blade mystery

[urbanspaceman]

Hello Folks.
Here is a simple question:
was Solingen producing and exporting to England such a blade as this in the early 1500s?
Further details will depend on the answer.
Thanks in anticipation... Keith.

[mariusgmioc]

Yes they were!

Solingen blades were traded since the Viking times.

In the 15th century Solingen has raised to a fortified city becoming one of the largest (if not THE largest) blades manufacturing centres in Europe.

Its blades were traded not only in Europe but throughout Middle East, Asia and North Africa.

[urbanspaceman]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Hello Folks.
Here is a simple question:
was Solingen producing and exporting to England SUCH A BLADE AS THIS in the early 1500s?
Further details will depend on the answer.
Thanks in anticipation... Keith.

The blade is from a Hounslow Hanger and is date-stamped 1553 which obviously must be a commemorative unless it was in existence 100 years earlier and was subsequently re-hilted a century later; this is what I am attempting to ascertain, hence my question.

1553 was the date of the Lady Jane Grey tragedy when her father-in-law (Dudley: Earl of Northumberland) manipulated her onto the throne after the death of Edward. She reigned for 9 days then was executed by her cousin Mary who took the throne. The father-in-law and his son – her husband – were also executed. She was only 16.

It is possible that the owner of the sword was related to the Dudley or Grey family and wanted to commemorate the issue when he ordered the sword in the 1630s.

[urbanspaceman]

Here is the entire sword image:

[Jim McDougall]

While not the exact fuller pattern, I found a similar blade in "European & American Arms 1100-1850" Claude Blair, 1962....#169, it has a blocked area at ricasso section in which I cannot see mark etc. However, it is inscribed ME FECIT HOUNSLO and dated c. 1640s.

Another 'cuttoe' in Blair (op.cit.#165) with a fullered blade of this type with sawback (as in Hounslow blades c.1640s) and latten running wolf.

What is important in this sword posted is that the configuration of the latten running wolf is upside down consistent with German placement of this mark. It is known that Solingen blades were being imported into Hounslow with this mark, then often inscribed with Hounslow, makers names of Hounslow, or possibly other inscriptions.

The 'ANNO' term in references suggests of course the year of the blade, such as 'ANNO cross 1660' (Wagner, "Cut & Thrust Weapons", 1967).

"Catalogue of the Sword Collection at York Castle Museum" , P.Newman, 1985, in sword CA778, the maker JOHANNES STAM ANNO 1612
CA730 has Wundes kingshead, wolf between 'magic numbers 1399'.

Therefore it seems pretty compelling that this blade was from Solingen and marked with the running wolf as was the practice c.1630-40s. When in Hounslow, the blades were often inscribed, but many not.
Hounslow was essentially Royalist in times of the Civil War, so the 1553 theory as an ancestral number seems plausible, but the ANNO unusual as a commemorative without further detail.
'Magic numbers' would seem to be placed with the wolf mark.

These blades were often remounted in the 18th century, and many hilts of the 'Hounslow school' were silver and had hallmarks c, 1750s which supports this.

[urbanspaceman]

Thank-you Jim, great research as always.

The latten wolf has cropped-up on Hounslow blades a few times for me; once with a curious X marking and a shield as well (see pics) which I only just missed acquiring.

The mushroom cap and scrolled quillon is typical Hounslow as well so all-in-all my inclination is it is homogeneous, except possibly the grip binding - but I can't be sure.
I sent pics to Dirk and he proclaimed it homogeneous.

Year 1553 can only be commemorating the Lady Jane Grey/Guildford Dudley tragedy but the family lines went everywhere during the following century so no chance of tracking down the owner that way.

One thing I would like to know is who used this very singular wolf latten which is common on Hounslow blades?

[urbanspaceman]

Sorry, should have included the image of the shield; here it is:

[Jim McDougall]

I have been trying to locate more on these Hounslow blades.
With the hanger in the OP, as compelling as the case for 1553 being a commemorative date is, especially having ANNO with it, the following moves toward the use of magic numbers.
These are four numbers, typically used along with the running wolf, in most cases with two of the numbers on either side of the wolf.

The running wolf itself was applied to blades which were made in Solingen to be hilted in Passau, a center for Landsknechts, mercenary forces. These were basically talismanic imbuements, and in many cases numbers with magic properties were combined with them.

In "Cut and Thrust Weapons", E. Wagner, Prague, 1967, material from "Die Klingenmarke 1414(1441)and Related Numerical Signs ", Walter Rose, (Zeitschrifte fur Historische Waffen und Kostumkunde", Vol.14, p.13) :

"...blades forged by Johannes Wundes used 1479; Johannes Kueller used 1495; Meves Berns 1506; Johann Hartcop 1506; Mathias Wundes 1515;and Peter Munich 1436".

Apparently according to Wagner (op.cit. p.76-77) Solingen makers making blades for Passau intended for Archprince Leopold began c. 1611, and through the Thirty Years War, with the running wolf applied as a kind of 'brand'. From there it gained a quality type character.

When the shops with German makers opened in Hounslow, blades with many having the latten running wolf were sent there, and many were inscribed with makers names and ME FECIT HOUNSLOW etc.

In "Catalog of the Sword Collection at York Castle Museum" (P.R.Newman, 1985) numbers of these blades are found in many of the swords.

Most important:
p.48 a dog head sword with English hilt c. 1640-50 has a German blade (no wolf) BUT THE MARKING ANNO 1414.
The numbers 1414 and 1441 are likely the most common magic numbers found on Solingen and some other European blades as they are based on the number 7.
Here the ANNO is found with a 'magic' number , not a date.

Another sword (p.52) has a maker, IOHAN ESALESON ANNO 1641.

Another p.51 , running wolf, number 1561, the hilt c. 1650
CA826, German blade , wolf, 1517
p.50: wolf, German blade 1670
p.29: wolf, 1399, hilt c. 1620-50
p.33: wolf, 1523, c. 1620
p.47: wolf, 1541 c. 1650
p.39 : wolf, 1656

While not helpful for the commemorative date theory on this great hanger, it is an example with a remarkable blade, and it does appear these blades were coming into England from Solingen from early 17th c. years. The mystery numbers on these blades seem largely to be of the 'magical variety, but clearly some represent authentic dates (1650,1670).

Still working on the wolf with the cross over it. It seems like I have seen it before but cannot locate. The shield at the forte only compares with a mark from Verdun (France) but that is too early for this blade (Gyngell and Lenciewicz have it c. 1480). It is similar to Passau types of early 17th but those are unidentified users.

[urbanspaceman]

Thanks again Jim... when do you sleep???

Your information regarding numbers is equally compelling and makes me question my indication of the historical event of 1553.

This business of ANNO alongside numbers is very curious; do you know why it was used?

Incidentally, I found a straight broadsword blade with multiple fullers and a Hounslow stamp on a sword in the York Museum (CA756).

I question a 1500s manufacture date with re-hilting but I don't know where to go to ascertain if such a blade was exported by Solingen back then; or even made back then.

Your referral to the Stortas makes me wonder though. Multi-fullered Schiavonas were common I know.

[urbanspaceman]

[QUOTE=Jim McDougall; Still working on the wolf with the cross over it. It seems like I have seen it before but cannot locate. The shield at the forte only compares with a mark from Verdun (France) but that is too early for this blade (Gyngell and Lenciewicz have it c. 1480). It is similar to Passau types of early 17th but those are unidentified users.[/QUOTE]

Don't let my grasshopper attention confuse: the latten with the crosses and accompanying shield are from the sword I didn't acquire.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Don't let my grasshopper attention confuse: the latten with the crosses and accompanying shield are from the sword I didn't acquire.

Thank you so much, and for the previous response.....the answer is, I sleep little when there is a quest . Most here do not realize the intensity and duration of research that obsesses to find answers. While many find little interest in the minutiae of arms markings etc. , this is how we discover the mysteries they hold.
Far more exciting than just placing a weapon on the wall with a laconic caption

While you did not acquire that sword, the markings are distinct.
That shield at the forte is one very close to an attribution known in Verdun (France) end of 15th c. which is far too early for this blade. I would suspect this to be later used by Passau or Swiss armourers laterin 16th to early 17thc.
Most of these 'armed' devices are regarded as unidentified, but are indeed recorded in collected arms records.

[urbanspaceman]

Yet again we progress, thank-you Jim.

The shield is like a one on a swept hilt rapier I have. You attributed it to a City Guard which is almost certainly correct as far as the rapier is concerned. However, I don't understand what it is doing on that Hounslow Hunting Hangar. Perhaps you are correct and it was simply diverted to England. Were those short curved blades found in military circles during the early 1600s or late 1500s; or even early 1500s?

I've searched as best I can for the origin of my rapier marking but to no avail . One reference I found looked similar. (see attached)

[Jim McDougall]

In looking more for this 'cross' design, I have found no evidence of this in the usual (and unusual) references other than crossed items used in proof marks mostly ordnance context with firearms.

However, I finally went to "British Military Sword 1600-60" Stuart Mowbray, 2013, and here are the most breathtaking photos and detailed captions of most of the actual swords we discuss. Every page is a gold mine of data, Stuart is one of the brilliant researchers and arms scholars of our time. He learned well from his father Andrew Mowbray, author of "The American Eagle Pommel Sword", and literally grew up immersed in weapons.

Hangers with virtually the exact fuller pattern from Solingen are seen, on p.175 is one but in the space where the wolf would be as on yours, there is the 'sickle mark' and surmounted by ANNO 1551. Here he notes these numbers and the word Anno are often palindromes, and that the numbers are (as I contend) magical . He disagrees and suggests that they are likely numbers of the year of establishment of the firm of the maker of the blade.

He has disagreed with me before on the presence of magic sigils and glyphs on blades insisting they are makers marks, but I must contend that magic devices are profoundly present on blades. It would seem odd that the year of maker founding would be represented when the blade is void of any mark denoting what maker that is.

On p.167, the number 1551 occurs again over a notably deviated 'cross and orb', a device used in the collective manner of the running wolf and 'sickle marks'. ..in this case the ANNO does not appear.

REGARDING THE CROSS AND DOTS:
on p.168 and on p.162, the decorative motif used on numbers of these hilts of Hounslow style is the cross hatch style with dots.....called dot and trellis.
This seems to have been popular in the early to mid 17th c. in motif, and would seem to have been added above the running wolf in that styled convention.

On that shield, while the device or sigil is 'similar' the one on the hanger blade noted is decidely different with the configuration of the arms.
As noted though, these designs seem to have been popular and were altered and configured in variation much as the cross bars on the cross and orbs and the anchors used along with inscriptions.
Most markings have been recorded from collected weapons over years by curators and collectors, and our references are compendiums of those rather than official records of regulating agencies.

[urbanspaceman]

I have to agree with you Jim and disagree with Stuart: you will recall that my initial question at the beginning of this thread was whether such a blade as mine was produced in Solingen in the early 1500s. Add to that, as you declare, why no maker's name, and even more to the point, why are there a variety of numbers found associated with a similar wolf/orb/sickle etc.

I fail to comprehend however what the significance of ANNO might be unless it is either a commemorative date or a production date; the former obviously appearing to me as the most likely.

When I first acquired my hanger, and discovered the significance of the year 1553, I made the mistake of associating the Earl of Northumberland with Syon House next to the Hounslow mills - which was the home of the Percys. In fact, the Earl of Northumberland in 1553 was a Dudley not a Percy. An easy mistake to make if you only have a superficial knowledge of the aristocracy back then... as did I. Had it been a Percy, then commissioning a hanger from your local swordsmith and commemorating such a significant date was highly likely. I asked the present Duke of Northumberland (a Percy) if there was any record of a sword being commissioned and was disabused of the connection.
All of this aside, I come back to my original question: could this blade have existed in England in 1553?

[Jim McDougall]

I really dont think these type of heavy curved blades were common in England in the 16th century, however there were examples of North European 'dusagge' (the 'Sinclair saber' type) which came back from Europe during campaigns with English participants. These were in essence forerunners of the Scottish basket hilt.
Obviously by the early 17th century hangers with such blades were being exported by Solingen into England and the famed Hounslow shops.

The idea of these magic numbers being just that is reprehensible to most students and collectors of arms as not empirically feasible, so not valid. This I have encountered many times in discussing such theories with many of them, but there are numbers of authors who have recognized that there is a certain plausibility to them.

As I have mentioned, why would a 'date' of establishment exist relating to a 'firm' or 'maker' on an unidentified blade? Further, in the images from Stuart's book, the number 1414 is used. This number and its other palindrome 1441 are the most commonly found on blades, and I listed earlier certain makers who favored and used other combinations........none of which had ANYTHING to do with their year of beginnings.

On the dog head hilt is ANNO 1414 on a sword from 1650s.............so WHO was the firm or maker established in 1414? However, we know this is a 'magic' number, and these numbers were used in the occult and talismanic charms used in Passau, and thereby in Solingen.

Here is the clincher, look at the picture of the sword (p.175) with the remarkably similar number to yours, ANNO 1551 ! off by 2 !!
Again, ANNO.

ANNO is of course, in the year of.....but among other meanings associated, 'God is gracious'., as in ANNO DOMINI, in the year of our Lord.
Talismanic augmentation to a magic (talismanic) invocation? I think so.
The occult was not always sinister, but religious in nature, as in the teachings of John Dee, late 16th c. occultist, astrologer, teacher who used a kind of alphabetic script which was regarded as 'Angelic'. Some of the glyphs in these are seen in markings on blades, and were perhaps talismanic much in the way of the running wolf, cross and orb etc.


Look at the fullering and ANNO 1553 on your example in pic 1.
Next (p.175, Mowbray) is a sword with similar fullers, in similar location is the 'sickle' mark and ANNO 1551
Next (p.172, the dog head sword, with markings and ANNO 1414, (an impossibly early date with no commemorative value viable)
Next: the dot and trellis designs in motif on this and numbers of these hangers 1620s-60s.
Seen augmenting the latten running wolf......it suggests perhaps either a Solingen maker acting on behalf of an English cutler/smith or that possibly a Hounslow maker may have added a running wolf with the known dot and trellis design. I would note here that these designs are known in other 'magic' connotations in degree as well.

[urbanspaceman]

Jim, that first sword is almost identical to mine. In fact, I would not be surprised if my grip binding was not a replacement for the original antler.

Adding it all up, I now think that the 1553 is probably not commemorating the Grey/Dudley tragedy but is talismanic as you suggest.

It would certainly make more sense than trying to consider the blade as early 1500s.

Maybe there was a connection to the date 1553 and its tragedy and maybe not: after all, it was a hundred years later and everything had changed a great deal on the political front diminishing the affair.

Remarkable research Jim, well-done and many thanks.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Keith!
I found more on the curious mark on the hanger with the wolf and dot and trellis augment in Wallace Collection (Sir James Mann, 1962), p.244.
Apparently this mark is associated with the well known Stantler family of Munich who were established 1455-1647.

Obviously the family had numerous types of marks, and were known to have used spurious markings of various makers, particularly Spanish.

In this case, the glyph with curved upper cross arm as seen on this hanger in cartouche with similar mark appears top have been incorrectly attributed to VERDUN c.1480 by an author named Viollet du Lac ("Armourers Marks", Dudley S. Hawtrey Gyngell, 1959, p.25). The error was then perpetuated (as often the case) bv Z. Lenkiewicz in his "1000 Marks of European Blademakers" (1991).

Mann notes this mistaken attribution (op.cit.p.244) by Viollet du Lac and suggests that the error may owe to the similarity of the device to the double armed 'Cross of Lorraine".

Christoph Stantler II of Munich worked 1607-1636, so quite likely this blade is from this period.

Attached the original entry from Gyngell (note the ? mark)
The entry from Sir James Mann, (1962, p.244. The author in question, du Lac apparently wrote in 1868.

While this detail pertains to a hanger which went to unknown buyer, this information is for the benefit of future research with reference to the markings .

[urbanspaceman]

Benjamin Stone was the biggest operator at Hounslow; he was certainly the most notorious. His factories and mill feature prominently on the map of Hounslow at the time.
Most of the Germans there were supplying him or working for him; IENKES is a typical example.
Stone did not forge: he had a grinding mill and workshops for scabbards, belts and hilts.
Stone was supplying the Tower until civil war broke out when he de-camped, joined the King at Oxford and set up shop in Gloucester Hall and at Wolvercote. He never returned to Hounslow.
It is possible these German blades with that distinctive wolf were imported by Stone; but there were many others importing blades during the lifetime of Hounslow sword production
as it was accepted by the government that their enormous demands required importing from Germany and paying dearly; the only alternative was using English made blades which was not popular; I'm about to start a new thread relating to this issue.

[mariusgmioc]

Very interesting information!

Thank you guys!