Koummiya for comments

Jim McDougall · 27th June 2017, 11:21 PM

These are way outside my field as well, though I have touched on them on occasion over many years. One key writer here, Louis Pierre Cavalliere wrote a wonderful paper on them it seems about 15 years ago, but I cannot find copy.
One of the reasons for slow response, in my case, is going through as much material as I can find to answer as much as possible. In the mean time I always hope more informed people can add notes, which here they have. I think the latter 19th century pretty much right on this one (very nice BTW!).

I think as Kubur has noted, the blade is one key point in recognizing older examples. This one is particularly notable having a blade with rib, which is quite unusual as it is of course heavier. I have understood that newer ones have quite thin blades, and often without the distinctive bevels on the half of the blade distally .

The scabbard also: older ones have the key decoration on the outer side only. The fretwork typically seen here on the displayed or outer side often is in motif incorporating the 'five' (hand of Fatima) in crosses, which very much aligns with one of the primary significances of the design of these Maghrebi/Berber daggers, its defense against the evil eye.
The shape of the blade represents the boar tusk, an animal known for its defensive aggression, as well as regarded to defend from the evil eye.

The shape of the pommel is of course typically termed 'peacock tail', and while often characteristic of koummya, however there are examples without it. I recall once being told the form may have derived from the Italian cinquedea, however the crescent type pommels were known in Islamic hilts as early as 16th century, and in Middle East earlier.

The ancestry of the koummya as far as I have found seems early 19th and perhaps slightly earlier but I have not ever seen 18th century examples.
Most vintage examples seem around 1850s into 1920s, but it seems that these traditional daggers are still being made for authentic wear, despite of course the masses of them commercially produced for tourists.
The newer examples have the scabbard decoration both sides if I understand correctly.

The baldric holes are also a point of reference as has been noted, and wear in these signifies years of wear. Fresh, tight and unmarred holes of course note the obvious.

Kubur · 28th June 2017, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The shape of the pommel is of course typically termed 'peacock tail', and while often characteristic of koummya, however there are examples without it. I recall once being told the form may have derived from the Italian cinquedea, however the crescent type pommels were known in Islamic hilts as early as 16th century, and in Middle East earlier.

Hi Jim,

I think that you refer to this kind of Italian dagger and you are right these kind of pommels exist in Luristan and other middle eastern bronze age swords.
So it's basically impossible to say if it was an European influence or not...

Habibi Ibraheem, I'm sorry, it's true I love the red pen, my favourite weapon... I just wanted to point out the points to look at when buying a koummiya...

motan · 28th June 2017, 08:25 AM

Thank you all for your responses, Ibrahiim, Kubur, estcrh sajen and Jim who really seems to be the scholar among us.
Kubur, thanks for your comments and because you seems to know the most about koummyas, I will go with your opinion - late 19th c +/- few decades.

I agree that the wear in the loops of rings are attest that the dagger has been carried for several years and it is a good sign of an authentic piece. It is hard with koummyas as hundreds thousands of tourist pieces were and are made starting quite early too (1920's??). Many are exact copies of original types and you can tell they are for "export" only by small details. Others are pure fantasy, with stones, bone and shapes not found in original types. To make things even more complicated, some are old, but primitive- what some people call "village type", so that even the quality of the blade is not always a good guide. Anyway, I bought it because it was an opportuntiy (cheap), but I like it and will keep it, at least for a while.
It is nice to have a well-crafted piece for once. My main area of interest are original ethnographic daggers from the Levant, but the majority of those have a "home-made" quality about them and are not a feast for the eye (see picture: South Syrian Bedouin dagger). The fact that the Levant, except for Damascus, has been quite poor in the 18th and 19th century may be the reason for the lack of serious dagger-making traditions.
Estcrh, I understand what you say. Koummyas are a bit too much bling for my taste too, but we know each other's views on the fighting value of daggers in general. I am in it first for the ethnographic value, and second for the esthetic value. Whenever I think of the fighting with (even large) daggers, I have to think about that famous scene in Indiana Jones..

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 28th June 2017, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

Hi Jim,

I think that you refer to this kind of Italian dagger and you are right these kind of pommels exist in Luristan and other middle eastern bronze age swords.
So it's basically impossible to say if it was an European influence or not...

Habibi Ibraheem, I'm sorry, it's true I love the red pen, my favourite weapon... I just wanted to point out the points to look at when buying a koummiya...

Salaams Kubur~ Stunning detail of the Italian dagger with a clear indication of style of pommel similar to the Policemans hat type Chapeau de Gendarme of Khoummya of Morocco. (see below.) It appears that the designation peacocks tail refers to the more full range of Khoummya pommels although I have no idea what the typography is with dates of style... I need to go to Morocco for a few years to find out..!!

Colin Henshaw you seem to be using the same estimate/ guesstimate that I use based upon patina / wear... I think that is quite acceptable but wish their was some publication that sets down the precise changes over a timescale of the last few centuries and the slight design changes encountered ...I could certainly live with about 80 years on the age of this item...

Below:
1. The Dagger style Chapeau de Gendarme.
2. The actual hat from which the term was taken.
3. How the weapon was worn.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

27th June 2017, 11:21 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,914	These are way outside my field as well, though I have touched on them on occasion over many years. One key writer here, Louis Pierre Cavalliere wrote a wonderful paper on them it seems about 15 years ago, but I cannot find copy. One of the reasons for slow response, in my case, is going through as much material as I can find to answer as much as possible. In the mean time I always hope more informed people can add notes, which here they have. I think the latter 19th century pretty much right on this one (very nice BTW!). I think as Kubur has noted, the blade is one key point in recognizing older examples. This one is particularly notable having a blade with rib, which is quite unusual as it is of course heavier. I have understood that newer ones have quite thin blades, and often without the distinctive bevels on the half of the blade distally . The scabbard also: older ones have the key decoration on the outer side only. The fretwork typically seen here on the displayed or outer side often is in motif incorporating the 'five' (hand of Fatima) in crosses, which very much aligns with one of the primary significances of the design of these Maghrebi/Berber daggers, its defense against the evil eye. The shape of the blade represents the boar tusk, an animal known for its defensive aggression, as well as regarded to defend from the evil eye. The shape of the pommel is of course typically termed 'peacock tail', and while often characteristic of koummya, however there are examples without it. I recall once being told the form may have derived from the Italian cinquedea, however the crescent type pommels were known in Islamic hilts as early as 16th century, and in Middle East earlier. The ancestry of the koummya as far as I have found seems early 19th and perhaps slightly earlier but I have not ever seen 18th century examples. Most vintage examples seem around 1850s into 1920s, but it seems that these traditional daggers are still being made for authentic wear, despite of course the masses of them commercially produced for tourists. The newer examples have the scabbard decoration both sides if I understand correctly. The baldric holes are also a point of reference as has been noted, and wear in these signifies years of wear. Fresh, tight and unmarred holes of course note the obvious. Last edited by Jim McDougall; 27th June 2017 at 11:49 PM.

28th June 2017, 08:25 AM	#3
motan Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: Jerusalem Posts: 274	Thank you all for your responses, Ibrahiim, Kubur, estcrh sajen and Jim who really seems to be the scholar among us. Kubur, thanks for your comments and because you seems to know the most about koummyas, I will go with your opinion - late 19th c +/- few decades. I agree that the wear in the loops of rings are attest that the dagger has been carried for several years and it is a good sign of an authentic piece. It is hard with koummyas as hundreds thousands of tourist pieces were and are made starting quite early too (1920's??). Many are exact copies of original types and you can tell they are for "export" only by small details. Others are pure fantasy, with stones, bone and shapes not found in original types. To make things even more complicated, some are old, but primitive- what some people call "village type", so that even the quality of the blade is not always a good guide. Anyway, I bought it because it was an opportuntiy (cheap), but I like it and will keep it, at least for a while. It is nice to have a well-crafted piece for once. My main area of interest are original ethnographic daggers from the Levant, but the majority of those have a "home-made" quality about them and are not a feast for the eye (see picture: South Syrian Bedouin dagger). The fact that the Levant, except for Damascus, has been quite poor in the 18th and 19th century may be the reason for the lack of serious dagger-making traditions. Estcrh, I understand what you say. Koummyas are a bit too much bling for my taste too, but we know each other's views on the fighting value of daggers in general. I am in it first for the ethnographic value, and second for the esthetic value. Whenever I think of the fighting with (even large) daggers, I have to think about that famous scene in Indiana Jones.. Attached Images