Omani Sayf/Saif

[colin henshaw]

Thought I would comment on this topic as I was in fact resident in Muscat, Oman for some time in the early 1970s. I visited the souk in Muttrah several times and saw many of these swords for sale there, both the straight double edged type and the curved single edged pattern. Also displayed for sale were plenty of khanjars, Martini-Henrys, matchlocks etc. There can be no doubt these Omani/Zanzibari swords were intended for combat (in the historic period), and not solely for dancing purposes. Although there was likely also a display element involved, being a part of male costume. I can remember it being said these swords did not have guards to the hilts, being unnecessary because "Africans did not have swords", which of course points to slaving.

Chris Peers writes excellent books, as well as the one mentioned by TVV above, another publication of his is "Armies of the Nineteenth Century: Africa East Africa" Foundry Books 2003, and I attach an extract for information. [Moderators - hope this is acceptable, if not please delete]

There is a potential parallel with these straight Omani/Zanzibari swords and the swords of the Mende people of Sierra Leone, their swords also being without guards to the hilt and who also had involvement in slaving in the 19th century. This was the subject of a previous post and I attach an image of the sword type concerned.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by colin henshaw

Thought I would comment on this topic as I was in fact resident in Muscat, Oman for some time in the early 1970s. I visited the souk in Muttrah several times and saw many of these swords for sale there, both the straight double edged type and the curved single edged pattern. Also displayed for sale were plenty of khanjars, Martini-Henrys, matchlocks etc. There can be no doubt these Omani/Zanzibari swords were intended for combat (in the historic period), and not solely for dancing purposes. Although there was likely also a display element involved, being a part of male costume. I can remember it being said these swords did not have guards to the hilts, being unnecessary because "Africans did not have swords", which of course points to slaving.

Chris Peers writes excellent books, as well as the one mentioned by TVV above, another publication of his is "Armies of the Nineteenth Century: Africa East Africa" Foundry Books 2003, and I attach an extract for information. [Moderators - hope this is acceptable, if not please delete]

There is a potential parallel with these straight Omani/Zanzibari swords and the swords of the Mende people of Sierra Leone, their swords also being without guards to the hilt and who also had involvement in slaving in the 19th century. This was the subject of a previous post and I attach an image of the sword type concerned.

Colin, thank you so much for coming in on this, and it definitely is most important that you also had experience in actually being in Oman, and first hand knowledge of the Mutrah souks.
What you add about those West African broadswords is very spot on, and I had known of these but did not connect them to those of East Africa and the obvious slaving denominator. Adding this to the information Teodor added really does present compelling evidence for use of these, and reasonable explanation for not needing a guard.
Aside from the Maasai having broadswords, indeed most tribes in Africa did not use swords in general.

The question that remains for me is wondering if it is possible that there were a number of examples of these conical hilt swords which were indeed a lighter, rebated group of weapons which were produced ONLY for performances. It seems there are numbers of these kinds of weapons in various circumstances for such purposes.

Is it possible that the confusion about the non viability of the conical hilt sword might apply to these lighter versions, and not the Mutrah assembled examples using the sturdy European blades?
I have recognized all along that any sword with a substantial blade as mounted weapon, despite its wear as a status symbol, could be used in its intended purpose.
This is of course notably the case with small swords, dress swords, court swords and the like.

[colin henshaw]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The question that remains for me is wondering if it is possible that there were a number of examples of these conical hilt swords which were indeed a lighter, rebated group of weapons which were produced ONLY for performances. It seems there are numbers of these kinds of weapons in various circumstances for such purposes.

I believe you are correct here Jim, in that modern Omani swords are currently produced purely for display and dancing type purposes. Here is a fairly recent picture of Prince Charles (now King Charles) in Oman with such a sword. It looks pretty simple, light and quite flimsy suitable for dancing...

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by colin henshaw

I believe you are correct here Jim, in that modern Omani swords are currently produced purely for display and dancing type purposes. Here is a fairly recent picture of Prince Charles (now King Charles) in Oman with such a sword. It looks pretty simple, light and quite flimsy suitable for dancing...

Thank you Colin!!! This is a PERFECT photo, and you can see the lightweight
blades. These are exactly what what used for the Razha ceremony, which was the sword 'dance'. Apparently part of this is having participants holding the swords vertically and vibrating the blades in unison, with large number at once, a notable sound from what I have understood.

These very simplistic swords were of the same basis form as the more ornamental counterparts that have been discussed with more elaborate decoration and using the substantial European blades. While of course they could be used in defense or other expected use, the likelihood that they were seems incidental. In most cases they simply were worn by merchants, slavers and officials as status symbols.

It has been a long haul trying to establish that with these conical hilt Omani swords, the old 'Highlander' movie adage, "there can be only one" does not apply

[colin henshaw]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

While of course they could be used in defense or other expected use, the likelihood that they were seems incidental. In most cases they simply were worn by merchants, slavers and officials as status symbols.

I don't see this as being accurate Jim. The flimsy type sword shown above is a modern production, and as already discussed previously in many posts by others, the historic swords were made for and used in combat, this not being an incidental purpose as you state.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by colin henshaw

I don't see this as being accurate Jim. The flimsy type sword shown above is a modern production, and as already discussed previously in many posts by others, the historic swords were made for and used in combat, this not being an incidental purpose as you state.

I see what you're saying Colin. So what is needed is the history of the origin and development of this sword form with conical hilt(as we describe it) and an understanding of why this type hilt was favored. We know the Omani battle sword used in the Nizwa interior by the Ibathi had a guard, as well as some elements seen on some of the simple conical hilt (cuffs on some) of these open guard broadswords.

But what warfare were these intended to be for? That is what I have been trying to discover for many years. While you were there in Oman, and saw these in the souks or elsewhere, were any details given as to what sort of history they may have been involved in. Were there civil disturbances involving tribal warfare? Was Oman under attack and being defended by warriors armed with these?
These are serious questions that I have not yet found answers for, and am hoping perhaps your time there might have experienced some of these topics.

As noted, these were worn by Arab gentlemen in Zanzibar and in trade caravans including slaving groups, but as you further note, the display element is notable. I always picture warriors and combative forces in a different light than well to do merchants and figures of station of course. The 'long swords' used by Congo Arabs in Nyasaland mentioned by Teodor in a 'charge' is interesting, and wondering how these Arabs and the Omani's are connected, so that is worth looking into also.
Africans, as noted, are not typically armed with swords, particularly long swords, so that begs the question.

I dont mean these questions as argumentative, but recognizing you guys clearly have information that exceeds the level of research I reached a number of years ago, and really would like to get back into it with better perspectives.

[colin henshaw]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I see what you're saying Colin. So what is needed is the history of the origin and development of this sword form with conical hilt(as we describe it) and an understanding of why this type hilt was favored. We know the Omani battle sword used in the Nizwa interior by the Ibathi had a guard, as well as some elements seen on some of the simple conical hilt (cuffs on some) of these open guard broadswords.

But what warfare were these intended to be for? That is what I have been trying to discover for many years. While you were there in Oman, and saw these in the souks or elsewhere, were any details given as to what sort of history they may have been involved in. Were there civil disturbances involving tribal warfare? Was Oman under attack and being defended by warriors armed with these?
These are serious questions that I have not yet found answers for, and am hoping perhaps your time there might have experienced some of these topics.

As noted, these were worn by Arab gentlemen in Zanzibar and in trade caravans including slaving groups, but as you further note, the display element is notable. I always picture warriors and combative forces in a different light than well to do merchants and figures of station of course. The 'long swords' used by Congo Arabs in Nyasaland mentioned by Teodor in a 'charge' is interesting, and wondering how these Arabs and the Omani's are connected, so that is worth looking into also.
Africans, as noted, are not typically armed with swords, particularly long swords, so that begs the question.

I dont mean these questions as argumentative, but recognizing you guys clearly have information that exceeds the level of research I reached a number of years ago, and really would like to get back into it with better perspectives.

Jim, Oman historically was always a fractious and violent place, with many tribal rivalries, dynastic struggles, uprisings etc. The countryside was/is studded with old fortresses, both large and small. Zanzibar and the East African interior, as we know, was subject to much bloodletting and violence, driven mainly by the slave trade. Even when I was there in Muscat, the rebellion in Dhofar was still current.

To further your studies on the subject, you need to equip yourself with a comprehensive library... the books by Chris Peers and Richard Burton are good. Chris Peers' books have substantial bibliographies. Looking at Ebay, there are a number of books listed there on the history of Oman itself which would be informative. Scouring the internet can also be of use. Oman itself was in fact once split in two - Muscat and Oman.

It was almost half a century ago now, but I can relate an anecdote... I once took an Omani friend (mixed Arab/African heritage) to the souk with me to help bargaining for a Martini-Henry I was after... he said in the past Omanis always went around armed to the teeth with pistols, muskets, swords, daggers etc. Judging by the enormous amount of redundant antique weapons then available, I could believe him !