kaskara konundrum
 

Hi Stephen,
I too followed this auction because of the 'eyelash' markings....usually associated with mainly Indian blades.
So, either this is a re-worked (?) Indian blade (possibly) or the marking has been 'adopted' ...as the 'half moon' was from earlier trade blades from Europe.

Seeing as there has been sea trade between India and the East coast of Africa, for centuries and, the overland Arab trade routes for even longer ...I can see no reason that the Kaskara is not genuine.

I wish I could have bid (damn credit crunch :mad: ) ...it is the first I have see with such markings.

Kind Regards David

I tried bidding, but did it in the last few seconds and of course forgot about the stupid ebay.co.uk edged weapons rules, which basically ask for credit card info. It looked like a really nice piece, but if it is of any consolation, I think I saw the ID of the winner (how this happened I am not sure, maybe some bug in eBay) and he is a member here, so we might actually see better pictures in a few weeks.

I agree the "gurda" markings seem to have an Indian origin, especially with the dots at the ends of the eyelashes.

Regards,
Teodor

I was watching this one too. Interesting blade. My guess is the hilt was added later. If I had bought this it would have gone on the wall with my other "enigma" pieces.

Cheers
bbjw

Extremely interesting blade in modern Darfur mounts, as seen with the flat discoid pommel, the designs in the grip cover, and the workmanlike, somewhat crudely fashioned crossguard.

What is interesting about the blade is keyed by the term 'sukhela' used by Stephen in describing this backsword blade, an instance seldom, if ever seen on Sudanese sa'if (kaskara). While the influx of blades into the Sahara and Sudan typically were through various points of entry from Meditteranean ports, it is known that others did in degree arrive through Red Sea ports.

The potential for a blade from India ending up in Darfur certainly is a plausible, and fascinating possibility. Stephen has aptly noted this case is indeed a 'conundrum' !! and David has astutely noted the highly notable consistancy of these 'eyelash' (also termed 'sickle') markings on Indian blades. The rather off center positioning of this marking over the double fullers, suggests native manufacture. These particular markings are especially associated with Genoan and German blades, and these straight blades, especially straight backsword blades, are associated with the Marathas on India's west Coast;
"...the Marathas had a preference for straight swords rather than the curved blades of the Turks and Persians, and purchased large quantities of European blades, especially German, Genoese* and Spanish..".
"Hindu Arms and Ritual" Robert Elgood, p.40
*the sickle mark is most often thought to be of Genoan origin, diffusing into German blade making centers and ultimately Caucasian, where they became known as 'gurda'.

While these blades most often are seen in the khandas used by Marathas, and termed 'firangi' when carrying these foreign blades, the straight blade was also termed 'sakhela' as a term employed describing native made blades of this type. The term refers to the type of Indian steel, highly flexible and became applied generally to the sword type (also termed 'dhup' in Deccani).

The Marathas were known as well for thier trade activity, as was the Malabar Coast of western India, and such contact with the Arabs, particularly Yemen and Hadrahmaut was well established. Many Indian blades made it to Yemen where they were mounted in the Arabian sa'if in the 19th century. From here it would not be surprising that the blade could have gone with trade into Ethiopia, Somalia or Eritrea, eventually entered routes moving eastward into Sudan and ultimately Darfur. It would be fascinating to know exactly how this routing entailed, how long it took, and what adventures might have been afforded this trusty blade, before it came into the hands of a Fur tribesman who had it mounted in the hilt of local fashion.

At least this is my version of the conundrum :) the way I'd like to think it happened.

All the best,
Jim

I do not know why do we have to postulate Indian origin of this blade.
It looks very African: village-made, for short.
Why would anyone import a blade of such quality from another country, when virtually identical blades were produced locally, is beyond me.
On the other hand, the "eyelash" mark was one of the most popular one in the entire world: from Italy and Austria, to N. Africa, Caucasus, Indian subcontinent etc., etc.
Putting it on a locally made weapon made a lot of commercial sense, and "importing" it was surely easier than the blade.
My vote: 100% African.

Nearly all Kaskara I have seen either have 3 thin fullers (centrally placed on the blade) or one wide, central fuller. This blade appears to have two offset from centre, which possibly suggests that the blade could have been originally, single edged ? Re-worked to be double edged ?.... What is definate is that the fullering was done before the markings.

I think India 'springs to mind' due to the influence of 'their' weapons design on a number of weapons manufactured during the Madhist uprising.

As we all know pictures can tell lies, I hope the new owner posts this sword....I think we need more information... that only the new owner can provide.

Kind Regards David

The conundrum term originally used here well describes this sword and in particular its blade. A conundrum is described as a paradoxical, insoluble or difficult problem; a dilemma.

I agree that postulation would be misplaced here, and the suggestions are presented as such to be considered rather than deemed any kind of assertion. While blades were indeed made locally in a number of locations in Africa, in this case the Sudan, there remained considerable numbers of trade blades throughout the vast networks of trade in Northern Africa. These were diffused and traded hands over long periods of time and through many means, and heirloom blades were often handed down in families or within tribal groups, resulting in remounting many times.

David's note on the blades typically produced in North African centers usually having three fullers is largely well placed, though at least one other form with deep central fuller is also known. The key point is that the blades, as previously mentioned, are invariably broadsword, that is with two edges.
With the fullers on this blade placed asymmetrically suggests of course that it was originally a backsword. As far as I know, no backsword blades would have been produced in Africa for the traditional native swords of North Africa, specifically the takouba and kaskara.
I will note that there is a variation of takouba using a curved blade, apparantly usually of European origin.

The native swordsmanship using broadswords favored slashing cuts, rather than thrusts, which is why broadswords were preferred. If this blade was a backsword form from an Arab or Indian source, and as David has pointed out, there are profound instances of weapons reflecting such influences and origins, then it does seem likely the back would have been ground away.

Very good point Ariel, on the very international presence of the eyelash/sickle mark, in fact that is the very reason it is so difficult to use in identifying blades. As you have well noted, it has travelled widely from its presumed origins in Italy, through trade into Styria and the Caucusus, and Central Asia and India as well. In Africa it is known primarily through trade blades, and as far as I know was not one of the images copied by the native smiths. The occurrence of these eyelash markings on African sword blades in most cases appears with others such as bracketing the familiar Andrea Ferara inscription, and occasionally others, but not singularly.
On the other hand, in Afghanistan, the sickle/eyelash mark does appear singularly and invariably, on the curved native blades of the paluoar. As noted, in the Caucusus, typically on Chechen blades, the marking denotes the blades known as 'gurda'.

All very best regards,
Jim

Hi Stephen,
I suppose that an enthusiastic collector in England putting this together with that extremely unusual hilt is possible, but my question would be, why? Kaskaras are by no means difficult to find, and it seems like creating this guard, and adding what appears to be authentic Darfur grip and pommel seems a great deal of trouble, and very odd.
If I recall, many years ago I saw a tulwar hilt sword with what was clearly a tulwar blade, pretty sure that Bottomley had it. That was the only one I had ever seen, and I have always wondered why, with the well established trade between India and Red Sea, into Egypt, that Indian tulwars were never seen there. Clearly there were distinct weapon influences from India, and the trade carrying the desirable cowrie shells that are so well known in West Africa, from the Maldives, by Arab traders into Egypt, across the Sahara to the western Sudan, eventually to West Africa.

With the diffusion of so many weapon forms seen along so many trade routes, it seems another conundrum to try to determine how certain weapon forms (at least the hilts, as we have seen) typically have remained so faithfully indiginous. For example, the takouba hilt form remains profoundly Saharan, while the kaskara ,Sudanese, from Niger to Sudan, Eritrea but seldom ever further west. The flyssa has always for its relatively short career remained Kabyle/Berber in Algeria, and remains an edged weapons mystery as to what its true ancestry might be. Naturally there are others, including the tulwar, which has seemed to never have left the Indian subcontinent, but for the rare instance you have noted, and confirms that at least some might have escaped! :)

But then, these edged weapons conundrums, and anomalies are really what makes the study of weapons so fascinating!!!

Thank you for posting this kaskara, great adventure :)

All the best,
Jim

Jim

I think that blade was a reworked Indian kirash.

Assuming this is an Indian blade that was originally fixed to a 'tulwar hilt' ...I would suggest that the rivetted crossguard was functional. The tang on such a blade would have been relatively short....compared to that of a kaskara blade.
To 're-inforce' the tang fixture, rivetting the crossguard through the blade makes sense ....bearing in mind that part of the 'langet' is bound/fixed to the hilt. The langet above the hilt is in fact wider, it is one piece with the lower section but 'stepped'.....this again suggests that a 'good, solid' fixing of the crossguard to the handle was required ....to which finally the blade was rivetted...

I am assuming that ... indeed, the rivet passes through the blade ....so is just pure speculation :eek:

Regards David

I'd like to make one comment on Jim's excellent observations, that is, in regards to the tulwar not travelling out of the Indian subcontinent.

I think the piso podang of Sumatra, primarily, but also seen in other regions, including Borneo, is very heavily influenced by the tulwar, or at the very least the earlier more archaic Indian hilts. There are some good old examples in Elgood's latest work that match up nicely to the piso podang form. In most cases the piso podang is shorter than the average tulwar and that is an adaptation, but otherwise, I think, clearly influenced by the "travelling tulwar".

Hi Lew,
A good suggestion, but if I understand correctly and from what I recall, most of these kirach blades are shorter,and much stouter in form, more akin to the Khyber 'knife' type blades. These were indeed single edged, and heavy, seemingly for more chopping type action.

All the best,
Jim

Outstanding Charles!! and thank you :)
I completely forgot about the 'piso' and the influences of Indian swords moving into SE Asia. I think that khandas also joined in the 'travels' along with the trusty tulwar.

All the best,
Jim

Anything is possible Lew; but it seems awfully long to be a kirach .. :shrug:

David, you bring up a most valid observation, another I had overlooked. That is this strange rivet feature in the center of the crossguard. About two years ago, Richard (Pukka Bundook) had a tulwar in tragic condition ("Bad News Tulwar" thread) that he beautifully restored. In the center of the crossguard, there was a rivetlike square, which I cannot recall whether functional or not, I dont believe that entered the discussion. In any case it was replaced by an aesthetic flower feature which looked great.
In the discussion, another tulwar which was one of the Rajput type form with the stem type appendage of Hindu basket hilt type on the pommel, had this centrally placed decoration in the crossguard. Again it was presumed to be a decorative feature associated with function, i.e. support as described.

I think your observation is really interesting and seems to further the support of the influence in degree of Indian weapons in the Sudan. It just seems that these often decorative rivet type features did exist on some tulwars, whether functional or not. Your case for the functionality according to the tang length seems extremely plausible as well.

The upper langet extension overwrapped and banded by the grip material is also a good observation. Much like the wire wrap over many shamshir hilts in this manner to secure and strengthen the blades reaction to the force of impact. This is seen in this fashion particularly in many Arabian sa'if (which often in the 19th century had straight SE blades) and is a feature also seen on Indian shamshirs in certain cases.
As I have often noted, I like your thinking ! :)

All the best,
Jim

Hi,
Tulwar of mine with through rivet/bar on hilt decorated on either side with a silver petal type motif.
Regards,
Norman.

I was thinking along the lines of this type of kirash ;) .

Strange cross guard. Which might make me think perhaps it never got as north as the Sudanese Mahdist state? This picture is interesting, shows Arab weapons {sea trade?} in North Tanganika. Northern rebellion leader Bushiri bin Salim.

Technically Lew, I would not call the blade from Oriental Arms a kirach. I don't think the point of the blade meets the qualifications.

I do, however, know exactly the type that you mean....long slender blade a tip that rather abruptly turns down instead of up. Some Indonesian swords are based on the same idea and similar blade profile.

Charles

What would this be considered? Is the criteria that the point must be lower than the center axis of the blade? If you have a straight bladed tulwar and the point is at the center axis of the blade is it called something else?

Lew

Lew,

That one I would call a kirach. It has a lot more in common with the previously pictured khanda hilted example, primarily curvature, though very mild. On the other hand, the long sword(in my collection, btw) is simply a straight fighter....more along the lines of a stereotypical straight blade firingi, but in the case of the straight sword you have pictured, it's an Indian made blade from the Bikaneer armoury.

I think your observations about blade qualifications are well founded. I believe a kirach, along with the downcurve, generally has some degree of false edge....long or short..., which differentiates it from a sossun patah, again, in general. But, I have seen so many Indian blades that don't "follow the rules", I'd say there are exceptions to practically every "type".

Hi Stephen,
with the new pictures you've posted...I can see that the rivet does not pass through the blade.

Regards David

I am still voting "Sudanese'
No Indian ricasso ( not obligatory, but would help)
The fullers are narrow, shallow, rudimentary.
It just says Sudan to me.
In the absence of Indian markings , I see no reason to invent long journeys and "first example". Occam's razor say local.
Elgood presented Indian sword with a Piso-like handle, and let's not forget Gulabhati " khanda" handle on Sumatran peudeungs. Sure, Indians traveled to Indonesia and brought with them not only weapons but a whole culture/religion.
Nice to be able to be contrarian: some other Forums ( Fora???) would have expelled me long ago :-)

Norman, this is a bit off the subject; but could you post a picture of the top of the pommel ? I have a very similar hilt that is missing the dome and would like to see how your example is finished for reference .
Thanks !

Rick

Good note on the 'ricasso' Ariel!
Contrarian? not at all, a different viewpoint yes. Yours is a respected opinion, and different opinions keep it real. Its really been interesting looking into the different views, and I think thats what adds to the learning potential.

Thanks Ariel!
All the best,
Jim

Outstanding Norman! Thats what I was thinking of.
Thanks for posting it.
All the best,
Jim

Sorry guys but the blade not having a riccasso does not prove anything. I have seen and own two tulwar that do not exhibit a riccasso. Not all tulwar especially from the Northern areas have riccassos these types were influenced by the Persians. See attached photos.

Lew