Transitional, Victorian, Other?

mariusgmioc · 14th October 2019, 03:41 PM

The mark is neither punched, nor engraved but crudely acid etched.

This makes me believe it is a 19th or even 20th century replica.

My two cents.

fernando · 14th October 2019, 03:59 PM

An approach to the smith's mark would perhaps be this one; Switz ... but from the 12th century !

.

Hotspur · 14th October 2019, 04:35 PM

Thanks guys.

Yes, even a very modern replica is certainly a possibility. As to an acid mark, I would say that is not too uncommon at the earlier timeline. The size/scale of the hilt could perhaps explain a decorative purpose but then again, the acute point not what one would expect for such.

A 20th century piece would be more likely to be a threaded union but once in hand I might see more clues. It could be all pot metal and cast iron

.

Cheers
GC

Jens Nordlunde · 14th October 2019, 04:39 PM

Yes Fernando, but what about the crown, and is this blade not a bit early for this kind of sword?

fernando · 14th October 2019, 05:06 PM

I know Jens. I am just suggesting that the Switz symbol might (might) be the basis for a later smith's imagination.

Jim McDougall · 14th October 2019, 07:26 PM

Some great observations here, and great catch by Udo on that majuscule A, as seen in the early Toledo markings. That marking on this sword of the OP looked almost like an oriental chop to me, and I didn't notice the A at first.

In my opinion, this sword is a pastiche recalling various elements of earlier classics, and in my thinking perhaps a Victorian accoutrement possibly worn in atavistic sense. The cast hilt is of course in the manner of small swords of the previous century, the screw in guard to the pommel in the manner of English swords in the 17th.
The bilobate guard is of pierced metal in the manner of 17th c. 'Pappenheimer' type rapier guards.
The blade is more 19th c. and the reduction to sharp point atypical of any small sword blade.

The markings I could not tell how applied, I thought etched but Marius sees acid etch, but either case very crude and approximating much earlier classic marks and arms. The crown over these devices alludes to earlier marking convention, but not correctly done.

It seems however an interesting item which may have had some interesting intent in its production and use.

Just my interpretation and opinions, certainly not anything conclusive.
Glen is a well seasoned collector and scholar so he surely sees more in this piece, and he will likely say more once he has it in hand.

fernando · 14th October 2019, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Some great observations here, and great catch by Udo on that majuscule A, as seen in the early Toledo markings. That marking on this sword of the OP looked almost like an oriental chop to me, and I didn't notice the A at first...

Jim, Udo will certainly appreciate your cheering his catch; however and as i have already observed, i am afraid i may not concur with such assessment ... for reasons relating either with the association of this mark to Toledo smiths and for it being a majuscule A, which i find more like a symbol than an alphabetic letter. We are aware of the somehow enigmatic habit of Toledan espaderos, to often using initials other than those of their (known) names in their personal marks, a criteria that, in this specific case, appear in a few examples. Go figure why they use a A, or what looks like a A, in their punzones. But in any case so far distant from the mark in Glen's blade,

.

Hotspur · 14th October 2019, 09:59 PM

The marks on this blade present other questions if a modern take on a period blade reconstruction. Disregarding the castle for a moment, if a modern mark meant to emulate a famous maker, wouldn't they choose something immediately familiar?

A second, for Jim. If it is a re-purposed 19th century blade, what might that origin be?

I will endeavor to shoot some clearer photos of the hilt construct itself and dialog a bit more about the blade cross section, etc.

Cheers
GC

Oh, re the guard screw. It is not so much the screw attachment as the type of screw, Also that the peen block may indeed be a nut but that alone would not dismiss a 17th century sword.

14th October 2019, 03:59 PM	#2
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	An approach to the smith's mark would perhaps be this one; Switz ... but from the 12th century ! . Attached Images

14th October 2019, 03:41 PM	#1
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,906	The mark is neither punched, nor engraved but crudely acid etched. This makes me believe it is a 19th or even 20th century replica. My two cents.

14th October 2019, 04:35 PM	#3
Hotspur Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Nipmuc USA Posts: 508	Thanks guys. Yes, even a very modern replica is certainly a possibility. As to an acid mark, I would say that is not too uncommon at the earlier timeline. The size/scale of the hilt could perhaps explain a decorative purpose but then again, the acute point not what one would expect for such. A 20th century piece would be more likely to be a threaded union but once in hand I might see more clues. It could be all pot metal and cast iron . Cheers GC

14th October 2019, 04:39 PM	#4
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Yes Fernando, but what about the crown, and is this blade not a bit early for this kind of sword?

14th October 2019, 05:06 PM	#5
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	I know Jens. I am just suggesting that the Switz symbol might (might) be the basis for a later smith's imagination.

14th October 2019, 07:26 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,190	Some great observations here, and great catch by Udo on that majuscule A, as seen in the early Toledo markings. That marking on this sword of the OP looked almost like an oriental chop to me, and I didn't notice the A at first. In my opinion, this sword is a pastiche recalling various elements of earlier classics, and in my thinking perhaps a Victorian accoutrement possibly worn in atavistic sense. The cast hilt is of course in the manner of small swords of the previous century, the screw in guard to the pommel in the manner of English swords in the 17th. The bilobate guard is of pierced metal in the manner of 17th c. 'Pappenheimer' type rapier guards. The blade is more 19th c. and the reduction to sharp point atypical of any small sword blade. The markings I could not tell how applied, I thought etched but Marius sees acid etch, but either case very crude and approximating much earlier classic marks and arms. The crown over these devices alludes to earlier marking convention, but not correctly done. It seems however an interesting item which may have had some interesting intent in its production and use. Just my interpretation and opinions, certainly not anything conclusive. Glen is a well seasoned collector and scholar so he surely sees more in this piece, and he will likely say more once he has it in hand.

14th October 2019, 09:59 PM	#8
Hotspur Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Nipmuc USA Posts: 508	The marks on this blade present other questions if a modern take on a period blade reconstruction. Disregarding the castle for a moment, if a modern mark meant to emulate a famous maker, wouldn't they choose something immediately familiar? A second, for Jim. If it is a re-purposed 19th century blade, what might that origin be? I will endeavor to shoot some clearer photos of the hilt construct itself and dialog a bit more about the blade cross section, etc. Cheers GC Oh, re the guard screw. It is not so much the screw attachment as the type of screw, Also that the peen block may indeed be a nut but that alone would not dismiss a 17th century sword.