17th Century Walloon swords

[Radboud]

Originally Posted by werecow

Unfortunately this link is now defunct. Does anyone still have a working link or a copy that they would be willing to share?

Also, will leave a link Gabri's latest video on these here for those interested in the type.

I enjoyed Gabri's video, unfortunatly much the same theories about the origin of this type. I think we can all agree that the too many examples survive for it to have been a militia's sword. However that doesn't exclude them from having been for a state armory. We see plenty of examples from other European armories that housed masses of equipment.

The issue that I have with the other theory, the tripple X mark belonging to Dutch merchants or guild who onsold the swords, is that we only see this mark on this specific pattern of sword. If it was a merchants' mark we would see it on other types of swords.

Below are screen shots I took of the article. To be honest, from what I read through Google Translate, it doesn't add much to the discussion either. Looking at their example, it also has a number of variations to the typical examples you see in the digital catalogue of the Dutch Army Museum (search for "Waalse degen").

[werecow]

Thanks Radboud! Time to practice mon français (even if it does not resolve this particular discussion).

EDIT: Also, interesting that this one has a TOLEDO(?) inscription and simple holes iso stars in the guard plates.

[ulfberth]

It has to do with economy and profit; these swords were easier to produce in large quantities and thus suitable for sale.
They were very versatile swords, practical and useful in many circumstances by both infantry and cavalry, etc. The Walloon sword remained in use for over 100 years, primarily in the Netherlands, Germany, and France, and also has many variants. Many have withstood the test of time, but in most, the plates in the guard rings have disappeared.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you guys for this valuable discussion.
I have this example which has been neglected in research for decades, and have always simply presumed it was English, and probably of c. 1690s.
In reading these entries, I am curious if my presumption was anywhere near correct.
I hope with the knowledge apparent here for either confirmation or more informed observations.
Its rough, I know, but I tend to leave examples unrestored.

[ulfberth]

Hi Jim ,
not saying it could not be Englisch, but the type style and form are typical French between 1750 and 1780

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by ulfberth

Hi Jim ,
not saying it could not be Englisch, but the type style and form are typical French between 1750 and 1780

Thank you Dirk! Then perhaps even tenuous possibility of Culloden (1746) association in degree (by type) as there were some French contingents there as Jacobites. Were turks heads used on grips that late?

[ulfberth]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Dirk! Then perhaps even tenuous possibility of Culloden (1746) association in degree (by type) as there were some French contingents there as Jacobites. Were turks heads used on grips that late?

Turkish knots were still in use on some officers swords, on troopers mostly wire or solid brass hilts, here is a French model 1734. The first French model with a brass hilt is as early as 1680 but it has a single guard plate.
There was a cross-pollination between the Jacobins and the French, in the 18th century the French King had Jacobins in his personal guard with typical Scottish Basket hilt swords with some a blade with "Vive Le Roy"

[Radboud]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Were turks heads used on grips that late?

Most definitely, the French Epee d’officier d’infanterie m1767 has a faux Turks head on the grip, and I have a French silver hilted smallsword with them that's hallmarked to 1760.

[Radboud]

Originally Posted by werecow

EDIT: Also, interesting that this one has a TOLEDO(?) inscription and simple holes iso stars in the guard plates.

There are several other subtle flaws with this example that lead me to suspect it's been restored. As you observe, the pattern of the piercings plus the missing star detail on the holes makes it likely that the plates are replacements.

Furthermore, the pommel shape is off, and it's missing some of the finer details again. Plus, the point where the knuckle bow is joined to the pommel is recessed, something I haven't seen on any originals.

On the TOL inscription, this isn't surprising; a lot of these and other swords for this region have spurious Spanish markings (the most obvious being the Sahagum) and given the history Spain has here, you'd expect their sword smiths to be associated with quality, much like Andreara Ferrara in the British Isles.