Jineta/nimcha/kattara

ariel · 29th July 2008, 12:29 PM

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

Jim McDougall · 29th July 2008, 06:02 PM

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 · 30th July 2008, 01:36 AM

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 · 30th July 2008, 12:55 PM

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 · 30th July 2008, 03:39 PM

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 · 31st July 2008, 01:21 AM

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

Gonzalo G · 31st July 2008, 11:52 AM

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

29th July 2008, 12:29 PM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Of course, I have an opinion, but it is such a pleasure to stay on the sidelines and listen to the arguments!

29th July 2008, 06:02 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,190	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.

30th July 2008, 01:36 AM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	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....

30th July 2008, 12:55 PM	#4
Marc Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Madrid / Barcelona Posts: 256	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.

30th July 2008, 03:39 PM	#5
chevalier Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 119	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.

31st July 2008, 01:21 AM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,190	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

31st July 2008, 11:52 AM	#7
Gonzalo G Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Nothern Mexico Posts: 458	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