SCHIAVONA, Napoleonic period (?) FERDINAND IV of Two Sicilies

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

...I did not understand what you meant by the dates dont match?...

I was only emphasing the fact that only the written mottos in both blades do coincide; the king mentioned in the sword i posted, judging by the seller's description, falls into a different period ? .. then we have two Ferdinando IV's ?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

I was only emphasing the fact that only the written mottos in both blades do coincide; the king mentioned in the sword i posted, judging by the seller's description, falls into a different period ? .. then we have two Ferdinando IV's ?

In my original post, the inscription aligned with Fernando IV of the Two Sicilies as far as I can tell, that regal numeric was only aligned WHEN Fernando ruled AS FERDINAND IV of Naples and FERDINAND III of SICILY (1759-1816).

When he was deposed in the Napoleonic mess, he regained power in 1816 as FERDINAND I of the Two Sicilies.
His father Charles VII if Naples and Sicily in the BOURBON schedule became CHARLES III of CASTILE, so placed Ferdinand as IV of Naples and III of Sicily.

The only other Ferdinand IV (1633-1654) was a Holy Roman emperor, Bohemia, Croatians and Hungary as well as Rome.

Therefore the BLADES MUST BE ascribed to the Ferdinand IV I describe.
and in the 1759-1805 period.

In following Udo's question about what did the sword posted had to do with Portugal and why would there be a Macedonia regiment associated with Portugal........I had assumed the specifying a Macedonian regiment suggested it must have been in foreign service.

Clearly if the sword was in use in Macedonia, why would the regiment be noted as Macedonian, and where do we find what unit this is?

The abbreviated PORLAMGDD is typically seen on inscriptions, like this is a rather unconventional acrostic manner.

So the big question is...what is a Ferdinand IV blade doing on an apparently mismatched hilt with Macedonian associations?

Hmm.....the possibilities are almost staggering.....whatever the case, the BLADE is Ferdinand IV as originally specifed.

[corrado26]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

whatever the case, the BLADE is Ferdinand IV as originally specifed.

this is absolutely correct