Boabdil swords and Jineta

[midelburgo]

On the other hand you have the so called war-Jinetas, like the bottom one at Sevilla. There is a similar one at Vitoria.
There is one has a flat disc pommel, that can be found also in Mamluk swords.

Nicolle described another two war jinetas (XII century) found in Gibraltar in a Gladius article. They have sphaerical pommels.
http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/inde...rticle/view/59

And another, sort of intermediate to the later Nasrid swords was found in Sanguesa (Navarra). Compare it to the San Telmo and Greco example.

Extra record: Is this a Jineta?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5h1k8-SzaI

And finally another arqueological find in Spain of unknown thereabouts.

[Jim McDougall]

Philip, I was remiss in not responding to your post #7 and thank you for mentioning the Furisiyya volume which I do have, and also for noting the work , "Al Andalus: The Art of Islamic Spain" Met, Mus. of Art, 1997, which is now on my 'get' list too.

Well observed on the blades.....it would be good to compare the blades on the swords of Topkapi and the examples in Spain. Yucel notes that while it is certain these swords in Istanbul with distinguished provenance along with the rest have been remounted c. 1517 , many of the blades may be of the antiquity noted and to the attribution claimed.


Keeping to the key topic here, the form and likely development of the Hispano-Moresque sword forms with regard to the hilts, it seems it was questioned at some point (I believe Gonzalo) how the notion of possible European infuence was arrived at. Also, how early was the downward turned quillon present in the Iberian/ Al Andalusian swords?


In Dr, David Nicolle, "Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era 1050-1350" (1988, p.158) , it is noted;

"... 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 and 12th centuries perhaps as a precursor to , or an early version of the JINETE light cavalry tactics clearly introduced from North Africa in the 13th-14th c.
Light cavalry combat a la' jinete was again associated with what west Europeans came to know as the Italian grip, and according to some scholars, with curved quillons".

in the article previously cited by Midelburgo, Dr. Nicolle again addresses the curved quillon conundrum in "Two Swords from the Foundation of Gibraltar" (Gladius XXII, 2002, pp 147-200);
Where two swords of 12th c. were found in a cave on Gibraltar in which one had somewhat downturned quillons, the other with straight.

While Yucel (2001, p.54) has asserted that virtually nothing is known about the form and nature of Umayyad and Abbasid hilts or the period from 8th c. to the Mamluk period. However it seems in various other works there have been presumptions that these hilts may have been guardless except for a kind of cuff extending over the blade forte.

Nicolle (2002, op. cit. #33) illustrates a hilt of this general form as Mamluk or Maghribi (North African broadly) 12th-14th c.


It would seem that both downturn quillons and straight existed contemporarily in Al Andalusian Spain in c. 12th century, and the 'cuffed' type hilt feature existed possibly from as early as Umayyad North Africa. Later the style probably influenced hilts in degree in the Maghrib and Mamluk spheres travelling into Al Andalusian Spain sometime after 12th c.

Perhaps the cuffed style incorporated downturned quillons and evolved into the elaborately decorated Nasrid (Boabdil/Jineta) style which were intended for prominant if not regal figures as reflective of stature.


I do not believe these elaborately decorated and structured hilts were prevalent overall in Spain, but were selectively unique and that most swords in use were of the more commonly seen quillon types which evolved into the crab claw types later.

[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

[Kubur]

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

Fantastic thank you! Excellent article.
Question: so this blade is Spanish and from the 16th c but the sword / hilt is from the 15th c?
Sorry for my simple question...

[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.

[Kubur]

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.

Mucho gracias
Animal representations are just forbidden in mosques.
Look at the quillons of the Jineta - if they had monsters on the quillons, a little dog on the blade was not really a problem!
Very kastane-ish (the Persian swords have also this kind of monsters for the quillons)

[Jim McDougall]

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.

There have been many great discussions here on the topic of Spanish marking over the years, and I know personally I have learned more than I can say from them. With that I would recommend readers use the search function here and simply use 'perillo' for example, to access these.


To summarize, Julian Del Rey was indeed a Granada swordsmith working for the Nasrid ruler Boabdil, and indeed after the conquest in 1492 went to work for Ferdinand and converted to Catholicism. As with most markings, their use and attribution is often unclear, but the 'perrillo' is claimed to have been used by him.

However, his father was a smith, as was his son, and there appear to be disagreements as to the use of their mark used in common.......the mark was NOT the so called perillo, bit a cross in latten (copper) . The perillo seems to have been applied as with most Spanish marks in tandem with other marks. It is actually not even clear that this represents a dog, and it is ofte believed to have taken that connotation from Cervantes tongue in cheek reference to the mark as on Spanish 'little dog swords'. It is remembered that "Don Quixote" was a brilliant satire on chivalry with much focus of course on Spain.


The stylized creature in rampant posture represented as the 'perillo' seems to have been a mark used along with others and which may have had numerous inside meanings. This is much like the curious but well known man in the moon' mark which was often thought to be that of the 'espaderos del rey' but we now know it was also an supplemental mark.


Therefore the notion of the Spanish mark being exclusively that of Julian Del Rey and the circumstances of his conversion to Catholicism suggesting a derisive statement noting sincerity in symbolic gesture using a 'dog' is 'interesting' but more 'lore' than reality. In the times I do not think anyone even thought of the mark as a dog, and may have been regarded as a heraldic lion in its rampant stance (contrary to running as in the 'Passau' wolf).


Apparently most of the blades of later in particular which have only the 'dog' are thiught to be spurious and on German blades. It should be noted that most of the 'running wolf' marks applied were on Solingen blades, and were often placed on blades destined for mounting in Passau as a kind of 'brand'. The possible connection between the 'dog' of Spain and 'wolf' of Germany is intriguing but largely unresolved.

[fernando]

As i browse on these swords and their implicit Nasrid saga, i feel i have to revisit the Alhambra, that breathless complex of palaces ...

The main and more complete iconographic sources depicting arms and complements of the Nasrid period are the codicess of las Cantigas of Alphonso X el Sabio (end XIII century), the murals in the Partal house in th Alhambrs (1340), the three domes painted by a Castillian artist/s in Gothic style in the Sala de los Reyes of Palace del Riyāḍ al-Sa‘īd (know as Palacio de los Leones) circa 1380 and the paintings of the battle of Higuerela, made by Juan II of Castille in 1431-1432, later copied in colour in the XVI century in the Monastery of San Lorenzo de Escorial.
The most emphasized weapon type of weapon genuinely Nasrid, conventionally known as Jinetas, a term of uncertain significance, is for the first time documented in the painting of the little Partal house. Of decorarive kuxury, with the presence of Nasrid motto or dinastic shield, indicate the probable production in Palatial workshops, such as confirmed by references to gifts that the Sultans of Granada used to offer Christian Monarchs. According to the chronicle of Alfonso XI (XIV century), this Monarch received from Muhamd IV when sealing peace with Castille, in 1333, a sword with a scabbard all covered with gold plates and several emeralds, rubis, saphires and pearls. In the testament of King Dom Pedro I, in 1362, is written: i send to the said Don Juan … four Gineta swords of gold, one that i made with gems and pearls.Their graphic representation appears in the joints of the Santa Catalina cluster of Burgos Cathedral; in the painting in the central alcoba de la Sala de los Reyes in la Alhambra; in the stonework choir of Toledo Cathedral; in the painting of Adoracion de los Reyes in the Royal chapel of Granada, where King Baltazar, dressing as a Muslim, carries a Gineta.
However between the second half XIII and beginning XIV centuries of the Nasrid Granadine Sultanate, two generic styles of weaponry coexisted; that adopted by copying Christian models, and that provenant of Hispano Muslim Oriental and Magrebi tradition. The adoption of weapons of Christian fashion is documented in las Cantigas de Santa Maria, where part of Muslim Cavalry shows a heavy charater, like close helms, cabacets, manoples, shields and the like.
Back to Jinetas, among the examples of interest preserved, are the one in the Paris National Library, provenant from Granada; the one of Saint Marcelo de Leon (now in the Arhaelogic Museim of Madrid); the one of Infant-Cardinal Dom Fernando de Austria (Real Armeria); the one supposed to be of Aliatar (Madrid Army Museum); the one of the Marquis of Campótejar, etc. The richest one of the this series appears to be ithe cerimony court sword captured from Boabdil in the battle of Lucena in 1483 (Army Museum) which, judging by its decoration, could be dated frpm the period of Muhamad V.


.

[Jim McDougall]

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.

Going to these notes after more revisiting other entries I think it is important to consider just when the 'perillo' began appearing on blades.
If Julian Del Rey was in fact working for Boabdil (Abu Adullah, Boabdil was a Castilian corruption of the name) in Granada, it would be interesting to see how he would have signed or marked his blades.
We know (as noted in my previous post) that his father and brother used the cross (in latten) in some fashion as Julian apparently used as well.
Were they in Toledo?

When Fernando II took over at the surrender of Boabdil in 1492 and later enforced expulsion or conversion of Muslims, Julian elected to stay on as swordmaker to him. Here is where the lore begins about the 'little dog' which is believed to derive from the description of this zoomorphic mark in Cervantes in "Don Quixote" in late 16th into 17thc. As far as I know, this mark, nor the term. perillo….did not exist prior to 1492.
But apparently the cross mark did as Julians father seems to have used it as well as Julian and his brother.....this was the contested mark between them Not the perillo.

So were blades made in Toledo and exported to Granada? Then what was Julian doing in Granada if not making blades? We know that blades were also made in Barcelona and Valencia, and Muslim smiths were well connected with their associated smiths in Syria in producing high quality blades.

It seems that some blades indeed did come into these regions from Germany, and the Passau wolf must have been known as they were in use in the 15th century. But did this 'perillo' come into being in imitation of that wolf, or is it perhaps a rendition of the rampant lion which was known in Castilian heraldry (though representing Leon).
It is suggested that the perillo, like the moon crescent with face, was added to marks on blades possibly in some other meaning.

While we presume to have record of the markings placed on blades in the time after the Reconquista into 18th century (when these were collected by Palomares) we have no certain knowledge if or how blades were marked in the Muslim regions of Al Andalus.

Though this may seem a digression from the topic on Jineta swords it is addressing markings which may establish period and region of blades which appear on many of them and swords of these times.

Regarding the letter 'S' on the blade mentioned, in some cases a letter, presumed an initial (uncrowned) would occur on a blade. It should be noted that in many cases a letter (crowned) would be noted to a maker, but the initial may not concur with the makers name (numerous in Palomares).
It may be a symbol meaning something other than a letter, and either way if used symbolically, why not on a blade from Andalusian Spain?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Excellent thread! In trying to catch up on proceedings I read this http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/inde...ewFile/204/206 which is interesting placing the Perillo mark in the same category as other famous sword smiths more in line with a quality stamp than that of an actual maker..

[Iain]

I don't think this example was added yet from the Alava Arms Museum, as well as another recently uncovered at Ain castle in Castellón.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by Iain

I don't think this example was added yet from the Alava Arms Museum, as well as another recently uncovered at Ain castle in Castellón.

Thank you Iain, it's a fantastic 14th c. example!
Do you think they lost one copper ring in the process from the site to the Museum? And do you think these rings were used to hold the grips?
This sword is very interesting but to me it's not a Jineta.

[Iain]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Thank you Iain, it's a fantastic 14th c. example!
Do you think they lost one copper ring in the process from the site to the Museum? And do you think these rings were used to hold the grips?
This sword is very interesting but to me it's not a Jineta.

To be clear these are two different swords. The images on the white background are from the Alava sword.

I think it is likely there was another ring that was lost at some point, yes they were used to hold the grips, likely two pieces of wood, possibly with cloth or leather.

Regarding the name, "war jineta" or jineta de combate is a term sometimes used regarding these as opposed to the more elaborately decorated examples. Personally I am more interested in the form than debating the name as this is the type of blade carried by Jinete cavalry.

The museum example is 12th century, while the excavated find is tentatively placed within the 14th century.

[Kubur]

I'm interested by both, names and shapes.
Without names and vocabulary it's difficult to differenciate diffrent models.

[RAMBA]

Auction description - "An unusual long straight possibly Islamic sword with elephant heads on its handle sides and possibly Arabic writing on blade"

This sword sold at auction recently and I was wondering if it is in fact a Jineta from Granada, Spain from the Moorish rule period or a later Victorian interpretation?

[Philip]

It gives the impression of being a later interpretation: if Victorian era then British India may be a possibility considering the ellyfunts. My recollection of Moorish art is that such depictions of animals tends to be quite out-of-place in the tradition. Which makes an anomaly such as the sculptures in the Court of Lions at the Alhambra in Granada so much more remarkable.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Philip

... Which makes an anomaly such as the sculptures in the Court of Lions at the Alhambra in Granada so much more remarkable.

[fernando]

I know this sword was already posted here but (i guess), the previous time there was no identity to it and, as i have just visited its residence (Toledo Army Mueum) i am posting it together with a humble transcription of the caption.

"THIS LUXURY SWORD IS ATTRIBUTED TO ONE OF THE PRINCIPAL MILITARY LEADERS OF THE NASRID PERIOD; ALI ATAR, WHO WAS ALCAIDE (MAYOR) OF LOJA AND BOABDIL’S FATHER IN LAW, THE LAST KING OF GRANADA. ACCORDING TO HISTORIOGRAPHIC TRADITION, THE CABALLERO LUCAS HURTADO HAS SNATCHED THE SWORD FROM ALI ATAR WHILST HE WAS FALLING DEATH DURING THE COURSE OF THE BATTLE OF LUCENA (21ST. APRIL 1483)".

Do i see a Moorish smith mark on the blade ?

.

[Philip]

Nando, the image does hint at Arabic calligraphy within the cartouche. Isn't it so frustrating to see something in a museum and either the lighting or the visual angle (behind glass, no less) stand in the way of a good photo?

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Philip

Nando, the image does hint at Arabic calligraphy within the cartouche. Isn't it so frustrating to see something in a museum and either the lighting or the visual angle (behind glass, no less) stand in the way of a good photo?

Added by a lousy photographer, with a lousy camera, Filipe .
... and the cartouche/mark is actually rather faded, by the way.

[Philip]

Originally Posted by fernando

Added by a lousy photographer, with a lousy camera, Filipe .
... and the cartouche/mark is actually rather faded, by the way.

Yeah the wear and pitting don't help but don't beat yourself up over equipment and talent, you actually take better pics than many that are posted on the forum.

I go light when traveling so typically take a very portable small Canon which does a decent job, but in situations like lousy museum displays, I whip out my phone and take "back up" pics. Sometime am surprised at how much better they turn out when I adjust them on my computer. This is from someone who likewise is not a very methodical photographer and who tends to "wing it" when it comes to using a lens...