European bladed takouba

[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

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks very much Iain!
The prevalent trade which came out of North Italy, particularly Venice, was of course likely to carry blades to the North African ports over many years.
It would not be surprising that numbers of surplus old blades may have been carried into the trade centers, and the fact that the broadsword prevailed in Mamluk regions for so long seems to add support to the idea.

Teodor, your theory is of course quite plausible as well, and we know that there were prevalent points of entry in the Maghrebi littoral to the caravan routes which headed southward and eastward across the Sahara. As noted, these routes were indeed controlled by Tuareg tribes.

Ibrahiim, the Ethiopian suggestion and the association of Greek cross with the Coptic Church is well placed. While we know as Iain has mentioned, there were many variations in the decorative style of Greek crosses used through medieval times. There are many subtle nuances and symbolic meanings applied through heraldic interpretations, so it is difficult to determine just how much must be presumed from these embellishments to this very simple cross design.
The cross you show for example is actually known heraldrically as the 'cross moline' and uses the bifurcated arms, but these are more in arched curve than the cross fourchee (forked) used in European parlance as discussed.
The more commonly seen 'cross potent' with straight lined serif at the arm ends is also known as the Jerusalem cross, and may well be aligned with the Coptic traditions you have well described with thier basilica there.

Actually the use of the kaskara, as far as I have known developed in Ethiopia much later than it did in the Sudan. During the early stages of the Mahdist uprising in the 1880s many of the tribesmen, if not even most, were poorly armed and had no swords or weapons other than tools or even rocks to throw. The use of the broadsword likely remained with Mamluks in Egypt and in some degree in the Sennar regions in Sudan where they had become established in slave trade.
There was not as much movement of blades as we are discussing into the Ethiopian regions, certainly not as was entering through Tunis and Alexandria...nor for that matter in the Moroccan ports. The key was that Malta and Cyprus were stops for Meditteranean trade and these locations are noted as likely having presumably significant holdings of surplus with provenance from probably any number of crusade associated campaigns.
Over time many changes in politics or power in areas where long established branches of military orders had once housed arsenals of these weapons had opened these to dispersal and likely brought forth these assemblages of blades etc.

Returning to Iains well placed query on why this blade was in Tuareg mounts rather than as a kaskara. Actually, in one of its earlier incarnations, it most likely was, and quite possibly in service in the Mamluk perameters. In my opinion it may well have entered into the westward trade routes with slave trade activity, probably in the 18th century as evidenced by the early form of Tuareg hilting. It would seem that the use of these broadswords in North Africa was more prevalent in Saharan regions in Chad, Bornu as well as with the Tuaregs and associated tribal confederations...at an earlier time than the widespread use of the kaskara in Sudan. In Egypt and the Sudan the use of broadswords existed of course with Mamluks and upper echelon and ranking individuals, but not with the majority tribal rank and file.

As Teodor has well noted, we're throwing our theories into the ring, and these are simply my own opinions. Its a great discussion!!! Lets keep it going, and of course look forward to thoughts of others out there reading this.

All best regards,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

I just wanted to add this from Dr. Lloyd Cabot Briggs (1965, "European Blades in Tuareg Swords and Daggers", JAAS Vol V, #2, pp.37-92):

"...northern Italy seems to have appeared as a new source of blades about the end of the 16th century or beginning of the 17th. The trade routes in this case ran probably from Tunis and perhaps Tripoli and Benghazi, southward across the desert via Ghadames and Ghat, or via Murzuk, and on through the Air to Katsina.
It looks as though the trade in North Italian blades was relatively short lived, but that may perhaps only be an illusion caused by the woeful insufficiency of our total example.
Germany seems to have remained priciple source of blades through Morocco southward into the desert from the 17th century into the 19th. "

The problem here is of course determining whether the blade is Italian or German, a difficult case since both sources used these marks and similar fuller patterns in period. It would seem with this analysis by Briggs that perhaps this blade, whether German or Italian, may have entered the Sahara via these routes entirely aside from the Mamluk venue I earlier suggested although that possibility remains plausible as well in my opinion.