clunker saif?

ariel · 20th February 2007, 01:48 AM

Wayne,
I appreciate your inquisitiveness, but this is not Cyrillic: just a poor and worn out G that looks like C and A that lost (or never had) a horizontal bar. Not a Cyrillic L. And, please, remember the absolute need for a letter Yat (see my earlier post) that is not there. It is like a famous dog: the absense of barking was the decisive evidence...
Genoese blades were very popular in North Africa. Moroccans even had a straight-bladed Koummya named Genoui ( or Janwi, depending on transliteration) meaning "Genoese"
What you got here is a classic Moroccan Nimcha (or Saif, if one prefers it) with a Genoese or pseudo-Genoese blade . Many of those were made in Germany or Styria and just marked Genoa to uphold the tradition and the value: market analysis was used even then! Yes, shashka blades marked Genoa were made in Circassia and marked as such. But the blade of the Nimcha in question has nothing to do with shashkas: it has a vestigial Yelman, "Indian" ricasso ( most likely an imitation of European military sabers) and a single, centrally-located, narrowish and deep fuller. None of those are features of a Circassian or any other Caucasian or Transcaucasian shashka. We do not need to know the history of this particular sword: the blade tells us the entire story.
There were Caucasian blades in Arabia proper and you can see 2 here:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4137
See the difference?
I have a Nimcha with an old blade marked (very illegibly) O N I N I and sporting the markings of "eyelashes".
The bottom line: nice Moroccan Nimcha, definitely not a "clunker', but nothing unusual about it. Born and bred in North Africa

Jim McDougall · 20th February 2007, 03:48 AM

No problem Wayne! You are most definitely thinking

, and again, you are doing well at using deductive reasoning. In this case however, the sword is what it is, just as Ariel has very well explained.
There were indeed many trade blades that carried spurious 'Genoan' markings found throughout the Maghreb. What made this blade unusual is the linear sickle mark motif, and the backsword profile, and as again, Ariel has noted, has nothing to do with the slightly curved, shashka type blades often found with the Genoan mark.

All the best,
Jim

BSMStar · 20th February 2007, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

this is not Cyrillic: just a poor and worn out G that looks like C and A that lost (or never had) a horizontal bar.

Well, the only reason I have stood my ground is because from the beginning, I saw no evidence of this. The bottom of the letter C shows no evidence of wear to the degree of loosing the bar that makes the letter "G." That area is clear and sharply stamped... it is a "C" and not a "G" as seen in the enlargement below. Since the old Lambda look like an "A" with out the cross bar (which I have seen written through WWII)... creates what can be all Cyrillic letters. When I showed this to a Russian the other day, he did not have a problem with this being a transliterated name. But, then again... maybe you are right.

I have no debate on the origin of the sword... just the stamp. And the stamp may well not be Cyrillic, but something strikes me as being very odd if it is not...

20th February 2007, 01:48 AM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Wayne, I appreciate your inquisitiveness, but this is not Cyrillic: just a poor and worn out G that looks like C and A that lost (or never had) a horizontal bar. Not a Cyrillic L. And, please, remember the absolute need for a letter Yat (see my earlier post) that is not there. It is like a famous dog: the absense of barking was the decisive evidence... Genoese blades were very popular in North Africa. Moroccans even had a straight-bladed Koummya named Genoui ( or Janwi, depending on transliteration) meaning "Genoese" What you got here is a classic Moroccan Nimcha (or Saif, if one prefers it) with a Genoese or pseudo-Genoese blade . Many of those were made in Germany or Styria and just marked Genoa to uphold the tradition and the value: market analysis was used even then! Yes, shashka blades marked Genoa were made in Circassia and marked as such. But the blade of the Nimcha in question has nothing to do with shashkas: it has a vestigial Yelman, "Indian" ricasso ( most likely an imitation of European military sabers) and a single, centrally-located, narrowish and deep fuller. None of those are features of a Circassian or any other Caucasian or Transcaucasian shashka. We do not need to know the history of this particular sword: the blade tells us the entire story. There were Caucasian blades in Arabia proper and you can see 2 here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4137 See the difference? I have a Nimcha with an old blade marked (very illegibly) O N I N I and sporting the markings of "eyelashes". The bottom line: nice Moroccan Nimcha, definitely not a "clunker', but nothing unusual about it. Born and bred in North Africa Last edited by ariel; 20th February 2007 at 01:59 AM.

20th February 2007, 03:48 AM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,459	No problem Wayne! You are most definitely thinking , and again, you are doing well at using deductive reasoning. In this case however, the sword is what it is, just as Ariel has very well explained. There were indeed many trade blades that carried spurious 'Genoan' markings found throughout the Maghreb. What made this blade unusual is the linear sickle mark motif, and the backsword profile, and as again, Ariel has noted, has nothing to do with the slightly curved, shashka type blades often found with the Genoan mark. All the best, Jim