![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,190
|
![]()
Thank you for the notes Ibrahiim, , and the majuscule A is primarily a point of reference for what this curiously applied marking is TAKEN from. This sword appears to be a soundly intended sword, but made in representation of earlier forms in a 'historismus' sense (in my opinion).
The markings seem to be a mélange of heraldic devices which are added to add a classic character, but in a manner outside the conventions of typical blade decoration. As the sword has not yet arrived with Glen, this is based only on photos and hypothetical supposition, and the markings are essentially anybody's guess as they do not (as far as known) have context to properly evaluate them. As the sword itself is a 'representation' it is hard to imagine the exact models or inspirations for its elements, and of course 'markings'. As I mentioned earlier, Glen is known for his keen eye in observing weapons, and it will be interesting to have his physical examination of the sword itself at hand. His 'curiosity' (as he describes) is seldom without plausible purpose. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nipmuc USA
Posts: 508
|
![]()
So, some first impressions with the sword in hand. No way I would suspect it to be a Victorian or later attempt. The hilt is comprised (as I suspected) as several individual pieces, joined and peened. The castings of the writhen elements actually quite delicate, with the grip sounding as not too hollow a shell. Speaking only to the hilt, the annelets are large enough to treat as a rapier grip. The grip by itself between the ferrules is 3". Photos in hand to follow.
Now some nitty gritty. The weight is considerable at 2.5 pounds (spring fish De-liar scale) eek, right? Well, hold on here, mixed dimensions Blade length is at 33" as shown. Width at the guard 27 mm Thickness at the guard 7 mm A very linear forte distal Thickness at the pob still 6mm a fighting distance from the guard pob at roughly 4" The blade (in my mind) shortened from a blade that was likely about 40" long at its original use Thickness at the point 2.5 mm The blade has the feel of varnish and the clank of a sword with good spring. Perfectly ovoid lenticular. Sorry, no spreadsheet. I judge swords as fencible or not. At a pound more than a light magic spadroon, it is still at the range of what a longer rapier might tip 3 lbs or more. Instantly appraised before I opened the USPS priority box, I was under no allusion it would be a box of air, as felt with an epee. I feel it was a marriage sometime before 1700 but folk are welcome to disagree. For me, as with so many, the questions of its history will always be there. My take is someone wanted a weapon, not a decoration. Pictures and more thoughts to come Cheers GC |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,190
|
![]()
Thanks Glen, as I indicated, I did not suspect this was a decorator, or at least in later consideration. Photos are always difficult.
The dramatic point is unusual, but would be understandable if the blade is shortened as you say. These blade devices were probably added later, with unclear association. A 17th century Walloon with the 'Pappenheimer' pierced bilobate guard plates attached, may well have been the design sought in this one. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|