Outstanding information Gonzalo, and its good to have some sound perspective on these often confusing terms as applied to these weapons.
While we have some good momentum focused on the early Spanish weapons, and the comments on Tizona and Colada have really piqued my interest!!
Through most of the day I've tried to find more on the famed swords of El Cid, and have found mostly the confusion of legend and scandal prevailing.
It seems terrible that the fire at the Armeria in Madrid in 1839 led to the unfortunate 'dispersal' of so many of the treasured weapons to London's auction houses thereafter. The re-cataloging of the weaponry remaining was not completed as I understand until Calvert's work in 1898. The weapons shown in his published work "Spanish Arms and Armour" mostly seem to carry a degree of mystery and rather confused attribution. It seems normal that weapons were 'restored' or remounted in earlier times as they represent important heritage and history, and such cases are not at all unusual in many, if not most, museums.
What puzzles me is that some sources claim Tizona was captured by El Cid from a Moorish chief, some that he was was awarded it for his exploits. Some say it was buried with him (some say his horse Babieca was too). Colada is even more of a mystery, as it was said to be two handed, and as noted, these were hardly in use in the 11th century.
While Tizona is supposedly on display in Madrid, its authenticity as of 11th century was questioned, and certainly, the hilt style is of medieval form from the 14th-15th c. I understand that in 1999, a bit of the steel from the blade was metallurgically tested, and found to be of 11th c. type from Moorish Cordoba.
Is that correct? I can understand rehilting, but is this blade, said in some references to have been mounted originally in Late Roman style, the real thing?
I'd really like to hear the views on this.
All best regards,
Jim
|