A rapier by Pietro Hernandez

[Gonzalo G]

According with the sources, the mark of the perrillo always appear in authentic spanish blades accompanied by other stamps, seemingly personal stamps particular to each swordmaker. Some of those blades are not from Julián del Rey. All indicates that the perrillo mark was a sort of garantee of the quality of the steel of the respective sword, used by Spanish swordsmiths in the 16th Century and it was not the personal stamp from Julián del Rey. Probably the mark of the perrillo was used by the Hipanic-Arab swordsmiths since at least the 15th Century, if not before. Julián del Rey worked at the end of the 15th Century, beginnings of the 16th Century. It is possible that this mark was not invented by him, but taken from a common practice on that time. The scarcity of Hispano-Arabic pieces of quality from the period, makes it difficult to have certainty. Also, it most be considered that the animal was not really a dog, but a different species, though the Spanish people in time, would considere it a perrillo, a small dog, because of its resemblance.
Regards

[Gonzalo G]

On the other side, probably the running wolf from Passau was a mark developed independently of the "perrillo" mark, and I quote:

"The sign of a wolf was used by the swordsmiths from the German town of Passau, as it is confirmed in a charter from 1340. Herzog Albrecht of Austria gave permission to the guild of swordsmith in this southeastern Bavarian town to
put the sign of a wolf from the town coat of arms on the blades they produced. Albert III, bishop of Passau confirmed this right in a new charter from 1368: ‘That stamp, which we call wolf we restore, verify and acknowledge. And it is our will that also our swordsmiths here in Passau engrave the same sign of a wolf on each blade’."

from Marko Alecsic´s Maediaeval Swords from Southeastern Europe.

Regards

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

According with the sources, the mark of the perrillo always appear in authentic spanish blades accompanied by other stamps, seemingly personal stamps particular to each swordmaker. Some of those blades are not from Julián del Rey. All indicates that the perrillo mark was a sort of garantee of the quality of the steel of the respective sword, used by Spanish swordsmiths in the 16th Century and it was not the personal stamp from Julián del Rey. Probably the mark of the perrillo was used by the Hipanic-Arab swordsmiths since at least the 15th Century, if not before. Julián del Rey worked at the end of the 15th Century, beginnings of the 16th Century. It is possible that this mark was not invented by him, but taken from a common practice on that time. The scarcity of Hispano-Arabic pieces of quality from the period, makes it difficult to have certainty. Also, it most be considered that the animal was not really a dog, but a different species, though the Spanish people in time, would considere it a perrillo, a small dog, because of its resemblance.
Regards

You may well regard his subject as a "two ends stick", or a point of discord, yet to be clarified.
Assuming this 'quality contrast' mark represents the zoomorphic figure of a perrillo (little dog) ...
The canine is considered by Muslims as an impure animal, almost as maligne as swines. If Julian del Rey was indeed born a Moor, how could he use this symbol in his swords? was he so deeply converted that this was a way to show Christian stalkers he really changed his faith ?
On the other hand when we read Leguina's work, according to Maindron, who followed Babelon's perspective, Julian would never use the dog mark 'even' after being christianized.

[kronckew]

ah, yes, the koran says somewhere that 'thou shall not suffer a black dog to live'.

normal city dogs are indeed, to the islamic faithful, unclean foul and nasty scavenger animals.

the running hound depicted on blades however is likely in islamic cases anyway, a saluki, which is not considered a dog, and actually lives in the bedu tents as a family member. in the traditional home, they are never sold, but given as gifts (for which a large 'gift' is expected in return)., they are noble creatures loved by, and bonded to their humans, and used to hunt gazelle, and rabbits, and raced for status. again i mention that they are known for their feathering on the feet, legs, tail and especially their ears. see my avatar.

human, horse, falcon, saluki - living together still, a team that are the beduin, masters of the desert.

[Jim McDougall]

First thing...........................Gonzalo, ITS GOOD TO HAVE YOU BACK!!!!!

Wayne, outstanding rendition on the Bedouin, and their dogs. I personally cannot see anything derogatory about dogs, in fact quite the contrary. They are outstanding and amazing beings, very much an important part of our world.

Getting to the 'perillo' dilemma, very interesting points Fernando makes, but looking at that image, I cannot see how it can be determined what this creature is (as Gonzalo has noted). It seems important to note that the 'running wolf' is always rendered in a four legged stance, not in the 'rampant' stance up on hind legs seen here. That seems more for lions , horses etc.
I think the 'perillo' moniker owes more to Cervantes colorful imbuement than actual intention , and has been described, its presence seems rather irregular as other marks are better known.

I had once thought that perhaps the perillo might be a perception toward the running wolf of Passau, which was of course known by this time, but since have regarded that unlikely.

While leaning toward these sorts of esoterica, I have always wondered about
the 'Lobera' sword of Fernando III of Castile of the 13th c. His grandson writing of his exploits in 1337 described his sword as "Lobera", (=the wolf hunter"). Could there be any sort of commemorative or honorific allusion?

[Gonzalo G]

Though I repeated the common statement that Julian del Rey was a converse (probably baptized by the king Ferdinand the Catholic), other sources points in other direction. Germán Dueñaz Beraiz, in "Julián del Rey: Nuevos Datos sobre su Figura" (Gladius Vol. XX, 2000), states that, according with legal documentation found in the archives of the city of Zaragoza (Libro de Actas de Zaragoza, 1549), there was a fight among Julián del Rey and his elder brother, named Miguel, for the exclusive use of the same stamp belonging to their father, also named Miguel. For which it can be concluded: first, Julián was not a converse, since his father and his brother bear christian names (so his baptism by the king as godfather is a myth); second, the stamp in question was possibly already prestiged, since both brothers were fighting for its use, though it is also possible that Julián gave it greater prestige. It must be noted that the sentence favoured Julián.

It remains open the question about if Julián and his ancestors were really moors and when did they convert, or if the "moor" apelative was only a nickname derived from the color of his skin, as it is not an unusual practice in Spain, Italy and Mexico (in Mexico the very dark skinned persons are called affectionately "negro", a black person, nigro, without a derogatory meaning, and it must be remembered also Ludovico Sforza, Duke of Milan, nicknamed "Il Moro", the moor, by the color of his skin and hair).

The peoples from the desertic areas consider impure certain animals on sanitary grounds. Muslims and jews prohibit the consume of the pig, and the dog is considered impure, as Kronckew has said, because it loves to eat garbage and rotten corpses, which is a potential source of infections, specially in hot climates.

Nevertheless, the moors in Spain were very lax in their practice of Islam, a motive of criticism and fury from the fundamentalist berber Almohads, who came latter. I personally disagree with the statement, made by some French authors in the 19th Century (Maindorm, Les Armes, 1890, cited by J.J. Rodríguez Lorente), that a converse would not use this mark, if the mark actually represents a dog. Specially if the mark is already in use by the swordsmiths of the era, considering also that the sources also points out that this mark was not invented by Julián del Rey but used by him.

Since the mark of the "perrillo" had been in use for a considerable lapse of time, it had some variants. Not all of them represent a prancing animal. In fact, the older known marks do not represent a prancing animal. The sword of Boabdil, which is a "espada a la jineta", represented by Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer in her article "Introduction to the History of the European Sword" (Gladius Vol. I, p.49), carries the mark of el perrillo, which is represented in the article of J.J. Rodríguez Lorente, "La Marca del Perrillo del Espadero Español Julián del Rey" (Gladius Vol. III, 1964). It is not a prancing animal, but a running animal with the tail laid straight behind at the level of the corpse, not a tail naturally curved, like in some dogs. More Spanish marks of "el perrillo" representing a running animal and not a prancing animal, can be found on other Spanish swords, as it can be seen in the figure No.5, p.96, of the last cited article. Some have raised tails, but lions in heraldry are also represented with raised tails.

Dueñaz Beraiz also points out that, though the ordinances for the swordsmiths of Zaragoza does not mention a quality garantee mark from the city, the ordinances for the knifesmiths of the city does, indicating that it should be the heraldic symbol of the city, a lion. We can suppose that, if the mark of "el perrillo" is an old one already in use, primitively representing as a lion in a very schematic way with only straight lines made by a chisel, since an appropiate stamp made by hand would be costly, it is perfectly possible to infer that the animal could be a lion and not a dog.

About the mark of "el perrillo" beign a quality mark and not the personal mark of a specific swordsmith, diverse Spanish specialists consider it so, among them, José Maria Florit y Arizcun, Francisco Javier Sánchez Cantón, Enrique de Leguina, Germán Dueñas Beraiz and J.J. Rodríguez Lorente. Enrique de Leguina, Barón de la Vega de Hoz and one of the greates Spanish specialists from the 19th Century, gives more specifics about this mark. In his book Los Maestros Espaderos, p.32, Don Enrique says that from the mines of Peña de Udala, in Gupúzcoa, was extracted a "natural steel", from which supposedly were made the swords with the mark of "el perrillo", without a core of iron, in other words, a pure steel blade.

It must be noted that when the Real Fábrica de Armas Blancas in Toledo was established in the 18th Century, the documents mention that the old way of making blades was entirely lost, except for one swordsmith. The "new" way of making, quenching and tempering sword blades since time ago, was made with a composite of iron and steel, some authors as Leguina saying "con alma de hierro" (core iron wrapped in steel), others, like Palomares saying that the steel was sanwiched among two outer layers of iron, like the san mai knives. The fact is that it was a composite, in which the iron gave thoughtness and the steel hardness to the blade. So it is relevant the distinction with the blades made with pure steel, which are more difficult to make, since the steel alone is more prone to breaking, if the carbon content is not adecuate and the thermal treatment is not made correctly. Anyway, we don´t know for sure how it was the “old way” technique of making swords.

Among these references, sometimes contradictory, the problem of the “perrillo” mark seems not be a simple one, since the available information raises more questions than answers. So, without more original information from the primary sources and a more detailed and guided study of the swords from this period, it is difficult to make valid generalizations. I am personally more interested in the knowledge on construction and uses of the edged weapons than in collecting, so my perspective could be a little different.

JIM: THANK YOU FOR YOUR WELCOME. IT IS GREAT TO READ YOU, FERNANDO AND OTHERS AGAIN, SINCE I LEARN MUCH FROM ALL OF YOU!!!

[Jim McDougall]

As we do from you Gonzalo!!! Fantastic dissertation and very well described. Definitely puts much needed perspective on this dilemma.

[fernando]

Waine, thank you for your contribution towards cracking the doggy riddle.
Noteworthily renaissance smiths were not skilled enough to shape a silhouette more in accordance with the saluki figure ... except for the feathers .


.

[fernando]

Great input, Gonzalo, with thoughts and data confirming points already focused in these (three) recent threads around such subject.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

...Though I repeated the common statement that Julian del Rey was a converse (probably baptized by the king Ferdinand the Catholic),

Speaking of which, the other day someone in a Spanish blog was asking how such person managed to be personaly baptized by the Catholic Kings and it was suggested (or assumed) that these baptisms were collective, you know, rites were processed before a number of gathered ones to be converted.. An interesting view.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

...other sources points in other direction. Germán Dueñaz Beraiz, in "Julián del Rey: Nuevos Datos sobre su Figura" (Gladius Vol. XX, 2000), states that, according with legal documentation found in the archives of the city of Zaragoza (Libro de Actas de Zaragoza, 1549), there was a fight among Julián del Rey and his elder brother, named Miguel, for the exclusive use of the same stamp belonging to their father, also named Miguel. For which it can be concluded: first, Julián was not a converse, since his father and his brother bear christian names (so his baptism by the king as godfather is a myth); second, the stamp in question was possibly already prestiged, since both brothers were fighting for its use, though it is also possible that Julián gave it greater prestige. It must be noted that the sentence favoured Julián.

And, if i recall correctly, the dspute was not about the perrillo but their personal mark, the one shown in post # 45.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

...It remains open the question about if Julián and his ancestors were really moors and when did they convert, or if the "moor" apelative was only a nickname derived from the color of his skin ...

Indeed the term Moor/Moro/Mouro, comes from the greek, meaning black, as dark.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

...Nevertheless, the moors in Spain were very lax in their practice of Islam, a motive of criticism and fury from the fundamentalist berber Almohads, who came latter. I personally disagree with the statement, made by some French authors in the 19th Century (Maindorm, Les Armes, 1890, cited by J.J. Rodríguez Lorente), that a converse would not use this mark, if the mark actually represents a dog. Specially if the mark is already in use by the swordsmiths of the era, considering also that the sources also points out that this mark was not invented by Julián del Rey but used by him.

Good and plausible points, Gonzalo; namely your last paragraph.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

...Since the mark of the "perrillo" had been in use for a considerable lapse of time, it had some variants. Not all of them represent a prancing animal. In fact, the older known marks do not represent a prancing animal.

Let's upload those variants in here.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

...We can suppose that, if the mark of "el perrillo" is an old one already in use, primitively representing as a lion in a very schematic way with only straight lines made by a chisel, since an appropiate stamp made by hand would be costly, it is perfectly possible to infer that the animal could be a lion and not a dog...

Another theory; maybe not so strong but, not to be discarded.


.

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by fernando

And, if i recall correctly, the dspute was not about the perrillo but their personal mark, the one shown in post # 45.

Yes Fernando, it is correct. I did not intend to say that the mark in dispute was the one of the "perrillo", as I know that the personal mark of Miguel and Julián del Rey was another one. My point was to show that the members of the family all bear christian names. Also, I did not want to explore further subjects and to upload images, as I saw that my post was already loo long. Thank you for doing it, it is very useful to illustrate the point.

Other subject that dreserves to be explored in relation with the personal mark of those swordsmiths, is the fact that some swords attributed to Julián, could be in fact be made by his father, since it was the same mark, according with the information from Dueñas Beraiz. It is to be noted that the legal document of the dispute is dated as late as 1549, many years since the fall of the Kingdom of Granada and the exile of Abu `Abdallah Muhammed XII, known as Boabdil. So, the sword of Boabdil was made by Julián, or by his father Miguel, as other jineta swordsl?

The statement that the animal could be also a lion, refers only to a possibility, it is not a theory. The animal could belong to other species. As I said, the subject is complex and there is a void in the available information.

Regards

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

While leaning toward these sorts of esoterica, I have always wondered about the 'Lobera' sword of Fernando III of Castile of the 13th c. His grandson writing of his exploits in 1337 described his sword as "Lobera", (=the wolf hunter"). Could there be any sort of commemorative or honorific allusion?

I forgot. According with the Catálogo Histórico-Descriptivo de la Real Armería de Madrid, by the Count of Valencia de Don Juan (1898), p.201, perhaps the term "Lobera" was used in the sense that the sword was to be carried with the costume used in the medieval Castile, known commonly as "Loba", which is more properly called a "traje talar" (search Internet with this words). The hilt with its guards is not the original, and the inscription on the blade can be interpreted as a way to say that a knight must keep his word, or as a quote from the bible (Mathew 5,37).

Regards

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

I forgot. According with the Catálogo Histórico-Descriptivo de la Real Armería de Madrid, by the Count of Valencia de Don Juan (1898), p.201, perhaps the term "Lobera" was used in the sense that the sword was to be carried with the costume used in the medieval Castile, known commonly as "Loba", which is more properly called a "traje talar" (search Internet with this words). The hilt with its guards is not the original, and the inscription on the blade can be interpreted as a way to say that a knight must keep his word, or as a quote from the bible (Mathew 5,37).

Regards

Salaams Gonzalo ~ An interesting thread! I note we enter the whats in a word connotation around Lobera which comes out as being related to wolves and other fractions of that meaning such as;

1. Ana María García, la Lobera, who appeared before the Inquisition of Toledo in 1648 accused of controlling seven demonic wolves.

2. Wolf trap, funnel-like walls leading to a pit with stakes for hunting wolves in Spain
3. Wolf-slayer Lobera (sword)
4. A wolfs lair.

Naturally I would swerve toward its meaning as a powerful sword..

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

I forgot. According with the Catálogo Histórico-Descriptivo de la Real Armería de Madrid, by the Count of Valencia de Don Juan (1898), p.201, perhaps the term "Lobera" was used in the sense that the sword was to be carried with the costume used in the medieval Castile, known commonly as "Loba", which is more properly called a "traje talar" (search Internet with this words). The hilt with its guards is not the original, and the inscription on the blade can be interpreted as a way to say that a knight must keep his word, or as a quote from the bible (Mathew 5,37).

Regards

Yes, the author mentions such possibility using the term "acaso" (by chance), with fair consistence with naming swords on a context and not referring to them by their use on the field. So we would have that, in such case, the Lobera term doesn't originate in Lobo (wolf) from the latin Lupu, but from Loba, originating in latin Alba, by french L'aube (alb) =white dress, such ancient judicial and clerical attire, to which this type of sword would be connected.

[Gonzalo G]

As it is the case of the ropera sword (rapier), since the castilian word "ropa", in this context, is the civil attire, by opposition to the uniforms used by the military. Originally the "espada ropera" was a civil sword, though latter it could have also uses on the battlefield.

The french word "L'aube" is pronounced more or less as "lob", which became "loba" in castilian, since in this language we don´t have words ending in "b", and a vocal "a" is added to naturalize it.