Jineta/nimcha/kattara

[Marc]

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:






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







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







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.

[ariel]

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

[Jim McDougall]

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.

[ariel]

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....

[Marc]

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

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.

[chevalier]

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.

[Jim McDougall]

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