The value of the additional visual sources for the study of historical weapons.

Ian · 6th January 2016, 02:06 AM

Gents:

This is an interesting thread but I must admit that, while the premise that coins may be a useful source of information about when a type of weapon was used is intriguing, the examples shown here are unconvincing for the most part. Except for the image on the gold coin, I'm struggling to see much else that would be likely called a sword. And I sense that others are also having a problem identifying weapons in many of the images. There appears to be some distortion of the coins over time, which also makes interpretation difficult.

As far as frescos are concerned, there are always issues of when the drawings were made and how such artwork might relate to other items found nearby. So, the discovery of articles dating to 10-30 C.E. in the vicinity of the fresco that is shown does not mean that the fresco dates from the same period--it may have been added much later.

Nevertheless, interesting thoughts and conjecture. Ariel, I look forward to seeing your article when it is finished.

Ian.

ariel · 6th January 2016, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian

Nevertheless, interesting thoughts and conjecture. Ariel, I look forward to seeing your article when it is finished.

Ian.

Thanks Ian.
I am working on it. If only not for such minor distractions as an 8 to 7 regular job plus weekends :-)

Mercenary · 6th January 2016, 07:28 PM

I'm looking forward to new article too. I hope our discussion will help you in research.

fernando · 7th January 2016, 05:09 PM

This illustration appears in page 247 of Portugal History (directed J.H.Saraiva) where the author narrates the invasion of the Iberian Peninsula by the Berbere Tärik b. Ziyäd, in the year 711 (92 Hegira, Rajab-Sha'ban ), landing in Gibraltar (Djabal al-Tarik). Unfortunately the illustration is not dated, although one may assume that it is consistent with the related period.
Whether more or less stilysed, one can not deny that the swords carried by the Islamic knights are sligthly curved, the term sabre being pertinent in this case.

.

Jens Nordlunde · 7th January 2016, 05:23 PM

Wrong thread - sorry.
Good illustration Fernando :-)

ariel · 8th January 2016, 12:37 AM

The more I look at the picture, the more doubts I have...

First, it cannot come from the Arab source. By the beginning of the 8th century, the idea of aniconism ( ban on human images) was already in a full swing in the Arab world.
Second, the style is Persian/Indopersian, even with clouds in the style of Chinese "chi"
Third, the armour looks East Asian: Mongols? Chinese? Even Persian, may be (???)
Fourth, composite bows.

My guess , this picture might be a part of Persian/ Moghul collection of miniatures 15-17 century.

The fact that it was used in a book dedicated to the history of Portugal and supposedly attributable to the battle at Jabal-al-Tariq is suspect. Not every reference or iconographic source can be accepted at face value.

I would dearly love to be wrong, but would need much more supportive evidence.

Sancar · 8th January 2016, 10:55 AM

This painting has nothing to do with Umayyad general Tarık Bin Ziyad or his invasion of Andulusian Spain. This is a scene from Shahnama, named "Charge of the Cavaliers of Faramouz". I can't say which time and place this miniature was painted for sure, but my educated guess is possibly in Iran, and more likely from post-Ilkhanid. It might be from Turkmen schools of art of Herat or Shiraz, or from Jelayirid period. The style of art looks like it is before Timurid period, so somewhere between Jalayirids and Timurids.

7th January 2016, 05:09 PM	#4
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	This illustration appears in page 247 of Portugal History (directed J.H.Saraiva) where the author narrates the invasion of the Iberian Peninsula by the Berbere Tärik b. Ziyäd, in the year 711 (92 Hegira, Rajab-Sha'ban ), landing in Gibraltar (Djabal al-Tarik). Unfortunately the illustration is not dated, although one may assume that it is consistent with the related period. Whether more or less stilysed, one can not deny that the swords carried by the Islamic knights are sligthly curved, the term sabre being pertinent in this case. . Attached Images

8th January 2016, 12:37 AM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	The more I look at the picture, the more doubts I have... First, it cannot come from the Arab source. By the beginning of the 8th century, the idea of aniconism ( ban on human images) was already in a full swing in the Arab world. Second, the style is Persian/Indopersian, even with clouds in the style of Chinese "chi" Third, the armour looks East Asian: Mongols? Chinese? Even Persian, may be (???) Fourth, composite bows. My guess , this picture might be a part of Persian/ Moghul collection of miniatures 15-17 century. The fact that it was used in a book dedicated to the history of Portugal and supposedly attributable to the battle at Jabal-al-Tariq is suspect. Not every reference or iconographic source can be accepted at face value. I would dearly love to be wrong, but would need much more supportive evidence. Last edited by ariel; 8th January 2016 at 08:06 AM.

6th January 2016, 02:06 AM	#1
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,523	Gents: This is an interesting thread but I must admit that, while the premise that coins may be a useful source of information about when a type of weapon was used is intriguing, the examples shown here are unconvincing for the most part. Except for the image on the gold coin, I'm struggling to see much else that would be likely called a sword. And I sense that others are also having a problem identifying weapons in many of the images. There appears to be some distortion of the coins over time, which also makes interpretation difficult. As far as frescos are concerned, there are always issues of when the drawings were made and how such artwork might relate to other items found nearby. So, the discovery of articles dating to 10-30 C.E. in the vicinity of the fresco that is shown does not mean that the fresco dates from the same period--it may have been added much later. Nevertheless, interesting thoughts and conjecture. Ariel, I look forward to seeing your article when it is finished. Ian.

6th January 2016, 07:28 PM	#3
Mercenary Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 430	I'm looking forward to new article too. I hope our discussion will help you in research.

7th January 2016, 05:23 PM	#5
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Wrong thread - sorry. Good illustration Fernando :-)

8th January 2016, 10:55 AM	#7
Sancar Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 79	This painting has nothing to do with Umayyad general Tarık Bin Ziyad or his invasion of Andulusian Spain. This is a scene from Shahnama, named "Charge of the Cavaliers of Faramouz". I can't say which time and place this miniature was painted for sure, but my educated guess is possibly in Iran, and more likely from post-Ilkhanid. It might be from Turkmen schools of art of Herat or Shiraz, or from Jelayirid period. The style of art looks like it is before Timurid period, so somewhere between Jalayirids and Timurids.