Tomas De Aiala sword blade.

Norman McCormick · 12th May 2015, 08:14 PM

Hi,
A very long shot here, does anybody have a hilt or parts thereof that is\are contemporary, stylistically correct for this blade and is willing to part with same?
Regards,
Norman.

Jim McDougall · 12th May 2015, 11:14 PM

Norman, in reviewing this you make some good points, and I am inclined to think you may be right on 17th c attribution here. The position of the anchor as you note, as well as the style of the fuller with the profiling along each side of the blade remind me of blades I have seen of Alonso Perez. This maker of Toledo also used a similar type anchor device.
What is interesting is that one of the Perez blades was on a rapier found on the well known galleon wreck , the Atocha, which sank in 1622.

What Fernando said is also correct, the punzone used by Tomas Ayala , the crowned ST would have been at the ricasso if indeed his work. Also I am unclear on why it would be Tomas DE Aiala and not TOMAS AIALA.
As noted he was around until the time of the Perez blades, so it certainly seems plausible it could actually be the general period.....the only concerns for me would be the nature of the tang/blade which does not correspond to the blades of period rapiers if I am correct.

Next I would ask what sort of provenance might have this blade without hilt. I have seen of course, many instances of unmounted blades, notably with JESUS MARIA as previously noted from a wreck (I think there were about 40 of them). These were apparently Solingen made and probably latter 17th c. and the punzones were not Ayala. These also had the same style tang as this one.

The 'disconnect' in the 'anchor' I think possibly due to these style markings (we call them anchors, but they are stylized sigils in my opinion) seeming to have peculiarities which reflect highly nuanced symbolism.

As far as finding a hilt, it seems some of the large auction houses sometimes have 'parts' sections in their offerings (at least Wallis & Wallis used to). It would be extremely difficult to find a displaced hilt, especially of period and style to suit this blade. For me personally I think I would hold to what it is....the JESUS MARIA blade I have has always remained unmounted.
I once had a great 17th century tulwar blade but mounted on a more modern hilt..........it finally got to me and I let it go.

Just my thinking.

All the best,
Jim

Norman McCormick · 12th May 2015, 11:30 PM

Hi Jim,
Many thanks for your further thoughts. As far as remounting the blade I would agree with you that it is probably best left as is particularly as I can see little evidence on the tang that it was ever mounted but and it is a big but if a contemporary hilt and fittings were available would I be tempted, possibly? Re the name I was under the impression that the smiths name was Tomas De Aiala and not Tomas Aiala.
Kind Regards,
Norman.

P.S. Ignore my ramblings the blade must have been mounted at some point as it shows signs of use but been dismounted some time ago as the patina on the point of the tang is the same as the rest of the tang. Old age doesn't come alone.

P.P.S. Is this the symbol or similar you are referring to?

Norman McCormick · 13th May 2015, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

As noted he was around until the time of the Perez blades, so it certainly seems plausible it could actually be the general period.....the only concerns for me would be the nature of the tang/blade which does not correspond to the blades of period rapiers if I am correct.

Jim

Hi Jim,
Can you expand on the tang/blade thing a little more?
Kind Regards,
Norman.

Norman McCormick · 13th May 2015, 12:25 AM

Some thoughts on a composite!!!!

Search/ triggers new broom, the ship of theseus on youtube

Jim McDougall · 13th May 2015, 02:24 AM

I'm really bad at finding pics etc. but what I mean is that on rapiers it seems the guard of course is at the base of the blade, and the ricasso extends to the bottom of the grip. In other words there is a section where the fingers extend past the grip and around the block section. With the cuphilt for example, the cup is at the blades end, and inside there are pas d'ane rings adjacent to the ricasso......then the grip starts beyond that.

In this type of tang, the grip is right at the blade base, there is no ricasso to be visible inside the cup or guard.
Fernando can explain this better

The symbol you show here is the cross and orb, while somewhat related to the 'anchors' in having cross symbolism, is not what I mean by the symbol on your blade.
The cross and orb relate mostly to German blades, and though often suggested 'makers marks' are usually used in conjunction with various names, invocations or other inscriptions on blades. This is very much like the way the 'anchors' were used on Spanish blades, and used in Solingen with other spuriously used punzones, names and phrases.

On the Aiala name, just an observation as the name is spelled differently on various occasions so interjection of the 'de' might be correct. Just seemed notable.

fernando · 13th May 2015, 01:17 PM

In the plate and nomina designed and crafted by Francisco Xavier Palomares in 1762, after the listing drawn by his father Francisco Santiago Palomares, the name for these smiths (father Thomás and son Luis) was DE AIALA.
Mind you, the maker's punzon may appear both in the uncovered part of the tang, before the guard (ricasso), also in the first third of the blade section (forte).
BTW, the term ricasso may also be applied to the blade section right after the hilt when its purpose is the ( long) sword entire hand holding, which is a different story.
Whereas the blade has (or not) an assumed ricasso before the hilt, i would say such is not a characteristic of different smiths but the purpose the blade is going to serve, whether a cup hilt sword, a swept hilt rapier, you name it.
I am not sure this whole story makes sense, as i am far from having a profound knowledge of the subject.
Attached are examples of marks in ricassos, the first a cup hilt sword with period symbol in both sides and the second with a makers punzon in one side; the first also with a period typical motto on the blade (MIN SINAL HES EL SANTISSIMO CRUCIFICIO) and the second with the maker's name (GONZALO SIMON).
Master Gonzalo Simon (1608-1617) also figures in the Palomares nomina and, eventually also uses the 'anchor' mark

.

Jim McDougall · 14th May 2015, 06:41 AM

Superbly explained and illustrated by the master !!!

Thank you Nando!

12th May 2015, 11:14 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Norman, in reviewing this you make some good points, and I am inclined to think you may be right on 17th c attribution here. The position of the anchor as you note, as well as the style of the fuller with the profiling along each side of the blade remind me of blades I have seen of Alonso Perez. This maker of Toledo also used a similar type anchor device. What is interesting is that one of the Perez blades was on a rapier found on the well known galleon wreck , the Atocha, which sank in 1622. What Fernando said is also correct, the punzone used by Tomas Ayala , the crowned ST would have been at the ricasso if indeed his work. Also I am unclear on why it would be Tomas DE Aiala and not TOMAS AIALA. As noted he was around until the time of the Perez blades, so it certainly seems plausible it could actually be the general period.....the only concerns for me would be the nature of the tang/blade which does not correspond to the blades of period rapiers if I am correct. Next I would ask what sort of provenance might have this blade without hilt. I have seen of course, many instances of unmounted blades, notably with JESUS MARIA as previously noted from a wreck (I think there were about 40 of them). These were apparently Solingen made and probably latter 17th c. and the punzones were not Ayala. These also had the same style tang as this one. The 'disconnect' in the 'anchor' I think possibly due to these style markings (we call them anchors, but they are stylized sigils in my opinion) seeming to have peculiarities which reflect highly nuanced symbolism. As far as finding a hilt, it seems some of the large auction houses sometimes have 'parts' sections in their offerings (at least Wallis & Wallis used to). It would be extremely difficult to find a displaced hilt, especially of period and style to suit this blade. For me personally I think I would hold to what it is....the JESUS MARIA blade I have has always remained unmounted. I once had a great 17th century tulwar blade but mounted on a more modern hilt..........it finally got to me and I let it go. Just my thinking. All the best, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 12th May 2015 at 11:27 PM.

12th May 2015, 11:30 PM	#3
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Hi Jim, Many thanks for your further thoughts. As far as remounting the blade I would agree with you that it is probably best left as is particularly as I can see little evidence on the tang that it was ever mounted but and it is a big but if a contemporary hilt and fittings were available would I be tempted, possibly? Re the name I was under the impression that the smiths name was Tomas De Aiala and not Tomas Aiala. Kind Regards, Norman. P.S. Ignore my ramblings the blade must have been mounted at some point as it shows signs of use but been dismounted some time ago as the patina on the point of the tang is the same as the rest of the tang. Old age doesn't come alone. P.P.S. Is this the symbol or similar you are referring to? Attached Images Last edited by Norman McCormick; 12th May 2015 at 11:56 PM.

13th May 2015, 01:17 PM	#7
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	In the plate and nomina designed and crafted by Francisco Xavier Palomares in 1762, after the listing drawn by his father Francisco Santiago Palomares, the name for these smiths (father Thomás and son Luis) was DE AIALA. Mind you, the maker's punzon may appear both in the uncovered part of the tang, before the guard (ricasso), also in the first third of the blade section (forte). BTW, the term ricasso may also be applied to the blade section right after the hilt when its purpose is the ( long) sword entire hand holding, which is a different story. Whereas the blade has (or not) an assumed ricasso before the hilt, i would say such is not a characteristic of different smiths but the purpose the blade is going to serve, whether a cup hilt sword, a swept hilt rapier, you name it. I am not sure this whole story makes sense, as i am far from having a profound knowledge of the subject. Attached are examples of marks in ricassos, the first a cup hilt sword with period symbol in both sides and the second with a makers punzon in one side; the first also with a period typical motto on the blade (MIN SINAL HES EL SANTISSIMO CRUCIFICIO) and the second with the maker's name (GONZALO SIMON). Master Gonzalo Simon (1608-1617) also figures in the Palomares nomina and, eventually also uses the 'anchor' mark . Attached Images

14th May 2015, 06:41 AM	#8
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	!! Superbly explained and illustrated by the master !!! Thank you Nando!

12th May 2015, 08:14 PM	#1
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Hi, A very long shot here, does anybody have a hilt or parts thereof that is\are contemporary, stylistically correct for this blade and is willing to part with same? Regards, Norman.

13th May 2015, 12:25 AM	#5
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Some thoughts on a composite!!!! Search/ triggers new broom, the ship of theseus on youtube

13th May 2015, 02:24 AM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	I'm really bad at finding pics etc. but what I mean is that on rapiers it seems the guard of course is at the base of the blade, and the ricasso extends to the bottom of the grip. In other words there is a section where the fingers extend past the grip and around the block section. With the cuphilt for example, the cup is at the blades end, and inside there are pas d'ane rings adjacent to the ricasso......then the grip starts beyond that. In this type of tang, the grip is right at the blade base, there is no ricasso to be visible inside the cup or guard. Fernando can explain this better The symbol you show here is the cross and orb, while somewhat related to the 'anchors' in having cross symbolism, is not what I mean by the symbol on your blade. The cross and orb relate mostly to German blades, and though often suggested 'makers marks' are usually used in conjunction with various names, invocations or other inscriptions on blades. This is very much like the way the 'anchors' were used on Spanish blades, and used in Solingen with other spuriously used punzones, names and phrases. On the Aiala name, just an observation as the name is spelled differently on various occasions so interjection of the 'de' might be correct. Just seemed notable.