How to id a European kaskara blade?

Mefidk · 3rd January 2012, 03:10 PM

No your not going blind, it is really difficult to see, bad picture.

The fuller also has me confused - it is poorly done, and it actually extends into the ricasso which looks to have been all but ground away leaving only very faint marks on both sides of the blade. Not knowing enough about trade blades I wonder if any came without a fuller and possibly some enterprising bladesmith corrected the 'mistake'? That would explain the incongruity between blade quality and the messy fuller.
I will try to replace the picture with one using incident light to bring it out the ricasso marks - then again I might be wishfully seeing things that turn out to be trickily placed horizontal scratches

Iain · 3rd January 2012, 03:22 PM

Looking forward to the better picture, but I think I see it now, was looking in the wrong area.

Looking again I can clearly see the thick, squared off edge and were it slopes and lookes like it has been ground down. Unless I am going blind

I'm pretty sure I see little squared off corners on the top and bottom surface of the blade there, right on the edge.

Mefidk · 3rd January 2012, 03:47 PM

Managed a better picture - but now looking at it blown up like this I think I'm leading you up the garden path. No idea what this is but it looks like incisions rather than a shoulder

Iain · 3rd January 2012, 03:59 PM

May as well post it for posterity. I am more than ready to admit I am probably seeing things that aren't there.

Mefidk · 4th January 2012, 03:54 PM

Iain - I replaced the picture in the post above.

I guess we can agree that we don't have a ricasso here, but my original question is still valid. If we do find a ricasso on one of these can we conclude it is European?

Jim McDougall · 4th January 2012, 07:18 PM

Hi Iain and Chris,
It looks like we are the discussion panel as other entries havent come in, and I think we've shown pretty much the evidence at hand, so we are at the fun part..deductive reasoning and observations

arms forensics.

The real conundrum here is the close similarity on these two blades and the enigmatic marking which despite being documented in Briggs, has little other recorded documentation as to its origins or possible meanings. The patinated blade has characteristics suggesting it is a genuinely old blade with corrosive areas and pitting reflecting considerable age, there even seems to be some of the blade scale mindful of the goethite on very old iron.

As we have seen from the examples RDG posted some time ago, there are provenanced examples stated to be from campaigns c.1882 one of which has this distinct type elliptical fuller.

We have considered that trade blades were likely coming in through areas in Tunis around this time as they had been for quite some time. These regions as well as into Algerian regions received many of these blades into the Berber tribes and the Tuareg who were in control of many of the trade routes. Here I would note that the Tuareg chiefs having blades with the marking anomaly as shown in Briggs (op.cit.) were from some of these regions, the swords with these blades captured in 1916-17. It is noted the mark had been taken from other similar as early as 1878.

The two blades Chris has have remarkably distinctive similarities, however they also have subtle differences returning us to the question..are these European trade blades? We have agreed that these are most probably from much earlier period than I had originally assumed, and are likely of the early 20th century. We know some trade blades likely were entering into the Sudanese regions in Darfur during this time despite political obstacles with the Anglo-Egyptian condominium. There were also large numbers of trade blades circulating in the networks which had already likely been there for several generations.

We have assumed that Solingen was likely producing some 'blanks' for trade export into some colonial regions, considering the political climate just prior to WWI, it seems reasonable that production may have been stepped up to provide erstaz supplies for potential upheaval in North African regions. As I have mentioned, the Senussi Brotherhood in Libyan, Algerian and Darfur regions were aligning with Ottoman factions to ally with Germany against the British and French occupying the Condominium of Egypt and Sudan.

Perhaps the ricasso type blade entered the regions prior to this presumed upward shift in these kinds of blades going to Africa, and the other type without ricasso from the later production had the same character in the blade profile and elliptical fuller. Perhaps it is possible that the blades without ricasso were native copies of the form which had been coming into these areas since the 1880s.

With these considerations it would seem that the blade with ricasso, obviously refurbished was from the 1880s period, and the marking was added at this later time to carry forth whatever traditional symbolism this mark may allude to. As we have established, it was used as late as mid 20th century as seen on the sword awarded to the political figure in Sudan in 1961.
The marking is not apparant on other Tuareg examples in the wider regions of thier habitat areas, though is seen as early as 1878 presumably. It does not seem to be an interpretation of the European marks mentioned (Kull nor the Mumm 'die puppe') so it likely has independant origin. It does not seem to be an astral or cosmological symbol alluding to the Mahdi in my opinion, but the geometric character seems closely followed in apparantly copied examples.

The mark on the refurbished sword seems more in line with the Briggs markings, while the example on the heavily patinated example seems more degenerative or stylized...which is most curious as it would suggest it was applied at quite early date. Perhaps by the 1916 period some examples were notably different or as always, different application by different artisans.
But then there is a curiously telling point.....the pair of 'jots' in the upper part of the sphere......these seem to be artistically oriented adds which of course are in shaded or dimension adding lines in drawn images. Why the subtle geometric variation such as separated 'lines' on the block type part of the mark..yet these 'shadings' or otherwise unessential jots are added faithfully?

Well, those are my ramblings in looking over our discussed material.

All the best,
Jim

Iain · 4th January 2012, 10:41 PM

Hi Jim and Chris,

Time to add some more of my own ramblings then.

Mainly I want to touch on an important point Jim raises regarding export blade blanks. One of the main issues I have trying to research and determine what is a trade blade boils down to the fact that some blades are nicely marked for us. Does this mean unmarked blades were not produced for the African market in Solingen? We really have little to go on but the old fall back of how a particular sword "feels". I have wondered if there are any records that could be checked on product and export. If a German member wants to get involved to help out please contact me.

In terms of a ricasso being necessary to term a blade European, I don't think so. I have seen a few of the Kull 1847 style pattern and none have ricassos, also blades from Clauberg without like this one: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10557

Incidentally that Clauberg blade has the same style of fuller and from rereading the thread should at least predate 1872...

Cheers,

Iain

3rd January 2012, 03:10 PM	#1
Mefidk Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Denmark Posts: 157	No your not going blind, it is really difficult to see, bad picture. The fuller also has me confused - it is poorly done, and it actually extends into the ricasso which looks to have been all but ground away leaving only very faint marks on both sides of the blade. Not knowing enough about trade blades I wonder if any came without a fuller and possibly some enterprising bladesmith corrected the 'mistake'? That would explain the incongruity between blade quality and the messy fuller. I will try to replace the picture with one using incident light to bring it out the ricasso marks - then again I might be wishfully seeing things that turn out to be trickily placed horizontal scratches

3rd January 2012, 03:22 PM	#2
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,708	Looking forward to the better picture, but I think I see it now, was looking in the wrong area. Looking again I can clearly see the thick, squared off edge and were it slopes and lookes like it has been ground down. Unless I am going blind I'm pretty sure I see little squared off corners on the top and bottom surface of the blade there, right on the edge.

3rd January 2012, 03:47 PM	#3
Mefidk Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Denmark Posts: 157	Managed a better picture - but now looking at it blown up like this I think I'm leading you up the garden path. No idea what this is but it looks like incisions rather than a shoulder

3rd January 2012, 03:59 PM	#4
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,708	May as well post it for posterity. I am more than ready to admit I am probably seeing things that aren't there.

4th January 2012, 03:54 PM	#5
Mefidk Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Denmark Posts: 157	Iain - I replaced the picture in the post above. I guess we can agree that we don't have a ricasso here, but my original question is still valid. If we do find a ricasso on one of these can we conclude it is European?

4th January 2012, 07:18 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,190	Hi Iain and Chris, It looks like we are the discussion panel as other entries havent come in, and I think we've shown pretty much the evidence at hand, so we are at the fun part..deductive reasoning and observations arms forensics. The real conundrum here is the close similarity on these two blades and the enigmatic marking which despite being documented in Briggs, has little other recorded documentation as to its origins or possible meanings. The patinated blade has characteristics suggesting it is a genuinely old blade with corrosive areas and pitting reflecting considerable age, there even seems to be some of the blade scale mindful of the goethite on very old iron. As we have seen from the examples RDG posted some time ago, there are provenanced examples stated to be from campaigns c.1882 one of which has this distinct type elliptical fuller. We have considered that trade blades were likely coming in through areas in Tunis around this time as they had been for quite some time. These regions as well as into Algerian regions received many of these blades into the Berber tribes and the Tuareg who were in control of many of the trade routes. Here I would note that the Tuareg chiefs having blades with the marking anomaly as shown in Briggs (op.cit.) were from some of these regions, the swords with these blades captured in 1916-17. It is noted the mark had been taken from other similar as early as 1878. The two blades Chris has have remarkably distinctive similarities, however they also have subtle differences returning us to the question..are these European trade blades? We have agreed that these are most probably from much earlier period than I had originally assumed, and are likely of the early 20th century. We know some trade blades likely were entering into the Sudanese regions in Darfur during this time despite political obstacles with the Anglo-Egyptian condominium. There were also large numbers of trade blades circulating in the networks which had already likely been there for several generations. We have assumed that Solingen was likely producing some 'blanks' for trade export into some colonial regions, considering the political climate just prior to WWI, it seems reasonable that production may have been stepped up to provide erstaz supplies for potential upheaval in North African regions. As I have mentioned, the Senussi Brotherhood in Libyan, Algerian and Darfur regions were aligning with Ottoman factions to ally with Germany against the British and French occupying the Condominium of Egypt and Sudan. Perhaps the ricasso type blade entered the regions prior to this presumed upward shift in these kinds of blades going to Africa, and the other type without ricasso from the later production had the same character in the blade profile and elliptical fuller. Perhaps it is possible that the blades without ricasso were native copies of the form which had been coming into these areas since the 1880s. With these considerations it would seem that the blade with ricasso, obviously refurbished was from the 1880s period, and the marking was added at this later time to carry forth whatever traditional symbolism this mark may allude to. As we have established, it was used as late as mid 20th century as seen on the sword awarded to the political figure in Sudan in 1961. The marking is not apparant on other Tuareg examples in the wider regions of thier habitat areas, though is seen as early as 1878 presumably. It does not seem to be an interpretation of the European marks mentioned (Kull nor the Mumm 'die puppe') so it likely has independant origin. It does not seem to be an astral or cosmological symbol alluding to the Mahdi in my opinion, but the geometric character seems closely followed in apparantly copied examples. The mark on the refurbished sword seems more in line with the Briggs markings, while the example on the heavily patinated example seems more degenerative or stylized...which is most curious as it would suggest it was applied at quite early date. Perhaps by the 1916 period some examples were notably different or as always, different application by different artisans. But then there is a curiously telling point.....the pair of 'jots' in the upper part of the sphere......these seem to be artistically oriented adds which of course are in shaded or dimension adding lines in drawn images. Why the subtle geometric variation such as separated 'lines' on the block type part of the mark..yet these 'shadings' or otherwise unessential jots are added faithfully? Well, those are my ramblings in looking over our discussed material. All the best, Jim

4th January 2012, 10:41 PM	#7
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,708	Hi Jim and Chris, Time to add some more of my own ramblings then. Mainly I want to touch on an important point Jim raises regarding export blade blanks. One of the main issues I have trying to research and determine what is a trade blade boils down to the fact that some blades are nicely marked for us. Does this mean unmarked blades were not produced for the African market in Solingen? We really have little to go on but the old fall back of how a particular sword "feels". I have wondered if there are any records that could be checked on product and export. If a German member wants to get involved to help out please contact me. In terms of a ricasso being necessary to term a blade European, I don't think so. I have seen a few of the Kull 1847 style pattern and none have ricassos, also blades from Clauberg without like this one: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10557 Incidentally that Clauberg blade has the same style of fuller and from rereading the thread should at least predate 1872... Cheers, Iain