WHEN DOES A LONG JAMBIYA BECOME A SWORD?

[kahnjar1]

Hi Jim and thanks for those comments. What I am trying to establish, is if there is a DIFFERENT term used for the shorter and longer versions of what are variously described as SABIKI, SABAK, DHARIA etc, depending on who's book you are reading. The term WAHABITE is purely (as far as I am aware) a term of "convenience" used to loosely describe these long Jambiya, which (I assume) were used by the Wahabite amongst others.
The name of the "normal" daggers of Arabia such as Khanjar etc are not at issue here.
Regards Stu

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Stu, I'm very well aware that importation and prohibition have been discussed at length more than once.

My post is not an attempt to hijack this thread, I was merely pointing out that in respect of Australia, the length and nature of a dagger is written into law.

We have already defined it.

In other places that definition could well be different, and in fact, it could well be something that is unable to be defined within the mindset of some societies.

I do most humbly apologise if I have created undue diversion and disrupted anybody's train of thought, however, be aware:- I will at the slightest encouragement continue to raise legal matters which have any bearing upon our shared interests.

For some of us, our only defence against the lawmakers is constant vigilance.

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yes Stu, I'm very well aware that importation and prohibition have been discussed at length more than once.

My post is not an attempt to hijack this thread, I was merely pointing out that in respect of Australia, the length and nature of a dagger is written into law.

We have already defined it.

In other places that definition could well be different, and in fact, it could well be something that is unable to be defined within the mindset of some societies.

I do most humbly apologise if I have created undue diversion and disrupted anybody's train of thought, however, be aware:- I will at the slightest encouragement continue to raise legal matters which have any bearing upon our shared interests.

For some of us, our only defence against the lawmakers is constant vigilance.

No appology needed Alan. I do realise that laws of countries define what is regarded as a sword and what is regarded as a dagger, and this of course does vary between countries.
What I am trying to establish is 1: What in collecting circles these long Jambiya are regarded as i.e when does a dagger become a sword. and 2 (and probably more importantly):Is there a specific name attached to these in Arabia, to differenciate between the dagger and the sword or are they NOT differenciated between in term of their name.
Stu

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Stu,
Actually the information you are seeking is very much in line with the constant bane of ethnographic weapons study, which is terminology, semantics and nomenclature. It is important to note of course that western transliteration has often played a hand in the adoptive terms for many weapons forms, the instance with 'shamshir' for example.

You have posed the question well, and I look forward to forthcoming information, while I added the variations for the Arabian dagger terms as a kind of benchmark for addition. As I pointed out with the reference to the Badu in the northern Nejd, they use the terms 'giddamiyyah' or 'sibriyyah' in describing the blade size, and I would presume the term is applied in conjuction with 'khanjar' to qualify the description. I also noted that in Rwala the longer weapon is termed 'gdaimi' while the short is still a 'khanjar'.
Here it seems, a separate term is used, just as you had noted your hopes in discovering.

I believe the first notes of the term Wahabbite were likely from Sir Richard Burton's amazing incursion (in disguise) into the Hejaz and other parts of Arabia in the mid 19th century. It seems that his notes defined the terms sabiki in these references as well, though the other classifications noted are from Elgood and his "Arms and Armour of Arabia". It seems that in the case of sabak (i) and sabik for these extremely large knife/daggers which reach sword proportions, the term is used in lieu of janbiyya.
To further illustrate the complexity here, the exhibition catalog from Riyadh (1991) describes these large daggers as 'Dharia' with the qualification of 'malsa' and 'shbeyl' sub terms, noting the blade types such as beyd and nafihi, with what must be terms of many subdivisions according to both tribes and regions.

It is important to remember that varying references will indeed use a number of different terms in describing these weapons, much in the same manner as individuals in different areas will lean toward the terms used in thier native language in some cases. For example, someone from Oman although in the Hejaz and describing a dagger will likely call it a khanjar.

I understand you are trying to determine if there are specific terms for larger swordlike daggers in certain areas, and discovering that will likely need to be addressed by individuals fluent in the dialects and lexicons of defined regions.
The notes I have presented are simply a few examples of what seemed to be pertinant, and I hope others come in here...this really is a quite valid topic worth pursuing.

While it seems that much of this would be irrelevant and frustratingly elusive data, it does play an important role in better understanding more specifically what weapons are being referred to in narrative descriptions, especially those contemporary from earlier times.

In the legal sense, which Alan has well addressed, the unfortunate results of misnomers in legal text pertaining to weapons seems excruciatingly apparant.

Excellent topic Stu!

All best regards,
Jim

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Hi Stu,
Actually the information you are seeking is very much in line with the constant bane of ethnographic weapons study, which is terminology, semantics and nomenclature. It is important to note of course that western transliteration has often played a hand in the adoptive terms for many weapons forms, the instance with 'shamshir' for example.

You have posed the question well, and I look forward to forthcoming information, while I added the variations for the Arabian dagger terms as a kind of benchmark for addition. As I pointed out with the reference to the Badu in the northern Nejd, they use the terms 'giddamiyyah' or 'sibriyyah' in describing the blade size, and I would presume the term is applied in conjuction with 'khanjar' to qualify the description. I also noted that in Rwala the longer weapon is termed 'gdaimi' while the short is still a 'khanjar'.
Here it seems, a separate term is used, just as you had noted your hopes in discovering.

I believe the first notes of the term Wahabbite were likely from Sir Richard Burton's amazing incursion (in disguise) into the Hejaz and other parts of Arabia in the mid 19th century. It seems that his notes defined the terms sabiki in these references as well, though the other classifications noted are from Elgood and his "Arms and Armour of Arabia". It seems that in the case of sabak (i) and sabik for these extremely large knife/daggers which reach sword proportions, the term is used in lieu of janbiyya.
To further illustrate the complexity here, the exhibition catalog from Riyadh (1991) describes these large daggers as 'Dharia' with the qualification of 'malsa' and 'shbeyl' sub terms, noting the blade types such as beyd and nafihi, with what must be terms of many subdivisions according to both tribes and regions.

It is important to remember that varying references will indeed use a number of different terms in describing these weapons, much in the same manner as individuals in different areas will lean toward the terms used in thier native language in some cases. For example, someone from Oman although in the Hejaz and describing a dagger will likely call it a khanjar.

I understand you are trying to determine if there are specific terms for larger swordlike daggers in certain areas, and discovering that will likely need to be addressed by individuals fluent in the dialects and lexicons of defined regions.
The notes I have presented are simply a few examples of what seemed to be pertinant, and I hope others come in here...this really is a quite valid topic worth pursuing.

While it seems that much of this would be irrelevant and frustratingly elusive data, it does play an important role in better understanding more specifically what weapons are being referred to in narrative descriptions, especially those contemporary from earlier times.

In the legal sense, which Alan has well addressed, the unfortunate results of misnomers in legal text pertaining to weapons seems excruciatingly apparant.

Excellent topic Stu!

All best regards,
Jim

Thank you Jim for your (as usual) thorough and informative reply. Gene (Atlantia) and I were discussing our collections by private email when he asked me the question about length of Jambiya and where they became swords. Interesting how an apparently insignificant question can generate so much opinion. Its a bit like the "country of origin" issue of Arabian Jambiya. DOM was of the opinion the "counry borders" mean nothing in this area, and Tribal origins are the important thing. I have to agree with this, but that is another subject. As you say, we in the West tend to label things to suit us, because that is what we consider important. I Arabia, and I guess in many other cultures, that is not the case.
Stu

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

No appology needed Alan. I do realise that laws of countries define what is regarded as a sword and what is regarded as a dagger, and this of course does vary between countries.
What I am trying to establish is 1: What in collecting circles these long Jambiya are regarded as i.e when does a dagger become a sword. and 2 (and probably more importantly):Is there a specific name attached to these in Arabia, to differenciate between the dagger and the sword or are they NOT differenciated between in term of their name.
Stu

I think things are getting a bit complicated here so I will reiterate the two questions which I would REALLY like answered.
1:What in collecting circles are these very long Jambiya regarded as.....Dagger or Sword?
2:Is there a specific name (which may vary by area) used in Arabia to differenciate between the dagger length and the much longer ones of sword/small sword length?
WE COLLECTORS DO NOT (MOSTLY) LIVE IN THE AREA, AND AS HAS BEEN STATED, TEND TO CALL ITEMS BY THEIR WESTERN NAME.
Stu

[fearn]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

I think things are getting a bit complicated here so I will reiterate the two questions which I would REALLY like answered.
1:What in collecting circles are these very long Jambiya regarded as.....Dagger or Sword?
2:Is there a specific name (which may vary by area) used in Arabia to differenciate between the dagger length and the much longer ones of sword/small sword length?
WE COLLECTORS DO NOT (MOSTLY) LIVE IN THE AREA, AND AS HAS BEEN STATED, TEND TO CALL ITEMS BY THEIR WESTERN NAME.
Stu

Speaking as an expert only on the website, I would say the answers are:

1. It's a jambiya, regardless of length. All else turns on the question of what your rules for sword and dagger are, and these very subjective and highly contingent rules vary between people and jurisdictions.
2. Jim has suggested sabaki for the longer blades in Wahhabi dominant areas. I'm not enough of an expert to know whether this is a term unique to Wahhabist areas, or a word used throughout the jambiya's "native range."

Best,

F

[ward]

I might be missing something here but shouldnt these weapons be consdered sword or daggers or whatever based on how they are used? Pesh Qabz means foregrip in Persian. It tells you how the knife was held. Extrapolating that you figure out the name exists because it's held differently than other daggers. As for swords in Middle East and most Asia, they are for cutting in various ways not thrusting. I am NOT saying they were never used to thrust just that their main use is cutting. Daggers are usually used for thrusting in that area. Not always like I said, but usually. Some cultures ahd rules about whether a dagger could be used for thrusting too, but that is pretty unusual and I didn't want to muddy the waters with that.

[fearn]

Ward,

A sword can be used to thrust (rapier) or cut (broadsword), or slice (saber), or chop (cutlass).

Neat thing? These are all ENGLISH words. Dagger is similarly an ENGLISH word.

The problem here is translation. Even among people who speak English, sword and dagger are defined differently, often subjectively, and often for different and contradictory purposes. The Australian law that Alan quoted above isn't THE definition, it's a rule for a policeman. Collectors will see things differently.

Who's right? No one is. The issue is translation. Sword and dagger are as much culture-bound concepts as jambiya. An English dagger isn't quite the same thing as a Philippine daga, although they have similar cultural and linguistic roots.

We get stuck, because English is the common language for the collectors who post here, and without thinking, we tend to assume that concepts in English are the standard to which everything must be translated. That doesn't work so well in practice. A jambiya isn't just an ornamented hunk of steel, it is a tool and an identity symbol. If you want to understand it, you need to know something about the Muslim culture it's embedded in.

As for uses, I'll admit that the only uses I've ever seen for a jambiya (on TV) are: a) dancing (as Khanjar showed above) and b) clearing debris out of a qanat (link) so that the water would flow freely (and I admire the men who waded through kilometers of muddy water to do the clearing). If I was to stupidly assume that that was all you could do with a jambiya, I'd suggest both that length was irrelevant and that calling it a sword was silly. Similarly, it's also myopic to assume that fighting is the only real function for a jambiya, and that is how it should be categorized in English: sword or dagger. It's a jambiya. Traduttore traditore.

Best,

F

[ALEX]

I also think the length/size of the sword or dagger does not change the classification/type, considering the same proportions!!! As an example, here's a Khyber, very large one, almost of a sword length. It is similar in shape with smaller Khybers, so I'd call it a Khyber sword, opposite to Khyber dagger/knife. However, as already pointed out - there are different local names for variations of similar type, but they're not determined only by size, but by design and proportions.

[fearn]

I'm tempted to label these types of discussions "machete arguments," as in: "Is a machete a sword or a knife?"

The basic problem with any of these discussions is that swords and knives are defined within one culture, primarily by inferring general traits from known examples. Then we try to fit other people's inventions into these categories, based on whatever rules we created.

As Mr. Maisey pointed out with those Australian rules, in Australian customs, any weapon that is two-edged and 39 cm long is not a dagger, nor is anything that can't be readily concealed on a normal person. My apologies, but it is very hard not to become sarcastic about that definition. I keep wondering whether I'd get arrested for trying to hide a swordfish bill down my pants, if some cop decided to call it a dagger.

The Australian rules are derived from whatever examples the rule-makers found objectionable, and I laid out another rule "the chop test" that depended on function rather than shape and size. But all of these are rules we make up from the blades we handle or read about. They don't really answer the question, they just change the argument to one about rules rather than one about blades.

So what's the answer? There is none. A machete is a sword, and a machete is a knife. Depends on who is arguing which side.

Best,

F