Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

That thread from 2008 was a remarkable exercise, and had a great deal of information about the Hispano-Moresque swords (Boabdil was only one user of them rather than a descriptive term).

It does not seem that the stylistic form regarded as 'jineta' (but also Nasrid) became known until 13th century during the 'Reconquista' ending the Muslim rule in Andalusia in 1491.....that was where Boabdil the Nasrid ruler was defeated.

Swords of the Nasrid/Hispano-Moresque styles are pretty rare, and I know only of examples in museums in Spain. They are best described in Calvert (1907), "Spanish Arms & Armour", although Nicolle's works have great coverage as noted in the discussions in the linked thread. Bibliographies there as well as even in the Osprey monographs are very thorough.

Originally Posted by ariel

Fred and Izzie.....
Sounds like a couple in SF bathhouse:-)

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

It is remarkable that these swords, which I think of as Hispano-Moresque, do not remain in larger number and even those which remain have been challenged as far as authenticity and provenance.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

But on the contrary, it is an accepted fact that the jineta sword influenced in the first place the spanish swords, to the degree it was copied in Toledo by the christians (in that time Toledo was on spanish hands), and latter this type of hilt probably spread to other countries, but I don´t have any proof of this diffusion into the rest of Europe. I don´t have the impression that the zenetes had much contact with europeans. In fact, the jineta tactics to make war using the cavalry in a special form, for which even the stirrups of the saddle were modified, were latter copied by castillians to the point it was known by europeans as the "castillian way" to make war.

As you know, the main weapon used by the zenetes was a lance which can be also throwed. Jineta, or Gineta, was a whole complex of tactics, weapons, horse harnesses, all interrelated as a whole, so you can find a treatise of this development in the "Tractado de la Cauallería de la Gineta" a military cavalty treatise written in antique castillian languaje by Hernan Chacon, a knight of the Order of Calatrava.

On the other hand, I have seen many interpretations about the supposed influences from Europe to the rest of the world which do not have a base in actual evidences of a causal nexus, but only on similarities, more or less superficial, on the morphology of the weapon. This a very known practice of ethnocentrism which must be revised in order to have a more objetive vision of the history of the swords. The first example I recall, is the supposed influence of the macedonic machaira on the hindu sousson pata and the khukri, although there is older evidences of this kind of blades in the south of actual India, far from the area of contact with the greeks.

You must take on account that the islamic hilts (and blades) do influenced deeply the european swords, as in the case of the hussar swords from Poland and Hungary, form turkish influence, which latter went as far as Spain with their "sables a la turca" (sabers turkish style). This influence was also reinforced by the mamluke influences which came latter, in the beginning of the 19th Century, and which reached even England. I have seen many european blades on middle east and oriental swords, but always they were remounted in new hilts in the taste of the new owners, and the old hilts were discarded.

Speaking of resemblances, I don´t think the downward curved quillons is enough proof of any influence in either side. But the jineta sword, and specially the hilt, has a special morphology considered as a whole, from which I cannot find ancestry on european swords before the 13th Century. Apart from resembances, we need to establish the physical routes of influence, the commercial or warfare netwoks, the ancestor models and their evolution, and so on. From my sources (Ibn Jaldun history of the berbers), the zenetes were a relatively isolated tribe from Europe influences in that time, making war to other berber tribes and to the fatimides, and it was not until they had an ephimeral hegemony in North Africa, that they went to Spain, first as military contingent, and latter as conquerors of Al-Andalús. Between zenetes, in the west of North Africa, and the europeans, in the Middle East, there were the fatimids, and no commercial post on the coast linked them directly with Europe until latter, when the jineta swords already was an adopted weapon.

However, maybe I do not have enough information on this subject, but if you do, please help me to correct my mistake. I think I have many black spots in my knowlege of the berber and moorish history, and I would appreciate any solid reference you can give me on this point.
My best regards

Gonzalo

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Having said that, I think it is best to consider these distinctly formed hilt styles and focus on their possible ancestry. While the history of the Zenatas and the geopolitics of Spain in the medieval period is fascinating, I hope I can address the question without that complexity.

As Gonzalo has aptly noted, we do not know what form the tribal groups that became known collectively as Zeneta in pre-Islamic times, but as they are believed from Tunisian regions, some research on those regions in period may reveal clues. As noted, we do know that by the 8th century, most of the groups were distinctly Muslim, and these Berber warriors were well established in Andulusian armies. By the 15th century, it is noted however that these light horsemen equipped a la jineta (for Zeneta) though numerous, "...much of thier equipment was imported from Italy, though Spain had a long established armament industry". ("Fernando El Catolico", David Nicolle, Military Illustrated #44, January, 1992, p.48).

While this would seem to suggest that European weapons were prevalent, and possible influence was there, there is no qualified estimation of how prevalent. It is noted further a suggestion of an earlier form of weapon existing in the description of the war sword of Ferdinand the Catholic "...a magnificent late 15th century weapon in an older Iberian-Islamic tradition; it is distinctly related to lighter Granadan swords such as the superb surviving 'jinete' sword of Boabdil". ( M.I. #44, op.cit. p.51)

The sword of Boabdil is the distinct form of Hispano-Moresque jinete, with pointed dome pommel, and profusely ornate with the quillons dropping straight downward, parallel to the blade. The Ferdinand sword has the gently drooping guard with drooping inner quillons associated somewhat with European 'crab claw' type hilts.

In "El Cid and the Reconquista 1050-1492" (D.Nicolle, 1988, Osprey200) these distinct 'jinete' hilts are shown on p.19 (fig. I) as late 14th century, and on p.46 (plate F2) being wielded by a Qadi (religious judge) of late 14th century. It is noted that "...the decorated light sword is described of Grenadine form, a weapon originally developed for light cavalry a la jinete".
It is also noted that some of these jinete swords were richly decorated, probably as gifts or bribes for neighboring Christian aristocrats (p.36).

The sword of Boabdil is illustrated and described in David Nicolle's article "Abu 'Abdullah' Muhammed XI Boabdil of Granada" (M.I. #43, Dec.1991, p.50) and is apparantly held in the Museo del Ejercito in Madrid.

Turning to the later representation of this distinct sword type, the Omani kattara shown in Robert Elgood's "Arms and Armour of Arabia" ( 1994, pp.17,18, fig. 2.13 and 2.15) shows these hilts structurally of essentially the same form of the 'jineta' discussed, but with decorative coverings missing, the dramatic downward quillons vestigial. There is no definite ancestry offered for these swords which are considered of 17th to 18th century (despite an auction catalog with 12th-14th c. date suggested without specific support). Though there is no agreed regional provenance on these, it does seem clear that they are reflective of the 14th century jineta's of the form discussed.

These jineta swords, with dramatically straight downward guard extensions that run parallel to the blade, rather than being guard quillons, particularly with elaborate decoration as in the Boabdil sword, seem to reflect an almost architectural characteristic.

While the reference to the sword of Ferdinand suggests association in its downturned quillons to the Boabdil jineta, I feel that this rather benign form in comparison relates more to cross influence with the European forms.

While this certainly does not answer the question, it has prompted me to learn more on the forms noted, which I have tried to share here.As always, I hope that others might have access to material that would describe the weapons used by the Zenete in North Africa, as well as early Granadan swords that might have been prototypes for the jinete.

Originally Posted by Marc

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.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

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

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

JINETA SWORDS A quote from a sold item at

Quote"Jineta (or Gineta) swords are the most direct, fair and rich inheritance of the hispano-arab panoply. The name origin comes from the Cronicles of Alphonso X which tells us about a berber tribe of the Benimerines also known as Zenetes who moved into the Iberic penninsula during the XIII century to fight at the service of Mohammed I of Granada, and brought with them this type of weapon, with a shorter and lighter blade but still as wide and with a great quality steel as the ones used by christian forces of the time.

Due to their quality and scarcity (nowadays hardly a dozen of these swords survive) the jinetas are universally considered and admired. Besides a few now within private collections and worldwide museums, in Spain only three museums are fortunate enough to treasure some examples; the San Telmo Municipal Museum (Picture 9) in San Sebastian, Basque Country, The Army Museum (Museo del Ejercito)(Picture 10); and the National Archeological Museum (Museo Arqueologico Nacional)(Picture11) in Madrid".Unquote.

Originally Posted by TVV

When I was in Spain a few years ago, I took the attached pictures of the jinetas.

First, a couple heavily adorned examples from Museo del Ejercito in Toledo, I believe the first one is attributed to Boabdil.

Then, a broadsword with an ivory hilt, also one of Boabdil's swords.

Finally, one more sword from the Archaeological Museum in Madrid.

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Whilst the Moroccan Nimcha has occasionally been associated in the design to or from this weapon I see virtually no link whatsoever except a vague potential hint because of the turned down quillons ...which as you can see bare no resemblance at all, nor does the hilt; whilst the blades are totally different...in fact the Moroccan blade is often European.

The swords below are indicated as (Top left to right) but may be incomplete as there are 11 descriptions but 12 pictures!! but it may be correct up to item 7.
1 - Sword found in Sangueza, pommel is missing (XIIIth century ?, probably the oldest known)
2 - Sword of the Cardinal Infant Don Fernando (Real Armeria in Madrid)
3 - Sword said to be of Sayyidi Yahya (Casa de los Tiros, Granada)
4 - Sword of San Marcello de Leon (museo archeologico, Madrid)
5 - Sword said to be of the Sultan Boabil (museo del ejercito, Madrid)
6 - Sword "bèrbère" (armeria real, Madrid)
7 - Sword hilt
************************************************** ******
8 - Sword of the "Cabinet des Médailles" (B Nat, Paris)
9 - Sword of San Telmo (San Sebastian)
10 - Sword said to be of Abindarraez (MET museum, NY)
11 - Sword of the Kassel Museum (Germany)

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

Note the presence of the spherical pommel, not to be confused with a discoidal pommel, more common on the European swords. This pommel maybe will evolve to the more dome-shaped with a finial as in the Nasrid swords, or maybe the last is a late stylistic import into North Africa or to Al-Andalus through North Africa. The provenance of this swords, in the opinion of most of the specialists, including Oakeshott, is occidental North Africa, around the 12th Century.
There are more illustrations in the study from Nicolle, which can be downloaded here:

Note the presence of the spherical pommel, not to be confused with a discoidal pommel, more common on the European swords. This pommel maybe will evolve to the more dome-shaped with a finial as in the Nasrid swords, or maybe the last is a late stylistic import into North Africa or to Al-Andalus through North Africa. The provenance of this swords, in the opinion of most of the specialists, including Oakeshott, is occidental North Africa, around the 12th Century.
There are more illustrations in the study from Nicolle, which can be downloaded here:
http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/inde...download/59/60

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

The broadswords with downcurved quillons came to the Iberic Peninsula since the early Muslim rule, as stated in the bibliography given by Marc, to which I add the study by Rafael Carmona Ávila, already mentioned. But until the 11th Century those swords have not yet the type of quillons found in the Nasrid swords. Those last came in two types: ceremonial (more apltly denominated “dress swords”, the type of sword used by Boabdil) and fighting. An example of the last is seen in the article from Berástegui Lizeaga, Crespo Francés y Valero y Rosado Galdós, “Identificación de una Espada Jineta de Guerra”, Trabajos de Arqueología Navarra, No. 18, 2005, pp.91 to 112 (it can be downloaded from the Internet):

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

This sword has more taper, no central fuller and more space to place the index finger over the quillons and under the blade. This is one of the very few existing jineta fighting swords, so we don’t know how representative is of his type. How can we fill the gap between the Muslim sword from the 10th-11th Centuries backwards with this new type? The only information we have is that the Berber Zenetes arrived in Al-Andalús around the 12th Century, and I quote again the work by Nicolle on the Gibraltar swords:

“A new type of sword and its associated tactics are believed to have been introduced to the Iberian peninsula by Berber mercenaries and conquerors in the 11th-12th centuries, perhaps as a precursor to or early version of the jinete light cavalry tactics clearly introduced from North Africa in the 13th-14th centuries. Light cavalry combat a la jinete was again associated with what western European came to know as the Italian Grip and, according to some scholars, with curved quillons 10. In fact the term jinete comes from Zanata, the tribe from which many of the Berber soldiers of both Granada and Morocco came. Their highly effective light cavalry tactics using minimal armour, light leather shields, relatively light swords and javelins thrown from horseback were adopted first by the native Andalusian troops of Granada, then by their Christian Iberian foes, and eventually by some other European cavalry as well.” Nicolle, Ibid., p.158.
Even if we concur with Marc in the fact that there are vague descriptions of the morphology of the jineta swords, we can establish: first, that the Zenetes Benimerines were the main military force under the Nasrid Emirate of Granada to almost its fall, so it is very likely that their military equipment dominate the military fashion of the emirate; second, the fighting sword already shown corresponds with the description, since it is not a broadsword, but a very tapered one, less heavy and more apt to pierce the evolved plate armor of the Christians (the cuirass); third, the quillons are more narrow and allow the “Italian grip” with more protection to the index finger than those given by the quillons of the traditional Muslim sword, since they almost close on the blade, like the later fingerguards, to which they very possibly evolved in time (see Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer, Idem., pp.32 and 34); the so-called Italian grip favored a more accurate thrust, which corresponds with the intended piercing action of the tapered blade; the Zenete sword was different to the classic Muslim broadsword, this is why it called strongly the atention in the Al-Andalus and Christian spheres, not only the morphology of the hilt and the quillons was different to the known Muslim broadswords from Al-Andalus, but also the morphology of the blade, and the souces insist that they were lighter; the difference among the dress swords and the fighting swords could be great in the Iberic Peninsula, just see how it evolved the rapier as a dress sword different from the military.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

But it must be also noted that North Africa experimented a development in the production of arms and armour, as Nicolle and McBride write about this production in the 10th-11th Centuries:
“These centuries also witnessed a huge expansion in Noth African metallurgy, far beyond what had been seen in the Roman period; but although arms and horse-harness were made locally there was little exportation of finished goods”.
David Nicolle & Angus McBride, The Moors. The Islamic West 7th-15th Centuries AD, Osprey Military, Col. Men-at-Arms, No.348. 2001, UK, p.18.
In other words, the problem with North Africa and probably the Iberic Peninsula was not the quality of their weapons, but the capability to produce in mass with a more or less uniform quality, a feature which conditioned the need of imports into the Muslim world from elsewhere, including India and Europe, especially under the constraining needs extant in times of war. And the west North Africa and the Iberic Peninsula were always in recurrent times of war, more or less like Europe. This is a feature which will characterize many areas of the East, since their producing capabilities were not equilibrated with their military needs, as their more traditional crafts were not so “pre-industrial”, possibly with a less efficient labor division and technology, a feature which would be more developed under the pre-capitalist and capitalist European economy. It was already noted in other thread that the Indian swords produced in Deccan were superior to the English, at least until the 17th Century (R. Elgood, “Swords in the Deccan in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries”, pp.223, and 224), but still existed the need to import European blades, as they also imported the Persian blades, even made with Indian steel.

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

My hypotheses: the original Zenete-Jineta was not the type of dressing sword used by the Nasrid nobility. This last had a blade more in accord with the traditional muslim broadsword, except for the hilt, which was influenced by the Zenete but highly ornamented, and not capable to support the “Italian grip”, since the altered form of the quillons did not allow it: they were literally closing over the blade. It is a common feature of the ceremonial swords to imitate old forms and use extreme ornamentation, since they gave to their owners the prestige of tradition and power. Fighting swords were another matter.

The Christians were influenced by this last type of sword, but with modified quillons and an incipient development of the ring guards, probably a development from the grip and quillons of the fighting jineta swords. It is not casual that the first ring guards, which evolved to the “crab claw”, appeared for the first time in the Iberic Peninsula, on the Christian Spanish and Portuguese swords (please see the Black Swords or “Colhona” used by the Portuguese). It must remembered that also Portugal was part of the Muslim domain and that to the 15th Century, even already independent, was influenced by the military traditions from the rest of the Peninsula.

The rapier evolved, at least in part, from this original fighting jineta sword. The cited study from Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer points in this direction.

The nimcha sword type of quillons does not necessarily owe to any European tradition. The cultural elements behind them were already in North Africa long time ago. In the Catálogo de la Real Amería de Madrid (the catalog of the royal armory of Madrid), we find a suggestive description of four sabres taken from the Spanish Expedition to Oran in 1732 (free translation): “Four Moorish sabers owned by the Bey of Oran. The first one with wood hilt and a cap of engraved silver; guard, quillon and guard rings ended in pythons, all this decorated. The second one has a hilt of horn with plaques of chiseled silver, guard with a quillon and ring guards made of steel. The other two have their hilts covered with shell, nacre and plaques of chiseled silver, guard, quillon and guard ring made of engraved metal. ” Catálogo de la Real Armería, edited by Aguado, Madrid, 1854. p.61. It must be noted thay they are sabres, had a guard (probably a knuckleguard) and only one quillon, since the word “gavilán” in spanish denotes a single quillon. Does this rings something? Maybe a nimcha?.

On the other side, just saying that the jineta or the nimcha are “likely” or “suggestedly” a product of influences from Italy or France, is patently a subjective judgment, as the words imply. And sometimes we found a wide abuse of this words, if not supported by clear facts. The first fact we have to take in consideration is that there are no European hilts in the 13th Century resembling those of the jineta sword. The second fact is that the crab-claw type of guards appear until 15th Century in the Iberic Peninsula (see Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer), and their only visible antecedent is the fighting jineta sword. Again, see the Castilian and Portuguese swords from this period.

And speaking of the possible diffusion into Europe, especially Italy, from this type of hilts, the berbers did have contact with Europe, contrary to what has been said. Europe did not came to North Africa, but the berbers went to Europe in this period. Just to mention some facts: Aghlabid Berbers conquered Sicily, North African Muslims colonized Bari, Taranto and Apulia in the 9th Century and in the 10th Century they fought in Southern France as allies in local Christian quarrels. Bishop Athanasius recruited Islamic troops and Muslims settled in the province of Lucania. David Nicolle & Angus McBride, The Moors. The Islamic West 7th-15th Centuries AD, Osprey Military, Col. Men-at-Arms, No.348. 2001, UK, p.16. And the Zenetes were a military contingent in all this armies. Just search in the history of the Berber emirates and dynasties and you will find.

Originally Posted by Kubur

...Is it possible to post here only information's and pictures relevant to the topic ...

Originally Posted by Philip

... Years ago someone gave me a 35mm print image of a really nice one in the Musée de l'Armée in Paris. but I can't seem to locate it at the moment...

Originally Posted by Philip

Haha :D Ariel. It's "Ferd" as in Ferdinand, not Fred. But the imagery is highly amusing. When I was in college we used to sing a ribald ballad about Christopher Columbus ...

Originally Posted by fernando

What an entry, Kubur !!!
We know you don't mean to be so authoritative as you may sound. Probably members find that weaving considerations on topic peripherals is part of the game. You should see what going off topic really is :shrug: .

Originally Posted by fernando

Then Philip, you will have to satisfy with a 2D image of the one in the Middle Ages Museum of Cluny ;)
.

Originally Posted by Kubur

Thank you Jim, it's a very clear and net abstract.

I will copy and paste the most relevant informations and pictures on Jineta / Boabdil swords of the previous thread here for all the forum members and visitors.

Originally Posted by Kubur

... Are you sure Cluny?
I was thinking the National library ...

Originally Posted by fernando

Well ...
.

Originally Posted by midelburgo

Blades from Nasrid kingdom seem to be mostly imported from the Christian side. Specially Toledo, but also Germany. The little dog mark is by Julian del Rey, not Passau, a converted Muslim swordsmith working for Fernando of Aragon.

http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/inde...ticle/view/203

Originally Posted by midelburgo

It is possible that these blades were made in Toledo and mounted in Granada before the war started in 1482. Maybe it is hard to believe Muslims would have allowed an animal representation on their swords, but there you have the lions fountain at Alhambra.

Originally Posted by midelburgo

I understand that Julian del Rey was a Granada Muslim up to 1478, making swords there, then became a Christian, changed name, and made blades in Toledo and Zaragoza afterward. Two of the jinetas have its perrillo (little dog) mark, those at Paris and another that used to be at the Royal Armoury in Turin (at least until 1840). It is possible that these blades were made in Toledo and mounted in Granada before the war started in 1482. Maybe it is hard to believe Muslims would have allowed an animal representation on their swords, but there you have the lions fountain at Alhambra.

The "perrillo" swords are a common find in Spanish XVIth century literature, now there are difficulties in making clear, which ones were made by Julian del Rey, its successors and which are imports from Passau.

Another of the jineta blades is marked with a roman alphabet S, what seems unlikely if made in an Islamic country.

Originally Posted by midelburgo

I understand that Julian del Rey was a Granada Muslim up to 1478, making swords there, then became a Christian, changed name, and made blades in Toledo and Zaragoza afterward. Two of the jinetas have its perrillo (little dog) mark, those at Paris and another that used to be at the Royal Armoury in Turin (at least until 1840). It is possible that these blades were made in Toledo and mounted in Granada before the war started in 1482. Maybe it is hard to believe Muslims would have allowed an animal representation on their swords, but there you have the lions fountain at Alhambra.

The "perrillo" swords are a common find in Spanish XVIth century literature, now there are difficulties in making clear, which ones were made by Julian del Rey, its successors and which are imports from Passau.

Another of the jineta blades is marked with a roman alphabet S, what seems unlikely if made in an Islamic country.