when and where those words originally existed. It is possible to trace Gypsies back to their origin: the Sind area of India (today south central Pakistan -- the mouth of the Indus). Three separate emigrations occurred over the course of about four hundred years, traceable today in three identifiable linguistic populations: the Eastern Gypsy (Domari) in Egypt and the Middle East, the Central Gypsy (Lomavren) in Armenia and eastern Turkey, and the Western Gypsy (Romani) (Romany refers to the people, Romani refers to the language, Rom refers to a man or the people as a whole. Confused yet? in Europe. This last group is the population most widely dealt with in reference works and literature, and therefore most of the information here pertains to them.

The first exodus was spurred by a ruler of Afghanistan, Mahmud of Ghanzi, who invaded the Sind area in A.D. 1001-1027. The second exodus arose out of attacks upon northwest India by Mahmud of Gorh (A.D. 1191-1192), and then the empire expansion of Genghis Khan (A.D. 1215-1227). The third took place during the reign of the khan Tamerlane in the late 1300's and early 1400's, when he attempted to repeat Genghis Khan's exploits.

Origin of the Gypsy

The cultural group that would later become the Gypsies led a semi-nomadic life in India, and has been tentatively identified as the Dom, which has been recorded as far back as the sixth century. The Dom performed various specialized jobs such as basket-making, scavenging, metal-working and entertainment, traveling a circuit through several small villages each year. This is not a unique phenomenon; the Irish Travellers, although completely unrelated genetically to the Gypsies, fulfill the same functions. Indian caste beliefs of the time may have been the original model for the strict purity and pollution ideology of the present Gypsies, modified over time through contact with other cultures. This semi-nomadic life allowed the Dom the opportunity to easily flee when battles threatened the area in which they lived, and apparently did so three times during the Middle Ages.

The European Gypsies are perhaps the original refugees from Mahmud of Ghanzi's wars, for all sixty Romani dialects contain Armenian words, suggesting that they passed through Armenia in the early 11th century on the way into the Byzantine Empire. The impetus to continue on and enter Byzantine Anatolia was most likely provided by the Seljuk Turks attacked Armenia during the 11th century and spurred the Gypsies onward

The earliest currently known reference to Gypsies is in a Life of St. George composed in the monastery of Iberon on Mt. Athos in Greece in 1068. It relates events in Constantinople in 1050, when wild animals plagued an imperial park. The Emperor Constantine Monomachus commissioned the help of "a Samaritan people, descendants of Simon the Magician, who were called Adsincani, and notorious for soothsaying and sorcery," who killed the beasts with charmed pieces of meat. (I wonder if the concept of "poison" never occurred to these people?) "Atzinganoi," the Byzantine term for Gypsies, is reflected in several other languages: the German "Zigeuner," the French "Tsiganes," the Italian "Zingari," and the Hungarian "Cziganyok."

During the next 200 years, the Gypsies slowly advanced southwest into Arabia, Egypt and North Africa, northwest into the Byzantine Empire and established themselves in the southern Balkan countries (Serbia, Moldavia, Bulgaria, Hungary and the surrounding area) before 1300. It seems likely to me that this movement was slow due to the westward pressure of the Mongolian Empire; all of Eastern Europe's population was in turmoil and Russian refugees were fleeing west at the time. Once Khubilai Khan died in 1294, the Mongolian Empire began its decline and the borders crept back east, easing pressure on Europe and allowing the Gypsies to expand more rapidly than the previous two centuries. They entered Dubrovnik (modern-day Yugoslavia) before 1362, and had blanketed the Balkans by 1400.

The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries came as close to a Gypsy Golden Age as there had ever been. Gypsies covered Thrace, Macedonia, Greece, Yugoslavia and Rumania long before the Ottoman Turks conquered those lands. There was a large population at the seaport of Modon in the 1300's, on the most popular route to the Holy Land, settled in the Gypsy Quarter, a tent-city just outside the city walls sometimes called Little Egypt. This exposure to pilgrims and the attitudes and privileges accorded to them may have led the Gypsies to adopt pilgrim personas once they spread into Western Europe.

The Gypsies seemed to prefer Venetian territories such as Crete and Corfu, perhaps because those lands were relatively safe from the constant Turkish incursions. The population, and therefore their annual dues, in Corfu increased enough to form an independent fief conferred in 1470 onto the baron Michael de Hugot, which lasted until the nineteenth century. In the town of Nauplion, in the eastern Peloponnese, the Gypsies apparently formed an organized group under a military leader, one Johannes Cinganus (John the Gypsy). The Venetians expected to be given military aid in the case of increasing Turkish raids, and may have hoped the Gypsies would cultivate depopulated land.

Gypsies a little farther north, in the Balkans, were not quite as lucky. They certainly had economic importance, valued as artisans practicing such trades as blacksmithing, locksmithing and tinsmithing, and also filled the niche between peasant and master, but to prevent escape the government declared them slaves of the boyars. They could be sold, exchanged or given away, and any Rumanian man or woman who married a Gypsy became a slave also. Liberty was not fully restored to them in Moldo-Wallachia until the nineteenth century.

During the fifteenth century, the nature of the Gypsies' hesitant travels into Western Europe changed. Before that time, they were quiet, unobtrusive and loosely organized, but afterwards they moved in a purposeful way, courting attention, claiming to be pilgrims and demanding subsidies and letters of dispensation. During the two decades after 1417, there are some interesting observations to make. The Gypsy bands seemed to have some unity of action and connection with each other, telling the same tales and displaying similar supporting documents (papal letters and such). A surprising fact is that well into the sixteenth century there is no mention made of Gypsies having their own language, and no apparent difficulty in communicating with the inhabitants of countries they were visiting for the first time. These groups were organized under leaders with noble names and titles, sometimes exchanged with other chiefs. This is unusual in that many of the countries of central and eastern Europe made sure that Gypsies did not rule Gypsies.

What was behind this curious behavior? It may have been the Turkish invasion of the Balkans in the early 1400's; Wallachia capitulated to Turkish rule in 1415, two years before the first Gypsy bands were recorded in Western Europe. The Gypsies themselves would probably not have been affected in the long run under Turkish rule (ignoring the immediate fires, sacking and battles), due to the Turkish habit of leaving civilian populations free as long as they paid taxes to their conquerors, not an unfamiliar state of affairs for Gypsies. Many people stayed and embraced Islam, but there are records of other refugees including nobles wandering west in groups and subsisting on charity. One traveler who visited Modon attributed the Gypsy migration to lords and counts who would not serve under the Turks. It seems that the self-interest of barons of Gypsy fiefs who stood to lose quite a bit under Turkish rule was the impulse behind the organized incursions into Western Europe, and at least during the first few years the men who claimed to be barons, counts and dukes were telling the truth.

Whatever the impetus, the Gypsies exploded into central Europe. The usual scam involved a group claiming to be from Egypt or Little Egypt (perhaps referring to Modon?) showing up in a city and informing city officials that they were Christians doomed to wander for a period of years to fulfill a penance imposed upon them for the sin of neglecting their religion. They would collect food, money and letters of protection from the city and then continue to the next town. By 1417, Gypsies were recorded in Germanic cities. In 1418, several thousand Gypsies under a leader called Count Michael showed up in Strassbourg. Gypsies were entering Brussels and Holland by 1420, Bologna in 1422, and showing up in Rome in July of that same year. They travelled into Spain by 1425 and Paris by 1427. By the middle of the century, rulers and town governments started banning Gypsies, usually citing theft, fortunetelling, begging and sometimes espionage as the reasons. Europeans also recognized as lies the Gypsies' claims to be pilgrims in exile from Egypt, but there are a few instances of alms being given into the sixteenth century, apparently by slow learners.

At this point their meteoric expansion westward stopped for almost a century. Groups traveled east from the Balkans into Russia, establishing themselves in Siberia by the early sixteenth century but they did not enter Great Britain until 1514, probably because a completely separate ethnic group, the Tinkers, already occupied Britain and performed the same roles Gypsies did in other countries: nomadic entertainers, knife-grinders, pot-menders, woodworkers, transient field employees and so forth. The impetus to enter the British Isles was probably given by late fifteenth century Spanish policies ruling against and banishing Gypsies. With nowhere else to go, they entered Britain, then finally Norway in 1544 and Finland in 1597.

Why stay nomadic for so long?

From an anthropological point of view, I would say that this transient, fully nomadic lifestyle developed in response to the constant fighting pushing them west. Originally refugees from India, they may have thought they would return to their homeland as soon as Mahmoud of Ghanzi's fighting stopped. Refugees quite often stay ready to return to their point of origin for many years once pushed out of their native lands. (A modern example: some Cuban refugees still keep bags packed in anticipation of returning at any time.)

When the Dom people left the Sind, they probably planned to live on the road for a few years and then return to their home territory. Normally, the second generation would have settled down in this "temporary" new area, but they were semi-nomadic to begin with, and then the Seljuk Turks invaded and pushed them farther west. After that the Mongolian expansion kept pushing them, and eventually the idea that there was a "back home" was lost. They retained their original semi-nomadic lifestyle in the midst of sedentary cultures, keeping their language and strict pollution ideology in order to maintain their unity as a people as well as clinging to something familiar in the midst of strange new cultures. They were mostly successful until the nations of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries grew powerful enough to force the majority to settle. Their identity as a separate people is still strong enough for them to remain the brunt of prejudice and hatred, a fact hammered home by the killing of half a million Gypsies by the Nazis during World War II. Now, it may only be a few generations until any idea of nomadism is leached out of almost all Gypsies

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

A possible hybridization or variant of an Omani Blade or an actual Omani blade in Wootz.

During the last few weeks I have had a most interesting exchange of letters with Rick Stroud on the subject of his excellent knowledge of Wootz and Omani and Indian blades. Somewhere herein could be the answer to the origin of the sword on this thread at #1 and other similar weapons. More importantly we may be on the edge of a fresh discovery; Omani Swords with Wootz blades?

(Tagged on the end as a note is a comprehensive methodology on etching by Rick which I commend to the Forum with the proviso "That this level of work should only be attempted as a detailed program in a workshops environment by competent restorers and that if in doubt don’t do it… moreover have an expert do it for you".)

Below is a more or less precise interchange of letters between Rick and myself on the subject of Wootz in Omani Swords.

Please see this but if it does not work simply copy the string into search; http://www.vikingsword.com/library/rick_seldomwootz1.pdf

Salaams Rick,
In considering your sword shown on the webpage reference as Omani I have a few pointers which ring fence this type of weapon to the Red Sea rather than Oman.
First I have seen no Omani wootz examples therefore this suggests that there are none therefore it is an out of area blade on an Omani hilt. There are similar blades in both the museums of Saudia and Yemen on forum and TVV s thread #1 which I believe is a similar blade though not apparently wootz.
The second test is in the flexibility range which from an Omani blade ought to easily go through a 90 degree flex and return to straight immediately.

Your fine sword may not do that though may well be flexible in the 5 to 10 % range.

Thirdly yours is pointed to take advantage of the straight stiffer blade whereas Omani Sayf (of the type argued as European Trade Blades perhaps 17th to 21 st C ) are as you know; spatulate tipped.

Originally straight swords passed from the Mamelukes down the red sea though your blade may have been made as a one off perhaps in Sri Lanka or Hyderabad.

In conclusion I would suggest that your blade is a Saudia or a Yemeni variant on an Omani long Hilt. It could be an Omani merchants or slave traders sword but I believe it is on the flank as a peripheral and important Iconic Red Sea style.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.


Salaams Ibrahiim,
Thank you for the e-mail and thoughts about the Omani sword that used to be in my collection but unfortunately has moved onto another collector. A couple of details to add to your assumptions.

First, the blade is thin and very flexible/pliable. It definitately would bend 90 degrees and return true. You mention Saudia or Yemeni as a possible origin but as in your experience with Omani swords and not running across any wootz examples, in my experience, I have not run across any Saudia or Yemeni examples of wootz. Of course, this is not to say that none existed in any of these areas.

A couple of possibilities. One is that we don't have sufficient number of examples left in original polish. A rusted or well patina'ed blade doesn't always reveal the wootz pattern. Matter of fact, on the example under discussion, when I first purchased the sword a wootz pattern was not clearly visible. It was only upon close inspection that I noticed the pattern and I sent it out for a polish which revealed the pattern. It is an unusual pattern and not one I would classify as typical Persian, Ottoman or Indian wootz. However, over the years, I have seen a number of variant patterns that could have originated from anywhere.

Another possibility to consider is that there may have been a small center of blade forging that was familiar with forging wootz that eventually died out and no longer was passed down the generations. From that, there could have been a small production of wootz blades that you may find still hilted in Omani long hilts but the pattern no longer visible due to time and patina.


The third possibility is as you say, an imported blade. On the example we are discussing, in my opinion, a likely source for the blade would be somewhere in India. I have seen a number of very thin, very pliable blades mounted Indian style which would suggest either an Indian blade origin, or, an imported blade from another region. If only our blades could talk to us! No doubt, continued research into this area should yield more findings.

I would suggest that on every blade you have the opportunity to view, that you take it out into very good light and really study the blade surface to see if there are any signs of patterning. Even polishing/etching some blades would reveal the forging technique and metallurgical properties of the blade and with enough samples you may begin to see patterns/similarities enough to opine as to a possible origin for these blades.

With kind regards,
Rick Stroud.

Conclusion (By Ibrahiim)
Essentially I agree with everything Rick has said and have undertaken to search for the Omani Wootz connection by looking very closely at Omani blades.
The likelihood of an Indian or Sri Lankan Wootz sword maker looms large in my calculations. It is likely that sword style was copied from either an Omani straight form ~ Sayf ~ and or styled on swords emerging in the Red Sea area from Saudia or Yemen which may be of Mameluke (or pre Mameluke) origin.
We may be looking at an Omani slave traders sword or an Omani merchant sword. The door is perhaps opening to more Omani swords with Wootz Blades.

If it is the case that this sword and others turn out to be Omani then a very important find has been discovered. The sword is fitted to an Omani Hilt and is flexible though fashioned to a point. Nonetheless the indicators are there for a very interesting addition to the Omani Armoury.

Regards, and with particular thanks to Rick Stroud,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.



Notes; Etching by Rick Stroud.

Hi Ibrahiim,
Thanks for the Christmas and New Year well wishes. Much appreciated.
Yes, feel free to record our conversation on your post. I'm happy to contribute in any small way.

As far as a polish and etch, my first recommendation is to utilize a professional polisher. I work with a gentleman in the US that does fantastic work and understands the proper way to clean, etch and neutralize the blade plus understands the proper contours of the blade, can straighten bent blades (when possible), etc. He really does great work. I have done some light cleaning and etching on my own. It is a multiple part process that you have to follow diligently.
The first is that the blade has to be made as smooth and as clean as possible. To do this, you have to remove any rust. Typically, a sanding block or sanding stone can be used to remove the rust but one has to be very careful not to scratch or damage the blade. Keeping the surface of the blade wet while doing this will help and then starting with coarser grades first and then moving down to finer grades will help remove scratches and keep the blade as smooth as possible. Deep pits are challenging because you have to remove too much of the surface of the blade so in those cases conservation of the blade is more in order than a full polish but you still may be able to determine if the blade is wootz or not in smoother/better areas. This is the most labor and time intensive part of the job. You can't rush it. You have to be patient and take your time.

Once you have removed the surface rust/oxidation and have the blade as smooth as possible you then need to make sure the blade is clean and free of any oils or other product. At this stage, you clean the blade thoroughly with a degreaser, like dish soap, and rinse with water. Once you have given it a good clean and then rinsed with water, dry it off with a towel and let it air dry for a bit. Make sure the blade isn't handled with your fingers because they contain oils and this defeats the cleaning you just did.

For an added layer of degreasing, you can take some acetone or denatured alcohol and wipe the blade down really well and then let it air dry for a while in a spot where it won't pick up any additional oils or particles.

Etching should be done with an acid like ferric chloride. It's best to start out with a diluted mix. About 2 teaspoons of ferric chloride and about 10 teaspoons of water. It's good to heat up this solution so the water being mixed in should be hot, even boiling hot. The blade should also be warmed up but not too hot. You don't' want to distort or retemper a blade from heating it up too hot. A hairdryer across the surface will warm the blade up or sitting in the sun for a little bit will warm the blade up.

Before etching the blade, you want to make sure you protect the handle or any important cartouche, inlay or koftgari. You can do a wax resist by the handle so the etchant doesn't run in there. You can also do this around the cartouche or a row of inlay or koftgari.

Then take a foam brush and brush the etchant onto the blade. Work the etchant thoroughly and evenly up and down the blade. Make sure you continue to reapply and keep "painting" the etchant onto the surface. Make sure you wear gloves because the etchant is not good for your skin. If there is a wootz pattern, it should begin to show up pretty quickly. Only etch the blade for a few minutes and then rinse with water. If you are seeing something in the blade, dry it real well, degrease it again, and then do another application of the etchant. I wouldn't do more than 2 or 3 applications. If a pattern is not showing by this time, then you are likely not to have a pattern.

Once finished with the etching, it is important to neutralize. You can take baking soda and make a paste with water. Make it thick enough to apply and "stick" to the surface of the blade. Leave it on for a few minutes and then rinse with water. Rinse well, take a towel and wipe dry and apply some acetone or denatured alcohol and wipe blade thoroughly. You may notice some discoloration on the blade from the etching. These are areas that were missed by the neutralization. You can take some 0000 steel wool and some oil and hit these spots to remove the color.

Most importantly, when you are finished with everything, you need to give the blade a good oiling. Depending on the steel, you may need to reapply a time or two as a blade tends to be "thirsty" after a good clean and etch. And that is pretty much it. At least one method. There are a dozen other ways to try and bring out a pattern but I have found this method to work pretty well on wootz. Good luck if you decide to give it a try.
All the best,
Rick

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Note to Forum. follows

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Note to Forum.

Salaams All ~It should be remembered that the Straight Omani Sayf has two distinct forms;

1. The original short Omani Battle sword and
2. The so called European Trade Blade replacement (17th ~ 19th C)

These are swords that work in tandem with a small shield; The Buckler Shield or Terrs.

The Terrs and Buckler Shield fighting technique. Terrs Wa Sayf.

I ventured onto the European Forum recently to examine some facts about European Buckler and Sword techniques in a bid to learn more on that and make some sort of suggestions on the origin of this type of combat and with reference to the Omani Style. For this I thank the European Forum especially Matchlock Freebooter and Broadaxe for their valuable contributions toward the system I Quote "from Broadaxe termed MS 1.33. From the famous German medieval fencing book Walpurgis-Fechtbuch MS I.33 of ca. 1320, now preserved in the Royal Armouries Leeds." Unquote.

The main questions being: How, if at, did the technique move from country to country and where did it originate?

One interesting gem gleaned in the European Forum ~ it appears that the system used in Lebanon was called the same but died out relatively recently... in the 1970s.

Clearly the technique used in Georgia by KHEVSAR tribesmen is also very similar. It is engrained into their tradition therefor it has survived in the same way essentially as "The Sayf and Terrs" technique in Oman.

As a bonus to that continuation in Oman is its inexorable link to the traditional Funun ... A played out dance(procession with swords and sword with shield mimic fight (ayalaah), music and poetry pageant practised many times a year at weddings, social gatherings, National Day celebrations and Bi Annual Eid Festivals thus tying it to the religious historical record.

The Georgians were very much part of the Crusader contingent and it is not inconceivable that this form was taken from their soirres into the Holy Land. Lebanon on the doorstep of the region would have easily absorbed the technique. Nights Templar and Masonic lodges and other military groups would certainly have experienced this system and could have adopted modified or studied the technique and transported it with them to Europe. Pilgrims may also have made the weapon system known to Europe.

Which way did it happen?... Did the Europeans or Arabs introduce it? My view is that the Funun started in about 751 in support of the Ibathi brand of Islam in Oman but that it actually commenced even earlier and in honour of the general Islamic movement in about 630 AD.

I therefor present the system as originating from Oman and spreading to other Arab countries in a ripple inspired by war, trade and socio-relgious interaction into the central Jerusalem hub. It is suggested that both the Georgian and European contingents absorbed this technique in Jerusalem.

As in most things it froze in Oman and in "The Funun" and was either adopted and retained as by the Khevsars or practiced in Europe for many centuries but waned and died out i.e.. in Europe because of the transition to gunpowder weapons and because it was not sealed within a socio-religious document. It was just a fighting technique.

In Europe it developed with more of the rapier style of sword though I see in the references fairly broad swords being also used... clearly the system was attractive because of the speed and balance of the combination.

I offer this as a forum note and invite suggestions. (Meanwhile I sketch out the direction required for advancing the theory and contradictions of European Trade Blades~plus further research on the Old Omani Battle Sword as well as the curved variants ) pictured below

Straight Sayf. Old Omani Battle Sword. Buckler. Curved Kattara.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

For the finer points of history and as a general timeline overview I place the following reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Islam

[TVV]

Interesting reserach Ibrahim.

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Clearly the technique used in Georgia by KHEVSAR tribesmen is also very similar. It is engrained into their tradition therefor it has survived in the same way essentially as "The Sayf and Terrs" technique in Oman.

The Georgians were very much part of the Crusader contingent and it is not inconceivable that this form was taken from their soirres into the Holy Land.

There are hisotircal sources that mention templars, which aided the Georgians at Didgori, but I am yet to see any sources about the opposite - Georgians travelling to the Holy Lands as mercenaries to the Latins. That does not mean it did not happen, but I would be interested in learning more about this with the proper historical argumentation.

It would also be interesting to see any parallels between the use of the buckler in Oman and the use of bucklers in India and Persia.

Personally, I am not sure if the sword and buckler technique originated somewhere and then spread out from Spain and Scotland to Rajhastan, or if it was independently developped in various places. A small, round shield is a very intuitive form, and the development of fighting technique with it and a sword does not seem that unique to require a single origin.

Regards,
Teodor

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by TVV

Interesting reserach Ibrahim.



There are hisotircal sources that mention templars, which aided the Georgians at Didgori, but I am yet to see any sources about the opposite - Georgians travelling to the Holy Lands as mercenaries to the Latins. That does not mean it did not happen, but I would be interested in learning more about this with the proper historical argumentation.

It would also be interesting to see any parallels between the use of the buckler in Oman and the use of bucklers in India and Persia.

Personally, I am not sure if the sword and buckler technique originated somewhere and then spread out from Spain and Scotland to Rajhastan, or if it was independently developped in various places. A small, round shield is a very intuitive form, and the development of fighting technique with it and a sword does not seem that unique to require a single origin.

Regards,
Teodor

Salaams Teodor~

Thank you for your constructive comments. I take your point since occasionally quite unrelated tribal structures appear globally and it is easy to conjecture buckler shield development as purely coincidental...However~

The Buckler is in the Omani Funun from the start of the Ibathi movement in what we generally consider as 751 AD. in Oman... though earlier if you take the start date of Islam proper.

Transition to the central sector which I include the Holy Land, Lebanon etc was through trade, war and religious pilgrimage. Via Mecca and direct. By sea and land routes; tried and tested.

Georgians and Europeans therefore would have viewed the system and likely came up against it and copied the form on any of the dozen or so crusades (Knights Templar, FreeMasons, Knights of Saint George et al)

System 133 the famous European Buckler and Sword style from the documents available appears to be from between the 10th and 13th Century... not before… so the Europeans developed it at the right time to agree with my assumption that it came to them from the Mediterranean.

My supposition on transmission is therefore: Oman, Mecca, Jerusalem, Lebanon (where it died out in 1970) Thence to Georgia and Europe via 2 different groups in about the 12th 13 th C..

Regarding India I think that may be linked though Oman has taken no bladed weapons to my knowledge (other than isolated firearms) from there. By that I mean of the hundreds of excellent different weapons in the Indian Armoury I see none that have traversed to Oman (though there may be odd individual pieces) The style is Omani.

There are many reasons why but the main one is, I believe, enthroned by the simple principle of "it it works dont change it". Combine that with the virtual sacrasanct nature of the Sayf ~ The Old Omani Battle Sword which lasted plus of 1000 years alongside the Terrs Buckler shield. These 2 pieces of kit are Iconic and virtually heraldic symbols in the Omani tradition reaching back to the 8th Century. Antony North describes in vivid detail the nature of Arab arms which once accepted changed very little down the centuries; Islamic Arms and Armour.

Naturally I view Indian, Sri Lankan and Persian steel production as having a potential bearing on Omani weaponry though actual "sword style" is completely different and the shield is African in nature hailing from Zanzibar (though you can say from African coastal regions)
Some point to the Khanjar as being Indian however the word itself like the word for the straight sword (Sayf) are pure Arabic words.
Pinpointing the origin of the Khanjar may be the subject of a different post however it may never be accurately uncovered.

I suspect however that it began here and evolved into the Indian vocabulary of weapons in about the 15/16th Century via trade etc. Backing my claim is the appearance in one specific pageant where Jebali dancers in the southern province of Oman (Dhofar) practice with it to music in a similar way to the Sayf exponents though I have not a clue (yet) to the time scale on that. The Metropolitan Museum puts the appearance of Khanjars in India to the 16th Century.

~I would, however, only like to mention this on passing since it is off theme slightly (my fault) and to return to the main argument regarding Buckler and Sayf transfer of technology and style to Europe~

I point to the Holy Land and the Crusades, the Omani trade links, known camel routes, sea trade routes, practices, pilgrimages, pageants and wars combined with what we know of the technique and its identical Omani name in Lebanon 40 years ago of "Sayf wa Terrs" and therefore I suggest, that since it began here 500 years before the European book was written on the system that it probably evolved from Oman between the 8th and 13th Century A.D.

I welcome any constructive views and once again thank you Teodor for your important input.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[ariel]

[QUOTE=Ibrahiim al Balooshi

....since it began here 500 years before the European book was written on the system that it probably evolved from Oman between the 8th and 13th Century A.D.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.[/QUOTE]


Well, don't you think that it might be more fair to compare apples to apples, i.e. date of publication of the first Omani book on the subject?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by ariel

Well, don't you think that it might be more fair to compare apples to apples, i.e. date of publication of the first Omani book on the subject?

Salaams Ariel,

You want me to compare the publication of the first Omani book on the subject ~ I assume you mean with the 13thC European work and upon the basis of fairness?

I think the answer is no for a number of reasons ~

First, that your question assumes perhaps a competitive argument between the two systems whereas mine is a theory for discussion in that the two evolved one from the other in keeping with my conclusive statement at the end of my post viz;

"I point to the Holy Land and the Crusades, the Omani trade links, known camel routes, sea trade routes, practices, pilgrimages, pageants and wars combined with what we know of the technique and its identical Omani name in Lebanon 40 years ago of "Sayf wa Terrs" and therefore I suggest, that since it* began here 500 years before the European book was written on the system** that it probably evolved from Oman between the 8th and 13th Century A.D".

* it refers to the Omani system.
** refers to the European development.

Second, that whereas there is the 13th C European Fightbook on the European system M.133. No document appears so far on the Eastern technique anywhere near the same time frame if at all. Thus in comparing the techniques I have scrutinized the European style and liaised with the European Forum on the subject therefore I report that the similarities are too close to ignore (though always admitting that the evidence as in all forensic research is very difficult to uncover.) Would you have me give up because there is no Arabic Textbook?

Third, your assumption based on the comparison of publications is curious. How many books have been written on the European trade blade structure of circa the 18thC ?... None. Where is the documentary evidence on precise wootz manufacturing technology?... none..The list is endless but illustrates my point that simply relying solely upon books of reference will get us nowhere, however, placing these subjects under the microscope of decent research and proper discussion will help shine a light into the dim corners of antiquity that so far have been blind alleyways.
This is surely the essence of our Forum.

As you probably know ancient mediaeval scripts often written by the clergy offer clues, however, on the Arabian Peninsula they are few and far between... and I fear in this case are non existent, moreover, what we do have is a played out performance structure passing down the message of "life at the time" through the Funoon accompanied by music and poetry which I describe as "the traditions". Thus we are able to view the two styles ~ One in a book for the West and the other as a pageant for the East. In addition the western technique has continued into martial art form till today and in the case of the Lebanese System it resurfaced about 2 centuries ago but has since died out(1970) and was known by the identical Omani name of " Sayf wa Terrs."
I believe that was a clue Dr Watson?

If there is an inherent weakness in my theory it could be in the fact that the Lebanese fight style was dormant and only revived 2 centuries ago but died in 1970, however, I believe it was born from passed down and possibly unwritten treatise and perhaps some vague references linked to the Knights in that region during the crusades.. The Georgian concept fits well into the general mix.

Therefore, I argue (in Forum Terms) for the transmission of technology from Oman via the Jerusalem/Holy Land "cog or hub" of this ancient system into both Europe and Georgia.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Note; The Omani style evolved from the Abbasid occupation and wars during the 8th/9thC. A.D. The Abbasid sword has been shown to be very similar in almost a dozen ways to the Old Omani Battle Sword illustrated on this thread at # 5 The Abbasid were great copiers of the Greek style of most parts of life: architecture, mathematics, science and weaponry etc...

I do not say that the Omanis developed in isolation the form of "buckler and sword" but that they evolved their own development of the technique probably from Abbasid influence (originally Greek) and may well have passed that on as described...and on to exponents who also modified and evolved their own styles in due course.

[Rick]

Thread locked until Lew's return .