Very Nice Nimcha

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Enamel work was used all over Muslim countries, especially with the Ottomans this is not a Bukharan specificity.

This Central Asian link is a nonsense. As another forum member mentions rightly, this is clearly an Algerian sword (at least it's obvious to me).

Of course this is (north-west) African nimcha, and enamel was certainly used elsewhere (and not only in Muslim countries)... I am surprised you thought this was even an argument
The point was in the kind of enamel! There are some known enameled nimchas ( there are a few examples HERE ) The enamel is distinctively different in many ways. Considering A&A and Ariel's+Elgood comments, and known Central Asian enamel samples, I suggested the possibility of Charles' nimcha (fittings) being produced by Central Asian master living elsewhere.

[Kubur]

OK OK sorry Alex

Here is the one from the MET

[ALEX]

Kubur, this is a nice example. It looks like enamel/champleve work, is it possible to see it closer? Also, is there an attribution or more details on this nimcha?
Looking at details of technique, design and material, it appears to me that enamel on most Moroccan/Algerian fittings is more granular and geometrical, whereas on Charles' example it is made in different style and technique, which makes it quite unusual, and special! As Bukharan enamelers were known to be working in Oman, perhaps similar workshops existed elsewhere, a suggestion we cannot verify now. I look forward to more comparisons and analysis of similar examples.

[Jim McDougall]

Actually if I recall looking into Elgood (1994) there was no mention of Bukharen work in Oman, but he did mention such Central Asian (Bukharan) work in Yemen, as was also pointed out by Ibrahiim. It seems Yemen had far more variations of influential sword mounting and furbishing which include the impressive examples of Hadhramaut, I believe considered part of Yemen. Also in San'aa which I believe as well part of Yemen in kind there were impressive swords mounted.

Again trying to keep to the suggestion of Maghrebi, most likely Algerian provenance for this blade, and likely these mounts, as Algerian, other examples of deeply stamped marks have been found in earlier discussions on a pistol.
As earlier noted these deep stamps may be those of an outfitter rather than a formally recognized arsenal. These places mounted received trade blades for distribution, and similar deeply stamped marks seem to occur in similar blade location near the ricasso in many cases (except obviously the pistol which is on the top of the barrel over the lock, not sure of proper term).

There was I believe a Yemeni classified sword of silverwork mounts with a straight backsword blade again with similar stamp (and location) but with central blade markings of Italian form (three hourglass type stamps).

As well noted by A&A, enameling was practiced throughout Ottoman Empire and the presence and skills of artisans from Central Asian regions and perhaps others would have certainly altered regional characteristics.

Without specific and reliable provenance we would have to turn to the styles, motif and theme of features in hopes of better classification.
Overall, most elements direct to probable Algerian mounting of this remarkable sabre.

Charles just wanted to thank you again for posting this, and giving us all what has become a great exercise in investigating this sword and others of its form.

[ALEX]

Jim,
I believe that more comparative analysis and samples of similarly detailed arms, or other objects made in similar technique, would benefit the research. Beyond mounting, the artistic characteristics and details can point to certain regions, masters and even workshops. I do not recall seeing similar enameled fittings on Maghreb weapons. Are there any? Again, I mean not just enamel, but this particular style of enameling. It is not characteristic of Maghreb in my opinion. Sadly, these details are not considered enough when it comes to arms, and 'artistic' part of research is often lacking, especially when it comes to such non-standard 'impressive' sword, whereas with other non-arms objects, it is a common practice. Perhaps I am over-analyzing. What do you think?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Jim,
I believe that more comparative analysis and samples of similarly detailed arms, or other objects made in similar technique, would benefit the research. Beyond mounting, the artistic characteristics and details can point to certain regions, masters and even workshops. I do not recall seeing similar enameled fittings on Maghreb weapons. Are there any? Again, I mean not just enamel, but this particular style of enameling. It is not characteristic of Maghreb in my opinion. Sadly, these details are not considered enough when it comes to arms, and 'artistic' part of research is often lacking, especially when it comes to such non-standard 'impressive' sword, whereas with other non-arms objects, it is a common practice. Perhaps I am over-analyzing. What do you think?

Not over analyzing at all Alex, in fact you more eloquently expressed exactly what I was trying to say. I am admittedly not especially adept at analysis of artistic techniques, but have always noted your observations as astute.
\
I think one of the most confounding circumstances is when artisans from other cultures or regions are working in areas outside their own which transposes their indigenous character into other context.

This was the situation which Elgood described concerning Bukharen enamel work in Mecca, but then suggested perhaps the item was removed to Bukhara and decorated there. Considering the diffusion of Bukharen goods and influences, possibly Yemen would be included, we know there were distinct religious connections there from Bukhara as previously discussed.

I completely agree, the artistic values and character in the evaluation of arms decoration is essential in classification of at least the mounts, the blades of course often being another story.
Well noted as always.

PS in my previous post I stated Elgood noted Yemen/Bukharen work but meant Mecca as he actually noted.

[Jim McDougall]

To reiterate what Midelburgo posted (#42) regarding the 'old hypothesis' on Italian origins of these nimcha hilts in the Mediterranean, carried forward in Tony North's 1975 article "A Late 15th Century Italian Sword", I wanted to repost the plate of hilt variants he included.
Attached below are 150-158 from "Armi Bianchi Italiene" (Boccia & Coelho, 1975) and all are 'storta' from Venice c. 1480-1490.

In the plate with markings, #150, the first one left top, has these three curious 'twig' markings, which are seen in the next image of the cylindrical Yemeni hilt with straight blade with apparently (heavier) marks on the blade as well as a cartouche near the ricasso. See next image for the caption #150 and followed by the article cover with Yemeni sword.

In the next images from Boccia & Coelho are storta which by the 17th century have gone from somewhat straight blades to the flared falchion type blades. These are not of course identical, but aside from elaborate fullering and added features, the sweeping profile into heavier point for optimum momentum in close quarters is evident.

In the last plate is a blade with four fullers, from Milan c. 1610, which shows makers mark and name in the key location on blade we have been discussing toward those seen on what we believe to be Algerian placed stamps.

I hope these plates might add to the detail here in our discussion which will show that evidence for Italian origins for these Mediterranean sabres from 15th century hilts is compelling. The strong influence of Venice and Genoa in North Africa and other ports of call throughout the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean, Southern Arabia seems profound.

* THE STORTA PLATE I INTENDED FIRST APPARENTLY DID NOT OPEN BUT LINKED BELOW , SORRY.