BAT HILTS

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Royston

There has been trade between the Arab countries and S.E Asia for a long time.
Does anyone else see a similarity between Nimcha hilts and the bat hilts of the Philippines ?

My question is this:-

Influence or Coincidence ?

All opinions welcome

Regards
Roy

PS:- Now that we are sure that the Minisbad comes from Bichol, I note that this area appears to be predominately Catholic, but was there trade with the Arabs in the past ?

Salaams,
This has to be one of the most interesting and fascinating of forum conundrums I have ever seen !
Here we have a direct, though as yet, unresolved link between Western and Oriental weapons ~ We dont know where it originates or when. I am amazed that this has not raised the roof on this Forum , yet, only 5 contributors! Five !

Where did this weapon originate? I have seen semi believable half explanations from the experts .. Some say Morocco others Zanzibar. Tobias Blose is pictured wearing one (Captain of a trained band in London) in a portrait painted in 1617.(I assume that was before trade blades started flooding Africa) Page 28 Anthony North Islamic Arms.
Then there is the great tidal wave of trade blades. Is this a trade blade or a trade sword? Does it originate in the Caucasus, Germany or elsewhere in Europe. How did it get to the Philipines?

Last question first~ Owned/administered by Mexico this weapon could have got there by two routes.. The Atlantic from Spain \ Mexico and on across the Pacific to its destination...or... Into the great trade hub controlled by Zanzibar via Dutch British and or French East Indies Traders.

In the case of the latter transfer ~ in its wake this sword appears to have morphed in the version Saudia and or Yemeni shown in the discussion. Either way this has to be a gripping story though I have to add that Im not convinced it is even European since it has the look of a Chinese or Oriental hilt mixed with a Spanish crossguard/knuckle bow format. Could we be looking at an early Chinese hilt? It is possible since the Chinese were trading before the arrival of the Portuguese in the Red Sea pre 16th Century.

Is it a Dog? Is it a Dragon? Or are we all mislead? Is it a Caucas Nimcha variant ? What in fact is the difference between a Moroccan and a Zanzibar sword of this type? Are they the same? The blades seem to be.

It is certainly an excellent ships weapon; ideal on Junk Dhow or European sailing vessel..

What we know from Anthony North is that these weapons could have either straight or curved blades and he tends to attribute them to a European source though frankly looking at the Philipine link it has to be more precise to be convincing in my opinion.. There must be more to this.

On the face of it, evidence seems to indicate a west-east transit since no weapons in the Zanzibar area appear with Philipine decoration, however, as a general question of its birthright I still think this is a vital topic into which this Forum should jointly sink its teeth !


Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Spunjer]

Minasbad...

[Battara]

Originally Posted by Spunjer

Minasbad...

Right - my bad.

Yes Ron is right, the Philippines was ruled by Spain's empire for roughly 400 years, not Mexico.............

[Rick]

IIRC the Treasure Ships sailed to the Americas where the cargo was carried overland to the Caribbean side; thence on to Spain (barring a Hawkins or a Drake interfering) .

[Nonoy Tan]

The resemblance is interesting. Nonetheless, more research is needed in order to support any of the theories IMHO.

Let us note too that the Bikol culture is closely similar to Visayan. This is because the sea currents flow from the Visayan to the Bikol coast, resulting to exchange between the peoples.

The Philippines was ruled by Spain through the Viceroy of Nueva Espana (present day Mexico) for several centuries until Mexico started to fight to its independence from Spain.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Nonoy Tan

The resemblance is interesting. Nonetheless, more research is needed in order to support any of the theories IMHO.

Let us note too that the Bikol culture is closely similar to Visayan. This is because the sea currents flow from the Visayan to the Bikol coast, resulting to exchange between the peoples.

The Philippines was ruled by Spain through the Viceroy of Nueva Espana (present day Mexico) for several centuries until Mexico started to fight to its independence from Spain.

Salaams. Thank you and apologies to Rick, Battora and Spunjer if the word "ruled" was a bit strong .. Ok "administered" may be a better term. Anyone not sure about who administered who may be interested in a quick history rebrief:

In 1543, Ruy López de Villalobos named the islands of Leyte and Samar Las Islas Filipinas after Philip II of Spain.[6] Philip II became King of Spain on January 16, 1556, when his father, Charles I of Spain, abdicated the Spanish throne. Philip was in Brussels at the time and his return to Spain was delayed until 1559 because of European politics and wars in northern Europe. Shortly after his return to Spain, Philip ordered an expedition mounted to the Spice Islands, stating that its purpose was "to discover the islands to the west". In reality its task was to conquer the Philippines for Spain.[7]

On April 27, 1565, a Spanish expedition of a mere 500 men led by Miguel Lopez de Legazpi landed in Bohol and made a blood compact with Raja Katuna Sikatuna in Spanish records, and Raja Gala Sigala in Spanish records He and his men then proceeded to the nearby island of Cebu.Where they were attacked by the defiant Tupas, who had succeeded Humabon as king of Cebu.[8] Tupas was defeated and requested to sign an agreement which placed his people and the entire island of Cebu under Spain. On that same day, the first permanent Spanish settlement of San Miguel was founded in Cebu. In 1570, Juan de Salcedo, in the service of Legazpi, conquered the Kingdom of Maynila (now Manila). Legazpi then made Maynila the capital of the Philippines and simplified its spelling to Manila. His expedition also renamed Luzon Nueva Castilla. Legazpi became the country's first governor-general. With time, Cebu's importance fell as power shifted north to Luzon. The archipelago was Spain's outpost in the orient and Manila became the capital of the entire Spanish East Indies.

The colony was "administered" through the Viceroyalty of New Spain (now Mexico) until 1821 (250 years of administration) when Mexico achieved independence from Spain. After 1821, the colony was governed directly from Spain. During most of the colonial period, the Philippine economy depended on the Galleon Trade which was inaugurated in 1565 between Manila and Acapulco, Mexico.

Trade between Spain and the Philippines was via the Pacific Ocean to Mexico (Manila to Acapulco), and then across the Caribbean Sea and Atlantic Ocean to Spain (Veracruz to Cádiz). Manila became the most important center of trade in Asia between the 17th and 18th centuries. All sorts of products from China, Japan, Brunei, the Moluccas and even India were sent to Manila to be sold for silver 8-Real coins which came aboard the galleons from Acapulco. These goods, including silk, porcelain, spices, lacquerware and textile products were then sent to Acapulco and from there to other parts of New Spain(Mexico), Peru and Europe.

The Philippines; A beautiful country full of wonderful people some of whom are my best friends... and I still believe this question of the Philippine, Zanzibar, Moroccan, Caucasian sword ?... is one which needs considerable input from this Forum.

Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Spunjer]

Also fascinating is which way around did the influence happen since the Philipines were for several centuries directly ruled by Mexico not by Spain/Portugal therefor it is conceivable that Magreb influence

Sir, i'm pretty sure philippines was ruled by spain, not mexico...