![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,429
|
![]()
Hi
With the European-style hilt and crocodile or lizard sheath, with claws etc (to create an exotic look), I think this falls into the category of Sudanese objects made post Anglo-Egyptian conquest (1898), for sale to Europeans. It could also be a commission from a European military person/administrator to a Sudanese artisan, for a curio or souvenir. Regards. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 75
|
![]()
Yes Colin, all is possible.
Thanks |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
|
![]()
Actually through all the colonial activity in particular, as well as the trade from Europe which extends well into antiquity, tribal awareness of styles and forms from these weapons is understandable. Many tribal weapons are fashioned after European forms, and often bayonets were used for daggers much the way that trade blades enabled the production of swords.These of course another weapon well adopted from both European and Middle East arms.
In Morocco the so called 'Zanzibar' swords discussed here years ago, are the Moriccan s'boula daggers which are often found with French bayonets. In the Sahara, Sudan and many tribal areas little is ever discarded, and blades of any kind can be recycled and remounted countless times over generations. While it is always tempting to classify any amomaly or unusual variant from these regions as 'commercially oriented', it must be remembered that these native weapons are not fashioned from a regulation pattern book. There were countless self styled artisans who created thier own weapons in the field, and the use of these hides including many crocodile types are known to have been favored by warriors during the Mahdist uprisings which the potent totemic value presumably imbued. This one seems to have some good genuine age with the deterioration in the pommel under the hide, and I think this puts it quite plausibly in the Mahdist period. I must confess at first I thought it might be a 'creative' item as suggested for the burgeoning tourist market of the occupation, but second thoughts make me feel differently. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 75
|
![]()
it came together with this more common and known ceremonial dagger, what let me think thar there must be some age.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
|
![]()
good observation, note the thuluth.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: GA USA
Posts: 76
|
![]()
I think this is a late 17th century early 18th century dagger.
You are right about the shape and being modified just adding the skin. Looking at the blade it does not seem to have been modified from a small sword. Second half of the 17th century had all kind of pillow swords and parring daggers with smaller cross guards. But is just me I could be wrong. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 75
|
![]()
I'm not longer sure zalmoxis, I think Jim with his Martini Henry socket bayonet is right. I checked it and indeed such bayonets have the same shape :-(
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|