Yemeni sword

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by Michael Blalock

Period photo

Beautiful photos of Yemeni swords
There is of course absolutely no evidence of Bukharan influences.
This discussion was all made up on the forum based on nothing...

[TVV]

I am sorry, I fail to see the Central Asian connection either.

[ariel]

With all due respect to the authorities:


The most obvious place to find Bukharan swords would be in the former USSR museums. AFAIK, there are none even remotely similar.
There are plenty of old Uzbek and Tadjik swords there, but all of them are just regular shamshirs of various quality and decorative techniques. These areas were under Persian influence till the Arabs came or under Turkic Mongols, all brandishing sabers. For more than a millennium they saw nothing else. Already in the 9th century Khwarizmians were boasting about their swords in curved scabbards.

In contrast, Yemen has always been the most “frozen in time” country.
Yemeni Arabic is widely considered the closest to the purest Pre-Islamic one. Just like the Omani ones, they might have preserved the pre/early Islamic swords as well.

In short, I, just like Teodor, see nothing Central Asian here, but the Yemeni connection sounds eminently plausible.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you guys, interesting views. I think what I am recalling toward the 'connection' or possible connection between Bukharen affectations on swords (in this case the spiral bands on scabbards) is the several examples of Bukharen swords in posts with this feature and described as Bukharen.

Also the similarities in the hilt elements (pommel, cylindrical etc.) were noted as with such possible connections between Yemen and Bukhara. It does not seem infeasible that religious connections between these clearly distant regions existed, and that such contacts would result in certain material culture designs or affectations. Obviously drawing such parallels would be a tenuous proposition, but to deem such connections impossible or non existent arbitrarily would be unfortunate. Theories, ideas and suggestions are pretty much just that, and not intended as conclusions.

In the photo I previously posted with the Yemeni swords with the spiral scabbards, the first image with three swords are of Buharen examples, as identified by the post I took it from (on these pages but trying to relocate).
It seems that the Persian factor in designs etc. is notably present in Bukhara and India's northern regions and Afghanistan.
In Arabian context, the same favor toward Persian design etc. is also well known.

Is it possible that such an affectation is via the Persian conduit rather than direct Bukharen /Yemen connection?
Whatever the case, it does seem, at least in what I have seen, that this particular banding on scabbards is seen (as agreed) on Yemen swords, but appears known as well on SOME Bukharen (or Uzbek) examples.

These three swords are NOT Yemeni, but Uzbek (Bukharen) and the center one is the one I refer to with the same spiral as on my Hadhramaut sa'if.
Also note the ovoid fluted shape of the scabbard tips similar to the pommel on the cylindrical hilts of some Yemeni swords.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Please see #13 where the link takes a look at the provenance of this style Quote"

A RARE CENTRAL ASIAN BROADSWORD

Description

A quite similar example depicted in the ninth-century fresco of a mounted Samanid ruler at Nishapur allows attribution of the form. The distinctive guardless hilt silvered or gilt, with an expanded ferrule and cylindrical grip, embossed and engraved overall with vinework, the bud-form pommel spirally fluted. The exceptionally long, straight, double-edged blade with evidence of wootz forging, a short central fuller to either side and a polygonal maker’s mark inscribed, WORK OF HASSAN [?] struck twice on either side. In its wooden scabbard with velvet covering, the locket and chape embossed and engraved en suite with the hilt, the suspension bands with openwork decoration. Beginning of the 19th century. Light wear, small area of pitting to blade. Very rarely encountered, probably a coronation sword.Overall length 101.3 cm. Condition I "Unquote>

What makes this sword seemingly difficult to get placed is its absence from museums although the Wallace has one... I tend to view the likelihood of a relationship to the Omani Battlesword as very tentative. The above expert portrayal pointing to 19thC seems possible and perhaps the work of Jewish craftsmen...either Bukharen or Yemeni. Some sort of very late influence from Omai Battlesword ..Sayf Yemaani to Bukharen or to Yemeni influence seems implausible..The Omani Battlesword did not influence Yemeni Battleswords 900 years after it is known to have been in service in the 11th/ 12thC. however may fit as a commissioned sword from Bukharen to Cairo for a dignitary and that may be the track of its provenance … I tend to suspect Mecca as the purchasing point for such a VIP weapon but am open to suggestions on this...

[Jim McDougall]

Two of these spherical pommel swords are shown by Michael Blalock on 11 May 2005. He notes these as Yemeni, but with connection to Bukhara, with explanation as follows:
" ....Mir-I-Madrasa (1535)
The Mir-i-Arab madrassah with the Mosque Bukhara's main kosh ensemble.
Under the left dome are buried Uyaydullah Khan (one of the first
Bukharen royals to not have his own mausoleum) and sheikh Mir-i-Arab after whom the madrasa is named. He is variously described as an architect, a YEMENI merchant and spiritual mentor of the early Sheibanids".

Michael here notes, "..this explains how a Central Asian sword could have
ended up in Yemen in the 1960s".

Auctions Imperial (3/16/2013, lot #230)
A CENTRAL ASIAN BROADSWORD . The description notes that this sword (of the type hilt described as Yemeni in these discussions noted in current thread) and that the item is of 19th c. and from the EMIRATE OF BUKHARA.
Supporting references are "A Song in Metal" Abdullayev, the Moser collection, Coe ("Swords and Hilt Weapons"p.141); "Szabla Wschodnia i jej Typu Naradowe" Jarnuszkiewicz, plate 11.
Also noted is a reference to a frescoe with image of a Samanid king with similar, 9th century, at Nishapur.

Yucel, "Islamic Swords and Swordsmiths", shows a 15th century Mamluk sword with this type of hilt.

To the SPIRAL banding:

Artzi (Oriental Arms) 11 May 2005, notes a 19th c. sa'if in a museum in San'a and that the original scabbards for these type swords usually include a SILVER STRIP spirally bound on them. A very similar SPIRAL binding is also COMMON ON BUKHARA swords as well as on other oriental swords.

Top images:

Left: the two swords posted by M.Blalock 2005, as Yemeni
next: The 15th c.Mamluk sword in Yucel.
" The Auctions Imperial example, 19th c Emirate of Bukhara
" My Hadhramauti sa'if (Elgood, Lebedynsky, et al)
right: one of these hilts but pommel more pointed ovoid as seen on
the Bukharen scabbard tips in my previous (one with
silver spiral band).

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Beautiful photos of Yemeni swords
There is of course absolutely no evidence of Bukharan influences.
This discussion was all made up on the forum based on nothing...

We would have to define Bukharen influence. Is there a distinctly Bukharen character which was confined to those specific regions? As far as I have understood the Persian dynamic in such influences affected many cultures and regions throughout the Middle East, India (particularly Mughals), Central Asia and more.
The point has been that influences which influenced Bukhara may well have shared and been diffused in Yemeni designs as well.
I was once told, 'weapons have NO geographic boundaries' in discussions with an authority on Bukharen arms, and in which a sabre (of similar form to shashka) could not be determined either Uzbek or Afghan. There were elements in character of both, so classification was pretty much a toss up.

I consider the observations in the discussions on these swords as all relevant and far from being based on nothing. In fact all of the content is pertinent data toward the remarkably difficult determination of the history and development of these weapons. Classifications and historical determinations of influences may not always be finite, but reasonable plausibility is a worthwhile outcome.

[Kubur]

Hi Guys,

As always I was too short! Let me add some facts:

First as Ariel said these swords don't appear in eastern collections... strange.

Second about the pommel and even the hilt, well you can compare the pommel to any dome or minaret from North Africa to Persia and India.
The ribbed domes are not specific to Central Asia. It's easy to check, you have plenty of books on architecture.

Third Yemeni in Bukhara, since the Arab conquest Yemeni are all over the place from North Africa up to India and even China! They were very influencial in religious studies. So Yemeni in Bukhara is not exceptional and not a proof that they brought back some swords to Yemen.

Fourth spiral design is found also on Ottoman scabbards and spiral banding on Indian swords most of the time to wrap up some textiles. So there is no proof that Bukharen invented this design...

Last two men who are not newbies commented these swords as yemeni, Robert Hales and Robert Elgood (he says Hijazi).
And yes I agree with you swords have no geographic boundaries and I like this discussion. The last example is really cool, from Solingen to India and ending up in Yemen...

[Jim McDougall]

You're right Kubur, this is a fun, and challenging discussion.
I think the case for these spherical pommel, shouldered or flared guard integral with grip swords being Yemeni is of course well known.
However, I don't think that it has been implied that somehow a Bukharen sword was brought back to Yemen, and suddenly all the Yemenis wanted such 'Bukharen' swords.

The point desperately trying to be made here is that this form of hilt was widely adopted THROUGHOUT the Dar al Islam, and examples in Bukhara, as well as through CENTRAL ASIA reflect the same styling.

While many of these examples are indeed Yemeni, they did not hold an exclusive patent on the design, and as often occurs, the influences did apparently diffuse via trade, diplomatic and other channels throughout regions from Arabia, the Middle East and Central Asia.

To reiterate, Bukhara was not the SOURCE of the designs, but ONE of the many regions which in varying degree adopted them.

In "Arts of the Muslim Knight" (ed. Bashir Mohammed) I attach three examples which show the collared hilt and spherical pommels and are identified as Central Asian and from 9th century. These are remarkably similar to the 'Yemeni' examples ; the Auctions Imperial example identified as 19th c. Bukharen; and others.

In "Two Swords from the Foundations of Gibraltar" by David Nicolle, the attached plate (#28) shows a bronze sword as late 10th, early 11th c. from a shipwreck and it is noted to likely be from Armenia or Azerbijian.
In the same article, a sword with remarkably similar style hilt is shown as Roman, 2nd c. AD.

So my question is, is it possible that the styling of these hilts developed from a quite ancient form or group of similar hilt features, became popularly known, and were adopted in numerous cultural spheres ?

So we are not saying that these hilts or affectations come FROM Bukharen influence, only that Central Asia apparently SHARED them, just as Yemen did.

[Kubur]

Thank you Jim for your precise and so well documented response as always

To your question

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

is it possible that the styling of these hilts developed from a quite ancient form or group of similar hilt features, became popularly known, and were adopted in numerous cultural spheres ?

IMHO I'll say yes of course.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=mamluk

[Iain]

These hilt styles, often made with cast parts and a "cuff" extension over the blade are part of a larger family with roots in central Asia. Similar hilts can be seen on reliefs documented in Bishapur and dated to the reign of the Sasanian ruler Shapur I (241-272). I have seen some speculation there may be a Chinese influence but I have not ever seen anything convincing on that front.

Regardless, by the 9th century, this general form can be encountered throughout the Byzantine Empire as well, including areas of influence like Ukraine and Bulgaria.

As has been already pointed out on this thread, within the Islamic world the form also became widespread including within Mamluk arms. The basic form typically sees a metal cylindrical grip, often multi-faceted, a separate pommel and a narrow guard, often with a "cuff". The components are often secured with brazing.

These are an important overarching form which sees regional variations from central Asia, to Europe to Africa. The Yemeni examples are of course simply a long-surviving branch within the family tree.

[ariel]

Is the " Omani battlesword" a member of the same Central Asian family or a traditional double-edged straight sword of pre-Islamic/early-Islamic "Aravian" weapon? Did straight early Egyptian Mamluk swords with bulbous pommels come from Bukhara ( Khiva, Samarkand etc)?

[TVV]

Originally Posted by Iain

Regardless, by the 9th century, this general form can be encountered throughout the Byzantine Empire as well, including areas of influence like Ukraine and Bulgaria.

Byzantine influence on Bulgaria is undeniable in almost all aspects of culture, especially after the conversion to Christianity in 864 AD. However, when it comes to arms and armor it was usually the Eastern Roman Empire adopting the weapons and tactics of its neighbors and enemies, many of which at one point or another found themselves in the armies of the Basileus as mercenaries.

Here is the sword from the Malaya Pereshchepina burial, associated with Khan Kubrat of Great Bulgaria before Danube Bulgaria was formed. The hilt is basically a tube made of gold, with the ring pommel typical of earlier steppe swords. It is very much a "cuff" hilt design.

Back to the topic, from Al Kindi we know that Yemen was a major sword producing center at the height of the Abbasid power - in fact, he considers the Yemeni blades superior to pretty much all others. Unfortunately he does not give detailed descriptions of the hilts, but the way the blade size and shapes are described they are very close to the older Omani saifs. Yemen's relative isolation explains why an archaic broadsword form may have survived there longer than anywhere else, along with perhaps areas in North Africa where the saif badawi and its derivatives made it to the 20th century.

In contrast, Central Asia was anything but isolated, and its arms evolution much more rapid, with the saber becoming the dominant form by the 10th-11th centuries, if not even earlier.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Thank you Jim for your precise and so well documented response as always

To your question



IMHO I'll say yes of course.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=mamluk

Thank you Kubur!
Iain thank you for entering on this, and for well illustrating that the elements and features on this form and its variants were broadly represented throughout many regions and cultural spheres over many centuries.
The key point we can take away here is that a direct link or an identifiable line of specific influence between the forms of different areas is not typically possible. This is especially the case where no linear chronological examples with provenance are extant which show such development.

Ariel, in my opinion, the Omani battle swords (sa'if Yemani) are certainly members of the same family of these type swords with the 'cuff' being a most notable feature.