Nimcha Questions

Rivkin · 10th June 2005, 04:41 PM

As far as my knowladge of arabic goes, "saif" is an exact synonim of "sword", therefore refers to any sword.

Aqtai · 10th June 2005, 05:46 PM

As an Arabic speaker, I can confirm that, 'saif' (pronounced Seyf) simply means 'sword'. It is possibly derived from the Greek Xyphos. Very nice nimcha BTW.

tom hyle · 11th June 2005, 01:00 AM

Yes, but I don't think that's in-depth enough for clarity, because the word "sword" does not just mean any sword; it (sword, svert, and even espada, though I don't know how things come down on that being the same word), like saif is in actual usage often only used to refer to longswords. This practice still holds in N America (another American comment "Those aren't REAL swords...."). A "Viking" would not refer to his long sax as a svert. Likewise, AFAIK an Arab would not refer to, oh say, one of those xtra big sword-sized jambiyas as a sayf (?) Swords that are AFAIK known to their native users as saifs; Arabian saif per se; "nimcha"; the guardless Berber sabres; kaskara. Other shorter swords from the same regions and tribes are, AFAIK (?) not called sayf. I'm all in favor of a breadth for the word sword comparable to how it is used in translating from Japanese to English, but it did originally refer to a longsword.
Rick, the joint you describe is exactly the joint I saw on a French guard I owned, except it was in brass, and with two round tenons. It was also soldered, but had broken wide open when it came to me....the lone round tenon if not soldered too, seems particularly liable to become loose and swingy? Is the joint "keyed" or "locked" in any other way (ie by the in-side of the knucklebow being hollowed, and the end of the quillon curved or peaked to match? Just a random thought, that.

Aqtai · 11th June 2005, 12:15 PM

I'm afraid that sayf is not an indepth word, it's just a generic name for swords.

It could refer to any kind of sword be it a Kilij, shamshir, rapier or broadsword. I'm sure two hundred odd years ago, they would have had different names for individual types, but they are still all swords, or sayfs.

tom hyle · 11th June 2005, 12:46 PM

Yet all those examples you have just given are longswords. I ask again; would the term saif be applied by an Arab to a shorter Arab type, such as the giant jambiyas, or would a Berber so refer to flyssas?

Rick · 11th June 2005, 02:35 PM

No badgering the witness .

Not an arabic speaker but sometimes a large kanjar is just a large kanjar .

I would guess saif is a term used like the word automobile , a general term for personal transportation that burns gas has a body and four wheels be it a mini cooper or a deville .

Aqtai · 11th June 2005, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hyle

Yet all those examples you have just given are longswords. I ask again; would the term saif be applied by an Arab to a shorter Arab type, such as the giant jambiyas, or would a Berber so refer to flyssas?

A modern Arab would probably refer to shorter swords (as long as it is not obviously a dagger) as sayf. I can't answer as to what they would have said 100 years+ ago. I have a feeling that a non-military person would have still called a sword of any length a sayf.

tom hyle · 11th June 2005, 11:43 PM

Thanks.

Jim McDougall · 12th June 2005, 12:37 AM

Hi Rick,
Thats a very good thought Rick!!

and well placed observation.
Best regards,
Jim

The Meditteranean was always a commercial superhighway, and one of the key regions of activity , of many, was of course the Moroccan littoral. It has been noted that since early 16th century there had been extensive commercial relations between Europe and Morocco. The famed pirate location of Sallee based persistant predatory operations that not only targeted the many commercial ships, but sent forth kidnapping raids to Spanish, French and even English coasts. While these constant activities were certainly an affront to these countries, as is often the case, commercial intercourse never ceased. The Spanish had coastal trade colonies in Morocco, and French colonial interest was established. England of course was established in the key location to the Meditteranean, namely 'Gibraltar'.

I think that this commercial activity in these regions certainly provided sources for these Moroccan swords to appear in England, however I think that 'popularity' as described would have been confined to prominant individuals displaying such 'exotica' as more of a fashion statement.
It is interesting that many of these distinctive swords may have been mounted with English blades, then returned to England in this manner, but many likely had other trade blades as well. I would doubt any sort of production of these type hilts would ever have occurred in England as these were simply a novelty favored for thier very foreign and adventuresome provenance.

The subject of the evolution of the familiar 'nimcha' hilt or more correctly, Moroccan saif, has been generally presumed to have derived from North Italian or Venetian swords of latter 15th century with developing guard systems. Much of this is discussed in Anthony North's "A Late 15th Century Italian Sword" (Connoisseur, Dec. 1975, pp.238-241) where he describes a sword which had been presumed Moroccan is actually, and quite clearly Italian of late 15th c. The relationship of the Ceylonese kastane to these European swords in similar development is also noted.
This discussion leads to wondering if possibly other similarly mounted European or Italian swords owned by prominant figures appearing in portraits may have led to the presumption these were 'Moroccan' in the same manner.

The idea that these Moroccan swords were 'popular' in England in this very early period is intriguing, and I think a good topic to pursue further to verify how accurate this presumption is and whether misidentified European swords may have come into play.

In looking at the illustrations of our subject sword, it seems the age and patination of the crossguard element and the blade seem quite close, suggesting they may be homogenous. The grip, and other elements of course seem more recent, and naturally refurbished as is quite expected with swords of such venerable age.

11th June 2005, 12:15 PM	#4
Aqtai Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Merseyside, UK Posts: 222	I'm afraid that sayf is not an indepth word, it's just a generic name for swords. It could refer to any kind of sword be it a Kilij, shamshir, rapier or broadsword. I'm sure two hundred odd years ago, they would have had different names for individual types, but they are still all swords, or sayfs. Last edited by Aqtai; 11th June 2005 at 11:01 PM.

10th June 2005, 04:41 PM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	As far as my knowladge of arabic goes, "saif" is an exact synonim of "sword", therefore refers to any sword.

10th June 2005, 05:46 PM	#2
Aqtai Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Merseyside, UK Posts: 222	As an Arabic speaker, I can confirm that, 'saif' (pronounced Seyf) simply means 'sword'. It is possibly derived from the Greek Xyphos. Very nice nimcha BTW.

11th June 2005, 01:00 AM	#3
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Yes, but I don't think that's in-depth enough for clarity, because the word "sword" does not just mean any sword; it (sword, svert, and even espada, though I don't know how things come down on that being the same word), like saif is in actual usage often only used to refer to longswords. This practice still holds in N America (another American comment "Those aren't REAL swords...."). A "Viking" would not refer to his long sax as a svert. Likewise, AFAIK an Arab would not refer to, oh say, one of those xtra big sword-sized jambiyas as a sayf (?) Swords that are AFAIK known to their native users as saifs; Arabian saif per se; "nimcha"; the guardless Berber sabres; kaskara. Other shorter swords from the same regions and tribes are, AFAIK (?) not called sayf. I'm all in favor of a breadth for the word sword comparable to how it is used in translating from Japanese to English, but it did originally refer to a longsword. Rick, the joint you describe is exactly the joint I saw on a French guard I owned, except it was in brass, and with two round tenons. It was also soldered, but had broken wide open when it came to me....the lone round tenon if not soldered too, seems particularly liable to become loose and swingy? Is the joint "keyed" or "locked" in any other way (ie by the in-side of the knucklebow being hollowed, and the end of the quillon curved or peaked to match? Just a random thought, that.

11th June 2005, 12:46 PM	#5
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Yet all those examples you have just given are longswords. I ask again; would the term saif be applied by an Arab to a shorter Arab type, such as the giant jambiyas, or would a Berber so refer to flyssas?

11th June 2005, 02:35 PM	#6
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,347	No badgering the witness . Not an arabic speaker but sometimes a large kanjar is just a large kanjar . I would guess saif is a term used like the word automobile , a general term for personal transportation that burns gas has a body and four wheels be it a mini cooper or a deville .

11th June 2005, 11:43 PM	#8
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Thanks.

12th June 2005, 12:37 AM	#9
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,454	Hi Rick, Thats a very good thought Rick!! and well placed observation. Best regards, Jim The Meditteranean was always a commercial superhighway, and one of the key regions of activity , of many, was of course the Moroccan littoral. It has been noted that since early 16th century there had been extensive commercial relations between Europe and Morocco. The famed pirate location of Sallee based persistant predatory operations that not only targeted the many commercial ships, but sent forth kidnapping raids to Spanish, French and even English coasts. While these constant activities were certainly an affront to these countries, as is often the case, commercial intercourse never ceased. The Spanish had coastal trade colonies in Morocco, and French colonial interest was established. England of course was established in the key location to the Meditteranean, namely 'Gibraltar'. I think that this commercial activity in these regions certainly provided sources for these Moroccan swords to appear in England, however I think that 'popularity' as described would have been confined to prominant individuals displaying such 'exotica' as more of a fashion statement. It is interesting that many of these distinctive swords may have been mounted with English blades, then returned to England in this manner, but many likely had other trade blades as well. I would doubt any sort of production of these type hilts would ever have occurred in England as these were simply a novelty favored for thier very foreign and adventuresome provenance. The subject of the evolution of the familiar 'nimcha' hilt or more correctly, Moroccan saif, has been generally presumed to have derived from North Italian or Venetian swords of latter 15th century with developing guard systems. Much of this is discussed in Anthony North's "A Late 15th Century Italian Sword" (Connoisseur, Dec. 1975, pp.238-241) where he describes a sword which had been presumed Moroccan is actually, and quite clearly Italian of late 15th c. The relationship of the Ceylonese kastane to these European swords in similar development is also noted. This discussion leads to wondering if possibly other similarly mounted European or Italian swords owned by prominant figures appearing in portraits may have led to the presumption these were 'Moroccan' in the same manner. The idea that these Moroccan swords were 'popular' in England in this very early period is intriguing, and I think a good topic to pursue further to verify how accurate this presumption is and whether misidentified European swords may have come into play. In looking at the illustrations of our subject sword, it seems the age and patination of the crossguard element and the blade seem quite close, suggesting they may be homogenous. The grip, and other elements of course seem more recent, and naturally refurbished as is quite expected with swords of such venerable age.