[Kubur]

9

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.