The Original Dhu'l-Faqar

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Ahmed,
I am a lazy caller :-)
We started this discussion on these pages and I would prefer to continue it the same way.
You are not lazy under any circumstances: you were typing long and detailed communications one after another :-) How about answering my questions n writing too, so that everybody on the Forum can read them and judge for themselves?

Ariel,

I'm very flattered, but the fact is that it takes great effort for me to type; I even forget completing a long sentence that I've started. Please remember that English is but my second language.

OK, I'll type each paragraph and then post it. Actually, the disconnection of the ADSL as a result of electricity cuts really demoralizes me.

Cheers!
Ahmed

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

Ariel,

(Grin) No, the conclusions you've fancied are in no way like the true story. OK, here we go:

From a very young age, I developed a special love and interest for military history. This grew with time. It kept on growing until I became interested in many parts of military history; like the campaigns of Alexander the Great, Hannibal, Scipio Africanus the Elder, Julius Caesar, and Surenas in ancient times, and Belisarius, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas, Musa ibn Nusayr, Saladin, Richard the Lion-Heart, Qutuz, Baybars, Edward III, and Henry V in the mediaeval times, and Mehmet II, Selim I, Gustavus II Adolphus, Eugene of Savoy, Duke of Marlborough, Frederick II, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Marshal Davou(s)t in modern history. My love for this turned into what you can call an addiction. Even when I took the IGCSE exam in history (which deals with the 20th century) in 1994, I was able to score an A+; although no one in Egypt ever scored more than a B! Along my love for military history rose my love for historical weaponry and the history of its evolution, its typology, etc. After I left the Faculty of Science (which my father pressed me into entering it) after only 5 months, and shifting to the Faculty of Archaeology (because the Faculty of Arts; which had the History Department did not accept me for not taking French in my IGCSE), I found myself greatly involved in the study of Islamic arms and armor; not because of any academic syllabus, but because of the immense presence of books that deal with this topic in the Faculty's library...along with other great libraries; including the Library of the Cairo University.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

Of course, I had already a lot of knowledge regarding Islamic arms and armor from the time of my secondary enrollment, but this was nothing when it comes to what was in the books of these libraries that I've found when I went to the university. During the four-year enrollment to earn my B.A. (from 1995 to 1999), we had to make two researches every year; one in Islamic architecture, and the other in Islamic art. I usually chose my architectural research about castles, citadels, and city walls, while my art research dealt with arms and armor. After earning graduating in 1999, I started my post-graduate studies. That year, we had to do three researches; one in Islamic art, the second in Islamic architecture, and the third in Islamic painting. Again, all three researches had to do with castles and citadels, and arms and armor. Everywhere in my faculty I was known for my love of military archaeology! Till now, the members of my faculty staff call me "Ahmed of the swords!"

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

While I was still in my second year in the Faculty of Archaeology, I had the opportunity to get acquainted to the Imam of the Mosque near our house; where we prayed our Friday congregational prayer. That man was a lecturer in al-Azhar University, and he was very academic in his speeches and Friday lectures. When talking about the Battle of Uhud (624 or 625 CE), he kept on lecturing us for two years (i.e. about 104 Friday lectures)!!! He was very well-informed, educated, pragmatic, liberal, etc. After each Friday lecture, he would sit with his companions and talk with them until the afternoon prayer time came. From October or November 1996, I started being one of his companions; the youngest one actually...aged only 20 years!

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

In November 1996, while I was telling the story of the Battle of Kossovo Polje (1389 CE), I was interrupted by the Imam when he asked me:

"Out of the fourteen Turkish emirates in Anatolia, why was it the emirate of the House of Osman that was able to accomplish all these military successes, by means of victories and conquests? Why only this emirate?"

So, I answered that the Ottomans pursued a policy of conquests ambitiously and more vigorously than the other emirates. Then I spoke about the formation of the Janissaries, Spahis, etc...but the Imam was unconvinced. The 60 year-old Imam told me:

"Listen carefully: All nations have clever people, vigorous people, geniuses, braves, champions, heroes, etc...yet it's technological superiority that comes as a decisive factor that decides which nation triumphs over the other...let me give you an example: After losing the Battle of Yarmouk in 636 CE, the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius I did not complain that the Muslim military leadership was superb, nor did he complain that the wars with Persia had exhausted him...NO! Rather he complained from the superiority of the swords used by the Arab Muslim warriors when he said: "My soldiers have spent their night waking up from the nightmares of the swords of the Arabs and their exceptional lengths!"

Then he added:

"That extra length in the Arab sword was something the Byzantine warrior found himself unaccustomed to and unable to deal with; something that made the Byzantine warriors frightened; especially that their casualties from these Indian swords (which the Arabs used) were tremendous."

...And it was then that I began thinking of writing about the Arab sword of the 7th and 8th century CE. Yes, that was the beginning!

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

And in the period between 1997 and 1999, I read a lot about Arab and non-Arab swords in the period 550 to 900 CE very vigorously, and I became more and more convinced that I should compose a book about this topic; especially that during this time, I was able to come out with new findings; some of which were very important.

After finishing and succeeding in my pre-masters academic year in 2000, I insisted upon doing my masters dissertation about the Arab sword in 600-750 CE. I consulted my Imam, and acknowledged that it was he who inspired me with this great idea, and he approved, and he promised me that this dissertation will be a great composition, one day.

Please put in mind that -according- to higher education statute in Egypt, you must have finished a masters dissertation and discussed it and received your M.A. before becoming a PhD student. This is why I wanted my masters dissertation to be somewhat short and useful...so that I'd save my energy for my PhD. However, the circumstances that followed didn't go in my favor, and in the next posting, I'll inform you of what happened next.

But for the time being, I need some rest...so please give me several hours before I could resume my story. I know that the overture had been long, but I feel it was necessary that I'd tell the whole story...OK?!

Cheers!
Ahmed Helal Hussein

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

When I wanted to register my masters dissertation, I contacted Professor Salah el-Beheiry (former dean of the Faculty of Archaeology- Cairo University) in order to accept his supervision over my dissertation. I chose the title: "The Arab Sword in the Islamic World from the Dawn of Islam till the Fall of the Umayyad Caliphate in AH 132/ 750 CE". Though he was very happy that I chose him for supervision, he insisted that Professor Hussein Eleiwa (former dean of the Faculty of Arts- Mansourah University) to be associate supervisor of my dissertation. Professor el-Beheiry defended his decision by saying that Professor Eleiwa studied the swords in Topkapi and the Askeri Museum before (these were part of his field studies for his PhD thesis which he obtained in 1974).

Now the first thing Eleiwa did was to try to convince el-Beheiry that he was worthy of his choice. So very hastily, he informed el-Beheiry that this title was unacceptable. Why??? Because, according to the conclusion of the field studies that were done by Prof. Yucel (whom Eleiwa was the one who read him the Arabic, Persian, and Ottoman inscriptions) and Eleiwa himself, and later David Alexander, that these swords actually referred to much later periods; especially from the 14th to the 17th centuries CE.

Frankly, I found what he said to be laughable. I then confronted Prof. Eleiwa and told him that that could not be true. I even asked him the what the difference was between Arab blades referring to the 7th-8th centuries CE, and the straight double-edged swords that were manufactured by the Mamluks...but he got very angry. He started claiming that I was still "crawling in this field", and that I was "very young and inexperienced" and "flamboyant and euphoric"...but I knew what I was saying back then.

BTW, that was in September-November 2000. I was 24 years old back then.

I was greatly upset, and I even informed Professor el-Beheiry that there was no need for Professor Eleiwa to be an associate supervisor for my masters dissertation, because simply, he'll ruin it. But el-Beheiry replied that I had to do what Eleiwa shall dictate. I was forced to comply.

When I confronted Eleiwa again, he asked me why I wanted to take this particular topic, so I answered that the superior Arab arms have contributed to the victories of the early Muslims in their wars against the Persians, Byzantines, Turks, Indians, Chinese, and the Visigoths. So he said that the period of the swords that I'll study should range from 600 CE (although he claimed that I won't be able to find blades that refer to that period) until the fall of Baghdad in 1258 CE. He claimed that such a long period may offer some swords in Topkapi and the Military (Askeri) Museums.

Thus I had to study the swords of the Arabs and non-Arabs from 600 till 1258 CE...and compare between them...in a thorough study!!! That for my masters dissertation???????????!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! So, it was. I very well remember before signing his acceptance of supervision that el-Beheiry looked at me with tears in his eyes and told me: "Wasn't the title that you chose better than this one?? It's a master dissertation after all??" So I replied: "You're the one who insisted on his supervision!" And so it was.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

Now then, in order to make my field study, I needed to study the Arab swords now preserved in Topkapi and the Military Museums in Istanbul; along with the sword now preserved in al-Hussein Mosque in Cairo. In order to get permission for studying those swords in Istanbul, I had to do the following procedures:

1- Since I was a registered masters student in the Faculty of Archaeology - Cairo University, I was able to get certified requests from my University to the Turkish Embassy in Cairo; along with the Turkish Ministry of Culture and the Turkish Armed Forces General Staff.

2- In order to consolidate this request, I obtained from the Egyptian Military Intelligence the telephone and fax number of the Egyptian Military Attache in Ankara; along with his name, and a secret name that he knew that proves that this request came from the Military Intelligence. I then faxed him the request in both Arabic and English (which the Attache's Turkish staff translated to Turkish).

3- I also telephoned the Egyptian Cultural Attache in Ankara, and told him what I wanted. I then faxed him my request in Arabic and English; which was also translated to Turkish.

4- I then telephoned IRCICA, and spoke to Prof. Ihsanoglu for further advice.

5- Oh, I forgot! Before doing all that, I went to the Turkish Embassy in Cairo, and met the Turkish Cultural Attache, and it was he who advised me to do those procedures. He even gave me Prof. Ihsanoglu's telephone and fax numbers.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by AhmedH

And in the period between 1997 and 1999, I read a lot about Arab and non-Arab swords in the period 550 to 900 CE very vigorously, and I became more and more convinced that I should compose a book about this topic; especially that during this time, I was able to come out with new findings; some of which were very important.

After finishing and succeeding in my pre-masters academic year in 2000, I insisted upon doing my masters dissertation about the Arab sword in 600-750 CE. I consulted my Imam, and acknowledged that it was he who inspired me with this great idea, and he approved, and he promised me that this dissertation will be a great composition, one day.

Please put in mind that -according- to higher education statute in Egypt, you must have finished a masters dissertation and discussed it and received your M.A. before becoming a PhD student. This is why I wanted my masters dissertation to be somewhat short and useful...so that I'd save my energy for my PhD. However, the circumstances that followed didn't go in my favor, and in the next posting, I'll inform you of what happened next.

But for the time being, I need some rest...so please give me several hours before I could resume my story. I know that the overture had been long, but I feel it was necessary that I'd tell the whole story...OK?!

Cheers!
Ahmed Helal Hussein

Salaams AhmedH,
I view the inclusion of this work as ground breaking and very important to the field of Ethnographic Arms and Armour... and naturally to our understanding of Islamic Arms and Armour. It represents the equivalent of a researcher turning up the sword Excalibur in the Tower Armoury or the V and A Museum in London.

My reading of the treatise focuses on the very vital area of al Kindi since it was largely his work that lead to the logical sequence of proofs and theories of your detective work unveiling as has been described very nicely of this sword hiding in plain sight Certain experts must be somewhat frustrated that they overlooked this most important sword.

In looking to Al Kindi we discover not just a great mathematician, scientist and philosopher but a veritable metallurgist. Without doubt his records of sword making and descriptions have formed the backbone of your thesis. The other supporter of Al Kindi is Colonel Doctor Zaky another of your well placed references. I am very surprised many of the other experts ... paid such lightweight attention to these two authors.

I have to say that I have reservations on a number of the other experts but that it is not my intention to criticize their inclusion. I also think the perfect balance of any paper can be thrown slightly when you have been required to reduce it. I found it very interesting that the late Mr Reinhardt was selected to throw some light on the cutting actions and probable techniques of Medieval fencing so that you were able to reverse engineer the weapon as a formidable sword against the various armour combinations.

I am still searching amongst Al Kindi writings and hope I can add more later and as I gradually get into this work. Indeed the plot thickens as I see areas of joint interest opening around the Omani Battle Sword (Sayf Yamaani) which I have placed at 751 AD.

I am sure a lot of members are delighted with your efforts and how you are fielding some searching questions so well. Very well done Ahmedh !

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

6- I then made a very big mistake: Instead of obtaining a STUDENT VISA from the Turkish Embassy in Cairo, I obtained a normal TOURIST VISA instead! The man issuing the visas told me that this was a big mistake, but it was still curable...if I were to go to the General Police Headquarters in Istanbul and asked for a change in the purpose of my visa.

7- When I arrived in Istanbul, I found all procedures went without the police's approval in the Military (Askeri) Museum. The Military Museum needs no permission or help from the Turkish Police.

8- The problem came from Topkapi, where I was told I needed to send a petition to the Turkish Cultural Minister in Ankara. This problem was solved when the photographer of the Military Museum told me he knew a friend of the Turkish Cultural Minister. On his bus trip from Istanbul to Iskenderun, the bus paused at Ankara, so he sent my petition to the Minister of Culture with the mediation of the Minister's friend! The Minister sent his approval.

9- When this happened, the curators of the Imperial Treasures Section (Emine Bilirgen and Sheyla Murat) enabled me to study and investigate "Dhu'l-Faqar". That had to be on a Tuesday. The problem was that this particular sword was suspended from its grip with a semi-circular transparent plastic lock. This was to protect the sword from falling from the show-case in case an earthquake occurred. That lock was wider than the grip, but slightly narrower than the pommel. So, I was able to turn the blade to the other face, but it was not possible to take the sword out of the show case. Since the lighting system in the Imperial Treasury Room was somewhat dim, I had to use more light to completely see all that was on the sword. From the first time, I was able to take all the data that I needed; except the full reading of the inscription that I discovered; though I was able to identify the other inscription that I discovered, which is "Sahh".

10- Regarding investigating the other swords, the curator, Hilmi Aydin, said that the approval of the Minister of Culture wasn't enough. He said I needed further approval from the Istanbul Police.

11- When I went to get approval from the Istanbul Police, they refused to give me permission. Why??? Because my visa was a tourist one; not a student visa. I showed them the Minister of Culture's approval...but they said that that was not enough. I had to go back to Cairo and get the Student Visa from the Turkish Embassy there!!! OH NO!

...So, I had to return back to Cairo...stay two months there to await getting my STUDENT VISA!

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

12- The guy issuing the visas at the Turkish Embassy in Cairo was very friendly and cooperative. He asked me for all the procedures that I've undertaken, and I even gave him the approval of the Turkish Minister of Culture. He promised me to do his best in order for me to receive my STUDENT VISA. A couple of weeks later, he told me that I had obtained my student visa, and I received my passport with the student visa in it.

13- Returning to Istanbul, I found Topkapi telling me that I could come and investigate the swords that I wanted there. Again, I started with "Dhu'l-Faqar", and then I went to investigate the swords in the Sacred Trust Section, and the Arab swords preserved in the Arms and Armor Section; both of which Hilmi Aydin was their curator.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams AhmedH,
I view the inclusion of this work as ground breaking and very important to the field of Ethnographic Arms and Armour... and naturally to our understanding of Islamic Arms and Armour. It represents the equivalent of a researcher turning up the sword Excalibur in the Tower Armoury or the V and A Museum in London.

My reading of the treatise focuses on the very vital area of al Kindi since it was largely his work that lead to the logical sequence of proofs and theories of your detective work unveiling as has been described very nicely of this sword hiding in plain sight Certain experts must be somewhat frustrated that they overlooked this most important sword.

In looking to Al Kindi we discover not just a great mathematician, scientist and philosopher but a veritable metallurgist. Without doubt his records of sword making and descriptions have formed the backbone of your thesis. The other supporter of Al Kindi is Colonel Doctor Zaky another of your well placed references. I am very surprised many of the other experts ... paid such lightweight attention to these two authors.

I have to say that I have reservations on a number of the other experts but that it is not my intention to criticize their inclusion. I also think the perfect balance of any paper can be thrown slightly when you have been required to reduce it. I found it very interesting that the late Mr Reinhardt was selected to throw some light on the cutting actions and probable techniques of Medieval fencing so that you were able to reverse engineer the weapon as a formidable sword against the various armour combinations.

I am still searching amongst Al Kindi writings and hope I can add more later and as I gradually get into this work. Indeed the plot thickens as I see areas of joint interest opening around the Omani Battle Sword (Sayf Yamaani) which I have placed at 751 AD.

I am sure a lot of members are delighted with your efforts and how you are fielding some searching questions so well. Very well done Ahmedh !

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams Ibrahiim!

I'm very thankful and grateful for your positive and useful review of my work. I agree with all what you've said in your post. Being an expert in the Omani Battle Sword (Sayf Yamaani) makes you very familiar with my work. This is why I highly value your review of my work so much.

I would be happy to discuss with you any corrections you'd like to make to this article.

Thanks a lot, Ibrahiim. I look further to your future posts.

Best regards,
Ahmed Helal Hussein

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

Never knew Turks to be so teary-eyed and gullible.... Must have been hell of a love story to force them to circumvent every known museum protocol:-)

1- You could investigate the swords of Topkapi in Tuesdays ONLY.

2- The "athletic" guard of "Dhu'l-Faqar" was a mustached tall guy called Kenan. He was told that this was Dhu'l-Faqar indeed. So when I asked him where's Dhu'l-Faqar, Kenan would point his right thumb on his chest and say: "It's my sword!"

3- Me, Hilmi Aydin, Emine Bilirgen, Suheyla Murat, and the other curators of Topkapi bacame very good friends. In fact, there was gossip that I fell in love with one of the female curators...which was partially true. The gossip reached the Military Museum too!!! Hilmi Aydin told me that if he had a sister that was single, he would have married her to me!

4- All the "athletic watchers" at Topkapi were my friends. We even prayed together (congregational prayer), with Hilmi Aydin laeding the prayers.

...I'll try completing any missing link(s) in my story...but I need some rest for the time being.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams AhmedH,
I view the inclusion of this work as ground breaking and very important to the field of Ethnographic Arms and Armour... and naturally to our understanding of Islamic Arms and Armour. It represents the equivalent of a researcher turning up the sword Excalibur in the Tower Armoury or the V and A Museum in London.

My reading of the treatise focuses on the very vital area of al Kindi since it was largely his work that lead to the logical sequence of proofs and theories of your detective work unveiling as has been described very nicely of this sword hiding in plain sight Certain experts must be somewhat frustrated that they overlooked this most important sword.

In looking to Al Kindi we discover not just a great mathematician, scientist and philosopher but a veritable metallurgist. Without doubt his records of sword making and descriptions have formed the backbone of your thesis. The other supporter of Al Kindi is Colonel Doctor Zaky another of your well placed references. I am very surprised many of the other experts ... paid such lightweight attention to these two authors.

I have to say that I have reservations on a number of the other experts but that it is not my intention to criticize their inclusion. I also think the perfect balance of any paper can be thrown slightly when you have been required to reduce it. I found it very interesting that the late Mr Reinhardt was selected to throw some light on the cutting actions and probable techniques of Medieval fencing so that you were able to reverse engineer the weapon as a formidable sword against the various armour combinations.

I am still searching amongst Al Kindi writings and hope I can add more later and as I gradually get into this work. Indeed the plot thickens as I see areas of joint interest opening around the Omani Battle Sword (Sayf Yamaani) which I have placed at 751 AD.

I am sure a lot of members are delighted with your efforts and how you are fielding some searching questions so well. Very well done Ahmedh !

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams Ibrahiim!

I'm looking forward to your additions regarding my article. As I said before, you being specialized in Yamaani swords make you very knowledgeable of what I've written in my article.

I repeat my many thanks to your great review, Sir!

Best regards,
Ahmed Helal Hussein

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

I kept quiet for quite some time and just read the discussion.



Metal composition, engineering features and mechanical properties are not sufficient to establish true identity and ownership. Among thousands upon thousands of early Islamic blades produced over several centuries there must have been many that shared similar features: length, width, fullers etc. I have an old Tulwar with a beautiful old crystalline wootz blade: can I clam that it belonged to Aurangzeb simply because there are miniatures showing him with a similar sword? Inscriptions could have been applied later and fake inscriptions on Islamic swords are dime a dozen: witness the case of Assadullah.

Also, if Ahmed indeed proved his case to multiple Turkish researchers in 2001, why there no mention of this truly momentous discovery ( I am not being ironic!) in the book by Hilmi Aydin published as recently as 2007? What possible benefit could be derived by the modern Turkish governmental authorities and by the staff of Topkapi museum from suppressing the true identity of Dhu'l Fakar in their possession or, at the very least, mentioning it as a serious possibility? How does Ahmed accomodate his belief that the true Dhu'l Fakar is stored at Topkapi with the Shia's insistence that it will be brought back to this world only as part of Al-Jafr by the Twelfth Imam? What evidence ( not supposition) do we have that this blade was made at the latest before Muhammed's death in 632 CE? ( sorry for the typo in the first draft and thanks for pointing it out)

What can be cautiously claimed from the voluminous circumstantial materials assembled by Ahmed is that, based on texts and recollections of ancient authors, Dhu'l Fakar COULD have been similar in its appearance to the Topkapi example, as opposed to the forked pattern uniformly agreed upon by generations of Islamic scholars. But in the absense of an iron-clad provenance tracing this sword backward from owner to owner, one cannot prove that this is THE TRUE Dhu'l Fakar.

The former is an interesting and potentially useful hypothesis, the latter is an unverified claim.

And BTW, can we see actual photographs of the inscription discovered by Ahmed and missed by multiple previous and subsequent researchers, including Unsal Yucel himself?

Hello Ariel!

It's quite ironic that I composed my article "Dhu'l-Faqar" while I was sitting on Hilmi Aydin's chair and writing on his desk in Topkapi in November-December 2001! Of course, I made some additions to the article when I returned to Cairo, Egypt.

The reason why Hilmi couldn't say it was Dhu'l-Faqar was because he promised me not to declare any of my discoveries before I did. Emine Bilirgen and the others in Topkapi did the same. It's a matter of ethics.

Also, Topkapi asked for a translation of my article to Turkish. I had to go to a translation center called Furqan in Fatih District in Istanbul, and pay two hundred US Dollars to get my article translated to Turkish; only to find the curators at Topkapi say to me that the Turkish translation was poor; as it lacked the ability in translating many sword terminologies.

Also, a Turkish newspaper called "Yeni Safak" (New Dawn) said they would like to publish what I've written, but then they said that the Turkish translation wasn't good at all.

BTW, Hilmi Aydin doesn't speak English...but Emine Bilirgen does.

Noteworthy is that when Hilmi Aydin called Tahsin Taha-Oglu to come and read the inscription that I found on the sword, Tahsin said that the identification of the Prophet's sword was a great event. After reading the inscriptions and informing Hilmi and Emine that this sword was Dhu'l-Faqar indeed, he told me: "Hey! You told me that you've identified the Prophet's sword, but this is Dhu'l-Faqar; Imam Ali's sword!" Then I told him that Dhu'l-Faqar was the Prophet's sword and then it passed to Ali...so he said: "Oh! OK!" and did not comment any further.

The curators at Topkapi -although they acknowledged that I had identified Dhu'l-Faqar- really accepted the event rather coolly. In fact, Hilmi once told me: "Big deal! We have 11,000 historical objects here in Topkapi!" When I told them that announcing that Dhu'l-Faqar was in Topkapi would add to the tourists visiting Turkey; especially Topakapi...the curators smiled and winked to each other.

However, it should be noted that Hilmi Aydin did have positive comments to give me like:

"You're very clever! Very clever indeed!"

"It's a scandal that a non-Turkish scholar would identify Dhu'l-Faqar; that sword that has been many hundreds of years in Istanbul, and that has been exhibited for almost 80 years!"

He also brought an article titled "Dhu'l-Faqar"; composed in Turkish by a scholar called Tapozoglu in the Encylcopaedia of Islam (In Turkish). The article was short, but it talked about Dhu;l-Faqar's features in older sources. He then opened Professor Yucel's book at the page of Othman ibn Affan's sword (which I identified as the true Dhu'l-Faqar), and at the same time opened the Islamic Encyclopaedia at Tapozoglu's article "Dhu'l-Faqar". Then he would take each description mentioned in Tapozoglu's article and correspond it with what's in the sword's photos (in Yucel's book), and then he would laugh in agreement with what I've told him and he'd say it out loud: "You're very clever! Very clever indeed!"

[Jim McDougall]

Ariel, I wanted to say that your concerns and observations are well placed and I appreciate your well written and detailed expression of them. I think that it is important to note that the details you have addressed are primarily those aspects and thoughts which are most likely to be experienced by many who will read this paper. This is exactly what I meant by 'constructive' in criticism as it reveals precisely where concerns or disagreement might develop in reaction to the material being presented. This way we are able to discuss these issues openly and not only better qualify details in the paper itself as required, but give us all the opportunity to express our own perspectives and all learn more in the process.


I am personally delighted to see the thread moving forward and the excellent entries by the other participants as well. In particular I am glad to see the fascinating entries by Richard as his well known expertise in metallurgy and blacksmithing are excellent perspective in adding to this discussion.

Whether we personally endorse or rebuke the theories presented in Ahmed's fascinating paper, they remain remarkably intriguing and well worthy of ongoing review and discussion.

"...discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen,
and thinking what nobody has thought."
-Albert von Szent-Gyorgy

I have not been to Topkapi but I have been grateful to those on these pages who have visited there and shared their experiences. From what I have gathered however, the forces of bureaucratic obstruction have often impeded many scholarly efforts. However, as with many museums and institutions there are from time to time those relatively miraculous moments when otherwise unheard of cases of extraordinary allowance can occur.
I experienced one myself when despite not having academic credentials nor associations I was able to be invited to personally handle and examine valuable manuscripts in a museum which also had a Gutenberg Bible and others at location. I had presented a very good case, and offered certain perspectives which apparently intrigued the curator and with letters of introduction I secured with prominent authorities and arms and armor figures I was granted entry.
When I told several important academics who were colleagues they were actually quite stunned! I guess the moral is, it can be done!

Onward and upward gentlemen!!! Excellent discussion, and outstanding interaction in keeping well on topic. Thank you all,

Jim

[VANDOO]

Originally Posted by Richard Furrer

I obtained a few small samples for a 800-900AD Avar blade for study. The bits are very corroded so it may not yield much, but I will try.
At the right lab you can have a good look at the steel with minimal damage to the object. I am sure that some museum has a few corroded examples slowly rusting away never to see the light of day again.
The trick seems to be having the right benefactor say it needs to be done.

Vandoo:
I suggest looking at the ULFBERHT, Sutton Hoo as well as the Bamburgh Castle sword and the finds of Illerup Adal. It helps paint a broader picture of the skills involved.
You know I was the smith in the NOVA show right?

Ric

I HAD LOST TRACK OF WHO FORGED THE SWORD FOR NOVA "TOO MANY IRONS IN THE FIRE AS USUAL" HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE MORE INTERESTING STUDIES AND WORK IN PROGRESS AS I ENJOYED THE NOVA PROGRAM.
THE ONLY WAY THE STUDIES OF TOPKAPI SWORDS COULD BE DONE WOULD BE IF THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT AND THE MUSEUM WERE INTERESTED IN LETTING THE WORK BE DONE ( AS YOU MENTIONED THE RIGHT BENEFACTOR MIGHT MAKE IT POSSIBLE). IT WOULD NO DOUBT HAVE TO BE UNDER STRICT SUPERVISON MOST LIKELY AT THE MUSEUM. THEY WOULD ALSO DECIDE WHO WROTE THE PAPERS AND WHAT WAS IN THEM CONSIDERING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SWORD BEING STUDIED THAT IS REASONABLE. NO DOUBT THERE WOULD BE THOSE FOR THE STUDY AS WELL AS THOSE OPPOSED TO IT FOR RELIGIOUS REASONS SO AGREEMENT IS NOT LIKELY ON THAT PARTICULAR SWORD.
PERHAPS OTHER SWORDS WITH SIMULAR AGE AND CONSTRUCTION BUT IN RELIC CONDITION COULD BE STUDIED TO SEE THE DIFRENCES AND SIMULARITIES IN METAL AND TECKNIQUE AND DETERMINE IF CRUCIBLE STEEL WAS USED AND AN APPROXIMATE TIME FRAME FOR THE TECKNIQUES DISCOVERY. IT WOULD BE A INTERESTING PROJECT AND I AM SURE MUCH COULD BE LEARNED.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by ariel

I kept quiet for quite some time and just read the discussion.



Metal composition, engineering features and mechanical properties are not sufficient to establish true identity and ownership. Among thousands upon thousands of early Islamic blades produced over several centuries there must have been many that shared similar features: length, width, fullers etc. I have an old Tulwar with a beautiful old crystalline wootz blade: can I clam that it belonged to Aurangzeb simply because there are miniatures showing him with a similar sword? Inscriptions could have been applied later and fake inscriptions on Islamic swords are dime a dozen: witness the case of Assadullah.

Also, if Ahmed indeed proved his case to multiple Turkish researchers in 2001, why there no mention of this truly momentous discovery ( I am not being ironic!) in the book by Hilmi Aydin published as recently as 2007? What possible benefit could be derived by the modern Turkish governmental authorities and by the staff of Topkapi museum from suppressing the true identity of Dhu'l Fakar in their possession or, at the very least, mentioning it as a serious possibility? How does Ahmed accomodate his belief that the true Dhu'l Fakar is stored at Topkapi with the Shia's insistence that it will be brought back to this world only as part of Al-Jafr by the Twelfth Imam? What evidence ( not supposition) do we have that this blade was made at the latest before Muhammed's death in 632 CE? ( sorry for the typo in the first draft and thanks for pointing it out)

What can be cautiously claimed from the voluminous circumstantial materials assembled by Ahmed is that, based on texts and recollections of ancient authors, Dhu'l Fakar COULD have been similar in its appearance to the Topkapi example, as opposed to the forked pattern uniformly agreed upon by generations of Islamic scholars. But in the absense of an iron-clad provenance tracing this sword backward from owner to owner, one cannot prove that this is THE TRUE Dhu'l Fakar.

The former is an interesting and potentially useful hypothesis, the latter is an unverified claim.

And BTW, can we see actual photographs of the inscription discovered by Ahmed and missed by multiple previous and subsequent researchers, including Unsal Yucel himself?

Regarding the last part of your question: I'm sorry that I was unable to photograph this sword in particular. I was unable to take the sword out of its exhibition showcase. As I said before, it was suspended in fear of an earthquake. But I was able to investigate everything in that sword. Regarding photographing, the Impearial Treasury Section has dim lighting. I had to use a light ray in order to investigate the sword thoroughly. The showcase opened from downwards to upwards; around 45 degrees only, so we had to duck until we were between the opened glass window and the sword itself, then we'd straighten ourselves again.

Kenan "the watcher" was with us; using a security wireless phone, and always answering to the main security office. I remember him receiving a question from there where he always answered by "Bilmiyorum" (I don't know). It was clear that they were asking him (when shall they finish?).

I held, investigated, and studied each sword two times; except "Dhu'l-Faqar" which I did 3 times. Worthy to note is that when I investigated the swords of the Sacred Trusts Section in the Topkapi Library (because it was warm there in late November!), I met some American scholars investigating Ottoman manuscripts (especially those dealing with Ottoman paintings). Yes, it was very weird for the tourists to see me and the curators inside the showrooms taking the swords in front of them in order to investigate and study them!

Regarding bending the blade, I did it with every sword; little by little: Bend it to say 10 degrees, then let go...it springs back...then bend it to 20 degrees, and then let go...it would then spring back right where it used to be...and so on. Of course, some swords were more elastic than others. Blades with a central ridge (of diamond cross-section) weren't tested for their elasticity.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams all ~ Note to Library. Not everyone will have at their fingertips much of the specialists content referred to in the thesis of Ahmedh. It is however apparent that four in particular are outstanding and it is this group that attracts my focus as , Al Kindi, Colonel Dr Zaky, al Biruni and Abdul Hameed al-Kateb.

Very clearly the trigger for the entire work is a combination of the authors brilliant tenacity coupled with the initial work by the famous early Islamic metallurgist (philosopher scientist mathematician etc) Al Kindi.

Col. Dr Zaky in our time has added such superb references and guides that his work is of an extremely useful calibre.

For very nice background detail please see http://www.history-science-technolog...ticles%205.htm

See http://books.google.com.om/books?id=...-_fMdeuepla1TM for some very interesting notes by Al Biruni on wootz and crucible steel.

Regards,
Ibrahiim ala Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by AhmedH

Here's the article that I've composed as an appendix of my master's dissertation in defense of the identification of the original Dhu'l-Faqar:

Salaams AhmedH, I have a much clearer understanding now of how you have arrived at what I believe is an extremely important discovery. I have boiled it down to solid research based upon a handful of specialists...

The Big Four. viz;

Al Kindi, Colonel Dr Zaky, al Biruni, Abdul Hameed al-Kateb.

Al Kindi was the real information linkage and the trigger.
Col Dr Zaky the magnifying glass whose brilliant work helped you clear up much of the previous confusion and the other two experts Al Biruni and Abdel Hameed al Kateb whose vital doctrines and research cemented the whole theory together. It is indeed remarkable that with so many other specialists in the mixture that you were able to stay on track and with so many having differing views (as experts often have) it is a miracle you have remained focused.

I mentioned a handful ... normally reserved for up to 5 or so names... Yours is the 5th name for without your amazing insight and vision this gem of information could have remained buried... lost in plain sight ...forever.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams all ~ Note to Library. Not everyone will have at their fingertips much of the specialists content referred to in the thesis of Ahmedh. It is however apparent that four in particular are outstanding and it is this group that attracts my focus as , Al Kindi, Colonel Dr Zaky, al Biruni and Abdul Hameed al-Kateb.

Very clearly the trigger for the entire work is a combination of the authors brilliant tenacity coupled with the initial work by the famous early Islamic metallurgist (philosopher scientist mathematician etc) Al Kindi.

Col. Dr Zaky in our time has added such superb references and guides that his work is of an extremely useful calibre.

For very nice background detail please see http://www.history-science-technolog...ticles%205.htm

See http://books.google.com.om/books?id=...-_fMdeuepla1TM for some very interesting notes by Al Biruni on wootz and crucible steel.

Regards,
Ibrahiim ala Balooshi.

Salaams Ibrahiim!

Thanks a trillion for your post! It was very informative and direct to the point. I hope the other members would open and read the links that you've provided.

I thank you, once again, for the effort you've undertaken to read, review, and evaluate my work. Thanks a lot, Sir!

-Ahmed Helal Hussein-

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by AhmedH

Salaams Ibrahiim!

Thanks a trillion for your post! It was very informative and direct to the point. I hope the other members would open and read the links that you've provided.

I thank you, once again, for the effort you've undertaken to read, review, and evaluate my work. Thanks a lot, Sir!

-Ahmed Helal Hussein-

Salaams Ahmedh... All thanks to Al Kindi !! Wa anta !!

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams AhmedH, I have a much clearer understanding now of how you have arrived at what I believe is an extremely important discovery. I have boiled it down to solid research based upon a handful of specialists...

The Big Four. viz;

Al Kindi, Colonel Dr Zaky, al Biruni, Abdul Hameed al-Kateb.

Al Kindi was the real information linkage and the trigger.
Col Dr Zaky the magnifying glass whose brilliant work helped you clear up much of the previous confusion and the other two experts Al Biruni and Abdel Hameed al Kateb whose vital doctrines and research cemented the whole theory together. It is indeed remarkable that with so many other specialists in the mixture that you were able to stay on track and with so many having differing views (as experts often have) it is a miracle you have remained focused.

I mentioned a handful ... normally reserved for up to 5 or so names... Yours is the 5th name for without your amazing insight and vision this gem of information could have remained buried... lost in plain sight ...forever.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams Ibrahiim!

I'm very thankful indeed for your review. I also agree 110% with all what you said...and I felt very flattered for you adding my name to the other BIG FOUR! That was very encouraging and flattering indeed.

I really wish I could have been able to send you my whole masters dissertation; as it's full of lots and lots of new insights regarding the Arab swords in 550 to 1300 CE; especially the Yamaani sword that you prefer (and which I prefer too!).

BTW, though I'm a strong believer in inspiration, I also believe in luck. If we add to those a strong love for the subject and great devotion to it; coupled with hard work...then the composition or results shall be very good, GOD willing.

Once again, I genuinely believe that I have come to the right place; when I submitted my article to this very great forum.

Thanks a trillion, Ibrahiim! I owe you, buddy!

Best regards,
Ahmed Helal Hussein

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Ahmedh... All thanks to Al Kindi !! Wa anta !!

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams Ibrahiim,

And to you too, of course, buddy!

-Ahmed Helal Hussein-

[AhmedH]

Ariel said:

"What can be cautiously claimed from the voluminous circumstantial materials assembled by Ahmed is that, based on texts and recollections of ancient authors, Dhu'l Fakar COULD have been similar in its appearance to the Topkapi example, as opposed to the forked pattern uniformly agreed upon by generations of Islamic scholars. But in the absense of an iron-clad provenance tracing this sword backward from owner to owner, one cannot prove that this is THE TRUE Dhu'l Fakar. "

Please note that Topkapi doesn't hold any private collection...in fact, the Ottoman sultans -who later on also became caliphs of Islam- took these swords and other holy relics from the Abbasid caliphs who were in Cairo. Some of these relics were also stored in Makkah and in Yanbu' (in what is now Saudi Arabia). The storing of these relics in Makkah and Yanbu' was several years before the Mongols sacked Baghdad in 1258 C.E.

As for the Abbasids possessing Dhu'l-Faqar...well this was during the reign of Caliph al-Mahdi (r. 775 - 785 C.E.), or even towards the end of reign of al-Mansur (r. 754-775 C.E.); and since then, that great sword was in their possession; until the Abbasids renounced their right of the caliphate to either Sultan Selim I, or his son, Sultan Suleyman I. The two stories mentioned by al-Asma'i reveal that Dhu'l-Faqar was in possession of Caliph Harun al-Rashid (r. 786-809 C.E.). There are poems mentioning 9th century C.E. Caliphs possessing Dhu'l-Faqar.

BTW, Professor Gulru Necipoglu of Harvard University has told me in 2009 that during her Sabbatical leave to Topkapi Museum Archives, she was able to obtain archival data that reveals that THIS SWORD was indeed Dhu'l-Faqar, and that the Ottoman sultans and court knew that THIS SWORD was Dhu'l-Faqar INDEED. You could email her or even call her to verify what I've told you (and I think I've told you about that before, no?).

Remember again, that I didn't find this sword in some auction, or some private collection in a wealthy man's house or something...NO! I found this sword preserved in the Imperial Treasury Section in Topkapi Museum; that Museum in which the possessions of the LAST CALIPHS OF ISLAM are preserved...so, please understand.

Cheers,
Ahmed Helal Hussein

[AhmedH]

Typing error: "Please note that Topkapi doesn't hold any private collection" should be corrected to: "Please note that Topkapi doesn't JUST hold any private collection".

I apologize for the typing mistake...and please bear in mind that English is but my second language!!!

[ariel]

Originally Posted by AhmedH

BTW, Professor Gulru Necipoglu of Harvard University has told me in 2009 that during her Sabbatical leave to Topkapi Museum Archives, she was able to obtain archival data that reveals that THIS SWORD was indeed Dhu'l-Faqar, and that the Ottoman sultans and court knew that THIS SWORD was Dhu'l-Faqar INDEED. You could email her or even call her to verify what I've told you (and I think I've told you about that before, no?).



Cheers,
Ahmed Helal Hussein

Well, it gets curiosier and curiosier....

A Harvard professor finds archival data confirming this sword's identity as "True Dhul' Fakar" and, moreover, proof of conspiracy at the Ottoman Court to keep this fact secret, and she does not publish it ?????

I know quite a lot of Harvard faculty and every one of them would kill his/her grandmother for a publication of that caliber:-)

Hilmi Aydin, a curator of swords at Topkapi, waits 12 years for your article to be published and , - also!, - doesn't publish the sensational story?

Multiple other researchers who know the "secret of Dhu'l Fakar" are all still silent?

Well, Ahmed, they all must love you a lot and are ready to sacrifice their academic glory to give you a leg up....

Please, don't complain about academic conspiracies against you anymore : you are surrounded by unbelievably generous and supporting people.

[Andrew]

Point made, I would say. Let's move on, please.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Point made, I would say. Let's move on, please.

All right, Sir!

Any dear member wishing to make a constructive comment is welcome, and I'll be more than happy to answer him/her.

[AhmedH]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams AhmedH, I have a much clearer understanding now of how you have arrived at what I believe is an extremely important discovery. I have boiled it down to solid research based upon a handful of specialists...

The Big Four. viz;

Al Kindi, Colonel Dr Zaky, al Biruni, Abdul Hameed al-Kateb.

Al Kindi was the real information linkage and the trigger.
Col Dr Zaky the magnifying glass whose brilliant work helped you clear up much of the previous confusion and the other two experts Al Biruni and Abdel Hameed al Kateb whose vital doctrines and research cemented the whole theory together. It is indeed remarkable that with so many other specialists in the mixture that you were able to stay on track and with so many having differing views (as experts often have) it is a miracle you have remained focused.

I mentioned a handful ... normally reserved for up to 5 or so names... Yours is the 5th name for without your amazing insight and vision this gem of information could have remained buried... lost in plain sight ...forever.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams all,

I would like to add that the Arabs regarded the best swords to be those that were "made of Indian [crucible] steel and were of Yemeni forge". Even the mentioning of "Hindi", "Muhannad", or "Hunduwani" for swords didn't mean that these swords were Indian; but rather "made of Indian crucible steel (or what is now known as wootz)".

Of course, Indian crucible steel had its disadvantages; especially that it became brittle in very cold temperatures (at -13 degrees Celsius, sword blades made of wootz when hitting armor would break like glass). This was noted by the early Islamic warriors in their campaigns in the Caucasus and Central Asia; something that made many of those warriors seek sword blades made of milder steel, or even pattern-welded blades.