Toledo Rapier Info and Toledo markings
 

Hello,
Got this rapier with the long, slender blade inscribed on both sides of the fuller "TOLEDO XX HEINRICH XX BRACHO."
I didn't manage to find any additional information about such a swordsmith so any opinions pertaining its origin, age and maker are very welcomed!

Nice sword.
A bit of a problem though ... a most usual one.
The name Heinrich is German and so not consistent with Toledo. However Bracho may be Spanish ... although not known as a Toledo sword smith, i would say.
Could this be a Solingen blade ? :o

Yes, Heinrich is a Germanic name, but BRACHO is a typical Spanish surname... just to add more to the mystery. :shrug:

Brach is a famous sword maker family from Solingen from the 16th and 17th centuries.

Very interesting! Then maybe BRACHO is the "spanicized" version of the name, to justify the "Toledo" inscription.

Thank you very much!

Excellent!

Based on your feedback I ran a search and found out in

"Historische Waffen und Kostueme, Band 1: Waffensammlung Dreger" by De Gruyter a reference to a HEINRICH BRACH of Solingen, active between 1661-1725.

I guess this might be my guy.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

PS: Fernando, your intuition was right!
:) :) :)

Precisely; to attract Spanish clientele ;).
But it takes Jasper to get these things clear :cool:.

His intuitions are nearly invariably right!!!! Actually Fernando knows 'a thing or two' about cuphilts!!! " :)
This example reminded me of Heinrich Koll, aka Enrique Koll or Coll, who was a Solingen swordsmith who indeed did go to Toledo to work. There were a number of others as well.

very good! btw your rapier hilt is indeed Spanish. Blade can be of Solingen manufacture or as it says Toledo. some Solingen sword smiths went to Spain.
I believe Johannes Brach did this around 1625 ! maybe his father, I have to check this later because my books are stored for the moment.

best,
Jasper

LS,

The story goes that two rapiers as a pair signed Johannes Brach and En Toledo were in the collection of Czar Alexander III
Sword makers used the name Brach to ad the value of swords for the Spanish market.
A very nice sword indeed , I like the model, nice old patina and no doubt all parts are original and belong together

kind regards

Ulfberth

Then i feel compelled to say that you know quite a few things beyond ;) .

Ah Master Coll; apparently this one also managed to introduce his 'trade mark' in Portugal.

Now that's really something!

So I may have a Spanish rapier ...
with a blade made in Toledo ...
by German swordsmith ...
from a famous Solingen swordsmiths' family...
who may have travelled to Toledo to perfect his art...
if I got it right.

Wow! Quite a story!
I find fascinating the idea of a swordsmith travelling all the way from Solingen to Toledo, just to learn new secrets and perfect his skill.

Thank you!

:)

PS: Any way the blade is surprinsingly strong and elastic for its age and I believe it is complete to the tip. Also all fittings share the same patina, consistent with a 17th century sword and are stronly bound together. So I suspect the sword is pretty much in its original condition.

Maybe not for learning but for trying to make a few extra pesetas with a better paid job. I guess Solingen smiths had nothing new to learn in Toledo, but the Spaniards were larger consumers, due to period expansion :o.

This is an interesting point, as Solingen was also a well established centre of excellence in swords making.

But then why not simply make the blades in Solingen and market them in Spain, as it is the case with many Spanish rapiers bearing Solingen made blades?!

However, we may stir now a debate whether Heinrich Brach traveled to Spain to perfect his skill or to boost his sales... while he might have traveled to Spain because he just wanted a sunny holiday and was fed up with German weather.
:)

SURPRISE
 

As I was trying to compare the signature on my sword with the one in the photo supplied by Jasper, while examining the blade under 10x magnification, I made a stunning discovery:

On one side the signature reads:

TOLEDO XX HEINRICH XX BRACHO XX

on the other side

TOLEDO XX HEINRICH XX BRACH XX

In both inscriptions the size of the letters decreases towards the tip, as the fuller gets narrower, exactly like in the photo supplied by Jasper.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR HELP!

reputation of Solingen vs Toledo
 

Hi, Fernando
Are you familiar with the writings of the late Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer? The other day I was revisiting her article "From Medieval Sword to Renaissance Rapier" in ART, ARMS, AND ARMOUR: AN INTERNATIONAL ANTHOLOGY Vol. 1 (ed. Robt Held, 1979), p 60 contains the following quote which is germane to the current discussion:
"In the succeeding centuries [after 1500] Solingen turned out blades that satisfied the requirements of both Latin and Germanic buyers, and in time became the leading manufacturing center for sheer quantity -- but the Spanish manufacturies in Toledo and Valencia were superior for quality... Probably no centre surpassed Toledo for quality. Both Toledo and Milanese products were extensively imitated by Solingen."

Interesting to note also that the gun barrel makers of Spain, especially those in Eibar and its vicinity, set the standard for quality in Europe during the 16th-17th cent., and their products as well as the best English barrels of the following century were often imitated by German makers (see James D. Lavin, A HISTORY OF SPANISH FIREARMS), though not necessarily with success (see Robt. Held, THE AGE OF FIREARMS, for a charming early-19th cent. American editorial on the subject).

Now you caught me, Philip :o
I confess i do not have Hoffmeyer’s work. I took it that these arguments are more based in the offer and demand phenomena, resulting from economic conveniences and in the most, to mystics applied to each case and not in factual scientific judgement. You know, Toledo with its steel brought from Mondragon (País Vasco), the secret tempering recipes, the river Tejo waters and all that. Like Larrañaga and Azpiazu, each one pulls the ember to his sardine.

But i happen to have Lavin's book. Although i only consult it to check on a determined smith or a gun example, i have now actually read a number of pages; as many as the cats allowed me to, with their everlasting interfering curiosity, jumping over to the book while i read it. What i have learnt so far is that the Germans were not that bad; reason why Carlos V and Prince Filipe had acquired a number of arquebuses with the wheel-lock system to furnish the Royal gunsmiths patterns for their manufacture in Spain. That the same Carlos V brought to Spain the famous Marquarts, considered the best he found in Aubsburg, then considered the center of firearms in Europe, to work for him and later Kings. And so it seems as these Marquarts became the local stars, for the King ordered them to come to court (then Toledo) as being two Master Armorers, who were doubtless the two finest in that Empire.
On the other hand, naturally also Portuguese smiths, sometimes quoted by Lavin, would have a say in this subject; but the country been obscured by Spanish Filipes domination during 1580-1640 and the very little material written in this area makes us think that only a residual number of them existed. I am lucky to have a work done by an expert in these things, Sousa Viterbo called A ARMARIA EM PORTUGAL (1907), where he lists hundreds (hundreds) of smiths, makers of armor, swords, crossbows and firearms, of which a master Pero Vasques is recorded to have made the first example in 1461. It is indeed a precious and comprehensive work, where he lets us know not only the smith’s specialities but also the date of their Royal letters of privilege (licenses) and often their production activities, personal events, problems with justice and all.

-

Philip, it is fantastic to have you writing here again!!! Your entries always add profound dimension to these discussions :)
For example, while I do have the work by Ms Hoffmeyer, I had always pretty much subscribed to the perspective noted by Fernando, and actually did not realize that Toledo remained a most viable center in these times.

I suppose I should have realized that with these Solingen sword smiths who had gone to Toledo in these times to comingle with the smiths there, and taking Spanish versions of their own names (Enrique Coll/ Heinrich Koll) that this might be the case.

I thank you very much for pointing out this essential and important passage, which definitely puts these centers operating concurrently in the proper perspective.

Fernando, I can totally relate to your cat dilemma! :) I used to have two who inevitably sprawled across the pages of books and notes I was working on as if I had put them there for that purpose. It always reminded me of Ernest Hemingway, who was constantly surrounded by his houseful of cats.
Interestingly, a man who was keenly fascinated by Spain and the Iberian Peninsula.

Fernando's mention of the Rio Tejo brings to mind the ancient Romans, who highly valued the steel made at Toledo. Jim, you probably recall the influence of Hispania on the development of the gladius as well -- reaching back to my grad-school readings, I remember that antiquarians classify two styles of the Roman shortsword, the so-called Spanish and Mainz patterns, distinguished primarily by their blade profiles. Perhaps the former was inspired by Celtiberian prototypes?

At any rate, Roman writers seem to have had high praise for Spanish steel for its superb temper. Contrasted with observations about the long swords of the Gauls, many of which were of softer metal which bent easily.

While my classical history is more than rusty!!! it is of course well known that Toledo from the earliest times was well reputed for its fine steel. It does seem as Philip notes, that the Roman gladius was adopted in form from the double edged swords of the Celtiberians, which had evolved from the swords of the Hallstadt culture.
I cannot say I know a great deal on the gladius itself or the various forms, as Philip notes, the Mainz and others, but it seems certain that the metal working techniques were enormously benefitted by the character of the ore resources.
With the advent of Muslim rule in Spain in the 8th century, and the many Damascus smiths who were fleeing Syria into Spain, the steel forging skills excelled.

It seems like in the 16th century the moving of the royal court from Toledo to Madrid had a detrimental effect on the industry, and by the latter 17th century the craft was virtually demolished. With the dissolution of the guilds there had been efforts to have foreign makers augment the faltering industry. In Solingen, they were having their own difficulties after the devastating Thirty Years war, and I think that this, as well as the need for smiths in Toledo, may have been the reason for numbers of German smiths actually going to Toledo.
Still, the makers in Solingen were using spurious signatures and marks playing on the well established reputation of Toledo.

While Valencia was certainly a noted source for blades contemporary to Toledo, in fact some references consider them superior , but the production there was much smaller in scale. It does seem worthy of note that when King Carlos III decided to try to revive the industry in 1760, the only place he could find a master craftsman with a few others was in Valencia. By 1780 the royal manufactory was engaged and in Toledos outskirts, but did not reach the former glories of its heritage.

Still, the sound of 'Toledo blade' certainly has that fantastic ring to it!!!:)

spurious markings
 

Jim,
Musicians and artists have a well-known reputation for "cribbing" their competitors' and predecessors' ideas, and the blade-making centers of Europe were up to the same shtik as well. As Solingen surpassed Passau in output at the beginning of the 16th cent., its workshops imitated the latter's renowned running-wolf mark in order to cash in on its sterling reputation (I've seen the wolf on blades mounted up as far afield as India and China). In the 19th cent., swordsmiths in the Caucasus were putting the same wolf on their blades; you can see some examples of the originals and the knockoffs in E. Astvatsaturyan, ORUZHIYE NARODOV KAVKAZA (armament of the Caucasian peoples), St Petersburg 2004, fig. 33, p 53. Some of them are pretty true-to-form, but the truly humorous ones display a good deal of artistic license: one of them is more a kangaroo rat or mutant gerbil than anything remotely lupine.

Pp 56-57 of the same book show comparisons of original European blade motifs (the familiar religious figures, hussars on rearing horses, crosses, and Latin inscriptions) and the copies seen on blades forged in the Caucasus. The Muslim artisans did a very credible job depicting subjects like the Virgin Mary, and the Hungarian royal arms, but their attempts at copying Latin text were even clumsier than those of the typical illiterate workman in Western countries -- letters reversed, oddly spaced, or transposed. Sometimes the Caucasians simply gave up trying to imitate the florid cursive German hand, and stuck an Arabic inscription inside the same baroque scrollwork cartouche seen on a typical blade from Germany.

Perhaps one should not reject the idea that, sometimes, blades (or whatever) produced by those who forgered 'trade marks' were so good as those they steal the ID from, but only not so appealing in the market :o .

Ah, the famous Gladius adopted by the Romans (Hannibal …) who named it as Hispaniensis, as they used to call the whole Iberian Peninsula; Spain was yet to be born and they didn’t like to remember Lusitania headhache.
Most probably inspired in the Falcata, another mythic sword that equipped Viriato and his Lusitanians in the guerilla warfare that terrorized the Roman generals one after the other. History (legend…) tells that these swords had a rather accurate metallurgic process, with an uncommon resistance and flexibility for the period; that their steel was buried under the ground for three years to corrode the weak parts of the metal.
Later in the middle ages Damascus steel appeared as competitor to that of Toledo; said to be famous for its metal-work technique, while that of Toledo was based on a very high quality alloy. But then scholars register that the best Toledo raw material was brought from Mondragon. Was it that its primary forging technique was the first value and the tempering of the sword was an added asset ?
What was in fact that took the Romans to bring along the Gladius … its exceptional design for close quarter combat … or its steel temper… or both ?

I couldn't resist uploading pictures of a few fascinating Iberian falcatas, dated 5th to 2nd. centuries B.C. sold from the Axel Guttman collection at Hermann Historica in 2003.
Note that item #064 has its blade intentionally bent (deceased ritual remnants ?), a detail that, for my ignorant knowledge, contradicts the exceptional temper they were said to have.

.

Hello Fernando,
While I am no specialist, I assume the Iberian Falcatas in your photos were of rather low carbon content steel, and while they may have displayed exceptional resilience due to their exceptional tempering, this may have been only exceptional for their period and compared to their Roman counterparts, but may be quite far away from our unerstanding based on modern standards.

Second, even some modern swords can be bent like this as elasticity works only up to a point and then, contingent on the steel composition and micro-structure, either plastic deformation or rupture follows.

Precisely what i want to get at; things may become mythic and legendary, but it helps a lot to contextualize them for a better judgement ;).

.

Philip,
Thank you so much for the nicely detailed response to my post, and it is truly rewarding to revisit some of this early history of the sword, something we don't often get to discuss as we examine much more recent weapons.
Very well noted on the character of these markings, in particular that of the famed 'running wolf' of Passau, which seems to have evolved around latter 13th century but of course dates are always debated.

As you note, the marking was taken up by Solingen smiths as they were advancing their production and usurping the business of Passau, among other centers, and applying spurious adaptions of their marks.

The almost whimsical interpretation of these chiseled 'wolf' marks is noted by Ewart Oakeshott in his most venerable "Archaeology of Weapons" (NY 1960 pp222-23), where he comments, "...a mark easily mistaken for the wolf of Passau is a unicorn since both wolf and unicorn only very summarily sketched with a few inlaid strokes, it needs the eye of faith to distinguish an animal at all".

It does seem that the design or stylization was dynamically varied depending on the skill or other as they were applied in various shops by various workers.

There was a most interesting parallel in Toledo, where the famed maker Julian del Rey, c.1470 became the official maker to Ferdinand II of Aragon. As the mark of quality on his blades, he adopted the small dog (perrillo), which was soon taken to represent a fox. Thus any sword with a good blade in many circles was referred to as a 'fox'.
"..thou diest on point of fox"
Shakespeare, Henry V; Act IV; scene 4
I cannot help but wonder if possibly the known use of the 'running wolf' in Germany may have had a degree of influence in his choice of symbol.
I have often wondered if the famed sword 'Lobera' might have obliquely referred to a Solingen blade in its given 'name', referring to wolves.

Also, I am wondering if the 'perrillo' or 'fox' mark applied by Julian del Rey is seen 'Arab' swords as stated by Richard Cohen ("By the Sword", 2002, p.114). Actually I have not seen this mark on examples, and wonder if indeed this became widely used on Arab or other Islamic swords as suggested by Cohen.

Thank you for the informative notes on the Caucasian use of the wolf mark used there on the Chechen blades (said to be termed there 'ters maymal') as noted by Ms. Astvatsaturyan in her outstanding book. It does seem ironic of course that the Muslim artisans faced difficulties copying the already somewhat debased markings and inscriptions from the European examples, which indeed were often already misspelled as spurious copies of others.
The tracking and comparisons of these markings etc really does present fascinating investigative opportunities.

canine connections
 

Jim,
Thanks for some very interesting points. There could well be something to the suggested connection between all this lupine / canine / vulpine imagery that you cite. The Passau wolf symbol is so stylized, and is often depicted with fairly short legs and extremely pointed snout that the result can be said to resemble a fox.

Re Julian del Rey and his "dog". As Hoffmeyer and other writers point out, he was a Moor who originally practiced his craft for the Nasrid Dynasty at Granada. After the conquest of 1492 and the expulsion of Muslims, he took Catholic baptism and went to work for the court of Ferd and Izzie in Toledo. Hoffmeyer reports in her article "From Medieval Sword to Renaissance Rapier" that his decision was the result of a discovered love of the Christian faith, but there may be other motives. At the least, if he wished to remain in Spain (and get on a royal payroll to boot), becoming a Catholic was pretty much expected.

In Islam, dogs are almost as maligned as are swine. New converts to Christianity in Spain, and later Portugal, were typically mistrusted by the "old Christians" and had to be ready to prove their attachment to the new faith (the fires of the Inquisition, which began in the 15th cent. in Spain, were a strong incentive). Thus, many former Muslims and Jews went out of their way to repudiate the quotidian, outward practices and taboos of the old religion. So they avoided indulging in excessive washing and bathing, and took up eating all manner of "treyf" -- the forbidden foods like pork, blood, and shellfish. (note that Portuguese cuisine is one of the few that have so many dishes combining pork and non-kosher seafood). The term "marrano" was applied to these new converts because so many carried a piece of ham in their pockets, as proof that their new identity was genuine. So Julian's decision to use a dog as a trademark can be seen in this light.

The Perrillo Mystery
 

Philip, thank you again for this interesting view on this subject. It seems sometimes that we continue to learn more on these matters the more we review them.
In "The History of Chivalry" by Charles Mills (1826), the excellence of the sword makers of Toledo is discussed with Julian del Rey noted , and that his weapons had peculiar markings; el perrillo (a little dog); el morillo (a moors head) and la loba (a wolf).

In "Don Quixote" , Cervantes refers to swords made by Julian del Rey as being short and broad in the blade which were called 'little dog swords'.

J.J. Rodriguez Lorente in " The Perrillo Mark of the Spanish Swordsmith Julian del Rey" (Gladius III, 1964, pp.97-98), notes that the smith seems to have used the canine mark selectively on certain types of sword.
These seem of course to have been the 'jineta' type swords, but that on 16th century rapiers the marks seem to have been coupled with others, as if signifying various meanings.
The perrillo seems copied later in Germany, but here it becomes confusing, at which point did the perrillo end and the 'Passau' wolf begin?

Lorente notes in his article that the figure was probably intended to be a wolf but that it was likely mockingly referred to as a 'little doggy'.

The sword of Ferdinand III, (G21 Calvert) once regarded as the 'Colada of El Cid, is now believed to be the 'Lobera' sword of this King of Castile and Leon (known as St Ferdinand). Since this was 1201-1252, it does seem to pre date the known period of the 'wolf' used as a symbol or mark on blades.
This would also preclude my thoughts of a possible reference to the Passau wolf and blades from there, and seemingly before the wolf/little dog as well.

Still, the connections between the canine marks used in Spain, and those which evolved in Germany in Passau and later Solingen are compelling.

Hi Philip,
Your mentioning the dog as an impure animal for the Islam world is a very interesting start for the posing of different theories about Julian del Rey origins.
According to Maindron and Babelon he would never use the dog mark 'even' after being christianized. But a harder puzzle comes from a document issued in Zaragoza in 1549 referring a familiar conflict, between Julian del Rey, his father Miguel del Rey 'mayor' and his brother Miguel del Rey 'menor', all three sword smiths. This contradicts the assumption that Julian was patronized by Fernando el Católico. The said conflict was about the right to use the mark. Julian's brother, Miguel, demanded to share with him the use the mark, in which he was supported by their father. But Julian refused such right as he was the one to have inherited with father's will and so was the first one that started using it. A vital issue was that, in any case, the mark could not be used by both, as the smiths guild had a norm that the mark used by one smith could not be used by another. It is not know that the popularity of the mark was result of Julian's father ability or he (Julian) who raised its importance.
But mind you, the mark so much disputed was not the 'perrillo' but a cross, of small size in estocs and larger in swords, with 'coloured metal', which would mean filled with copper, as used in the period. This is not the only source that mentions than Julian used 'various' marks, a habit also adopted by his brother, although in 'less quantity'.
One version of such cross atributed to Julian can be seen in a sword in the Musée de l'Armée in Paris.
But of course the theme of the 'perrillo' mark is no doubt the one that made more ink run about, notwithstanding the doubts remaining about its zoomorphic figure, where even a lion is suggested to be the intended mark; this judjing by the hipothesis that Palomar made a wrong interpretation of the beast.
All the above is based in an article written by Germán Dueñas Beraiz, called new data on Julian del Rey and his person... which i bet you all know about it :o

.