kaskara konundrum

[Jim McDougall]

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

[ariel]

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.

[katana]

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

[Jim McDougall]

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

[stephen wood]

...I am certain that the blade is from India - I have something very similar (no eyelashes) with a typical tulwar hilt. As for grinding a single-edged blade (with, maybe, a false edge) into a double edged blade, there is precedent.

I suppose the nightmare scenario would be that it was put together from parts by a late-Victorian enthusiast who had seen images of the kaskara in the press. If it was hilted in the Sudan, why was the customary crossguard not fitted.

As for Indian weapons in North Africa - I recall seeing a tulwar in the National Army Museum which was picked up during the Egyptian campaign after an engagement with Mamelukes...

[Jim McDougall]

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

[Lew]

Jim

I think that blade was a reworked Indian kirash.

[Jim McDougall]

As for Indian weapons in North Africa - I recall seeing a tulwar in the National Army Museum which was picked up during the Egyptian campaign after an engagement with Mamelukes...[/FONT][/SIZE][/QUOTE]

Hi Stephen,
I found the reference in my notes concerning the tulwar hilted kaskara, which was the open hilt style, no knuckleguard and standard triple fuller, thuluth covered blade. It was in Andrew Bottomley's catalog #5 (#556) 1996.
I kept the reference because I was intrigued by the incongruent association, and wondered if this was the real deal or not. It does seem a number of unusual items were brought back from the Sudan after the campaigns, and apparantly the occurrence extends much further back.

All best regards,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

Charles I sent you a PM.