The Manding sword, the Tuareg aljuinar and Omani curved kattara: Are they connected?

[Jim McDougall]

Iain thank you for addressing these talking points, as it helps if we can arrive at common perception in consideration of them. As you have noted, lack of guard does not render any edged weapon non combat worthy, as in any such combative interaction often parry or defense was with shields etc.

In considering swords equated with prestige, rank, station etc. while not necessarily in accord with combat weapons, they are indeed often in the same or similar form with those that were. As I said earlier, at any time circumstances might call for these 'parade or status' type weapons to serve as weapons of opportunity and as required. Their functionality might be less than optimal, but we cannot presume that their use was discounted regardless.

In the famed 'battle' with Blackbeard in 1718, Lt. Maynard's 'dress' small sword broke in his attack on the pirate. He was pretty much saved by the action of his men. Typically in military cases, officers would have their fancy or dress/parade swords , but took similar 'fighting' swords on campaign.
In ethnographic cases, persons of rank were typically protected by their bodyguards etc. but if overrun or attacked, these swords of rank could be used in some degree.

In many cases, the embellishment of swords of state or status, might have hilt décor which precluded the reasonable grasp of the weapon in action. Things such as highly ornate creature heads and other decoration (such as on many kastane) would impair normal grasp for combat.

Thank you as well for the reminder on the takouba form, which is a long standing development of a standardized generality which indeed diffused throughout Saharan and Sahelian regions which expected variation in degree. The trade blades which travelled throughout all of these regions varied as well. It is reasonable to note that these blades could be used on these variant weapons, and that curved blades would be used by Manding and Tuareg or whomever chose to use them.

The origins of the takouba itself I would understand being unclear, and it seems even its range of use as indeterminate as the boundaries of the Tuareg or any of these tribes. I don't think there can be any question as to its use as a weapon, though as anywhere, the advent of firearms did have some effect by the 19th c.

[Iain]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Iain thank you for addressing these talking points, as it helps if we can arrive at common perception in consideration of them. As you have noted, lack of guard does not render any edged weapon non combat worthy, as in any such combative interaction often parry or defense was with shields etc.

In considering swords equated with prestige, rank, station etc. while not necessarily in accord with combat weapons, they are indeed often in the same or similar form with those that were. As I said earlier, at any time circumstances might call for these 'parade or status' type weapons to serve as weapons of opportunity and as required. Their functionality might be less than optimal, but we cannot presume that their use was discounted regardless.

Hi Jim,

I think we are still misunderstanding each other a little on this topic.

My point is not that so called parade or status weapons (usually highly embellished) can also serve as weapons.

Rather, normal, functional, swords often serve to denote the rank or social position of the bearer. A Medieval knight carried a sword, it was a sign of his position, this was not a parade weapon but still had a duel function of being both a weapon and a symbol of status. The takouba is much the same as is the Manding sabre. One role does not rule out the other. Simply put a sword which indicates a status is not necessarily a sword that differs from any other piece of the type. The sword form itself in the case of something like the takouba, was the status symbol in certain groups like the Tuareg, no parade versions needed.

The origins of the takouba itself I would understand being unclear, and it seems even its range of use as indeterminate as the boundaries of the Tuareg or any of these tribes. I don't think there can be any question as to its use as a weapon, though as anywhere, the advent of firearms did have some effect by the 19th c.

The origins are rather more clear than previously thought, as this forms part of an upcoming publication I don't want to reveal too much, but perhaps sufficient to say even modern day Tuareg have a pretty good idea where it came from as confirmed with primary field research.