Jineta/nimcha/kattara
 

I posted this question some time ago as a "relply" in one of the discussions, but it was buried deep and nobody bothered to answer...
Perhaps, this question was just stupid.
But I hope it was a proverbial "sleeper" and would like to try one more time:

There are several examples of swords with " drooping quillons" : Spanish-Moresque Jineta, North African and Zanzibari Nimcha and Omani Kattara ( the older variant). They look like sharing this feature.

Do these swords carry a " birthmark" of the early , pra-Islamic model? Or, were the "droopers" peculiar to local Berber traditions and later just spread both East and West? Or...
You got my drift.
Jim? Ward? Any volunteers?

Ariel, any question put forward by you would never be considered stupid! quite the contrary! I know very well how disappointing it is when a post goes unanswered, so without doing my usual marathon of research I will just place tentative comments pending further detail.
The style of quillons drooping downward have of course brought forth the pragmatic idea that these were intended to catch and stop the opponents blade in sword to sword combat, and that hilts with more developed quillon systems followed.
In the middle ages, the term 'quillon' did not exist, and the broadsword was mounted with simple horizontal bar known as the crossguard. During the crusades this was known as the 'cross', and of course the imagery of these times noted the sword as in the image of the Holy Cross.
It would be tempting to suggest that the Islamic swords had thier guards fashioned dropping downward to move away from that representation, however unlikely the idea, it seemed worthy of note. Having brought in that suggestion, it should be noted that the drooping quillon was also quite well known in Europe and the multiple downward quillons arrangement is seen on the 'crab claw' hilts as well as simple downward quillons seen on French and Italian medieval broadswords as well.

The Hispano-Moresque jineta was likely a product of influences with Italy and France, and it seems more probable that that influence was most probably induced to the jineta much in the way that the stortas and hilts of Italy influenced development of the 'nimcha' hilt in the Maghreb.

The downward projection on the earlier form of kattara in Oman would seem to have also reflected the effect of the hilts seen on the early swords of Islam of which I believe many were remounted with these form hilts.

The Zanzibari nimchas seem to have also borne the influence of Italian swords, particularly with the ring on the crossguard.

While many scholars will take the pragmatic approach, and suggest this characteristic of these hilts as a combat improvement, some will take the romanticized concept related to the cross into serious consideration. From an artists or historians view, perhaps the style of turning down the quillon was simply a variant design to be aesthetically pleasing.

Whatever the case may be for the reason of the downward quillon, its diffusion seems most likely like that of most weapons, following trade and warfare.

I hope this perspective offering my own opinions may bring forth others, and as always I welcome other views.
It was a good question, so lets hear em ! :)

All best regards,
Jim

Maybe I misinterpreted the question?

Jim, what makes you think that the jineta and it´s derivations are originated in their style from Europe? Do you have time tables and examples? As far as I know, the jineta was introduced from Africa to muslim Spain (Al-Andalús) by the Zenetes, a word which became in the spansih word "jinetes". I understand this sword was already in use from the 13th Century. Are there some causal nexus based on some evidences? This is an interesting subject.
My best regards

Gonzalo

Thank you Gonzalo, you are right that is the accepted theory. I meant to suggest that there was distinct similarity in the weapons of Islamic Spain and Europe just as there were apparant cross influences between North Africa and Europe, particularly Italy which predominated trade in many Meditteranean routes as well as others. As I noted, I have worked on focused research regarding these developments for some time.

I hope that my comments regarding the drooping quillons on medieval Islamic broadswords being intended to deviate from the cross representation on the European broadsword will not be perceived as 'theory' :)

While there are many similarities and suggestions of influence reflected in a number of sword forms between varying cultural spheres, it is difficult to determine exactly which direction the influence moved in many cases. What I meant to say it that it seemed unlikely that Islamic design preferences would influence European hilt forms such as in this case of drooping quillons.

It does seem however that European designs did influence many sword hilt forms in the Islamic sphere such as the Moroccan 'nimcha' from the Italian stortas and others; the 'Zanzibar' type s'boula from baselards of undetermined origin but certainly European; and the koummya, whose pommel closely resembles and has been suggested to have developed from the Italian cinqueda.

Ariel, you asked a question, do you have thoughts?

But on the contrary, it is an accepted fact that the jineta sword influenced in the first place the spanish swords, to the degree it was copied in Toledo by the christians (in that time Toledo was on spanish hands), and latter this type of hilt probably spread to other countries, but I don´t have any proof of this diffusion into the rest of Europe. I don´t have the impression that the zenetes had much contact with europeans. In fact, the jineta tactics to make war using the cavalry in a special form, for which even the stirrups of the saddle were modified, were latter copied by castillians to the point it was known by europeans as the "castillian way" to make war. Please see this reference:

http://xenophongroup.com/EMW/article001.htm

As you know, the main weapon used by the zenetes was a lance which can be also throwed. Jineta, or Gineta, was a whole complex of tactics, weapons, horse harnesses, all interrelated as a whole, so you can find a treatise of this development in the "Tractado de la Cauallería de la Gineta" a military cavalty treatise written in antique castillian languaje by Hernan Chacon, a knight of the Order of Calatrava, now traslated to english:

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-77096829.html

On the other hand, I have seen many interpretations about the supposed influences from Europe to the rest of the world which do not have a base in actual evidences of a causal nexus, but only on similarities, more or less superficial, on the morphology of the weapon. This a very known practice of ethnocentrism which must be revised in order to have a more objetive vision of the history of the swords. The first example I recall, is the supposed influence of the macedonic machaira on the hindu sousson pata and the khukri, although there is older evidences of this kind of blades in the south of actual India, far from the area of contact with the greeks.

You must take on account that the islamic hilts (and blades) do influenced deeply the european swords, as in the case of the hussar swords from Poland and Hungary, form turkish influence, which latter went as far as Spain with their "sables a la turca" (sabers turkish style). This influence was also reinforced by the mamluke influences which came latter, in the beginning of the 19th Century, and which reached even England. I have seen many european blades on middle east and oriental swords, but always they were remounted in new hilts in the taste of the new owners, and the old hilts were discarded.

Speaking of resemblances, I don´t think the downward curved quillons is enough proof of any influence in either side. But the jineta sword, and specially the hilt, has a special morphology considered as a whole, from which I cannot find ancestry on european swords before the 13th Century. Apart from resembances, we need to establish the physical routes of influence, the commercial or warfare netwoks, the ancestor models and their evolution, and so on. From my sources (Ibn Jaldun history of the berbers), the zenetes were a relatively isolated tribe from Europe influences in that time, making war to other berber tribes and to the fatimides, and it was not until they had an ephimeral hegemony in North Africa, that they went to Spain, first as military contingent, and latter as conquerors of Al-Andalús. Between zenetes, in the west of North Africa, and the europeans, in the Middle East, there were the fatimids, and no commercial post on the coast linked them directly with Europe until latter, when the jineta swords already was an adopted weapon.

However, maybe I do not have enough information on this subject, but if you do, please help me to correct my mistake. I think I have many black spots in my knowlege of the berber and moorish history, and I would appreciate any solid reference you can give me on this point.
My best regards

Gonzalo

Outstanding Gonzalo!!! You have presented a well supported response to my comments that clearly shows you are extremely well informed on this topic. All of what you are saying is well placed and answers many questions about the development of weaponry and tactics in these medieval periods, and emphasizes the importance of Spain in the diffusion of these.

I think that you are the one with the key information on this, and I thank you for the detailed presentation which certainly clarifies my own perceptions on this.

I wonder if this information will answer Ariels question:) , regardless, thank you very much Gonzalo, you have definitely answered some for me!!

All very best regards,
Jim

Thank you very much Jim, but still, I think it remains open the question from Ariel, for which I have no answer. Did the jineta sword, and all their close relatives, were an islamic, or a pre-islamic model? Where does it comes from? I think more search must be made. Berbers are an antique people from Africa, related by some authors to the numidians, whose cavaly fought the romans and latter were their auxiliaries. It seems they had a very old culture. On the other hand, the influences comming from arabs or other islamic peoples cannot be discarded. We have to read the descriptions of the swords used by arabs, sarracens and berbers over the period from the 10th to the 13th Century, at least. The problem is that many sources were written in arab and no traslations are made to european languajes. There is a new book in english, a traslation from Al-Kindi with some information on this subject, and there are other sources we have to check. Even biznantine sources could be useful in this task, not to mention the accounts from the crusades. This is a literate job.

But maybe someone on the forum has just found something about this subject.
My best regards

Gonzalo

Reviewing some resources at hand has given me some perspective on this interesting question that Ariel has posted, suggesting that he has either some interest in this subject and I would imagine, has formed his own opinions on this. Meanwhile, Gonzalo has posted well placed information, and I will try to add more of what I have discovered in review of my resources at hand.

I think that the Moroccan and Zanzibari nimchas are not inclusive in the subject of the Hispano-Moresque 'jineta' and the apparantly atavistic version in the mysterious Omani kattara of early form. Having said that, I think it is best to consider these distinctly formed hilt styles and focus on their possible ancestry. While the history of the Zenatas and the geopolitics of Spain in the medieval period is fascinating, I hope I can address the question without that complexity.

As Gonzalo has aptly noted, we do not know what form the tribal groups that became known collectively as Zeneta in pre-Islamic times, but as they are believed from Tunisian regions, some research on those regions in period may reveal clues. As noted, we do know that by the 8th century, most of the groups were distinctly Muslim, and these Berber warriors were well established in Andulusian armies. By the 15th century, it is noted however that these light horsemen equipped a la jineta (for Zeneta) though numerous, "...much of thier equipment was imported from Italy, though Spain had a long established armament industry". ("Fernando El Catolico", David Nicolle, Military Illustrated #44, January, 1992, p.48).

While this would seem to suggest that European weapons were prevalent, and possible influence was there, there is no qualified estimation of how prevalent. It is noted further a suggestion of an earlier form of weapon existing in the description of the war sword of Ferdinand the Catholic "...a magnificent late 15th century weapon in an older Iberian-Islamic tradition; it is distinctly related to lighter Granadan swords such as the superb surviving 'jinete' sword of Boabdil". ( M.I. #44, op.cit. p.51)

The sword of Boabdil is the distinct form of Hispano-Moresque jinete, with pointed dome pommel, and profusely ornate with the quillons dropping straight downward, parallel to the blade. The Ferdinand sword has the gently drooping guard with drooping inner quillons associated somewhat with European 'crab claw' type hilts.

In "El Cid and the Reconquista 1050-1492" (D.Nicolle, 1988, Osprey200) these distinct 'jinete' hilts are shown on p.19 (fig. I) as late 14th century, and on p.46 (plate F2) being wielded by a Qadi (religious judge) of late 14th century. It is noted that "...the decorated light sword is described of Grenadine form, a weapon originally developed for light cavalry a la jinete".
It is also noted that some of these jinete swords were richly decorated, probably as gifts or bribes for neighboring Christian aristocrats (p.36).

The sword of Boabdil is illustrated and described in David Nicolle's article "Abu 'Abdullah' Muhammed XI Boabdil of Granada" (M.I. #43, Dec.1991, p.50) and is apparantly held in the Museo del Ejercito in Madrid.

Turning to the later representation of this distinct sword type, the Omani kattara shown in Robert Elgood's "Arms and Armour of Arabia" ( 1994, pp.17,18, fig. 2.13 and 2.15) shows these hilts structurally of essentially the same form of the 'jineta' discussed, but with decorative coverings missing, the dramatic downward quillons vestigial. There is no definite ancestry offered for these swords which are considered of 17th to 18th century (despite an auction catalog with 12th-14th c. date suggested without specific support). Though there is no agreed regional provenance on these, it does seem clear that they are reflective of the 14th century jineta's of the form discussed.

These jineta swords, with dramatically straight downward guard extensions that run parallel to the blade, rather than being guard quillons, particularly with elaborate decoration as in the Boabdil sword, seem to reflect an almost architectural characteristic.

At this point, I feel that these distinct hilts of the jineta, and the later example appearing in the early Omani kattara, are reflective of the medieval period in Moorish Spain, and are most likely decorative forms derived perhaps in exaggerated form of much simpler weapons used by jineta forces.

While the reference to the sword of Ferdinand suggests association in its downturned quillons to the Boabdil jineta, I feel that this rather benign form in comparison relates more to cross influence with the European forms.

While this certainly does not answer the question, it has prompted me to learn more on the forms noted, which I have tried to share here.As always, I hope that others might have access to material that would describe the weapons used by the Zenete in North Africa, as well as early Granadan swords that might have been prototypes for the jinete.

Just to add some thoughts to the discussion…

If by “the war sword of Ferdinand the Catholic” David Nicolle means either the so-called (sometimes) “Ferdinand’s sword” in the Real Armería:

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/mcgener/FernandoWeb.JPG




or the sword from his tomb that stays now in Granada:




http://www.oronoz.com/imagenes/marca...s00/003924.jpg


then, beyond some decorative aspects, I don’t really see any relationship with the so-called sword of Boabdil in Madrid’s Army museum:



http://www.oronoz.com/imagenes/marca...s00/002848.jpg http://www.users.drew.edu/~ebunn/135/jineta_sword.jpg



which is a “typical” exemplar of the courtly/luxury Hispano-Moresque sword of Nasrid style from the 14th-15th c, of which some exemplars (less than a dozen, I think) are still extant. I seems quite clear that from this date afterwards this was the style associated with what a “jineta” sword was, specially in the Christian ambit, but it is not so clear that this was the kind of sword that the Zenetes brought with them. We know the Zenetes, in their 13th c. invasions of the Iberian Peninsula, bring with them the light cavalry tactics that will heavily influence the Christian Spanish way of fighting on horseback, including many changes of equipment. But the period descriptions of their swords are not clear enough to make us able to recognize a Zenete/Jineta sword by itself, specially regarding their morphological features, as many of the accounts are not only vague but also centred in the description of how rich and decorated some of them were, obviating the characteristics of those swords that were not destined to the rich and powerful.

On the other hand, in the 13th c. the Zenetes had already been Islamized for a long time, as they had contacts with the first Umayyad invading waves that in the 7th century swept North Africa from East to West, and in fact they helped them to first conquer Iberia as shock troops, at that time. Well, to make a long story short, what I try to point out is that the elite ruling classes in Muslim Spain, those who brought the strongest “foreign” influences in art, religion, society, law, technology, etc. were Umayyad Arabs. And the pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arab swords had straight, double-edged blades, with short, curved quillions (even “D” shaped guards, where the blade emerges from the straight side and the grip from the curved one) of Persian/Sassanid influence (see, for example, HOYLAND, R. G. and GILMOUR, B. “Medieval Islamic Swords and Swordmaking. Kindi’s treatise ‘On Swords and their Kinds’ ”, Ed. By E. J. W. Gibb Memorial Trust, 2006; ALEXANDER, “Swords and sabers during the Early Islamic Period”, Gladius XXI, 2001, pp. 193-220 or ZAKY “Introduction to the study of Islamic Arms and Armour”, Gladius I, 1961, pp. 17-30). And in Al-Andalus there was no take-over by the Central Asian Turcoman tribes with their curved swords (among other things), but instead there was a certain fondness by the old Arab traditions. And on top of that, and most importantly, there are examples of straight double edged swords with short and/or curved quillions from the 9th (CANTÓ GARCÍA, “Una espada de época Omeya del siglo IX D.C”, Gladius XXI, 2001, pp. 183-192) and 12th (NICOLLE, “Two swords from the foundation of Gibraltar”, Gladius XXII, 2002, pp. 147-200) centuries in the territories of Muslim Spain. The picture that seems to emerge to all this, is that the late Nasrid swords are a development of these earlier double-edged swords which in turn are the inheritors of the pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arab swords, and that their dropping quillions seem to owe more to the Persian/Sassanid typologies than to any European influence. As an additional twist to the question, those early Arab swords are, after all, what the Qajar “revival” swords tried to imitate, if I’m not mistaken, with a tendency to also feature the kind of dropping quillions that we also find in Qattaras from Oman and Yemen.

In short, that although the mutual influences between Hispanic Muslims and Christians is an absolutely undeniable reality for as long as they shared the territory, I don’t think that the dropping quillions of the late Nasrid luxury swords are a consequence of it, but a development of the old pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arabic sword typologies.

Of course, I have an opinion, but it is such a pleasure to stay on the sidelines and listen to the arguments!

Fantastic Marc!!! I have been hoping you would write on this.
Thank you for posting the illustrations, which does show that the sword of Ferdinand and these Nasrid forms are not really typologically related.
I am, as always, in complete admiration of your knowledge and understanding of these weapons and particularly your command of the references on them. The Gladius references are of course especially important, and I notice some fairly recent issues. Can you recommend how one might obtain these or back issues? I presume they are in Spanish.

I agree of course, completely with all of what you have said, and am most grateful for the thorough detail you have added here. My understanding of most of the history and weapons of these early periods of Spanish history was notably lacking, and even after spending quite a bit of time reviewing resources at hand, still incomplete. What you have written beautifully fills in more of what I needed to know, and you have summed it up quite nicely.

Ariel....ya rascal!!! I figured you were out there watchin' :)
I told you this was a good question, and I know I've learned from it. Its always great when more resolution than disagreement comes out in a good discussion. With the detail added here by Gonzalo and Marc, I think the subject is greatly clarified.

Marc, this is a remarkably clear and informed analysis. I just want to question a small part of your statement: "their dropping quillions seem to owe more to the Persian/Sassanid typologies "
The most exhaustive and partisan argument in favor of this hypothesis comes from Mr. Khorasani's book " "Arms and Armour from Iran" (Chapter 10, pp. 198-206). However, the actual pictures of Sassanian swords shown by him do not present a single example of a domed pommel and drooping quillons. He shows 2 schematic drawings of staright-bladed swords with curved handles ( Mameluke-type or Topkapi-type, attributed to the Prophet and companions) and drooping quillons than are kept in Russian museums ( ~17th century). The reason behind using them as a support for the "sassanian" theory is obscure.
Do you have any support for the Sassanian origin of the " straight blade/ domed pommel/downturned quillons" influence on the Zenetes/ pre-Islamic Arab swords?
Furthermore, he enumerates several arguments why the so-called Revival Qajar swords " revived" not the Arabian early and pre-Islamic traditions, but rather Achemenian/Sassanian one. The gist of it is that " It is highly unlikely, that Iranians, who fought the Arabs for centuries to gain their independence, would have imitated Arab straight swords". This argument, in my opinion, is weak and disingenious: Iranians willingly adopted the most salient elements of Arab culture: writing and religion. " Reviving" old Arab weapons would, in their mind, only bolster the sentiment that they, the Shias, were the true inheritors of the True Islamic Creed.
I fully agree with your final interpretation.
The only unanswered part of my question relates to the Nimcha-type quillon block. I fully understand Jim's position re. Italian influence, but I am still wondering whether even there the influence went from Africa to Europe or vice versa. Indeed, if there is a straight line between Arabia proper and Moorish/ Iberian constructions, the Moroccan/ Algerian Nimchas fall right in the middle.
My 5 cents....

Jim:
As always, you are far too kind :) . And regarding the GLADIUS issues, the articles with the title in English are written in this language. Oh, and the issues from 1999 onwards are fully online, except for the current year's issue that has only the abstracts HERE
Enjoy :D

Ariel:
I'm glad we agree in the fundamental points :) Just wanted to reiterate that the "Zenete connection" bit is exactly what I have issues with: we don't know how the Zenete swords really looked like, but in this case that’s of only relative importance. I’m afraid I might have explained myself confusingly… I don't think we're here in front of a case of diffusion of the Arab typologies through geographically adjacent areas of influence East to West across North Africa. The 7th c. Umayyad culture was directly carried out to Southern Spain on the wings of the rulers of the conquering waves, who also became the rulers of these new territories. The swords of the elites were directly taken from Mecca to Córdoba, and THEN they started to evolve divergently in each place due to their local influences. Regarding the issue about the Sassanid influences on the pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arab swords, it’s a field I which I really consider myself a bit out of my depth for any fine detail discussion (although it’s only of relative transcendence for our argumentation: there’s some iconographic evidence of the typology of these early Islamic Arab swords), but I would like anyway to point out that whan I mention this subject in my post the references I give don’t include Mr. Khorasani's book… :) And, yes, I do have it. :D

i had read somewhere that late roman and visgothic pattern swords were still being made as late as the 11th century (and perhaps later) el cid's "Tizona" is considered an example of a "late roman style" sword.

Marc, thank you so much for the link to the Gladius resource!

Chevalier, its good to see you posting on this! and especially contributing a very interesting observation. I have also seen the comment on 'Tizona' being of late Roman form. It seems that in the references I have seen it is unclear whether the mounts on the El Cid sword are original to the period of his use of the weapon.

Concerning the jineta, as Marc and Ariel have shown, more work is needed to determine the course of development and possible influences.

Ariel, I'm glad to see you coming in on this! The 'nimcha' does present problems in determining the direction of the diffusion of the multi quillon arrangement that is distinct on the Moroccan nimcha. In an excellent article by Anthony North ("A Late 15th Century Italian Sword", Connoisseur, Dec. 1975, pp.238-241) a sword with this quillon arrangement is presumed Moroccan but turns out that it is actually 15th century Italian. I cannot locate my copy of the article, but noted it to show the long standing of confusion on this subject.
I remain inclined to believe that the Italian hilts of this arrangement were diffused with Venetian traders in the 16th century into Meditteranean trade centers, and likely adopted by Arab armourers. It seems that the same basic quillon form may have found its way further east via Arab traders to Sinhala (Ceylon, Ar.=Serandib) resulting in the distinct Sinhalese kastane hilt, of which earliest known examples date into early 17th century. Clearly the same diffusion with Arab trade routes brought the hilt form to Morocco, which is as you note, a key point in the development of various interpretations of it.

It seems to me that Italian swords and blades seem to have generated a great deal of influence, certainly through thier trade. The familiar 'sickle marks' found widely on trade blades (incl. the 'gurda') trace back to Genoa; the cinquedea is considered the likely source for the pommel on the Moroccan Koummya; the s'boula form we have discussed with the T or I hilt
(the 'Zanzibar' swords) appears to have evolved from European, possibly Italian baselards (further from Switzerland).

All best regards,
Jim

Marc, I´m very glad you came here. I think you made a splendid exposition. I only have some doubts. The influence from the Umayyad Dynasties ended in the 11th Century, and so the relatively isolation of the Califate of Cordoba from the rest of the islamic world. From the 11th Century, north african infuences went into Spain with the sucesive waves of the invasive berber which founded new dynasties, intensifying the cultural contact among them. First the Almoravids, latter the Almohads and finally the Zenetes related to the Marinid dynasty to the beginning of the 14th Century. They were part of the ruling class in Al-Andalús, and the support of the Nasrids for a time.

Although I think traditions changes slowly, some amount of influence must be carried by the new berber rulers along all those centuries of constant intercourse with North Africa, and this is specially valid in the case of weapons. I can´t imagine the berber warriors leaving their weapons and adopting new ones but in a period of time where very serious intercourses must be happened.

I agree that there are almost no recorded swords from this period, and the same thing happens with the christian swords. The swords from Santa Casilda, Don Fernando de la Cerda and King Sancho IV, are among the few we can count on. By the way, the sword of King Fernando El Católico is more related to this last sword, clearly a christian sword, than to the muslim swords. There are documented downward quillons in swords from the 12th Century in Europe, in Oakeshott, "Records of the Medieval Sword" from the types Xa and XII and foward, but I think those are clearly different from the muslim types.

So, there are great difficulties in establishing ancestries and the various steps on the evolution of the spanish-muslim swords and their infuence over the ones used by christians, as the swords used by the kings are not necessarily representative of the diverse variants used by the common soldier. But there is a fact which makes me think more, that there is a connection between the nasrid swords, and the espada jineta, and this is the fact of the great similarities among the Omani Qattara and those swords, a smilarity which goes more far than a mere coincidence and points directly to the berber as the link between them. Of course, as I said, in the measure we have more information, even in this thread, there can be other explanations. More archaeological developments and more translations from arab books must be made to have a firm certainty in all this genealogic tree of muslim swords in Africa and Spain. In this, I would leave a chapter apart for the nimcha.

Marc, I think you can get online only from the XIX Volume of Gladius. I only have texts from this volume to the XXVII. I would appreciate very much if you can tell me how to get the first volumes online. Maybe I´m not very good with the web. As with many other things.
My best regards

Gonzalo

This question posed by Ariel has evolved into some great discourse on a topic that remains quite unclear in so many instances, the chronological and typological development of various sword types. In this case the focus is on the connection between the Nasrid espada jineta and the more recent Omani kattara of 17th and 18th century form. As seems to be agreed, the nimcha of Moroccan form as well as the Zanzibari form are separate developments but also with unclear developmental explanation.

It is great to have both Marc and Gonzalo in this discussion, and I am enjoying having the complexity of this field of study concerning the history of
Hispano-Moresque Iberia and North African Maghreb, being brought into perspective. I think everyone is bringing up excellent points, and it is most interesting seeing the balance of plausibity and probability in motion as the discussion continues.

What I think is most interesting is that the atavistic interpretation of various ancient and classical weapons presents a profound challenge in trying to establish the direct lineage of many relatively modern forms. As is noted, there are distinct gaps in the chronology that defeat such attempts, as well as the absence of archaeological or reliably provenanced examples.

It seems that the elaborate espada jineta was a form in itself of limited production, and as noted in my earlier post, made exclusively for important figures or for in some cases presentation, probably not made in large numbers. These seem to have been sumptuously decorated and the dramatically downturned guard seems to be more aesthetic than practical.

As I mentioned, it seems that in many cases, classic weapon styles are fashioned in later times recalling those early weapon forms. Obviously it would seem these are intended to instill nationalistic fervor in being produced in such forms, and certainly profound reverence is intended in the case of the Qajar 'Revival' arms and armour. In this sense, the Omani kattara appears to have been intended to represent the distinctly elaborate espada jineta, though extant examples of these have been relieved of whatever valuable application covered them.

I am inclined to think that the jineta and kattara are distinctly related elaborately fashioned swords that are not chronologically connected, rather the kattara more likely an atavistic reflection of that earlier grandeur.What would be most interesting would be to discover more on the early Granadan swords used by the rank and file, and just how much they might have influenced the general form of the Nasrid jineta hilt.

The gently downturned quillons on many crossguards on medieval broadswords seem to be a matter of deviation in style not particularly exclusive to either Muslim nor Christian swords. It is clearly present on the Ferdinand sword, which is very much like the crab claw hilts seen in Italy and Germany. The developing quillon arrangements in these crossguards of course do seem to have led to the hilt forms that later influenced the nimcha style hilt.

These are simply my own interpretation of what I understand from what has been discussed, and I look forward for more in the discussion.

Thank you guys!

All the best,
Jim

Here we have to ponder how much of the original Arab/Persian influence survived in the Nasrid society and art, and how much of the Bereber culture, which in turn was already quite influenced by the oriental traditions due to its own process of Islamization, was integrated into the Andalusian life. Although the presence of the Bereber culture can't be denied (together with others, like the Christian one), as far as a I know, the Art Historians seem to acknowledge a good survival of Oriental traits in the Nasrid art and culture, as can be seen in textiles, writings, iconography, etc. I won't deny that this is an area that needs a much deeper knowledge than the one I have of such details of the Al-Andalus history and culture to be able to put up a solid discussion, but fact is that there's some archaeological and iconographical evidence from 9th to 15th c. in the Andalusian context for swords that share typological characteristics with the pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arab swords. Not as many as one would like, sure, but so far, I think, quite enough to have the Arab influence as a good working hypothesis which I, at least, feel quite comfortable with.

Now, regarding the Qattara, I would like to see if there’s any more or less continuous archaeological/iconographical record of that typology in southern Arabia from early Islamic times to the 17th-18th c., from when exemplars of the Qattara we’re familiar with have arrived to us. Then we would have our answer.

Finally, regarding GALDIUS, as I mentioned in my post one can find online just the issues from 1999 (number XIX) onwards. Number XVIII was never published, and the earlier issues are not online right now. In a fairly recent conversation with one of the Editors of the journal this subject came up, and although the wish to put them online at some point was there, there was some lack of resources to do it anytime soon.

Omani Swords. Origins.
 

:shrug: Salaams,
I have puzzled over the entire question of Omani Short Battle Sword versus the long Omani Kattara, their origins and influence. Then I stumbled upon your observations and the joint exploratory detective work of forum members which leaves me very impressed and staggered by the amount of research . So far as I can see the answer has not yet been proven despite the huge detective work already carried out. My question is several fold.. though I have to admit that I prefer the arguement from the influence of the Nasrid side because I dont swallow the Persian angle though it cannot be as yet ruled out.. Persian influence in Oman was pre Islamic(they built the great fort at Bahla before the 7th Century) and there are weapons today that are directly traceable to Persian weapons such as the Mussandam(N Oman) Shihuh axe linked to the Persian Luristani axe.
The Nasrid dynasty (1242 ~ 1492) fits neatly into a time frame for its influence on the Omani Short Battle Sword. There were trader-explorers moving through the entire Islamic block at about that time such as Ibn Battuta Of Morocco who had visitted Oman in about 1330 and Spain in about 1350. I add this only to show potential interlinking between those two places though he journeyed to almost everywhere in the Islamic world and beyond.
What is interesting is who or what influenced the Nasrid sword style?... Is it not possible that the Omani sword was the first in its style and that sword influenced the Nasrid? It is a big question since if that were the case it would put the Omani Short Battle Sword as earlier than thought to perhaps (and logically) just after Oman accepted Islam. Oman did this during the lifetime of the prophet in the 7th Century therefor could we be in fact looking at a staggeringly ancient weapon? Pushing the envelope back to 7th or 8th century seems unimaginable ... but perhaps it is that old. It could have frozen simply because Oman became completely Ibathi Islamic by the 8th century and therefor other Islamic countries would not copy the sword(logically).
Almost as an afterthought could it not be that the Omani Short Battle Sword is completely on its own... not copied ...frozen in time.. not influencial and totally a one off design?
This brings me to my third question ~ What relationship does the Short Omani Battle Sword have with the long Omani Kattara? In my opinion this is critical, though, like the entire question of its so called predecessor completely shrouded in mystery.
I would describe the Omani Short Battle Sword as a two edged short close action stiff hacking blade like a Roman Gladius. The pointed blade capable of stabbing and probably employed behind a sizeable shield. The hilt with a spiked Islamic Arch Pommel constructed simply of two main parts and put together over a wooden core and with 2 rivets and a third hole for a wrist strap. The pointed pommel possibly a useful weapon against head/face targets. The handle probably covered in leather and a scabbard in the normal simple fashion.
My description of the Omani Long Kattara ~ Long flexible blade with rounded point worked in unison with a small buckler shield at considerable speed and at great distance from the adversary. The handle; long connical with an integral tang and pommel as one piece made with the blade. Pommel often with a hole for a wrist strap. Handle and scabbard leather covered etc.
These two weapons could be off separate planets! There appears to be no evidence of a transition from one to the other.
I put it to the forum that they are unconnected and that the development of the Long Omani Kattara occured because of African influence via Zanzibar in about 1652 when Oman seized it.
Further I submit that the Omani Short Battle Sword is unconnected to any other sword and that it developed much earlier in about the 8th Century soon after Oman converted to Islam.

Omani Short Battle Sword and Omani Long Kattara
 

As a guide I have put up two pictures.
The Short blade 60 cms long the Kattara long at 80 cms.

To Continue ~ This is an excellent thread and it is an honour to expand upon the details...I found this artwork...I will add more as it happens but this thread is open to comments... :shrug:

Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

JINETA SWORDS A quote from a sold item at https://www.worthpoint.com/worthoped...denix-20531549

Quote"Jineta (or Gineta) swords are the most direct, fair and rich inheritance of the hispano-arab panoply. The name origin comes from the Cronicles of Alphonso X which tells us about a berber tribe of the Benimerines also known as Zenetes who moved into the Iberic penninsula during the XIII century to fight at the service of Mohammed I of Granada, and brought with them this type of weapon, with a shorter and lighter blade but still as wide and with a great quality steel as the ones used by christian forces of the time.

Due to their quality and scarcity (nowadays hardly a dozen of these swords survive) the jinetas are universally considered and admired. Besides a few now within private collections and worldwide museums, in Spain only three museums are fortunate enough to treasure some examples; the San Telmo Municipal Museum (Picture 9) in San Sebastian, Basque Country, The Army Museum (Museo del Ejercito)(Picture 10); and the National Archeological Museum (Museo Arqueologico Nacional)(Picture11) in Madrid".Unquote.

When I was in Spain a few years ago, I took the attached pictures of the jinetas.

First, a couple heavily adorned examples from Museo del Ejercito in Toledo, I believe the first one is attributed to Boabdil.

Then, a broadsword with an ivory hilt, also one of Boabdil's swords.

Finally, one more sword from the Archaeological Museum in Madrid.

Salaams TVV ~Absolutely excellent shots of the Jinetas .

Here are a few more I have been gathering together.

I thought to place a book I discovered on the subject ~ Note that this is a historical novel...:shrug:

Please see http://www.discoverislamicart.org/da...es;Mus01;31;en

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Searching the web I discovered this amazing picture at my armoury.com see http://myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.13183.html :shrug:

Whilst the Moroccan Nimcha has occasionally been associated in the design to or from this weapon I see virtually no link whatsoever except a vague potential hint because of the turned down quillons ...which as you can see bare no resemblance at all, nor does the hilt; whilst the blades are totally different...in fact the Moroccan blade is often European.

The swords below are indicated as (Top left to right) but may be incomplete as there are 11 descriptions but 12 pictures!! but it may be correct up to item 7.
1 - Sword found in Sangueza, pommel is missing (XIIIth century ?, probably the oldest known)
2 - Sword of the Cardinal Infant Don Fernando (Real Armeria in Madrid)
3 - Sword said to be of Sayyidi Yahya (Casa de los Tiros, Granada)
4 - Sword of San Marcello de Leon (museo archeologico, Madrid)
5 - Sword said to be of the Sultan Boabil (museo del ejercito, Madrid)
6 - Sword "bèrbère" (armeria real, Madrid)
7 - Sword hilt
************************************************** ******
8 - Sword of the "Cabinet des Médailles" (B Nat, Paris)
9 - Sword of San Telmo (San Sebastian)
10 - Sword said to be of Abindarraez (MET museum, NY)
11 - Sword of the Kassel Museum (Germany)

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

As Marc rightly pointed out before, the swords with down curved quillons have an old Islamic provenance, and I quote:
"The down-turned quillons found on some medieval weapons and in medieval pictorial sources are generally agreed to be of eastern origin or at least inspiration. The Islamic, Mediterranean and Iberian archaeological evidence ranges from quillons which are both substantial and down-turned, to those which are so truncated and rudimentary that they merely reflect this fashion (figures 28-30, 33, 35, 38-44 & 46-51) They are relatively rare in early medieval western Europe but do appear in Mozarab manuscript illustrations from the Iberian peninsula in the 10th and 11th centuries. As such they probably reflected Islamic Andalusian rather than Christian northern Spanish military styles, particularly as they are mostly on swords whose scabbards are carried on baldrics rather than sword-belts. In these manuscripts, however, the down-turned quillons are often associated with the clover-leaf or trilobate pommel rather than the spherical pommel of the Gibraltar swords 63 (figure 65). Early western Mediterranean examples of genuinely down-turned quillons include the probably western Islamic sword from the Agay shipwreck (figure 39), now considered to date from the 11th or 12th centuries 64, and a fragmentary sword from the region of Seville (figure 40)." David Nicolle, “Two Swords from the Foundation of Gibraltar”, Gladius, Vol. XXII, 2002, pp.178-180.

This is confirmed in the study by Rafael Carmona Ávila, “Un Arriaz Broncíneo Decorado, de Espada de Época Omeya Andalusí, Hallado en el Occidente del Alfoz de Madinat Qurtuba (Cordoba), Gladius, Vol. XXVII, 2007, p.99, who adds that only in the 13th Century this type of quillons are associated with Christian swords in the Iberic Peninsula, but with the variance of beign more long and narrow. He offers a long list of illustrations from this period as a proof.
Interestingly enough, the downcurved quillons had more than a fashion. It was a practical need, derived from an adapted style of fencing:
“It seems to have been from the Sassanian Persians that Muslim Arab swordsmen learned what later became known in Europe as the ‘Italian Grip,’ though this may actually have first been developed in early medieval India. It involved placing the index finger of the sword hand over the quillons, thus bringing the centre of gravity closer to the point of percussion….Light cavalry combat a la jinete was again associated with what western European came to know as the Italian Grip and, according to some scholars, with curved quillons 10 .” (the bold is mine) David Nicolle, Idem. p.158.
From this, we see two elements: the downcurved quillons are first systematically (but not exclusively) used in the Islamic context, and second, the Italian grip (which is not “Italian”) was first used in the same context. I will come to this point later. I don’t pretend that the downcurved quillons were “discovered” or “invented” in any place in particular, though all points to the east. What I expose is the systematic use of this type of quillons by certain cultures, based on practical needs, rather than fashion. About the Sassanian grip which, by the way, is associated with the development of the ricasso, please see Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer, “From Medieval Sword to Renaissance Rapier”, Gladius, Vol.II, 1963, pp-30, 31.

In the early Islamic representations to at least the 13th Century, the curvature of the quillons is more moderate than the later Nasrd-Nasrid swords. Please see this illustrations from David Nicolle, “Two Swords from the Foundation of Gibraltar”, Gladius, Vol. XXII, 2002,pp.168-169.


53) Relief carving of cavalryman on ivory chess-piece, Islamic Sind or eastern Iran 9th century AD (Cabinet des Médailles, inv. 311, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris). 54) Warrior on lustreware bowl, Iraq 9-10 cent AD (Museum of Fine Arts, inv. 57.684, Boston). 55) Warrior on ceramic bowl from Nishapur, Khorasan-10th century AD (Victoria & Albert Museum, inv. C.294-1987, London). 56) Warrior on fragment of ceramic bowl from Nishapur, Khorasan-10th century AD (National Museum, Tehran). 57) Warrior on ceramic bowl from Nishapur, Khorasan 10th century AD (National Museum, Tehran). 58) Warrior on fragment of ceramic bowl from Nishapur, Khorasan, Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. 66.176, New York). 59) One of a pair of mirror-image gold necklace pendants, Buyid Persian 10th century, (Art Museum, Inv.1953.70, Cincinnati). 60) Unnamed warrior Saint on a Synaxary from Tutun, Fayum, Coptic Egyptian, 10th century AD (Pierpont Morgan Library, inv. M613, f.1v, New York).

Take note of the quillons in the figure No.54, and see the similarities with the Qattara.
An image of the swords studied by Nicolle in this study on the page 154:

Note the presence of the spherical pommel, not to be confused with a discoidal pommel, more common on the European swords. This pommel maybe will evolve to the more dome-shaped with a finial as in the Nasrid swords, or maybe the last is a late stylistic import into North Africa or to Al-Andalus through North Africa. The provenance of this swords, in the opinion of most of the specialists, including Oakeshott, is occidental North Africa, around the 12th Century.
There are more illustrations in the study from Nicolle, which can be downloaded here:

Note the presence of the spherical pommel, not to be confused with a discoidal pommel, more common on the European swords. This pommel maybe will evolve to the more dome-shaped with a finial as in the Nasrid swords, or maybe the last is a late stylistic import into North Africa or to Al-Andalus through North Africa. The provenance of this swords, in the opinion of most of the specialists, including Oakeshott, is occidental North Africa, around the 12th Century.
There are more illustrations in the study from Nicolle, which can be downloaded here:




http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/inde...download/59/60

The finial of the late Nasrid sword could be a development of this type of pommel, from a sword hilt described as shared Mediterranean and Middle Eastern style, 11th Century, David Nicolle and Angus McBride, The Moors. The Islamic West 7th – 15th Centuries AD, p.10

Please take notice of the finial, and also the type of quillons. They began to resemble those of the nimcha, or it is my imagination? More than any quillons in an European sword? Is there any European sword from the 11th Century or before with this type of quillons? I would like to see a picture, since I have not enough bibliography. And also see the broad blade. The provenance is unknown, but the sword is in the Museo del Ejército in Madrid. Given the globular pommel and other features, it is not difficult to imagine the origin, especially when Nicolle says “…the artistic evidence supports the idea that the spherical pommel was a Middle Eastern and Mediterranean fashion…” (David Nicolle, “Two Swords from the Foundation of Gibraltar”, Gladius, Vol. XXII, 2002, p.174).
Not unlikely also North African. And one must take into account that North Africa and Al-Andalus, contrary to common ideas, were culturally more sophisticated than the rest of Europe during all the Middle Ages.

The broadswords with downcurved quillons came to the Iberic Peninsula since the early Muslim rule, as stated in the bibliography given by Marc, to which I add the study by Rafael Carmona Ávila, already mentioned. But until the 11th Century those swords have not yet the type of quillons found in the Nasrid swords. Those last came in two types: ceremonial (more apltly denominated “dress swords”, the type of sword used by Boabdil) and fighting. An example of the last is seen in the article from Berástegui Lizeaga, Crespo Francés y Valero y Rosado Galdós, “Identificación de una Espada Jineta de Guerra”, Trabajos de Arqueología Navarra, No. 18, 2005, pp.91 to 112 (it can be downloaded from the Internet):

This sword has more taper, no central fuller and more space to place the index finger over the quillons and under the blade. This is one of the very few existing jineta fighting swords, so we don’t know how representative is of his type. How can we fill the gap between the Muslim sword from the 10th-11th Centuries backwards with this new type? The only information we have is that the Berber Zenetes arrived in Al-Andalús around the 12th Century, and I quote again the work by Nicolle on the Gibraltar swords:

“A new type of sword and its associated tactics are believed to have been introduced to the Iberian peninsula by Berber mercenaries and conquerors in the 11th-12th centuries, perhaps as a precursor to or early version of the jinete light cavalry tactics clearly introduced from North Africa in the 13th-14th centuries. Light cavalry combat a la jinete was again associated with what western European came to know as the Italian Grip and, according to some scholars, with curved quillons 10. In fact the term jinete comes from Zanata, the tribe from which many of the Berber soldiers of both Granada and Morocco came. Their highly effective light cavalry tactics using minimal armour, light leather shields, relatively light swords and javelins thrown from horseback were adopted first by the native Andalusian troops of Granada, then by their Christian Iberian foes, and eventually by some other European cavalry as well.” Nicolle, Ibid., p.158.
Even if we concur with Marc in the fact that there are vague descriptions of the morphology of the jineta swords, we can establish: first, that the Zenetes Benimerines were the main military force under the Nasrid Emirate of Granada to almost its fall, so it is very likely that their military equipment dominate the military fashion of the emirate; second, the fighting sword already shown corresponds with the description, since it is not a broadsword, but a very tapered one, less heavy and more apt to pierce the evolved plate armor of the Christians (the cuirass); third, the quillons are more narrow and allow the “Italian grip” with more protection to the index finger than those given by the quillons of the traditional Muslim sword, since they almost close on the blade, like the later fingerguards, to which they very possibly evolved in time (see Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer, Idem., pp.32 and 34); the so-called Italian grip favored a more accurate thrust, which corresponds with the intended piercing action of the tapered blade; the Zenete sword was different to the classic Muslim broadsword, this is why it called strongly the atention in the Al-Andalus and Christian spheres, not only the morphology of the hilt and the quillons was different to the known Muslim broadswords from Al-Andalus, but also the morphology of the blade, and the souces insist that they were lighter; the difference among the dress swords and the fighting swords could be great in the Iberic Peninsula, just see how it evolved the rapier as a dress sword different from the military.

Of course, the cultural interactions among the Christian and Muslim worlds were strong, but not in the simplistic way the European-centered specialists have written about. It was not a matter of fashion influences, but of military needs, which involved the style of fencing, the type of armour of the foe, the metallurgical capability to produce certain types of blades, etc. In this sense, it must be noted that the fighting jineta sword must be materially produced as a capable weapon. As any swordcraftsman or knifecraftsman knows, when the quality of materials is good enough, wider or thicker blades must be produced, in order to secure that the blade would not be broken or bended. Also, the broadswords could be used very effectively against certain types of body protection. The military evolution carried the need of a more tapered sword, but it only would be possible through better production methods, better quality of blades. A tapered sword not only have more thrusting capability, but also displaced the center of gravity toward the hand, a feature which gave more speed and maneuverability to the handling of the sword, which in turn modified the style of fencing. The production of tapered blades was initiated in Europe probably by the carolingian sword masters:

“The reign of Charlemagne also witnessed a significant change in the shape of the longsword blade. On earlier swords, the edges had run parallel for most of the length of the blade, then converged sharply a little way above the point. After about 800, however, the edges of the blade tapered gradually from hilt to tip, with the result that the centre of gravity shifted toward the sword grip, making the weapon significantly more maneuverable and facilitating swordplay. “
“To the south of the empire, the Saracens likewise recognized the quality of Carolingian swords, as is indicated by their demand for one hundred fifty such weapons as part of the ransom for Archbishop Rotland of Arles in 869.However, the Franks seem to have prized Saracen swords equally highly…”
“To summarize, as a result of technological changes during the reign of Charlemagne, the ninth-century Frankish sword was a considerably stronger and more maneuverable weapon than its antecedents. The swords’ signed blades and high cost both reflected the superior quality which made them greatly sought after by other peoples, including the Scandinavians.”
Simon Coupland, “Carolingian Arms and Armor in the Ninth Century”, en Viator. Medieval and Renaissance Studies, v.21 (1990).

But it must be also noted that North Africa experimented a development in the production of arms and armour, as Nicolle and McBride write about this production in the 10th-11th Centuries:
“These centuries also witnessed a huge expansion in Noth African metallurgy, far beyond what had been seen in the Roman period; but although arms and horse-harness were made locally there was little exportation of finished goods”.
David Nicolle & Angus McBride, The Moors. The Islamic West 7th-15th Centuries AD, Osprey Military, Col. Men-at-Arms, No.348. 2001, UK, p.18.
In other words, the problem with North Africa and probably the Iberic Peninsula was not the quality of their weapons, but the capability to produce in mass with a more or less uniform quality, a feature which conditioned the need of imports into the Muslim world from elsewhere, including India and Europe, especially under the constraining needs extant in times of war. And the west North Africa and the Iberic Peninsula were always in recurrent times of war, more or less like Europe. This is a feature which will characterize many areas of the East, since their producing capabilities were not equilibrated with their military needs, as their more traditional crafts were not so “pre-industrial”, possibly with a less efficient labor division and technology, a feature which would be more developed under the pre-capitalist and capitalist European economy. It was already noted in other thread that the Indian swords produced in Deccan were superior to the English, at least until the 17th Century (R. Elgood, “Swords in the Deccan in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries”, pp.223, and 224), but still existed the need to import European blades, as they also imported the Persian blades, even made with Indian steel.

My hypotheses: the original Zenete-Jineta was not the type of dressing sword used by the Nasrid nobility. This last had a blade more in accord with the traditional muslim broadsword, except for the hilt, which was influenced by the Zenete but highly ornamented, and not capable to support the “Italian grip”, since the altered form of the quillons did not allow it: they were literally closing over the blade. It is a common feature of the ceremonial swords to imitate old forms and use extreme ornamentation, since they gave to their owners the prestige of tradition and power. Fighting swords were another matter.

The Christians were influenced by this last type of sword, but with modified quillons and an incipient development of the ring guards, probably a development from the grip and quillons of the fighting jineta swords. It is not casual that the first ring guards, which evolved to the “crab claw”, appeared for the first time in the Iberic Peninsula, on the Christian Spanish and Portuguese swords (please see the Black Swords or “Colhona” used by the Portuguese). It must remembered that also Portugal was part of the Muslim domain and that to the 15th Century, even already independent, was influenced by the military traditions from the rest of the Peninsula.

The rapier evolved, at least in part, from this original fighting jineta sword. The cited study from Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer points in this direction.

The nimcha sword type of quillons does not necessarily owe to any European tradition. The cultural elements behind them were already in North Africa long time ago. In the Catálogo de la Real Amería de Madrid (the catalog of the royal armory of Madrid), we find a suggestive description of four sabres taken from the Spanish Expedition to Oran in 1732 (free translation): “Four Moorish sabers owned by the Bey of Oran. The first one with wood hilt and a cap of engraved silver; guard, quillon and guard rings ended in pythons, all this decorated. The second one has a hilt of horn with plaques of chiseled silver, guard with a quillon and ring guards made of steel. The other two have their hilts covered with shell, nacre and plaques of chiseled silver, guard, quillon and guard ring made of engraved metal. ” Catálogo de la Real Armería, edited by Aguado, Madrid, 1854. p.61. It must be noted thay they are sabres, had a guard (probably a knuckleguard) and only one quillon, since the word “gavilán” in spanish denotes a single quillon. Does this rings something? Maybe a nimcha?.

On the other side, just saying that the jineta or the nimcha are “likely” or “suggestedly” a product of influences from Italy or France, is patently a subjective judgment, as the words imply. And sometimes we found a wide abuse of this words, if not supported by clear facts. The first fact we have to take in consideration is that there are no European hilts in the 13th Century resembling those of the jineta sword. The second fact is that the crab-claw type of guards appear until 15th Century in the Iberic Peninsula (see Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer), and their only visible antecedent is the fighting jineta sword. Again, see the Castilian and Portuguese swords from this period.

And speaking of the possible diffusion into Europe, especially Italy, from this type of hilts, the berbers did have contact with Europe, contrary to what has been said. Europe did not came to North Africa, but the berbers went to Europe in this period. Just to mention some facts: Aghlabid Berbers conquered Sicily, North African Muslims colonized Bari, Taranto and Apulia in the 9th Century and in the 10th Century they fought in Southern France as allies in local Christian quarrels. Bishop Athanasius recruited Islamic troops and Muslims settled in the province of Lucania. David Nicolle & Angus McBride, The Moors. The Islamic West 7th-15th Centuries AD, Osprey Military, Col. Men-at-Arms, No.348. 2001, UK, p.16. And the Zenetes were a military contingent in all this armies. Just search in the history of the Berber emirates and dynasties and you will find.

Salaams Gonzalo ! What a brilliant sequence of posts. It may take me some time to fully arrange in my mind the references but some I know and the others I will find. I find all what you write most compelling. There is surely a mirroring of Umayyid (or at least early Islamic battle sword themes) reflected in these weapons although the date span is somewhat later since the 13th C was when they appeared with the Berber tribes and the conquest of the Iberian peninsular.

Looping the index finger is interesting as it gives more control and pushes up the power in the favoured down strike of this cutting weapon and must also have added to power in thrusting.

I have little to add at this point~ though checking back I note one of the write ups I placed would look better in full thus I set out below the complete description from https://www.worthpoint.com/worthope...-denix-20531549
somewhat tidied up, viz;

Quote"JINETA SWORDS

Jineta (or Gineta) swords are the most direct, fair and rich inheritance of the hispano-arab panoply. The name origin comes from the Cronicles of Alphonso X which tells us about a berber tribe of the Benimerines also known as Zenetes who moved into the Iberic penninsula during the XIII century to fight at the service of Mohammed I of Granada, and brought with them this type of weapon, with a shorter and lighter blade but still as wide and with as great a quality of steel as swords used by Christian forces of the time.

Due to their quality and scarcity (nowadays hardly a dozen of these swords survive) the Jinetas are universally considered and admired. Besides a few now within private collections and worldwide museums, in Spain only three museums are fortunate enough to treasure some examples; the San Telmo Municipal Museum (Picture 9) in San Sebastian, Basque Country, The Army Museum (Museo del Ejercito)(Picture 10); and the National Archeological Museum (Museo Arqueologico Nacional)(Picture11) in Madrid.

Jineta swords are characteristic weapons of the Nazari period in Granada with no known north-African or middle eastern precendents which confers the a somewhat unclear origin. The are characterized by a double edge straight, light-weight and not so wide and medium length blade. Their most significant feature and what makes them stand upon their individuality are their hilts; in general magnificently decorated which has brought the arguable statement that most of the presently preserved Jinetas could have been designed as parade, dress or ceremonial swords.

In general the Jineta hilt consists of a extremely curved guard, in the horse shoe shape with the quillons pointed towards the blade, embracing the ricasso and decorated in the shape of animal heads or with filigree. the handle takes in general fusiform and the pommel is usually spherical or discoidal with a long, prominent and pointy top button. The scabbards are made of wood covered in leather with metallic fittings and usually showing two hanging rings to clip to a baldric or belt hangers. Pictorial depictions in paintings from Alhambra show the sword carried on baldrics over the shoulder in most cases. Both the scabbard neck fittings and the hilts usually match their decorations and motifs which, with the sword sheathed exhibit a design continuation and in some way masks the union between both pieces.

The materials used in decorating hilts and scabbards are plentiful in golden bronze, silver, gold filigrees, incrustations, gem stones, enamels, etc, which make these pieces astonishing and lavish sets of design and decoration. Many have gold, silver and enameled engravings, inlays and incrustations with verses of the Quran and praises to Allah and Mohammed.

Those who possessed these highly decorated Jinetas belonged to a high social status and was considered a symbol only achievable by high ranking officials, sultans and Arab Emirs. Christians were only allowed to carry Jinetas if received as a gift of some Emir or Muslim king or another very important person. But then in the XV century, while Granada was still in under Muslim rule, Jinetas began to appear among Christian soldiers either obtained as military trophies or acquired in Toledo where smiths began to copy the Muslim model of these swords after the battle of Elvira in 1431.

It is probable that the ones used for battle were not as decorated as the ones we are still able to appreciate in museums and private collections, however it is uncertain as none of the undecorated examples have survived up to our times.

As stated, quite few examples of Jineta swords have survived the scourge of time. One is kept in the National Library in Paris, obtained by french Napoleonic forces in Granada at the beginning of XIX century. One more is held at the Municipal Museum of the city of Kassel in Germany. One other is exhibited at the New York Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the surviving Jinetas are however kept in Spain and constitute some of their most priced treasures."Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Ibrahiim, that description corresponds with the dressing sword of the Nasrid nobility. It was influenced by the original fighting jineta sword but they are not equal, as I said before, though they are also called "jineta". Practically there are fewer specimens of the last, since the those swords preserved were trophies from the defeated nobility, of great value and exotism by their ornamentation, but you could hardly think the Zenete Berber mass of soldiers carried the same kind of hilts, and also there is the subject of the form of the blade. The problem with the preserved Christian swords from the period, is that they are also swords used by the nobility, and as I can recall, even with Moorish blades. We have to see what kind of swords used the common cavalryman. I believe that the tendency goes to more tapered blades and hilts evolved from the Zenete fighting sword, or shorter broadswords instead, compared with those used by the rest of Christendom, in order to lighten the blade. The form of the pommel was not important, since this form was decorative and what mattered was its weight. But the quillons did matter, since they were part of a fencing technique.
Regards