Jineta/nimcha/kattara

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by fernando

Ah ... you raise this question to the author i have being quoting and he will immediately state that, the downturned quillons in the Kastane were brought to Ceilão by the Portuguese and, as the locals didn't resource to Portuguese fencing style, those quillons in Kastanes soon became 'atrophied'.


.

But they aren't Quilons per se. These come from the Vajra format in the religion of the region... Probably Tibetan origin. Pre 5th C. AD
I would further suggest that the Kastane became a court sword and transitioned before that as a secretaries sword in the equivalent of the civil service but that in the Portuguese era another form may have existed...similar to the stone carved example below, lying on the ground, bearing in mind that differences in the guard may be the result of it having been made by a Portuguese stone mason.... so it may be slightly wrong...however, it seems the blade is a battle field one; and the rest of the carving is accurate. Not the flimsy blade seen on Kastane afterwards. I could go on to suggest that the early battlefield Kastane may not have had quilons at all; like the weapon below in stone. It has a straight guard. No quilons.

By the way the sword you have ringed above is in the Japanese Museum and was purchased as a gift by Hasekura in the Philipines. In my view that hilt is a Storta as well... hardly surprising since Iberian shipping was in the region full time and in huge numbers thus a Storta or two would certainly have been on board some of them so cross hilting could certainly have occured. That blade seems to me to be a Battlefield blade as well.

Would it not be more plausible to suggest that the sword shown from your author of the broad curved paddle style blade at #52 may have gone into the Indian Ocean ( on board a Portuguese Battleship) as a Portuguese/Benin weapon and came out in the same format unchanged and actually with no link with the Kastane?