Toledo Rapier Info

mariusgmioc · 3rd March 2016, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fernando

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.

fernando · 3rd March 2016, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

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...

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

.

.

Jim McDougall · 3rd March 2016, 06:17 PM

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.

Philip · 5th March 2016, 06:28 AM

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.

Jim McDougall · 6th March 2016, 06:40 AM

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.

fernando · 6th March 2016, 06:57 PM

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

.

Philip · 7th March 2016, 05:54 AM

Thanks, Jim, for posting the reference page on the evolution of the "Passau wolf" symbol. The most frequently seen styles are those of the 17th cent., but in looking at the evolution of the iconic beast as a whole, it's amazing to see the variations, bordering on the fanciful. Note some of them with rather equine necks and heads, one that can be mistaken for a shrimp or prawn, and another that is positively rodentian! Seeing this mini-zoo, the "mutant gerbil" that appears in Dr Astatsaturyan's book in the section on Caucasus imitations is not so outlandish after all!

Jim McDougall · 7th March 2016, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

Thanks, Jim, for posting the reference page on the evolution of the "Passau wolf" symbol. The most frequently seen styles are those of the 17th cent., but in looking at the evolution of the iconic beast as a whole, it's amazing to see the variations, bordering on the fanciful. Note some of them with rather equine necks and heads, one that can be mistaken for a shrimp or prawn, and another that is positively rodentian! Seeing this mini-zoo, the "mutant gerbil" that appears in Dr Astatsaturyan's book in the section on Caucasus imitations is not so outlandish after all!

I totally agree Philip, these zoomorphic renditions in these assemblages of chiseled markings would make Picasso proud!

The plate from Wagner is misleading, as it purports that there was some sort of chronological progression with these 'wolf' marks by placing date years on them. In fact, these were stylized because of the 'freehand' application by workers who were simply complying with the apparent requirement of placing a 'wolf' on the blade.
I think that in the case of the 'perrillos' it was very much the same, and I have seen a plate of examples drawn from a number of smiths in Spanish context which display the same 'range' of depiction.

In discussions, Oakeshott (1962) mentions that in many cases it is hard to tell what creature is depicted, and notes others such as unicorns were depicted in similar 'creativity'.
In his discussions of Sudanese kaskara, Reed (1987) notes a Darfur chieftain examining a 'wolf' mark on one of these blades, and thought it represented a hippopotamus!!

Its really great to have you writing here again Philip!!!!

ariel · 7th March 2016, 10:05 PM

On the original blade posted by Mariusgmioc, it is not Bracho: it is Brach. The "letter o is in fact just a decorative motive: compare its size with the unquestionable "O" in the word Toledo.

5th March 2016, 06:28 AM	#4
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	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.

6th March 2016, 06:40 AM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,458	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. Attached Images Last edited by Jim McDougall; 6th March 2016 at 07:11 AM.

6th March 2016, 06:57 PM	#6
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	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 . Attached Images

7th March 2016, 05:54 AM	#7
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	quite the menagerie! Thanks, Jim, for posting the reference page on the evolution of the "Passau wolf" symbol. The most frequently seen styles are those of the 17th cent., but in looking at the evolution of the iconic beast as a whole, it's amazing to see the variations, bordering on the fanciful. Note some of them with rather equine necks and heads, one that can be mistaken for a shrimp or prawn, and another that is positively rodentian! Seeing this mini-zoo, the "mutant gerbil" that appears in Dr Astatsaturyan's book in the section on Caucasus imitations is not so outlandish after all!

3rd March 2016, 06:17 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,458	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.

7th March 2016, 10:05 PM	#9
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	On the original blade posted by Mariusgmioc, it is not Bracho: it is Brach. The "letter o is in fact just a decorative motive: compare its size with the unquestionable "O" in the word Toledo.