Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. The term “gineta,” as well as the Spanish “jinete” probably derive from the Moroccan Berber tribe of the cenete (Zanata), which came to the Iberian Peninsula in the thirteenth century, although the word does not appear in Spanish until the fourteenth century (Maíllo Salgado 106–07). 2. Noel Fallows (297–98), looking at the editorial history of the treatises on the gineta, concludes that, while they were at first popular in Andalusia, they became accepted all over the Iberian Peninsula only by 1600. The gineta and the game of canes were also taken to America as part of the colonizers' culture (Harris 122–69; Gimeno Gómez 470–74). But they did not function merely as indicators of the colonizers’ status. In 1582, the Aymara principals of Charcas sent a letter to Philip II asking for recognition of their noble status and claiming that participation in the game of canes be one of their signs of integration as Spanish subjects (Murra xviii). 3. Neither the Valencians nor the Castilians held consistent opinions towards their respective Moorish legacies. Though Moorishness was embraced by many Valencian aristocrats, it was also contested by others, like Rafael Martí de Viciana, who argued in 1574 that the Castilian language was full of Arabic words while Valencian was completely free of them (5v–6r). Perceptions of Moorish influence were highly relational and to some extent purely rhetorical. 4. The location of the juego de cañas is vague in the poem, somewhere between the Algarbe and Andalucia, but he is probably referring to the English assault on Cadiz in 1596 when he mentions the resistance to Protestants (132v). 5. Following medieval and early modern sources, modern scholars assume that the game of canes was taken from the Moors who came to Spain, although the cultural archeology has not been clearly established. For a comprehensive overview of medieval sources dealing with the introduction of the gineta in the Iberian Peninsula, see Soler del Campo (158–71). On the other hand, as Fallows points out, the gineta riding style was reinvented in sixteenth-century Spain (275). 6. For a general account of Spanish colonization of North Africa, see García Arenal and Bunes Ibarra. For the ideological justifications, see Bunes Ibarra (265–331). 7. While keeping the ambivalent meaning of “Moorish” is useful for the discussion throughout this article, some nuance is needed here. The object of Philip II's prohibition were Morisco cultural practices, which is not necessarily the same as North African cultural practices or even the cultural practices (real or imaginary) of medieval Iberian Moors. 8. For the sartorial instructions in the libros de gineta, see also Puddu (823–24n35). 9. The decree, signed by Philip II in November 17, 1566, mandated that: “ninguno de los dichos nuevamente convertidos del reino de Granada, ni descendientes dellos, no puedan hacer, ni cortar de nuevo almalafas, ni marlotas, ni otras calzas, ni vestidos de las que usaban, i traian en tiempo de Moros” (códigos 11: 240). 10. The play El prado de Valencia was only published after Tárrega's death in 1602, first in Valencia in 1608 and later in Barcelona in 1609 (Canet Vallés 65–66). 11. See Requena Amoraga and García Martínez. 12. A similar argument is made by Fallows (292–309), for whom the alleged military efficacy of the gineta was only a market strategy. 13. The competition between local production and imports from North Africa is also acknowledged in Bernardo de Vargas Machuca's Exercicios de la gineta (1600), which advises against the use of “estribos berberiscos” (Sanz Egaña 154), recommending instead those made in Córdoba or even better Ávila. But at the same time, he praises the borceguís from Barbary (Sanz Egaña 161), noting that they no longer seem to be in use. 14. The purchase of these kinds of Moorish war garments from Islamic lands was common at least from the beginning in the fifteenth century, when the Castilians traded with the Nasrid kingdom of Granada in order to arm their own Moorish troops (Echevarría Arsuaga 116–17). 15. For the arrival of the Moriscos in Oran, see Alonso Acero (282–318). 16. Jaime Bleda (1007), who also recounts this episode in his Corónica de los moros de España (1618), is careful to omit this joint game of canes. 17. Christian Mediterranean navies disguised themselves as Turks as a recurrent strategy, as evidenced in the account of his exploits by Alonso de Contreras. 18. See Clamurro (66), Smith (49), Johnson (141–42), and Fuchs (Passing 73–75), just to mention the most telling analyses, all of which point to the cultural influence of the Ottoman Empire, even if it was considered a rival.
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Jan 1, 2024
Fathi, S 
Open Access