Help pls. on 15th-17th C. cutlass & scimitar

[Jim McDougall]

Lorenz has asked some most interesting questions, and again I have been reading along with the discussion, as the topics of the history of Spain and its colonies are among my favorites, as of course, are Spanish swords.
In my youngest years I loved studying the conquistadores, and thier exploits in the Americas, and grew up in a region that reflected the profound influence of the Spanish culture, in southern California.
El Cid was also one of my favorite movies, and clearly carried the colorful pageantry that I always thought of associated with Spain's history.

However, like all history, there are often at least two sides, and in reviewing or studying it, there will always be empassioned debates and perspective much in the way politics bring volatility to virtually every venue of media daily.

Once again, I will say that I admire the knowledge displayed on these pages, and especially sense the restraint that is clearly being struggled with in some of the entries. You have all expressed yourselves well, as you have the questions posed.......please leave the barroom chest pounding out of this, along with the political editorials OK guys. I do not want this discussion 'divided' nor do I want to have to 'conquer' this thread !

The focus is on the weapons, and great information on Tizona and Colada!
Great assessment on the ongoing debate on the falchion Fernando, another mystery of medieval swords and thier terminology. It seems more a heraldic term in most cases these days, as like 'scimitar' the term became archaic.

The word 'scimitar' is as described by Fernando, a term whose etymology derives from early transliteration, and was often applied in many flowery narratives in English of those early times to illustrate the exotic sabres of the Moorish world. It is now an archaic term left best to the Elizabethan and Victorian literature that it was most used in, and to the fantasy swords it often names.

All best regards,
Jim

[fernando]

Hi again, guys.
I completely agree with Jim's reminder that we must stick to the weapons business. Your knowledge in this subject is by far good enough to fulfill the plenitude of this space ... something that does not happen with me, as probably the least school educated character that posts in the Forum.
As i firstly introduced in my perspective, weapons typology is never easy to deal with; allways a struggle with translations, transliterations, ethimologic and semanthic paths ... not to speak of the greatest chalenge in tipyfying weapons, which is: does the discussed term refers to a specific model, or is it no more than a generic name, developed in a determined region to encompass a limited or wide variety of models and submodels coming from remote origins which, missing their name in the local 'catalogue', are baptized by the peoples with a name either alegoric to its shape or capabilities, or instead with a term close to that given if the original region or culture to one of its variations, preferably the most basic one ... such term being eventualy corrupted within time?
When i said that the scimitar could or could not have originated the falchion, i was only quoting sources; i am no scholar or any kind of specialist.
Assuming (then again) that the bracamarte is an equivalent to the falchion, i have just read in one of my humbliest books (Portuguese medieval war men), that such weapon is supposed to derive from the Vicking sax. How's that for an aproach?
I have also found a link, regretfully only usefull for those who can read castillian, where this problematic of the terminology
falchion/scimitar/bracamarte is discussed; complex stuff ... maybe too much sand for my truck.
http://images.google.pt/imgres?imgur...pt-PT%26sa%3DX
Without failling to see that some the aproaches from the various sides are convergent, i like the way Jim puts it, when he says that the term scimitar was used to 'illustrate the exotic sabres of the Moorish world'. Only i think that it was not only the way, but it still is, namely for the common person.
Fernando

.

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by fernando

Assuming (then again) that the bracamarte is an equivalent to the falchion, i have just read in one of my humbliest books (Portuguese medieval war men), that such weapon is supposed to derive from the Vicking sax. How's that for an aproach?

Fer, that illustration from a portuguese book is just a falchion, so bracamarte and falchion are the same thing. I was reading the page from the AEEA, and I was wondering what is the word in english for "alfanje". Maybe your "unscholared" person can tell me, because I don´t know. The word "falx", from latin, designated a downcurved blade, something opposite of what we talk about. The scramasax was only a raw, usually straight long knife used by the german tribes. I cannot relate it to the alfanje.

Some authors indentify the scmitar with the alfanje, others deny this relation. In the article about the tipologic study of spanish weapons, German Dueñaz Beraiz denies that alfanje and scimitar are the same thing, but he does not explains what a scimitar is. Instead, he identifies the arab alfanje with the english falchion, the french badelaire, the italian cotellaccio or sttorta and the spanish terciado, and describes it as a "sword with a short, wide and curved blade, with a an austere hilt, normally with straight quillons". Also, he says that some of this swords were used exclusively for executions, in the decapitation of prisioners (German Dueñaz Beraiz, "Introducción al Estudio Tipológico de las Espadas Españolas: Siglos XVI-XVII", Gladius, Vol XXIV, 2004, p.219).

And, Miguel, history is not water under the bridge. History is condensed in our present, and it reveals the tendencies toward the future, the hidden currents which moves the actual world. And we have to take sides, or be dragged by the currents to an unknown destiny.
Regards

Gonzalo

According with Beraiz, the description of a scimitar in the way Covarrubias explains, corresponds with a shamshir, and this is the reason he does not accept Covarrubias description, because the scimitars were "more short" than a shamshir from his point of view. But this description also is valid for some kiliç, which in some cases, as in the type some persons call "pala", are short enough to fit in the description. Evidently, there are confussions and ambiguity on what those terms design, and there are not illustrations and secure references to have an unmistakedly ID. And other point: Dueñas Beraiz does not mentions the bracamarte in this article.

But I also think those terms were used in a more lax manner by the common folk, giving birth to this typologic problems. Even in this forum, I have read descriptions of a "dagger", which do not correspond to a double edged short weapon, but to a single edged weapon, and this is strange to me, as many dictionaries in english defines a dagger as a short pointed weapon with sharp edges used to stab or pierce, and in spanish it is of the outmost importance to precise that a dagger is a double edged weapon. Also, we differentiate the puñal and the dagger, being both of them weapons to stab (not excluding the cut), on the fact that the puñal has only one edge, and sometimes, also a short false edge. And if the blade is extremely narrow, we use another name. So, the problem is a little more complex, when entering to equivalences and traslations, as in the case of the question from Miguel.
Regards

Gonzalo

[Jim McDougall]

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

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

... Fer... I was wondering what is the word in english for "alfanje". Maybe your "unscholared" person can tell me, because I don´t know ...

I would be the last person able to tell you, Gonzalo; as said before, that is too much sand for my truck .
I go one place and it says: Scimitar; i go another one and it says: cutlass. Apparently there is no strict translation. Likely this term never turned into english vocabulary.
It seems as alfange is connected to Persian FAchar, or Urdu URchar, originated from the Arabic ARchar (Al khanjar); poping around through the Spano-Arab al-hangal ... pretended by others to be al-janyar (puñal?).
If you go by the digestive description/definition, you fall into the bottomless well of the short, slightly curved wide blade sabres range which, in its widest interpretation, embraces the European falchion, fauchar, bracamarte, messer, storta, the Turc Kiliç, the Indian talwar, the Arab saif ... not to speak about their Spanish (Peninsular?) keen alfanjón, alfanjonazo and alfanjete; even the terciado (so much discussed in the kampilan thread) or the chafarote ... look at me, breathless .
Maybe in a first aception you could consider the alfange a composite 'pattern', partly European and partly Oriental. Shorter but heavier than Oriental sabres, with a false edge that could well come from the longsax, the 'cutlass' or the falchion, generaly equiped with an 'S' guard, like the bracamarte, the messer and some late falchions. Beautyful specimens, like the one attached, were made and exported from renascent Venice ... the pieces you are looking for, Lorenz
It is also written that the term alfanje (later alfange) was used in medieval Iberia to define Moorish curved swords, shorter and wider than scimitars; such being potentially the weapon used in the Muslim conquest of Penisula..
The alfanje is also cited by Cervantes in Don Quixote:

"-Vos sois quien la necesita», respondió el manchego, y abrió la batalla con un tajo tan desmedido, que si el arma fuera un alfanje, allí quedara el portugués para la huesa"

" ... and opened the battle with such an enormous slash that, if the weapon were a an alfanje, there would remain the portuguese for the grave"

End of this unschooled chapter

Fernando

.

[migueldiaz]

Originally Posted by fernando

... It seems as alfange is connected to Persian FAchar, or Urdu URchar, originated from the Arabic ARchar (Al khanjar); poping around through the Spano-Arab al-hangal ... pretended by others to be al-janyar (puñal?). If you go by the digestive description/definition, you fall into the bottomless well of the short, slightly curved wide blade sabres range which, in its widest interpretation, embraces the European falchion, fauchar, bracamarte, messer, storta, the Turc Kiliç, the Indian talwar, the Arab saif ... not to speak about their Spanish (Peninsular?) keen alfanjón, alfanjonazo and alfanjete; even the terciado (so much discussed in the kampilan thread) or the chafarote ... look at me, breathless ... the pieces you are looking for, Lorenz ...
End of this unschooled chapter

Fernando, wow that's a very beautiful sweeping panorama, the way you walked us through those swords! If that's what "unschooled" means, get me out of those learning institutions Thanks!

[Gonzalo G]

Mmmm, Fer...I don´t believe the arabs of the conquest used any curved sword, but very late on the 15th Century. This venetian weapon I believe is a sttorta, and the longsax is a similar weapon, but maybe all of them are called "alfanjes" by the spaniards, so the word continues being ambiguos, and does not designates a precise and specific weapon. Seems a good sword to figh on the sea, by the way. Miguel de Cervantes fought against the turks in the maritime battle of Lepanto, where he lost a hand.
Regards

Gonzalo

[Gonzalo G]

As for the traslations, this is my free version:

For the first image

LOOPS AND RINGS RAPIER
Toledan
End of the 16th Century

Hilt: Loops and rings, chiselled with great mastery, with a truncated cone pommel resting over a rounded base, and then over a ferrule. Cylindrical hilt, deeply grooved in a spiral, straight guard quillons and polygonal block. The loops are made with three wires, the central one continues as a knuckleguard. The posterior part of the loops are united with the rings, which extends to the end of the recasso. A very armonic and well made work.

Blade: Wide, diamond profile with a fuller in the first third. Double edged.

And the next:

LOOPS AND RINGS RAPIER
Iohannes de la Horta
Middle 16th Century

Hilt: Loops and ring, italian style, and a little asymmetric in it´s development. Note the presence of only one quillon curved toward the point of the sword, only one wire directed to form the knuckleguard and a big loop which goes from the recasso to the cross in a subtle curvature. There are three loops over the recasso joining at the cross where the knuckleguard begins. Very pointed block. Pommel almost cylindrical, but rounded in it´s superior portion. Faceted hilt completely covered with brided wire among two ferules in the form of a "turk head" knot. All the elements are chiselled and damasquinated.

Blade: Lenticular, double edged and fullered in the first third.

Inscription: Stamped on the recasso with an "A", from Iohannes de la Horta swordmaker.

Gonzalo

[fernando]

Hi Gonzalo

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

Mmmm, Fer...I don´t believe the arabs of the conquest used any curved sword, but very late on the 15th Century ...

I wonder if there is solid evidence of that, as i have been reading otherwise; as if all three sword types, straight, alfanje and scimitar have shown up at the reconquest period.
Not that all such sources can be considered reliable, but some serious guy wrote that:
... in the combats following the 711 Arabic invasion, Asturians and Leonese used their (straight) swords of Roman tradition, in contrast to Persians and Arabs that exhibited the recurved models of their country of origin.
In a context that:
... the type of swords used by the folks of the center and northern Peninsula, inherited from Roman civilization, of vertical disposition, short and solid, but lacking artistic attire, ended up being influenced by the aptitude and elegance of Muslim swords, at least in the upper parts (hilts...) by the hands of Mossarabs; this giving logic to specimens appeared by mid IX century, in Spain, Portugal and the Fench Midi, which development in European territory can not be denied.

Fernando

The pictures attached are not necessarily reliable.

.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by migueldiaz

Fernando, wow that's a very beautiful sweeping panorama, the way you walked us through those swords! If that's what "unschooled" means, get me out of those learning institutions Thanks!

Fernando is most modest, and by 'unschooled' simply, in my understanding, means not necessarily formally schooled in degree. In my personal estimation, often self education can exceed such categorized results....well illustrated by the knowledge he openly shares here!

All best regards,
Jim

[fernando]

Hi Gonzalo

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

... In the article about the tipologic study of spanish weapons, German Dueñaz Beraiz denies that alfanje and scimitar are the same thing, but he does not explains what a scimitar is ... According with Beraiz, the description of a scimitar in the way Covarrubias explains, corresponds with a shamshir, and this is the reason he does not accept Covarrubias description, because the scimitars were "more short" than a shamshir from his point of view ...

I browsed on this article. Do i see it differently, or have i read a different passage ?

"Relacionada con esta tenemos otra arma de origen árabe, como es la cimitarra. A pesar de que Covarrubias diga que es igual que el alfange, eso si remarcando la curva de su hoja, al decir que es una espada vuelta a manera de hoz (Covarrubias, op. Cit. 283 r). Esta tipología se corresponde a los shamsires turcos, que resultaban algo más largos que los alfanjes, con hojas más estrechas y curvadas."

Isn't it Beraiz, opposing Covarrubias, who defines that a scimitar, like a samshir, is larger than an alfanje, with narrower and more curved blades?
Or am i confusing things?
Fernando

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by fernando

Hi Gonzalo



I browsed on this article. Do i see it differently, or have i read a different passage ?

"Relacionada con esta tenemos otra arma de origen árabe, como es la cimitarra. A pesar de que Covarrubias diga que es igual que el alfange, eso si remarcando la curva de su hoja, al decir que es una espada vuelta a manera de hoz (Covarrubias, op. Cit. 283 r). Esta tipología se corresponde a los shamsires turcos, que resultaban algo más largos que los alfanjes, con hojas más estrechas y curvadas."

Isn't it Beraiz, opposing Covarrubias, who defines that a scimitar, like a samshir, is larger than an alfanje, with narrower and more curved blades?
Or am i confusing things?
Fernando

No Fernando, I am sorry, but It is just that I think you read wrongly the same passage. Let me first translate, to the benefit of the forumites:

‘In relation with this, we have another weapon of arab origin, which is the scimitar. Although Covarrubias says that the alfanje is the same that the scimitar, but more curved, when states that it is a sword bended as a sickle (Covarrubias, op. Cit. 283 r). But this typology is related with the turkish shamshirs, longer and heavier than the alfanjes, with blades more narrow and curved.’

OK, Fernando, based on this description, can you say Beraiz has defined or described the scimitar? I don’t think so. At the best, you can infer that the shamshirs are longer and heavier than the alfanjes, with blades more narrow and curved. In other words, Beraiz says that the alfanje and the scimitar are not the same weapons, and also enumerates some differences among the alfanjes and shamshirs. But it says nothing about the scimitar itself.

I call the attention to the point that even two spanish specialist in swords do not agree if alfanjes and scimitars are, or are not, the same weapon, and with the lack of trustable illustrations about this kind of swords. Also, the lack of records among available authentic swords existing to the present day, mentioning arab ‘scimitars’ and ‘alfanjes’. In my opinion, those terms were used vaguely and imprecisely to refer to other curved weapons from the Middle East and the near Orient, and there are not swords we can call today scimitars and alfanjes, but the european Renaissance weapons already mentioned. I believe it is not a mere coincidence nobody can show today any arab, turkish or persian authentic alfanje, but only references and illustrations of weapons made in Europe.

And, I’m sorry again, Fernando, but I personally find your source with insuficient credentials, with all due respect. You have to have knowledge of the swords, far more than the traditional descriptions you can find on old books and museographic references, so full of mistakes and gaps. Your quote from this person does not add much light on the subject of the scimitar (the subject of the present thread), but it does make me think about the nature of the author’s approach. First, I can tell you that there are many references in this forum from Jim McDougall and others, stating that the early islamic swords (the time of the arab conquest) were straight and not curved. But there are more specialists on the subject, whom I will enumerate latter as suggested readings, as I don’t like very much quoting out of context. First, we don’t know when and by whom curved swords were carried into Europe. It seems that the avars, who invaded Hungary, were the first ones. It is said that the saber of Charlemagne, according with some sources, comes from his wars against the avars. The oldest known saber from islamic procedence, was unearthed in Iran, and it seems to belong to a 9th Century turkish slave warrior. Latter, maybe carried by central asian turkish groups, this type of blade had more diffusion into actual Iran, Middle East and North Africa, but it came very late into Spain. Just take on account that Spain was the far-west islamic dominion with respect to Iran-Persia, and the curved sword had to travel in some way to the Iberian area. It seems that even early mamelukes or mamluks used straight swords. The arabs which invaded Europe used straight swords. The latter invasions from North Africa into actual Spain used straight swords. If you know the Gineta or Jineta sword, carried by the berber zenetes, you will know what I mean. The preserved swords from the late nazarid period, also were straight. The men el Cid fought to, used straight swords. This is the reason the Tizona, which is a straight sword, is been called as ‘andalusian’, meaning an arab weapon, independently if it is not from El Cid. Also, the Gineta swords illustrated in your post, are straight. We will not question in this moment why these swords are classified as ‘ginetas’ by some spanish scholars.

You have to take on account, also, that the words ‘saif’, ‘kiliç’, and ‘shamshir’ only designate a ‘sword’ of no specific form in their original languages, and that those swords also came with straight blades. In the case of the shamshir, it seems that still under the arab rule it has a straight blade, and it was until latter, before or after the mongol invasion, but probably not under the arab dominion over Persia, it took the curved form. This is a subject yet not clarified satisfactorily, but at least the curved shamshir seems to have not predominated under the arab rule. So, the great development of curved shamshir comes from a turkish or a mongol period, and not arab, as a result of central asian influences.

As from other parts of your quote, I find them very questionable. Of course, Roman and Arabs belonged to different cultural environments…and timelines…maybe the preislamic arabs or other semitic nomads (in the nabatean and the yemenite kingdoms, or the numids, for example) used roman style swords, or at least straight swords reminiscent of the roman. But I cannot characterize the mass of christian swords from the Reconquest as ‘roman’, though some of the spanish peoples could use some kind of short sword in the roman style. Most of the medieval swords in your illustration are germanic long swords (from diverse origins: visigothic, viking, saxon, frankish, etc.) And the germanic swords do were decorated, if in a different way than the arabic. I don’t think the islamic art influenced the romanic swords, but instead the germanic ones. The first sword from your illustration, looks like late roman, and not frank, but I can be completely mistaken. As I don´t have much knowledge of the frankish swords. In fact we don’t know to which degree romans decorated their swords, as we have but few examples, mostly in very bad shape, and maybe from common soldiers. Decoration was determined by the rank and richness of the sword owner, so many swords from common arab and berber soldiers were also ‘absent of artistic attires’. You have to take on account also the availability of decoration techniques on the arab empire and in the european kingdoms, which seem to be more primitive in their technologies. The technique of damanascening was unknown outside the arab area in the Iberian Peninsula for a long time.

And, what does it mean the statement: ‘submitted to Christian power the Persians and Arabs of the center and north of the Iberian peninsula’? I don´t know id I undertood well, but it seems that your author believes that there were persians and arabs alongside in the Iberian Peninsula…another questionable point, to say the less. And, finally, there were muslim units during the arab conquest which used the straight short sword blades, roman style.

To make a personal verification of the arab swords, please see:

‘Some issues in the studv of the pre-Islamic
weaponry of southeast Arabia’
by D. T. Potts, in Arabian archaeology
and epigraphy, Denmark, 1998

Early Islamic Arms and Armour, by David Nicolle,
Instituto de Estudios sobre Armas Antiguas, 1963

‘The Sword in Islam’, by Zaki Abd al R., in Studies in Honour of Prof. K. A. C. Creswell, El Cairo, 1965

‘Jihad and Islamic Arms and Armour’, by David Alexander, in Gladius, Vol. XXII, 2002

‘La Espada de Protocolo del Sultán Nazarí Muhammad V’, by Virgilio Martínez Enamorado, in Gladius, Vol. XXV, 2005

‘Las Armas en la Historia de la Reconquista’, by Ada Bruhn de Hoffmeyer, in Gladius, Vol Especial 1988

‘Swords and Sabers During Early Islamic Period, by David Alexander, in Gladius, Vol. XXI, 2001

‘Una Espada de Época Omeya del Siglo IX D.C., by Alberto Canto García, in Gladius XXI, 2001

El Cid and the Reconquista 1050 . 1492, by David Nicolle, Osprey Military (Collection Men-At-Arms Series, No. 200), 1996

The Moors - The Islamic West 7th - 15th Centuries A.D., by David Nicolle, Osprey Military (Collection Men-At-Arms Series, No. 348), 2001

Armies of the Muslim Conquest, by David Nicolle and Angus McBride (or is Jim McDougall?), Osprey Military (Collection Men-At-Arms Series, No. 255), 1993

Saladin and the Saracens, by the same authors, Osprey Military (Collection Men-At-Arms Series, No. 171), 1996

Also, you can search images in the web from the swords of the ayubids (the dynasty of Saladin in North Africa and part of the Middle East), the Gineta swords, the nasrid swords, and so on. They are real swords from the time period.

I want to bring here another reference to the scimitar from the article by Dueñas. On pages 10 and 11, he writtes: ‘One type of weapon, less known and fabricated in Spain on the 16th Century, was the terciado. According with Covarrubias (Covarrubias, op. Cit. pág. 85), it´s name was originated on the fact that the length of the blade was smaller than the third part of the marca. If we take on account that the marca was of five quarters of a vara, equivalent of 83 cm, the terciado should have a length of 50 cm approximately. Furthermore, he says that it was a short and wide sword , but does not mention if it was curved or straight, or if it had one or two edges. This widthness is confirmated in several texts from this time, like this:

The giant arosed the cane to Marcelino, but he tilted his body and the cane hitted the floor, and the cane jumped off the hand of the giant. Then he took a terciado, which was very wide and strong, and tried to hit Marcelino destroying part of his shield, but Marcelito hitted him back’.


‘Another possible synonym of this type of weapon is the machete. Which was defined in this time same as the terciado, who was not as long as the sword, nor as short as the puñal or the daga (Covarrubias, op, Cit. pag? 531r). It is possible that the only difference was that the machete, more than being a weapon, was a tool, a knife of great proportions useful in agriculture and cattle raising. From other references it can be deducted that the term terciado was used as a synonym of the expression scimitar. Maybe it was the term in Castilian to refer to this arab weapon.

He fell upon the weapons of a soldier,
Taking his quiver and a terciado.
Which now used over a less strong shoulder,
Of the wide scimitar he ornated the narrow band.
(Oña, 1596: 251)’

So, we find here an hypotheses: that the terciado and the scimitar could be the same weapon. Also, that the terciado and the machete could be the same weapon, being the only difference the working purposes of the machete. There is no specification to the form of the blade, if it was straight or curved. We have to take on account that the machetes were not only a working tool in those times, but also a weapon used in the 19th Century in place of the sword and the saber by the non mounted soldier and specialist of the spanish army, meaning all the infantry, artillery, grenadiers, engineers, musicians, etc., and their blades varied drastically along the time. So, we have to precise what kind of machetes Dueñas Beraiz is referring to, but the most common type of machete had a straight blade and a curved edge. So, it was not a curved type of sword or working tool. It is also possible that the terciado was the direct ancestor, or the same weapon than the espada ancha.
Regards

Gonzalo

PD: Fer, I apolgy for my delayed response, but I previously said in other thread, I have problems with internet connection. In the future, I will respond a little late, but I will respond.

[Gonzalo G]

Celtan, Manolin, sorry but I find your posts about this subject very boring, useless, off-topic, biased and not very constructive for all the froumites. Your spanish-centerd vision-compulsion is absurd and uninteresting. I will not waste my valuable time and the few moments I can get into internet answering a late pile of idiocies. But I will fight you any time you persist in dealing with subjects politically or ideologically biased into your fascist ideas and your self-cultural-centrism, and especially in off-topic areas forbidden to deal with on this forum. Please don´t bother to answer me on this matter. Neverthless, in other matters, you are a nice guy and I love you.
Kisses

Gonzalo

[Gonzalo G]

Jim McDougall, I couldn´t find my questioning to a previously statement you made, and I must make a public apology of my mistake. I found a source for your statement about arabs importing european blades into their dominions in Al-Andalus in actual Spain in the early stages of their domination there. I have not read previously that source, so it is my mistake to deny such big imports in the early history of muslim rule in that area. Why did you not mention it to me before, when I asked for? I wonder to which extent in time these imports were necessary.
Regards

Gonzalo

[celtan]

Gonzo,



If you’d rather lie in the perpetual dream of Aztlanic navel-ism , then do so. It’s your prerogative. But I will not allow you to preach your lies-of-convenience uncontested, specially if you try to do so at the expense of Spain or the US, whose Histories I’m relatively well versed in.



Otherwise, let’s keep to the subject of bladed weapons, and perhaps we can make it a productive arrangement after all.



Toots!



: )

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

Celtan, Manolin, sorry but I find your posts about this subject very boring, useless, off-topic, biased and not very constructive for all the froumites. Your spanish-centerd vision-compulsion is absurd and uninteresting. I will not waste my valuable time and the few moments I can get into internet answering a late pile of idiocies. But I will fight you any time you persist in dealing with subjects politically or ideologically biased into your fascist ideas and your self-cultural-centrism, and especially in off-topic areas forbidden to deal with on this forum. Please don´t bother to answer me on this matter. Neverthless, in other matters, you are a nice guy and I love you.
Kisses

Gonzalo

[fernando]

Hi Gonzalo,
Just a couple layman senseless loose notes ...

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

... Let me first translate, to the benefit of the forumites:
‘In relation with this, we have another weapon of arab origin, which is the scimitar. Although Covarrubias says that the alfanje is the same that the scimitar, but more curved, when states that it is a sword bended as a sickle (Covarrubias, op. Cit. 283 r). But this typology is related with the turkish shamshirs, longer and heavier than the alfanjes, with blades more narrow and curved.’

It's funny; i still don't interpreter it that way but, being you spanish speaking, i will not presume i am right and you are wrong. I even think there is a problem of punctuation in the text .

And, I’m sorry again, Fernando, but I personally find your source with insuficient credentials, with all due respect.

Maybe yes, maybe not. I wouldn't diminish him so quickly. I am only citing parts of the work, with my interpretation and translation limitations. Besides, every now and then he quotes people that are certainly within the subject, presupposing that he is not 'inventing' the whole thing; guys like Pompeo Gener, Cobn-Wiener, Raimundo Koechlin ... who ever they are .

Your quote from this person does not add much light on the subject of the scimitar (the subject of the present thread),

If i well remember, my post was an evolution on the probability of curved swords, scimitars or other, appearing in the peninsula, handled by Arabs (or Muslims) at such early stage, after being said (by you at least) that curved swords appeared a good couple centuries later.

If you know the Gineta or Jineta sword, carried by the berber zenetes, you will know what I mean. The preserved swords from the late nazarid period, also were straight. The men el Cid fought to, used straight swords. This is the reason the Tizona, which is a straight sword, is been called as ‘andalusian’, meaning an arab weapon, independently if it is not from El Cid. Also, the Gineta swords illustrated in your post, are straight. We will not question in this moment why these swords are classified as ‘ginetas’ by some spanish scholars.

I am aware that the gineta was produced in Granada by the XIII century and copied by the christians by the XV century in Toledo, and was later westernized; but this doesn't avoid peoples to use more than one type of sword in the same period of time, as frequently occurs ... right ?

But I cannot characterize the mass of christian swords from the Reconquest as ‘roman’, though some of the spanish peoples could use some kind of short sword in the roman style.

Maybe we are shortening time spans. The romanized sword like in figure 1 was on between the IX and mid X centuries. The reconquest went on for seven centuries;certainly things changed whilst it lasted. Figure 2 pretends to represent the sword used during XI, XII and XIII centuries; this was the model with the greatest credits. Certainly an European design, with pommels having the knights crests engraved which, besides heraldic representation, were used as seals to press on the wax of parchments.

Most of the medieval swords in your illustration are germanic long swords (from diverse origins: visigothic, viking, saxon, frankish, etc.)

Maybe 'most' is a strong term, but no wonder; swords in the peninsula alternated their influence from Perso-Arab, Mozarab and European ... in a random sequence and returns.

The first sword from your illustration, looks like late roman, and not frank, but I can be completely mistaken.

Naturally this is the illustration of the sword evoluted from that quoted of Roman tradition, used by the locals against the Arab invaders, appearing in the IX century with Mozarab influences. I guess the author uses the term frank in a different meanning than that of it having Frankish origins... sort of free, like in free style, or the like; he even puts frank sword between " ".

And, what does it mean the statement: ‘submitted to Christian power the Persians and Arabs of the center and north of the Iberian peninsula’? I don´t know id I undertood well, but it seems that your author believes that there were persians and arabs alongside in the Iberian Peninsula…another questionable point, to say the less.

The Arabs with whom Tarik invaded the Peninsula in 711 included Sirians, Egiptians, Persians and Berberes.

To make a personal verification of the arab swords, please see:

I already decided that i will soon order a couple Nicolle works.

I want to bring here another reference to the scimitar from the article by Dueñas. On pages 10 and 11, he writtes: ‘One type of weapon, less known and fabricated in Spain on the 16th Century, was the terciado. According with Covarrubias (Covarrubias, op. Cit. pág. 85), it´s name was originated on the fact that the length of the blade was smaller than the third part of the marca. If we take on account that the marca was of five quarters of a vara, equivalent of 83 cm, the terciado should have a length of 50 cm approximately. Furthermore, he says that it was a short and wide sword , but does not mention if it was curved or straight, or if it had one or two edges.

So it appears that the term terciado (terçado in portuguese) was (also) one of those atriibuted to various types of sword throught time.

So, we find here an hypotheses: that the terciado and the scimitar could be the same weapon.

At least the Portuguese chroniclers often mention the terçado as a weapon ( also?) used by the Moors.

In the future, I will respond a little late, but I will respond.

Take your time

Fernando

[Jim McDougall]

How disappointing. The subject of these swords, the history of Spain and the colonies in its empire ( I hope I worded that properly as I wouldnt want any of the combatants here to take offense), in what promised to be an extremely informative discussion, completely trashed by personality laden , barbed cattiness.
I've said it before....I wanted the discussions here clear of that kind of nonsense, and thought what I had noted was understood.

In order to spare any more suffering or embarassment for the rest of us, I think we'll have to wait to learn more about this subject another time, and I hope the parties here that are obviously most learned on this history will try to brush up on diplomacy. Its actually pretty easy....it it really necessary to be insulting to make a point? No, but it does take some skill and above average patience and understanding to take the time to craft the message.
I honestly expected more.

Thread regrettably closed.

Jim