Zanzibar Nimchas, a More In-Depth Discussion

TVV · 9th January 2024, 04:48 PM

Jim, good point about Indian production meant for Arab mercenaries in Hyderabad. This could be yet another example of that connection.

You are correct that the ring guard is not a key feature that distinguishes between Oman/Zanzibar nimchas and those from the Maghreb. As discussed earlier in the this thread, there are plenty of examples from Oman/Zanzibar and the Comoros without a ring guard. There are also examples from the Maghreb with the ring guard. The shape of the knuckle guard and the tilt of the pommel are usually a better indicator of geographic origin.

The sword with the lion head pommel does not look to me as coming from the Mediterranean, and the Indian attribution has some merits, so it is more likely to be connected to Oman/Zanzibar/Comoros examples, but it is intriguing that the quillon finials are like those on Algerian nimchas. The only way for me to explain this feature is through an Ottoman connection. In the 16th century, when the Ottoman privateers were at their height in the Mediterranean, Ottoman naval power in the Arab sea also peaked, with notable Ottoman involvement all the way along the Indian coast. In fact, the battle at Diu preceded the siege of Malta and the battle at Lepanto by more than half a century.

The quillon block, quillons and ring guard are very likely to be derived from Italian (or Portuguese or Spanish) swords, but the grip and the pommel probably came from the East. This kind of fusion probably does not happen without the Ottomans, but how exactly it occurred is a mystery to me.

Jim McDougall · 9th January 2024, 05:40 PM

Teo,
The complexity of these trade networks and the ever volatile conflicts between national and ethnic entities were key dynamics in the diffusion of these familiar elements of varying sword forms make it difficult, at best, to solve most of these conundrums.

All we can do is speculate with reasonable consideration (ratiocination) to try to find viable identifications or classifications on these anomalies.

By analogy, I have always been fascinated with ethnography and various ethnic and cultural characteristics of nationalities (sort of inherent working in international airports in my career). I would often guess where someone was from in conversation, and one lady who was clearly Indian, I guessed she was from Gujerat. She smiled and said, 'no, Im from Kenya'. Seeing I was taken aback, she then added.......many Indian people went to Africa to work.....my PARENTS were from Gujerat!!!

So it is with these weapons.

The inherent influences of the elements of Italian and Portuguese swords had entered these spheres long before the period of most of these weapons we discuss, so its difficult to place or date based on these characteristics. There were cases of course of various components produced in one location, then exported to others to be used in assembly of locally favored sword types.
In India, the tulwar is a good example, it seems a high percentage of these hilts were produced in the numerous centers in Rajasthan. Many went to other locations for decoration and mounting using blades from other areas or trade blades....much as the manner of cutlers assembling swords in other countries.

As mentioned, the ring guard feature, as seen in Buttin, is not seen as any sort of locally distinguishing feature on these swords of the Arab sphere, simply regarded as sa'if. As you say, the rather vast conduit of the Ottoman Empire was most assuredly the dynamic that carried much of this diffusion, but alongside the equally dynamic Arab trade.

It has seemed to me, as I learned years ago in research along with Peter Hudson (Ibrahiim al Balooshi) Zanzibar was a profound 'X factor' in this Arab trade sphere,and the 'ringed guard' sa'if were simply among the numerous other forms there. Among the anomalies studied were the so called 'Zanzibar' swords.........which were termed that first by Demmin (1877), then that carried forth by Burton (1884)........but as noted by Buttin (1933) these were in fact s'boula of Morocco. They were simply deemed Zanzibari by having been seen in that context.

There I go again, rambling away. Its just that I find this topic really exciting and fascinating, and you have for as many years as I can recall, deeply studied these areas, so I cannot resist sharing perspective.

9th January 2024, 04:48 PM	#1
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,664	Jim, good point about Indian production meant for Arab mercenaries in Hyderabad. This could be yet another example of that connection. You are correct that the ring guard is not a key feature that distinguishes between Oman/Zanzibar nimchas and those from the Maghreb. As discussed earlier in the this thread, there are plenty of examples from Oman/Zanzibar and the Comoros without a ring guard. There are also examples from the Maghreb with the ring guard. The shape of the knuckle guard and the tilt of the pommel are usually a better indicator of geographic origin. The sword with the lion head pommel does not look to me as coming from the Mediterranean, and the Indian attribution has some merits, so it is more likely to be connected to Oman/Zanzibar/Comoros examples, but it is intriguing that the quillon finials are like those on Algerian nimchas. The only way for me to explain this feature is through an Ottoman connection. In the 16th century, when the Ottoman privateers were at their height in the Mediterranean, Ottoman naval power in the Arab sea also peaked, with notable Ottoman involvement all the way along the Indian coast. In fact, the battle at Diu preceded the siege of Malta and the battle at Lepanto by more than half a century. The quillon block, quillons and ring guard are very likely to be derived from Italian (or Portuguese or Spanish) swords, but the grip and the pommel probably came from the East. This kind of fusion probably does not happen without the Ottomans, but how exactly it occurred is a mystery to me.

9th January 2024, 05:40 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Teo, The complexity of these trade networks and the ever volatile conflicts between national and ethnic entities were key dynamics in the diffusion of these familiar elements of varying sword forms make it difficult, at best, to solve most of these conundrums. All we can do is speculate with reasonable consideration (ratiocination) to try to find viable identifications or classifications on these anomalies. By analogy, I have always been fascinated with ethnography and various ethnic and cultural characteristics of nationalities (sort of inherent working in international airports in my career). I would often guess where someone was from in conversation, and one lady who was clearly Indian, I guessed she was from Gujerat. She smiled and said, 'no, Im from Kenya'. Seeing I was taken aback, she then added.......many Indian people went to Africa to work.....my PARENTS were from Gujerat!!! So it is with these weapons. The inherent influences of the elements of Italian and Portuguese swords had entered these spheres long before the period of most of these weapons we discuss, so its difficult to place or date based on these characteristics. There were cases of course of various components produced in one location, then exported to others to be used in assembly of locally favored sword types. In India, the tulwar is a good example, it seems a high percentage of these hilts were produced in the numerous centers in Rajasthan. Many went to other locations for decoration and mounting using blades from other areas or trade blades....much as the manner of cutlers assembling swords in other countries. As mentioned, the ring guard feature, as seen in Buttin, is not seen as any sort of locally distinguishing feature on these swords of the Arab sphere, simply regarded as sa'if. As you say, the rather vast conduit of the Ottoman Empire was most assuredly the dynamic that carried much of this diffusion, but alongside the equally dynamic Arab trade. It has seemed to me, as I learned years ago in research along with Peter Hudson (Ibrahiim al Balooshi) Zanzibar was a profound 'X factor' in this Arab trade sphere,and the 'ringed guard' sa'if were simply among the numerous other forms there. Among the anomalies studied were the so called 'Zanzibar' swords.........which were termed that first by Demmin (1877), then that carried forth by Burton (1884)........but as noted by Buttin (1933) these were in fact s'boula of Morocco. They were simply deemed Zanzibari by having been seen in that context. There I go again, rambling away. Its just that I find this topic really exciting and fascinating, and you have for as many years as I can recall, deeply studied these areas, so I cannot resist sharing perspective.