Very Nice Nimcha

[fernando]

Jim, i would not concur with the impression that, illegible arabesques (jibberish per you) only appear in European or exotica items; on the contrary, when i recall discussions had here in the past over diverse situations.
But i will not intrude any further with side topic considerations; back to the beautiful Charles's Nimcha appreciation .

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Jim, i would not concur with the impression that, illegible arabesques (jibberish per you) only appear in European or exotica items; on the contrary, when i recall discussions had here in the past over diverse situations.
But i will not intrude any further with side topic considerations; back to the beautiful Charles's Nimcha appreciation .

While I do not wish to detract from the discussion, I think it only fair to point out, quid pro quo. that in my post #38 I did not say that 'illegible arabesques' were 'jibberish' appearing only on European and exotica items.

What I said was that 'arabesque', the term you used, and such 'attitudes' (again your term) were usually reserved for European and exotica items, with no mention of jibberish. The Arabesque term as you know is an art history term describing rhythmic patterns and interlaced foliage, often used to fill empty space or dynamically complete the composition.

When I used the term jibberish it was to describe 'previously held' notions that the thuluth calligraphy on Sudanese Mahdist weapons was jibberish, and noted that recent research found it was in fact tangible verses in repetition. Those instances were I believe the long ago discussions which I recall, as I was one who was inclined to agree in those times. Its amazing how much we learn as we get older and thanks to these kinds of details often shared in discussions here.

In returning to the topic if I may, add some other details I have found that might be of interest on these markings on these Algerian blades . In my notes I found another of these triple fuller blades, but in the location of blade noted......there is a name ZAUOE, spelled out, but in exactly the same location. The registers list this man as a gunmaker in Marseilles 1757-61.
Obviously a Maghrebi name, but in France, and it is notable that gun makers often, even typically, outfitted blades.

In looking at the fantastic array of weapons from Valletta that Teodor shared, in this huge assortment of nimsha, none of them had these markings in that blade quadrant. Could it be that these examples predated the use of such markings? or that perhaps they were never in the regions (Maghrebi littoral or Marseilles?) where such markings were used.
Perhaps rather than makers marks, or arsenal, these were outfitters stamps in one of the entrepots either Meditteranean or Maghrebi.

Just more food for thought, and these considerations I think might be important to the thorough examination of Charles' sword.

[midelburgo]

There are some old hypothesis about nimchas being an evolution of Italian XVth century stortas.

Some circunstancial evidence.

[fernando]

Dear Jim, it is i alone, who doesn't much to offer on this topic.
Concerning the actual difference in nomenclature between 'arabesque' and 'jibberish' ...
I have used arabesque (from the Italian ((also Portuguese))arabesco) as the term i had at hand, as intendedly meaning a decoration detail rather than pure arabic caligraphy. I wouldn't use the term jibberish (propper gibberish) as i gather that this is perhaps more indicative of 'speaking' rapidly and inarticulately, and not 'writing' in such mode. But when i quoted your mentioning the jibberish term, my intention was to attest that we were both meaning the same thing.
But speaking of fine tunings, allow me to remind (in double) the intrinsic distinction between recazzo and forte, such as not underlined in Peter's drawing link.
While the forte defines a determined area (section) of the blade, as in principle its strongest part, the recazo, while circumstantially associated with a inherent location, is a term that refers an added value created in a blade, being a blunt (non edged) zone in which you can grip the blade with your fingers, to better (wrist) handle the sword, acquiring a wider angle for sword combat. So we have that, while blades could/should 'always' include a forte, the recazo is not necessarily a 'ever present' part of the blade, this having being a later 'invention', i guess during the XVI century; according to some, a resource more practicable in Western terms, being more of an esthetical detail in the Orient, when it exists.
Perhaps you knew all this; sorry for the bore.
Take care .


.