Sword of Prophet Muhammad

ariel · 2nd September 2006, 02:55 AM

I was perusing the book " Islamic swords and swordsmiths" by Unsal Yucel and suddenly saw something I did not notice before: among the Suyuf-i Mubareke (The Sacred Swords), the sword #2 (p. 17) attributed to Prophet Muhammad was described as straight. But the picture shows a clearly curved one.
I cannot attribute it to the printing irregularity, because the scabbard is also curved appropriately. If this is the case and, as we know, all early Arabian swords were straight (and, indeed, that's how they look in the book), the sword in question must have been a product of at least 13th century. Indeed, the sword of Husam al-Din Lajin (p. 80) from 1297-99 CE is described as the earliest known authentic, curved and grooved Islamic sword.

What is going on? How could the curators call that sword straight when it is obviosly curved? What are the implications re. its dating and attribution?

S.Al-Anizi · 2nd September 2006, 11:22 AM

I too, have found this sword interesting, its clearly not from from the 7th c, nor arab (absence of gold stamps)

ariel · 2nd September 2006, 01:39 PM

I'll buy the absence of markings, the decorations (or absence thereof) and anything else .

However, I am truly flabbergasted how could the curators, the writers and the editors describe it as straight and miss its obvious curvature? What a shoddy job!

Aqtai · 2nd September 2006, 04:08 PM

The status of the "Suyuf Al-mubarakah" as quasi holy relics has prevented detailed examination of them. While most of the swords are probably what they say they are, others undoubtedly seem to belong to a later era. We had a discussion about this before on the forum a while back.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=892

2nd September 2006, 02:55 AM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Sword of Prophet Muhammad I was perusing the book " Islamic swords and swordsmiths" by Unsal Yucel and suddenly saw something I did not notice before: among the Suyuf-i Mubareke (The Sacred Swords), the sword #2 (p. 17) attributed to Prophet Muhammad was described as straight. But the picture shows a clearly curved one. I cannot attribute it to the printing irregularity, because the scabbard is also curved appropriately. If this is the case and, as we know, all early Arabian swords were straight (and, indeed, that's how they look in the book), the sword in question must have been a product of at least 13th century. Indeed, the sword of Husam al-Din Lajin (p. 80) from 1297-99 CE is described as the earliest known authentic, curved and grooved Islamic sword. What is going on? How could the curators call that sword straight when it is obviosly curved? What are the implications re. its dating and attribution? Attached Images

2nd September 2006, 11:22 AM	#2
S.Al-Anizi Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Arabia Posts: 278	I too, have found this sword interesting, its clearly not from from the 7th c, nor arab (absence of gold stamps)

2nd September 2006, 01:39 PM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I'll buy the absence of markings, the decorations (or absence thereof) and anything else . However, I am truly flabbergasted how could the curators, the writers and the editors describe it as straight and miss its obvious curvature? What a shoddy job!

2nd September 2006, 04:08 PM	#4
Aqtai Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Merseyside, UK Posts: 222	The status of the "Suyuf Al-mubarakah" as quasi holy relics has prevented detailed examination of them. While most of the swords are probably what they say they are, others undoubtedly seem to belong to a later era. We had a discussion about this before on the forum a while back. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=892