Rings on Yemeni jambiya: what for?
 

AFAIK, Yemeni jambiyas are worn under the belt, kind of "tucked in"
However, many scabbards have little rings at the back of the scabbard? What are they for? Are Yemeni scabbards sewn to the belt through them?
If so, why at the back? Wouldn't front of the scabbard be more logical?

Furthermore: here is a pic of the late Jordanian king Abdulla: his bodyguard on the left ( and, perhaps, even the one on the right) wera their Jambiyas outside the belt. Using the little rings? Any ethnic preferences? Any other thoughts?

Hey Ariel,

These are worn outside the belt with leather through the rings and inside the belt. The examples of ones tucked behind the belt I saw are new marriages mostly.

Picture with the black background shows a touristy khanjar so the rings are not right.

Thanks.
But I am still confused: all jambiyas shown in the S. Gracie's book are tucked behind the belt and there are no visible retaining cords/ straps.
Furthermore, most jambiyas on Artzi's site have no little rings.

If what you are saying is correct ( some worn inside, some outside), is there a tribal/social class/ ethnic distinction between them? I can imagine the way to secure these "ring-y" jambiyas outside the belt, but IMHO, the only way to do it would be to wear them vertically, i.e. Manassib-style. How would it influence the Thouma jambiyas?

I found an article, "Daggers: From Fearsome Weapon to Fashion Statement" by Shilpa Mathai, ('Gulf News.com, December 28,2000) in which the author notes, "...the mark of a good sheath are its inlaid silver rings, the maximum is seven rings of which two are used to hold the belt, and five through which strands of thread are woven as ornamentation". It is further stated that there is no special significance to the number of rings on a khanjar and this depends on personal preference. The rings are expensive and usually the more wealthy would wear the maximum number of rings according to the author, so apparently these would be more status oriented.

It seems that the minimum number would be two, as these seem to be structurally situated, but others have four and six rings, with the seven typically to examples of the higher degree and of the 'tuza' category for aristocrats and important tribal figures such as chieftains.

I have often wondered about the significance symbolically of certain design features on hilts as well, and it seems on certain Islamic swords there are numbered strings of beads, but cannot recall significance.

I don't think this answers the question which concerns placement on the scabbard in the back or method of properly wearing these, but the information seemed pertinent anyway.

I looked again at Gracie's book. And... I think I might have found the answer:-)


If one looks very,very carefully, many jambiyas worn behind the belt seem to have a set of sturdy staples or even rivets at the junction along the side of the scabbard, implying metal rings underneath the belt. If so, they just created a single piece: belt/scabbard that was worn together as one unit. That assured firm fixation of the scabbard behind the belt and prevented jambiya from being lost. An interesting thing, is that the same feature is present on the belt/scabbard unit dated 1707. So, it is not the feature of the new jambiyas. Perhaps, vice versa, - the old ones.


Still, the last one in my series is puzzling: the rings just stick out behind the scabbard. What were they attached to?

Salaams~ Rings on Yemeni and Omani weapons are unrelated. On the former the rings appear as anchor points tie down points onto the belt but on the Omani Khanjar they are huge , frontal and part of the architecture and structure of the scabbard... and may be 4 ringer, two ringer or 7 ringers... In fact the odd variant appears with more than the usual 7 ring maximum on occasions. The Royal Khanjar with 7 rings was redesigned from essentially the 7 ring Muscat Khanjar but beefed up with an Indian style Hilt by Sheherazad the Persian wife of a previous Sultan see.. The Omani Khanjar.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

So, do you think I was right in my suspicion re. staples/rivets attaching the scabbard of the Yemeni jambiya to its belt?

Ariel,

Can you reference the pages on Steve Gracie's book that you have found the jambiyas on? I'll have a look as I have a copy.

Lotfy

Hi Lotfy,
Look at pages 66, 84,120,122 ( a good one!), 130 ( tied, not stapled),135, 189 ( riveted).
I might have missed some and erred here and there looking at the pics and not at real things.


There are also some examples where it seems that the belt was slit, forming a "channel" into which the scabbard is tucked in. In these cases it is likely that the scabbard was sewn to one or both flaps of the belt using the rings as anchors, so no staples or rivets were used and the outside of the belt remained undisturbed.

You are in a better position to check the real stuff. Let me know when you find out what is going on.

I know that the jambiyas in northern Yemen usually have a strap on the back side of the belt with the sheath often sewn to the strap though they have rings from time to time. The south Yemen Jambiyas shown in your picture are often just tucked into a twisted sash or worn with a thin belt. I would assume that is why they often have rings. In the 60's the British had outlawed the wearing of Jambiyas in the protectorate so I have only seen photos of this style of Jambiya worn. The Saudi and Mecca style are worn outside the belt in most photos that I have seen, even the Wahabbi style.

Hello,
Here are photo's of the front and back of a Yemeni jambiya attached to its belt. My understanding is that the jambiya is very often bought separately from the belt hence it is logical that the jambiya would be fully finished in it's own right and yet contain the "eyes" necessary to attach to a belt.
Incidentally, I would not be surprised to learn the British banned the jambiya in Aden during the insurgency, but not so sure about the hinterland. British colonial administration was nothing if it was not pragmatic.
I always thought the real ban on the Jambiya was imposed by the NLF Government which followed British withdrawal in 1967 and was part of a deliberate policy to destroy tribal loyalties and identities as they were considered incompatible with loyalty to the Marxist government.
Regards
Richard

Salaams Richard G ~ I had a look around for the ban details as it seemed (as you say) this was the Marxist government after the British left...

From http://www.pachydermjournal.org/inde.../viewFile/32/8

Quote"In the south,
before Marxism, jambiyas were worn by the Bedus in
the interior rather than the townspeople or fishing peo-
ple. Marxist rule forbad jambiyas. In 1972 there was
a massive campaign to rid the south of jambiyas and
many of the more influential families were targeted.
They had to get rid of their jambiyas quickly, selling
them for low prices to be traded in North Yemen and
Saudi Arabia (Vigne and Martin 1993)."Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams Ariel~So far as I can see you have sorted the rings out...Omani Khanjars don't have these peculiar rings except in the case of the weapons shown which are Jebali Salalah variety very closely aligned to the Yemeni form. You can see that when the belt is tightened around the waist that the top weapon lies flat as opposed to vertically. The rings in this case are decorated florally..and function as ties to the two section belt.

Another picture is shown below and at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...8&page=5&pp=30 at #127 with it configured on an Omani style belt showing the 3 rings reduced to two on each side and somewhat redundant.. The weapon has apparently been fully retro fitted with the mid-scabbard Khanjar style of silver belt wired to big support rings. In the case of the small rings you are analysing it seems the position is variable but is determined by how the weapon sits with the belt....flat or more upright.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

I agree with Ibrahiim's comment regarding placement of the anchor rings. They always seem to be in the position suited to the way a particular style of Jambiya is worn on the belt.
Just a comment regarding the pic of Richard's showing the way Thouma Jambiya from Yemen are attached. This style in my experience does NOT have rings but is attached as shown by lacing to the back covering of the scabbard.
I have attached a few pics of different styles of Jambiya WITH rings showing how they sit on their particular belts. I note that even though these all have attachment rings, they do not all use them. Some as you can see use a strap across the scabbard even though rings are present.
Stu