Interesting points, Gonzalo, thank you for your response. I was hoping you will chime in, as your expertise on Central American and Spanish colonial weapons in general could be very helpful here.
If I understand your post correctly, you are saying that these swords, known until recently as "berber" due to a Tirri attribution, are not regimental. I fully agree, as they vary considerably in their shape and size. You also point out the African flavor of the hilt and scabbard decoration, which I also agree with, and this is not surprising considering the large African population in many of the New World colonies, especially in the Carribean.
I am wondering, could these sabres simply be sabres preferred by irregulars in the Spanish army, mostly of African descent, from the Carribean? My other sword with its motto obviously referring to the Dominican Republic would support this.
As for guard vs. no guard, I am not sure that the lack of a guard is necessarily unknown in Spanish long bladed weapons. For example, here is a Spanish colonial sword/machete from the sold section of Oriental Arms (I hope Artzi would not mind using his pictures as an example):
http://oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=3052
Note the similarities in hilt construction and the pointed tip.
Now, the Riffian sword in the Versailles painting is most intriguing, and I have no doubt that Ariel knew what he saw. However, a painting is a work of art, and I would prefer to see a picture of Riffian warriors with such swords, before I am convinced that this is indeed a Riffian weapon.
Regards,
Teodor