European bladed takouba

[TVV]

Iain, while I cannot add much to the discussion, I just want to congratulate you on what is undoubtedly an amazing find. Given all your effort and research into takoubas and weapons from the Western Sahel, this is most deserved. Merry Christmas!
Teodor

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by TVV

Iain, while I cannot add much to the discussion, I just want to congratulate you on what is undoubtedly an amazing find. Given all your effort and research into takoubas and weapons from the Western Sahel, this is most deserved. Merry Christmas!
Teodor

Salaams All ~!! .... Absolutely !!!!!

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Iain]

Hi Jim,

Yes, I think the 14th century date is fairly supportable now. The twin circles seems to have been popular as well as I've seen a few now (all Alexandria related).

Teodor and Ibrahiim,

Thank you for the kind words. It was pure luck, but the best Christmas I can remember in quite some time.



I wanted to continue with the discussion a bit now that the blade has been pretty thoroughly commented on.

While the 1365 invasion by Peter of Cyprus is probably the most well known of the late crusades, the Mahdian Crusade should also be mentioned. A 1390 campaign against the pirate stronghold on the Tunisian coast. Besides this various other small campaigns and actions on Malta, Cyprus or the Italian commercial cities like Genoa could account for such a blade arriving in N. Africa and then on, into the Sahel proper.

But I wanted to talk about the hilt on this sword, which, putting aside the blade for the moment, is equally worthy of discussion.

The pommel is of the older oval type and interestingly is curved on the inside to fit the palm of your hand. Made of two halves, the top features a single strap of iron and a cap of brass in a rectangular shape. It is the most comfortable and hand fitting pommel I've seen so far.

The handle is ten sided and very solid. Almost certainly originally covered in leather.

The guard appears to be a single piece of iron forming both sides of the guard and a second piece on the top forming the ends and the top slot for the blade. This differs from the usual method of wrapping two pieces around the blade to form the guard. This in constrast this has clean, square edges and is more solid. I would say this has a chance to be an 18th century hilt and mount judging by the early 19th century mounts we can compare it with.

I still need to do a bit of derusting, there are some pits and built up dark areas on the blade, but knowing the age of it now, I am going slowly and carefully.

[Jim McDougall]

Intrigued by this blade, I have been on a fact finding mission to try to learn more on the history surrounding these medieval swords and these markings, and trying to also better understand the presence of this blade in North Africa.
I think that the early hilt style noted by Iain is significantly placed in possibly 18th century, early 19th though I am not nearly as clear on dating these so I would defer to his judgement. What I am trying to determine is when this blade, which seems to be at this point probably a 14th century example, may have entered the North African sphere.

As has been shown, the late crusades swords which survive mostly were presented to the arsenal at Alexandria with most of them apparantly entering those holdings as donations presented by the amirs. It seems understandable that these were afforded this extra attention as they were considered as trophies and proudly emplaced, most seem to have been donated between 1367 and 1467 AD (Kalus, 1982).

The dual concentric rings encircling the cross fourchee seem to be present on a number of these, with several accompanied by the running wolf. Since the terminus ante quem for these marks on the blade of I believe a couple of these is 1408 (the death of one donating amir) with the naskh inscriptions showing that amir as 'in the time of'. ...we can establish the markings used accordingly.

It is suggested that most of these blades were probably made in Milan (Boeheim, 1890, suggests the marking with single circle is probably Italian and in use as late as 14th-15th c.). The examples with the crudely chiseled 'quadraped' or running wolf (pre 1408) are quite probably Italian interpretations of the Passau mark....Italy and Germany were competitors in the arms market and as Sir James Mann (1962) points out, often spuriously used each others markings.
These Italian blades certainly had potential to later enter trade networks to North Africa as it is noted that Venice maintained trade with Mamluk Egypt. It seems clear that this trade continued post crusades of course, so the entry of these medieval blades into Mamluk possession need not have been through combat, but would certainly have been attractive reflecting the trophy type presence of those earlier examples which were. Many of these quite possibly entered the general population in Egypt for some time afterwards and even blades which had reached 'surplus' or obsolete status probably entered the North African littoral sometime indeterminately after thier manufacture. It was not at all uncommon for somewhat antiquated materials to end up entering colonial use in thier more remote circumstances or trade stock of merchants supplying these regions.

The Mamluks in Egypt were feudally in control until thier clandestine massacre by Muhammed Ali Pasha in Cairo in 1811, though many of them escaped to Sennar in Sudan to the south. As I understand, there had already been numbers of the Mamluks emplaced in these regions and engaged in the slave trade.
I am wondering if perhaps this medieval blade had entered the Mamluk reign and moved southward into Sudan either before or as result of the events of 1811. If it had entered the slave trade areas in Sudan, it seems not only likely but probable, that it may have been among trade materials, especially if it had been compromised by age or damage already.

In this scenario, the blade was appointed with the interesting collar to bolster the blade, and has clearly been ground to Tuareg or Hausa preferred profiles. With tradition of these being handed over and refurbished through generations, it seems possible it may have become static in early times and revered as a heirloom no longer for use, perhaps around end of the 18th to early 19th c.

Just my thoughts for possible scenario.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams Iain and Jim et al ~ and congratulations on an excellent topic ... This specialist research project is stunning !

The cross is of course Ethiopian Coptic and a fine example exists in the Deir es Salam Coptic Ethiopian Church in Jerusalem which in itself has for 1500 years been the beacon of their religion and indeed their country ~ such is its importance. (Picture attached)

The ancient forked cross pushes the envelope or rather supports the theory on the blades antiquity. Could it be that pilgrims passing into the Jerusalem hub have transferred either this blade(or the original blade which may have been modified later) and /or the technology centuries ago to Ethiopia ?... It makes sense to me.

Reference the second exhibit at #20; As a caution (and to myself since I dont have the knowledge on this particular type of weapon) the passau wolf and the cross look like having been made with the same tools i.e. the outlines are feathered in both cases with what looks to be from the same tool. The chisel strikes look to be the same on the wolf and cross (from the same tool). It can be argued, therefor, that they were done at the same time.

It is difficult to decide where these marks were made; Europe or Ethiopia. I leave that to the specialists however I lean toward Europe as I can believe a Coptic cross but not perhaps the wolf as both being put on at the same time in Ethiopia!! Therefor in the case of #20 I follow the earlier date rather.

In respect therefor of... #1 it appears to compare favourably with # 20 and in the absence of a radio spectrometry probe I would say its the same vintage..

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi..

[Iain]

Hi Ibrahiim,

The mark, along with many other European crosses, is largely derived from the Greek cross and you can find many cross marks with either fork terminals, or straight, Maltese or many other designs. So I think there is some superficial similarities with all Coptic crosses.

This blade and the marks are entirely European and I think the entry point into the Sahel is likely to have been Egypt or Tunisia. About dating I really hope it is 14th century as well and I see no reason at this point to think it is not.

Jim,

Brilliant as always! Very helpful material, Italian seems a very likely attribution. The idea of the blade moving with the Mamluks, either by trade or war, is a valid path to consider. My reason for suspecting an early date for the hilt is mainly the difference in construction and the pommel. If we use the two examples from 1830 as a benchmark and consider those styles in vogue for +/- 50 years, we are already back in the late 18th with those two swords. I think it is fairly reasonable then consider an 18th century date for this one. It is quite lucky for me this wasn't rehilted more recently!

Thinking about the Mamluk connection, it strikes as odd these haven't turned up in kaskara hilts as well... This was the pinnacle of the gold routes and large numbers of traders would have been moving with the great camel caravans.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Iain

Hi Ibrahiim,

The mark, along with many other European crosses, is largely derived from the Greek cross and you can find many cross marks with either fork terminals, or straight, Maltese or many other designs. So I think there is some superficial similarities with all Coptic crosses.

This blade and the marks are entirely European and I think the entry point into the Sahel is likely to have been Egypt or Tunisia. About dating I really hope it is 14th century as well and I see no reason at this point to think it is not.

Jim,

Brilliant as always! Very helpful material, Italian seems a very likely attribution. The idea of the blade moving with the Mamluks, either by trade or war, is a valid path to consider. My reason for suspecting an early date for the hilt is mainly the difference in construction and the pommel. If we use the two examples from 1830 as a benchmark and consider those styles in vogue for +/- 50 years, we are already back in the late 18th with those two swords. I think it is fairly reasonable then consider an 18th century date for this one. It is quite lucky for me this wasn't rehilted more recently!

Thinking about the Mamluk connection, it strikes as odd these haven't turned up in kaskara hilts as well... This was the pinnacle of the gold routes and large numbers of traders would have been moving with the great camel caravans.

Salaams Iaian, What an interesting thread...!! I neither disagree nor agree if you see what I mean... for example the Maltese cross ... ok it is related but it is very different to the almost exact form of the cross in a 1500 year old Church in Jerusalem and the one on your sword! I suspect the earlier date illustrated by Jim in his reference quote :

"Lech Marek ("Early Medieval Swords from Eastern and Central Europe", 2005, p.47) notes 10th century swords from Slovakia with Greek cross inlaid in copper in the blade".

I see a situation where this sword has perhaps transmitted from Europe with pilgrims to Jerusalem thence via Ethiopian traders to Africa.... Ethiopia. It is one of the possibilities. There are others. Mine is the most fanciful!

I further fancied that the other sword mark >-l--- was related to ancient Ethiopic or Greek script however after hours of comparison I cannot report any success with that theory moreover I suspect it is simply attempt at a second Coptic Cross which has stopped abruptly >-l--- rather like my letter !

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[TVV]

If I had to make a guess on the journey of this blade (and at this point we are all only making guesses), I would think that it is most likely to have entered the Western Sahel through the Maghreb. We all know about the activity of North African corsairs during the 16th century, when they sacked many Mediterranean coastal towns. While this type of sword was not in vogue, it is not improbable that many such swords were still in use a century to century and a half after their manufacture. The plunder that just the Barbarossa brothers brought to North Africa must have surpassed any trophies from the Eighth Crusade by a large factor.
In his book, Smaldone points out the trade links of the Sahelian Muslim Kingdoms and Empires with the Maghreb, and most of that trade was controlled by the Tuaregs. It is not difficult to imagine how this blade may have entered the Sahel through trade with Morocco for example.
Anyway, since we are all throwing theories, I thought I'd throw in mine as well.
Regards,
Teodor