Not necessarily owned by an Omani. Many countries traded thru Zanzibar including the Omanis.
Why do you think that the grip was ivory? Could just as easily been bone or giraffe hoof, or for that matter a wood of some sort. If it was ivory (suggesting a high class owner) it would also point to the grip dressing being silver. From your photos it would appear that the grip is not silver.
Could you post a photo of the whole sword please.

As well noted by Kahnjar, Zanzibar was a key trade center in the 19th century and of course being an Omani sultanate, there were considerable numbers of the types of edged weapons commonly in use in Arabia in that context.

The Persian shamshir was a highly prized sword by Arabs throughout the Dar al Islam, so presence of this example in Zanzibar is not unusual. It seems unusual that the hilt material is gone as I thought bone, ivory etc. would survive in an archaeological deposit. More likely of course the ivory would have been taken for its value and the sword discarded.
By the same token, if the hilt was silver, that too would have been taken.

Always fascinating when any weapon is found in situ, and speculating how, when and why it ended up where found. Thank you for posting this!

It's worth bearing in mind the climate of Zanzibar. It's a tropical island six degrees below the equator. It has two rainy seasons with torrential rain and flooding. Annual rainfall is av. 1684 mm (compared to 1,168 in the UK). So Zanzibar gets nearly 50% more rain than the UK. So it can be very wet and humid. The average temp. is 25 - 30 degrees C.

So the sword would have been exposed to a lot of water while in the soil. Imagine what those conditions would do for between 300 and 500 years...

The shamshir
 

Here's the sword. It's almost exactly the same dimensions as the shamshir in the National Museum of Oman, except the blade is slightly narrower. However, there might be a reason for that, which I'll go into on another post. The shamshir in the museum is dated 1675 CE, but I think the Zanzibar shamshir is older.

Rain in Zanzibar
 

In fact, it's rainy season right now in Zanzibar.

It's not like the drizzle in the UK - it's a proper tropical downpour. It can go on for hours. If you're outside you get completely drenched, even with an umbrella.

At the earliest, this blade could be late 17th c. Much likelier mid-late 18th century. The guard is 18th century. Where it was found doesn't impact its origins, it is Persian, plain and simple. That it was carried (and apparently lost) in Zanzibar is an interesting side note, but that is all you can say about it. On the other hand, if the blade were inscribed for example, MY NAME IS MUSTAFA, I'M OMANI AND THIS HERE IS MY SWORD, you could make a case for such an attribution.

There are excavated ivory artifacts dating back over 40,000 years which are surprisingly intact. No type of ivory I'm aware of degrades easily or quickly. Assuming the grips were ivory, which is far from certain unless there were particles attached to the tang, this sword lost its grips before it was... interred, as it were.... They were just as likely to be horn or wood.

An overall image would be helpful.

17th century
 

Ivory can degrade within hundreds or thousands of years depending on the conditions. I had this confirmed by an expert in ivory. The local expert said in this case it would take more than four hundred years. The handle shows remnants of a white substance and there are also white traces at the top of the blade.

As I mentioned before, the tropical climate is very different to what most people are used to. We get nearly 50% more rain than the UK, plus of course it's very fertile here with lots of bacteria etc.

As for the style, two experts have said it's 17th century but could be earlier. The shamshir in the National Museum of Oman is almost the same style dated as 1675 CE.

Ivory deterioration
 

Here's a link to an Australian museum website that mentions conditions for the deterioration of ivory:

https://manual.museum.wa.gov.au/book...s%20by%20acids.

Oliver thank you so much for coming in on this!!Well noted on the fact that the place where a sword is found, whether intact, as a heirloom, trophy or as in this case, an excavated relic ...makes little difference as far as the origins of the item itself.

Going forward with research from various sources, I hope my interpretations might lend to some viable assessment of this example, and I always hope for corrections as required.

In this case, with the fact that this shamshir, clearly of Persian form and of course likely origin, was excavated from a local area after being in situ for an indeterminate period, in Zanzibar.

It is suggested that it would be likely that such a high quality sword might be expected to be found in Zanzibar as this was of course an Omani Sultanate, and with Omanis, as throughout the Dar al-Islam, the Persian shamshir was a highly prized mark of status.

With Zanzibar being a most dynamic entrepot for trade and diplomatic contact in East Africa linking the Red Sea, Gulf, and India with the Omani ports in Bahrain and Muscat being key in the network.
After the death of Said bin Sultan in Zanzibar in 1856, his dominions were split into two separate Sultanates based in MUSCAT and ZANZIBAR.

In Muscat, there was a resident population of Persian merchants who imported, assembled and exported arms into the interior, but certainly to Zanzibar as well.
(material taken from "Arms & Armor of Arabia in the 18th and 19th c", Robert Elgood, 1994, p.2, not quoted).

In looking at the example in discussion, the high relief calligraphy in the center of the cross guard reminded me of the use of the bold thuluth script as used decoratively in various Islamic situations. This pen (style) of Islamic calligraphy was popularized by Mehmed Sevki Efendi in the 19th c. but as written was also well known my Mustafah Rakira Efendi (1757-1826).
This is far out of my field, but the primary point here is that the inscription in the guard seems Thuluth, and Ottoman centered. Thuluth evolved with Ottoman calligrapher Hafiz Osman in the 17th century.

To be more specific, the thuluth style brought to mind the distinct blades which began being produced in Khorassan, Qazuin and Isfahan in response to increased demand for Persian blades both there and abroad in the late 18th early 19th century. These were heavier, with more complex system of fullers and grooves and with cartouche with pictogram of lion as well as large panel of this kind of calligraphy on other side of blade. These blades have been regarded as 'Persian revival' blades and from early to near mid 19th c.

These are shown and discussed in the outstanding article by Oliver Pinchot ("The Persian Shamshir and the Signature of Assad Allah", Arms Collecting, Vol.40, #1, 2002. p.7).
The reason for adding this is primarily for perspective.

With the demand for Persian blades demanding a shift to commercialism toward end of 18th c. , the impetus for likelihood of the example shamshir in discussion having a much earlier blade, probably more to middle of 18th century or earlier, and it being watered steel more likely as well.

With Persian blades, during the 17th century regular steel was used in roughly half the blades, while the majority of patterned steel blades had increased by end of century. Into the 18th virtually all Persian blades had complex and impressive patterns in the steel. The Persian damask blades were highly prized in Arabia, thus it would seem likely this example's blade is quite likely of some sort of damask.

Finally, I found a compellingly similar example in "At Study of the Eastern Sword", (Kirill Rivkin & Brian Isaac, 2017, example 178b):

From this, it is referred to as a QUALITY PERSIAN SHAMSHIR LATE 18TH CENTURY, with WOOTZ blade. Note inscriptions in cross guard. The cartouches on blade are as emulated in the later 'commercial' Persian blades with Lion of God pictogram.


The pics:
Top is often regarded as a Bedouin shamshir, however these, with the commercial Persian blades may occur throughout Arab spheres. These 'trade' blades from c.1800-40s are found in swords from Caucasian shashka, to Indian tulwars and many others. Shown as perspective with Persian shamshirs from end of 18th c.
Next:
The comparative example of Persian shamshir we are looking at, which appears from mid to latter 18th century, with likely earlier blade likely of watered steel, pattern unknown, and as of notable quality probably of some distinguished owner in Zanzibar. The corrosion of course makes further identification of blade difficult if not virtually impossible unless through radiographic analysis.
The missing grip plates, which were likely ivory, are in my opinion absent due to being removed for the ivory itself, and the sword likely stolen, was discarded accordingly.

Ownership
 

Thanks Jim, that seems plausible. The next question would be who it belonged to. As stated previously in the thread, the shamshir was used as the regalia for Omani-Zanzibari sultans and high-level dignitaries.

AFAIK nearly every sultan of Zanzibar is pictured bearing a shamshir in official portraits whether it's a painting or photograph.

Here are two photographs. One showing Sultan Khalifa with his son Abdullah and grandson Jamshid, who both went on to become sultans - in fact the last three sultans of Zanzibar. I assume the two standing at the back are junior members of the royal family - they hold kattaras.

The other photo shows three Omani-Zanzibaris with a British officer. The governor of Bagamoyo on the left and "Rumaliza" al-Barwani each hold a shamshir, but Tippu Tip (on the far right) has a kattara. Tippu Tip is reputed to be the second richest muslim slave trader in history, so I assume that means he was the richest in Zanzibar. However, he wasn't considered to be a pure Omani as his father was a swahili arab who had some African ancestry.

The Zanzibar shamshir was found in Mazizini which is near the coast and roughly half way between Stonetown and Chukwani (where the royal family had a palace) - roughly 5 km each way.

Apart from the occasional royal palace there wouldn't have been any major settlements outside of Stonetown before the 20th century. (Obviously there would be a few fishermen and farmers here and there but they would have simple dwellings).

As for stealing the sword for the ivory, again that seems plausible. They could just put the ivory in their pocket. However, it is quite sharp and not something that's easy to carry around. Plus why not just jump in a boat and take the whole sword to the mainland?

I wonder if there was a political motive for stealing the sword, and maybe the ivory was just a bonus?

Also, it seems reasonable to me that it would have been bad form for a non-Omani or a commoner to have a shamshir in Zanzibar as it was the official regalia of the Sultanate.

Royal shamshirs
 

The other interesting question is: what happened to the royal shamshirs of the Sultans of Zanzibar - where are they?

Comparison to two swords
 

First is the shamshir attributed to Saif bin Sultan in the National Museum of Oman, dated as 1675 by the museum. The Zanzibar shamshir has almost exactly the same style and measurements as this sword. The differences are:

* Width of the blade:
Oman shamshir: 3.5 cm; Zanzibar shamshir: about 3 cm.

* Cross guard:
The Oman shamshir has a floral Omani design but the Zanzibar sword has a Quranic inscription.

* Colour:
The steel on the blade of the Zanzibar shamshir seems darker, but that might be due to weathering.

Second is Al-Qadib, a sword attributed to the Prophet Muhammed. I just thought it's interesting because the length and width of the blade are almost exactly the same as the Zanzibar shamshir. The width of al-Qadib is 2.8 cm which was the initial measurement I had for the Zanzibar blade. I later thought this seemed too narrow and asked the owner to re-measure it and she said 3 cm. In any case, Al-Qadib is known as a defence and companionship sword, not to be used in battle. This made me wonder if the Zanzibar shamshir was a defence and ceremonial sword. (It's still an effective weapon though, it's quite heavy, solid and sharp).

Al-Qadib
 

Putting aside the question of their authenticity, I assume that the Persian master swordsmiths would have known the measurements of the swords attributed to the Prophet.

I doubt very much if most Persian smiths were even aware of any such thing, other than literary references to Dhul-Faqar.

Companionship sword
 

Al-Qadib is nicknamed "The Rod" due to its narrow blade and described as a "defence and companionship sword" not to be used in battle.

Leaving aside the authenticity issue, I just thought that the concept of a "companionship sword" was an interesting one. As we can see from the 20th century photos, the Sultans carried their swords around when on official duties. The shamshir is a wedge shaped sword - it's a big chunk of steel and quite heavy.

The Sultans used the shamshir for ceremonial duties and did not need it to fight in an actual war - so hence the idea of a "companionship" sword which has a narrower blade and would have been a bit lighter. It's hard to tell from the photos with the Sultans' swords in their scabbards but some of them do seem narrow.

Below is the photo of Sultan Khalifa meeting Princess Margaret and carrying his shamshir around with him.

Sword of the King
 

Here's a picture of the last indigenous king of Zanzibar (who reigned in the 15th century), with what appears to be a shamshir.

This could indicate that the shamshir was a badge of office for Zanzibari rulers, or a Victorian era (?) Orientalist illustrator retroactively inventing a tradition.

It is worth noting that indigenous Zanzibaris call themselves Shirazi and believe they are descended from Persians. There is not much left of this influence in the modern era except that a version of "Nowruz" - the Persian New Year - is celebrated on the south east tip of the island.

It seems you have exhausted this thread. Your reasoning vis a vis this illustration is nebulous. As you noted, it's Orientalist work, and not very good at that. It's clear it was done by an illustrator-- someone who has little or no knowledge of the material culture of Zanzibar, specifically not weapons-- what is the point of citing such a thing? Bart Simpson would be as accurate a reference on kings of Zanzibar.

Regarding your query, the sword in the image isn't a shamshir. It's a nimcha.

King of Zanzibar
 

The picture of the Mwinyi Mkuu is actually here in Zanzibar. Most of the older people who knew about the history of Zanzibar have passed away and a lot of the archives were destroyed. So it's difficult to know what the picture was based on. Stonetown itself is a very small and compact town so there used to be people who knew the oral history of these things, including people who knew the royal family and life before the revolution. In fact, back in the 90s, in the house where the picture is there was a former servant who still lived in the mansion who was nearly a hundred years old, so had lived most of his life in Zanzibar when it was a Sultanate.

First Sultan of Zanzibar
 

Sayyid Majid bin Saïd al-Busaidi: first Sultan of Zanzibar (when Oman and Zanzibar became separate realms). Shown with his ceremonial shamshir.

Rumaliza
 

After a bit of research it appears that Rumaliza is the gentleman on the (viewer's) left in the photo posted above. He is the one wearing the lighter coloured robes.

I've found a larger copy of that photo online which shows the hilt of his shamshir. I've also found a photo of Rumaliza and Sayyid Sir Hamad bin Thuwaini Al-Busaid, both displaying their ceremonial shamshirs. Both photos had watermarks and were copyrighted so I decided not to post them. I have a few more historical photos (of sultans etc.) from here in my ancestral family mansion in Zanzibar which I may post at a later date.

Sayyid Sir Khalifa II
 

Two photos of Sayyid Sir Khalifa II bin Harub Al-Busaidi, the ninth Sultan of Zanzibar (r. 9 December 1911– 9 October 1960), one presumably near the beginning of his reign and the second on his silver jubilee. Both of course show him holding his ceremonial shamshir.

Mwinyi Mkuu
 

I found a bit more information about the Mwinyi Mkuu. It turns out that the caption of the picture was wrong - the people depicted were not from the 15th century:

"Mwinyi Mkuu, the 'Great Owner', last descendant of the Shirazi sultans who preceded the Omani Sultanate, together with his son. He died in 1865 and his son soon thereafter."

https://zanzibarhistory.org/Palatial_Zanzibar.htm

I'd be interested to know if there are any photographs of the type of nimcha he is seen with.

Mwinyi Mkuu (Muhammed bin Ahmed al Alawi, 1785-1865) was the last of the line of Shaziri rulers in Zanzibar.
Mkuu was a Tanzanian term for hereditary ruler.

The Shazadas were dynastic rulers of Persian origin so this dynasty appears to be from Persian settlers there c. 10th c. +

From the illustration the sword referred to has the familiar peak at the pommel seen on 'Zanzibar' versions of 'nimcha'......however the crossguard is notably that of a Persian shamshir. The shamshir was a prevalent sword form highly favored as a sword of status here much as many other places in the Dar al Islam, so not surprising.

This illustrated example however Im not sure represents a form of nimcha as much as perhaps IMO a notable combination of both Zanzibar nimcha and Persian guard.

Shamshir vs nimcha vs kattara
 

I just wondered, what was each type of sword used for and who would have used it?

It seems like the shamshir was an effective sword for cavalry and also used as a badge of office for royals and senior military commanders. The kattara also seems to have had a ceremonial function, but was it also used for fighting? And I assume the nimcha was used used by rank and file foot soldiers?

These are good questions. Swords in Oman and Zanzibar may have indeed been used to denote status and/or rank.

Stephane Pradines has suggested that the shamshirs in Oman and along Eastern Africa were reserved for persons of very high rank, such as sultans, emirs and viziers. There is a photo in Hales that shows a vizier from the Comoros with a shamshir. This may explain their relative rarity.

The cylindrical hilt saif is the sword most likely to have been the rank and file sword. It is the most common, including in museum collections. For more on that sword I recommend "Ancient Weapons of Oman" by Vincenzo Clarizia, Vol.1 where all the edged weapons are discussed.

Then we get to the "nimchas" and here things get a bit more obscure. In the aforementioned photo in Hales, the vizier's guards are holding nimchas. Here is a link to a thread I started for the purpose of studying these swords in more detail, which show additional photos of people with nimchas (and some other swords):

http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=28273

I wonder if the nimcha was in some manner the sword of guards or other officials. At this point, unfortunately I cannot make a conclusion in this regard with any degree of certainty.

For what its worth, in my view, as mentioned earlier responding to the question on the 'nimcha' of Mwinyi Mkuu, the sword depicted in likely a combination of a nimcha hilt with Persian crossguard and not a 'form' itself.

Regarding the prescribed 'use' of sword forms by certain groups and for which uses, while of course there were some 'guidelines', there were not 'rules'.

As Teodor has noted, as I mentioned also in my previous post, the shamshir was a prestigious weapon not only in Oman and Zanzibar but in India and Central Asia. While obviously high end sabers of high quality, there were of course examples of lesser quality used by those of various station, though not likely rank and file.

The nimchas also are known in varied forms with similar hilt and quillon systems, and again in more ornate examples often high end swords of office or station, while simpler examples can be found in general use.

The cylindrical appearing hilt is a bit more complex, and though these have become known as kattara, the local term is simply sa'if. The kitara term applies to swords with this type hilt, but curved blade.

These straight blade sa'if with cylindrical open hilt seem to have evolved around 1800 from earlier swords of Omans interior (Nizwa) with quillons and other similar features. While these open hilt swords often with European broadsword blades and often embellished hilts and scabbards were again, worn as status symbols by Omani merchants into Zanzibar and the interior on trade expeditions, they were not used for fighting (Burton, 1884).

In the Busaidi dynasty in Zanzibar post 1820s, these open hilt broadswords with cylindrical hilts, were produced and used in ceremonial functions, including remarkably impressive demonstrations of swordsmanship. They were basic swords, but not used in combat. This was noted by Burton, a well known swordsman, that he could not imagine this type of sword used in combat.

Just my views of what often become highly contentious topics. Like Teodor, Ive spent 'a few years' studying these.


First example, munitions grade ceremonial sa'if
next, the 'kitara' with somewhat curved shorter blade

It is a contentious topic Jim, and I completely disagree with you on the cylindrical hilt swords, as I am sure you know well by now. I will leave it at that.

No problem Teodor :) I of course remember, and was hesitant as I placed my notes, as the contentious situation with these has remained so, and very much unresolved. Knowing that you have researched these for as many years as I, perhaps even more, I think there is room for equitable explanation as there is no edged weapon I know of produced soundly with solid components that cannot be used in various circumstances.

Grateful for the gracious response, I will also leave it there as well.