Two Very Fine Landsknecht Swords, Southern Germany, ca. 1490 and 1525

[Matchlock]

These were sold at Auctions Imperial Timonium, March 19, 2011, and went straight into my friend's collection!

The hilt of the first, a Late Gothic two hand or a-hand-a-half sword, is most problay of North Italian or South Tyrolian origin, ca. 1490, while the fine blade inlaid with the Gotic letter A was recycled and can be dated as early as mid 14th c.! I have seen the same letter A on contemporary barrels and strongly believe that it stands for Augsburg, Bavaria - which would make this the only known early Augsburg blade!

The second item, with an incredibly high quality Passau wrought 15th c. blade inlaid with an early Passau running wolf and various apotropaic (magic) symbols, and a refined hilt retaining all its original bluing, is a great Landsknecht two hand sword of ca. 1525. Originally riveted on top of the pommel was a small iron flowerhead shaped plate, which is now missing. Note the acanthus leaf engraving on the pommel. The extreme tang of the blade has been crudely bent by hammering but the rest of the piece is preserved in almost as new condition, considering its great age of almost 500 years!!!

These two items were deaccessioned of by the Higgins Armory Museum. Well, they were not cheap though worth each and every cent! Wonderful pieces, and I am going to handle them very soon when they have arrived here!

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

The rest of the images of lot 48.

[Matchlock]

Now here comes the fine Passau two hand sword!

[Matchlock]

The rest of the images of lot 164.

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Michael,
Thank you so much for posting these amazing swords! and it really is exciting to see such historic treasures especially with my favorite topic, these markings.

Do you have illustrations of this unusual 'Gothic' letter A on the barrels as you mentioned? It is strange to have the center bar in the shape of a 'V'.
It would indeed be great to have this turn out to have the Augsburg association.
I know the armourers in Augsburg used the letter A surrounded by 'pearls' or dots and the fir cone, and one of the more renowned Anton Peffenhauser used the triskele (sort of a three legged swastika).

I am wondering if perhaps the 'A' might have been used as a kind of armoury or allegiance type marking as Augsburg was one of the number of Imperial Free Cities, sort of independant entities who answered directly to the Holy Roman Emperor only. These cities operated thier own armies, trade and economic alliances and so on in these times, contemporary with the Hanseatic League. It is wonderful to see an example with this type of latten (inlaid brass).

With the fantastic two hand sword, the markings are most intriguing, and very much remind me of the kinds of symbolic groupings seen on swords associated with the mysterious Vehdic courts, or of the 'Free Judges'.
These German tribunals were well known in the 14th and 15th century but less so later, though they were certainly still known. What seems most to remind me of these are the 'cross fourchee' or cross with forked arms. In medieval times, these type crosses were used to denote Christian piety, and in the case of certain executioner or heading swords, these crosses occur with other symbols noting the piety of those who were charged with carrying out justice.
Again these markings in latten are outstanding, and the symbolism seems to carry out the representation of authority. It is often believed that these large swords were used as a kind of bearing sword in assembly of these courts rather than actual execution weapons, however it would be hard to say. These of course like many weapons may have been actual combat swords that came into use in these capacities later in thier working lives.

While of course not declaring that this is what the sword is, I am simply describing these associations as worthy of note in considering the nature of the markings.

The well known 'running wolf' of Passau is seen here in of course the typical interpretive application. These marks were indeed seen as magical after a time suggesting power and invincibility as associated with the arms production of Passau in these times. Though the marks were most likely originally guild compliance markings, their association with the quality of the weapons and imbued talismanic power became legendary over time.

I just wanted to add things that come to mind as I observe these wonderful swords, and congratulations to your friend for such fantastic acquisitions and sharing them here.

All the very best,
Jim

[Matchlock]

Hi Jim and all,

I am extremely sad to say that both my friend Ottmar and I were cruelly cheated on the second sword by the incompetent management of Auctions Imperial. Our emailed (!) high bid was 18,000 USD. I have Oliver's approving reply email assuring at the same time that our bid was accepted up to 100,000 USD. Now I have been told that there was a so called 'bidding mistake' with the computer and the sword was 'paid and taken' by somebody else for 12,500 USD!!! We got each and every single proof!!!!

Gosh, is this a banana repubic where high bids are not accepted??!!

This catastrophe of handling foreign bids will go all around though in the international collectors' scene, believe me!!!

Michael

[Emanuel]

Hi Michael, Jim,

I got to handle the two-hander at the auction. First time I held such a big sword, it was a pretty awesome feeling.
Sorry to hear of the troubles with absentee bids

Regards,
Emanuel

[Jim McDougall]

Michael, it appears my congratulations were premature, I am so sorry this has happened. I had hoped we would be on the way to some interesting discussion here, and very much enjoyed the hours researching these anyway.

Best,
Jim

[laEspadaAncha]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Hi Jim and all,

I am extremely sad to say that both my friend Ottmar and I were cruelly cheated on the second sword by the incompetent management of Auctions Imperial. Our emailed (!) high bid was 18,000 USD. I have Oliver's approving reply email assuring at the same time that our bid was accepted up to 100,000 UDS. Now I have been told that there was a so called 'bidding mistake' with the computer and the sword was 'paid and taken' by somebody else for 12,500 USD!!! We got each and every single proof!!!!

Gosh, is this a banana repubic where high bids are not accepted??!!

This catastrophe of handling foreign bids will go all around though in the international collectors' scene, believe me!!!

Michael

Hi Michael,

Sadly I had a similar experience with AI last year (albeit with a significantly less expensive item).

I understand an auction house's willingness to show some love to the floor bidders, but you do that by dropping the hammer before a high bid is accepted from elsewhere, whether it be from cyberspace or an absentee bidder, and not by accepting a high bid and then disallowing it after the fact. Sorry to hear about your experience...

[Matchlock]

Originally Posted by laEspadaAncha

Hi Michael,

Sadly I had a similar experience with AI last year (albeit with a significantly less expensive item).

I understand an auction house's willingness to show some love to the floor bidders, but you do that by dropping the hammer before a high bid is accepted from elsewhere, whether it be from cyberspace or an absentee bidder, and not by accepting a high bid and then disallowing it after the fact. Sorry to hear about your experience...

Thank you for coming in; so we are not the only ones.

In more than thirty years of international bidding practice, nothing like this has ever happened to me. We have expierenced that our high bids were used till the last cent but an item hammered down to a much lower bid - I feel this is not only unfair beyond words, it also means a financial loss to both the auctioneer and the consigner. To me this means double cheating.

But now back to the swords.

Jim, I am attaching images of a 500 year old barrel and stock of a haquebut wall gun in the reserve collection of the Museum für das Fürstentum Lüneburg, Northern Germany. You will see the same Gothic majuscule A for Augsburg struck on the barrel. So this seems to be the older Augsburg city proof mark; the wellknown pyr (pine cone) seems not to have been used for firearms before the mid 16th c.

Best,
Michael

[Carl M]

Hi Matchlock,

In all honestly, I think you guys got a blessing in disguise when you didn't get that second two-hander. I was at the auction (I bought a few pieces, notably the bilbo a transitional rapier and some smallswords), I held every piece there several times and I must say that something was very wrong with that two-hander. The crossguard was said to be later, but the sword itself was waaaaaaaaay too heavy to be functional. It felt like it weighed 15 lbs with poor balance to boot. Functional, large 2 handers are usually in the 6 lb range and well balanced.

All of the dealers that I was there with concurred. It was definitely a composite as stated. The blade looked like it could be original (but you never know). The guard was definitely Victorian and the pommel didn't look right. Looking at the pommel in thos pics shows that the tang was just bent over the pommel in an amateur fashion, not peened. I have never seen that done before. Definitely not worth $12,500. Personally, I wouldn't have paid $800 for it.

Even if it is German and 16th century, there is nothing confirming it to be a landsknecht sword. This sword does not look to be a typical Landsknecht pattern.

[Jim McDougall]

Extremely well placed notes Carl, and I am inclined to share your opinions on the nature of the refurbished mounts, which as noted in the auction description are of the Victorian period. It is fairly a matter of preference to individual collectors on how much they are willing to accept as far as items that are composite in order to acquire certain authentic components, in most cases of course the blades in swords.

While the hilt does appear to emulate the earlier styles in degree, these Victorian items were clearly made for impressive display rather than functionality. It seems to me that it has been noted that in the industry of reproducing medieval arms and armour in these times, there were instances of authentic early components being put with these then newly fashioned ones in such cases. One of the most renowned producers of these was the atelier of Ernst Schmitt in Munich, and I believe that there were a number of his weapons among the holdings in the Higgins Museum. It would seem however that this apparantly amateur peening would steer away from the work of this particular maker. Regardless, it seems that the weapon was apparantly among venerable company in the Higgins Museum prior to its deaccess in 1951, and has its own established provence distinguished by having been in an esteemed collection.

In any case, the blade on this one was to me of great interest, as I noted in my earlier post, and carries some intriguing markings that may potentially have some much deeper historic connections, as also noted. I believe these were the source of the interest shown by Michael and his friend, and extremely unfortunate that this situation developed with the auction.

Michael, thank you so much for posting the excellent illustration of the early Augsburg marking! With this I can see exactly what you mean in the comparison. I have been trying to discover whether the letter 'A' as seen in these examples in majascule script, and in this curious style with the flattened v shape crossbar and the elongated serif at the top , can be found in other paleographic examples of medieval Germany. It does not of course correspond to the various examples of Fraktur or other 'Gothic' script, and I am wondering if it might be something found in religious psalters or Gospels of the time.

According to Stockel (ref: "One Hundred Great Guns" , Merrill Lindsay, 1967, p.220), "...Augsburg control marks are the earliest known marks used on guns" with a bronze gun c.1480, noting there are marks found on crossbows as well. Also, that "...Augsburg had for a long time been a center for the manufacture of armour and had used identifying marks".

Since from early times such majuscule scripts were used in scriptoriums centuries earlier, and it is well known that Bishops and Abbots were often in effect controllers of weaponry and ordnance materials, might it be presumed that such style lettering would be adopted in marking weapons even in these later times? It sounds like if this is the case with the old Augsburg proof mark, then your suggestion is right on target.

It would be great if we could find this letter in this configuration among letters in these medieval scripts to corroborate, or perhaps the letter became stylized independantly to become the specific marking rather than a copy of the actual type letter itself.

Also, I wonder of the mark can be found on armour and crossbows as well?

All the best,
Jim

[Matchlock]

Hi Carl M,

Even though you had the advantage of actually handling the sword I wonder how many doubtlessly genuine 500 year old two hand swords you have had the chance to handle. We have the privilege not only to do this regularly in museums, but in Ottmar's collection as well. And this invaluable practical experience, including 30 years of intense study of original surfaces, has enabled us to tell wrong from right and Victorian pieces from Renaissance.

Aboe, I mentioned the fact that originally there was a small brass plate riveted on top of the pommel which, together with the tang rivet, is now missing. Nobody repairing such a piece, be it in the 19th century or later, would just hammer the tang bluntly bent but would care to rivet it. The only possible explanation for that crudely bent tang is a working repair done on the battelfield in a hurry and probably with a stone - when all that mattered was that the pommel was fixed and the sword could be employed! That fact that nobody had cared to embellish that work is the ultimate proof that this piece is completely original and in virtually untouched condition for almost 50 years!

The decscription of both swords in the cataloge to have been mounted in the 19th c. actually amused us as it sure dumped the prices. They really are all original!


And: the early 16th c. Landsknecht two hand swords were huge and heavy indeed! I attach an illustration by Sebald Beham, Nürnberg, ca. 1530. They should in no case be compared with the late 16th c. two hand swords that were never used for combat but just as bearing swords (Vortrageschwerter).

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

Hi Jim,

Thank you for such a thoughtful and profound reply, as of course always!

Yes, I have seen the Augsburg A, together with a smith's mark, on the barrel of a ca. 1580 wheellock sporting gun, the stock profusely inlaid with engraved staghorn, and I guess I also remember seeing that A struck on 500 year old helmets and breasts.

Interestingly enough, the common Gothic majuscule A as used in 15th c. books greatly differed from the Augsburg shape. I attach two samples from a ca. 1420 Prague illuminated manuscript. This, in my experience, is not unusual though letters struck into stone, wood or iron do not look the same as calligraphic letters as they are composite by various tool strikes.

Best,
Michael

[Carl M]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Hi Carl M,

Even though you had the advantage of actually handling the sword I wonder how many doubtlessly genuine 500 year old two hand swords you have had the chance to handle. We have the privilege not only to do this regularly in museums, but in Ottmar's collection as well. And this invaluable practical experience, including 30 years of intense study of original surfaces, has enabled us to tell wrong from right and Victorian pieces from Renaissance.

Aboe, I mentioned the fact that originally there was a small brass plate riveted on top of the pommel which, together with the tang rivet, is now missing. Nobody repairing such a piece, be it in the 19th century or later, would just hammer the tang bluntly bent but would care to rivet it. The only possible explanation for that crudely bent tang is a working repair done on the battelfield in a hurry and probably with a stone - when all that mattered was that the pommel was fixed and the sword could be employed! That fact that nobody had cared to embellish that work is the ultimate proof that this piece is completely original and in virtually untouched condition for almost 50 years!

The decscription of both swords in the cataloge to have been mounted in the 19th c. actually amused us as it sure dumped the prices. They really are all original!


And: the early 16th c. Landsknecht two hand swords were huge and heavy indeed! I attach an illustration by Sebald Beham, Nürnberg, ca. 1530. They should in no case be compared with the late 16th c. two hand swords that were never used for combat but just as bearing swords (Vortrageschwerter).

Best,
Michael

Hi Michael,

I hope you did not take offense at my post. I was not suggesting that you and your friend did not know what you were doing. I was hoping to make you feel better about not getting the sword.

As for my experience, I have held numerous originals in the years I have been collecting. I have had the had the privelege of being in the vaults in the Royal Armouries at Leeds and the Higgins museum in Massachussetts as well as numerous shows and auctions.

I have to respectfully disagree about the sword being untouched and the bent tang over the pommel being a battlefield repair. While such a story is wonderful to picture, there is no evidence of it here. Saying that "nobody" repairing a piece in the 19th c. or later would ever hammer the tang crudely like that just isn't true. I have seen all sorts of crude, amateur repairs over the years, including home-made pommels; wrong, composite pommels, spraypainted guards; destroyed, over polished, mirror bright pieces; and even bent and poorly smashed peens. I am sure your friend, Ottmar and yourself have seen such repairs on pieces in the past as well. I have never seen that guard typology on a genuine two hander. I have seen the double ring crossguard, but nothing like this. There just seems to be too much steel. I know that there were unique items made historically, but the guard on this one seems historically anacronistic. I have no doubt that the blade is genuine, but after handling it, I have to say that whomever put it together to restore it got the weight ratios of the mounts wrong. There was no way one could fight with this thing.

In my opinion, the more likely scenario for the bent tang/peen is perhaps someone took it apart 80 years ago and cut some small, rotted portion of the handle away, leaving too much tang and simply bent the tang over the pommel. Either that, or they hammered the pommel on, smashing some of the wooden handle, which exposed too much tang. Who knows?

As for the early 16th century swords being "heavy," well, heavy is a relative term. As I mentioned, I would put most early 16th century two handers in the 6-7 lb range, and well balanced. I do not have the exact weight of this particular one, but it certainly felt heavier than that, and the balance was astoundingly poor - more evidence that the restorer who made the mounts got the weight ratios and dimensions wrong. This is just my opinion, but it is backed up by evidence and expert opinion from the Higgins Armory Museum, and the Parke-Bernet Galleries who sold it in 1951. I am sure, had those two institutions thought the sword were all original, that Auctions Imperial would have listed it as so, and not as a composite with 19th century restored mounts.

Still a beautiful, piece though! No doubt!

[Swordfish]

Hi all,

that the pommel of the twohander was hammered onto the tang
during combat is a nice theory, but very unlikely. Does any
Landsknecht has the time during fighting, to search the pommel
fallen on the ground, an hammer it onto the tang?
And why is the tang ab. 1 cm too long for the hilt?
Does the Landsknecht has shortened the grip before he put on the
pommel? All during combat? All very unlikely!
All looks as if the hilt was associated later.

That the letter A on the first sword is the mark of Augsburg is
also very unlikely. Why Augsburg and not Aachen or any other
town starting with A?
Most sword blades of the 12th, 13th and 14th have inlaid
symbols , the meanig is unknown today.
I attach photos of a sword dating c. 1200 with a letter A.

Best wishes
Susi

[Jim McDougall]

Michael, thank you so much for the kind words, and for the illustrations of the haquebut c.1600 with one of these majuscule 'A''s.

In going through "Waffenkunde" (W.Boeheim, 1890, p.678) an marking which is very much like the shape of this A with the crossbar atop and no center bar is shown as unidentified, but attributed to Augsburg 15th century. Thus, it seems that the character may have been known without the central rib as well and in Augsburg.

In Boeheim, other examples of these type A letters are seen with other initials and types of crossbar and serif, some attributed to 16th century makers or armourers such as Durer, Aldegrever and Glockendon all from various cities.

It seems that even among the Toledo and Madrid smiths a number of them of the 16th century used the letter A enclosed in cartouche of varying shapes, but often square, with one using the identical style A with V shape crossbar (listed in "Arms and Armour", A. Demmin, 1877, p.567). This one is shown to Alonzo de Caba, armourer. Another with extended bar top cap and drooping serifs at ends, straight center bar to Alonzo de Buena, of same period. There are a number of other A types with varying flourish, serif or structure.
While these obviously indicate the initial of the armourer, it was interesting to see the similarity in majascule style A to these German examples, suggesting the well known traffic in arms and armour commerce between these countries.

Returning to the more arcane, with the mysterious Westphalia tribunals previously mentioned, they had several little known coded alphabets, in which the diagonal lines with top bar and dropped serifs at the ends in the basic shape of the A sans crossbar......in one alphabet the letter 'L' is signified and in another the letter 'Y'. (Demmin, p.582).

So it would seem perhaps that while the letter A could signify Augsburg in the case of the stamp on the haquebut and other items, these stylized majascule letters with varying embellishments also may have been more widely used with different meanings in other parlances. There are many markings which reflect makers marks, with others being monograms of rulers of minor principalities, then of course the guild marks of various centers of arms production.

These are the mysteries that make the study of these blade markings so facinating!





All the best,
Jim

[cornelistromp]

Hi Gentlemen,

very nice discussion, I hope I don't put some oil on the fire with my opinion.
the sword is a composed sword but probably this has been done in the 16th century.
The blade is much older, probably late 14th early 15th century and marked with the Tau cross or St Antons cross. The Guard is very atypical , but like Oakeshott claims; that you never have seen it means nothing unless you have seen them all, anyway it looks 16th century to me, the patin corresponds with the pommel and it has the same mythical creature heads as some of the landsknecht katzbalgers have at their guards.
The bent tang however this could have been done recently or maybe not so recent who can tell ? Grip can be a replacement or authentic and 1cm shortened.

Best,

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by cornelistromp

Hi Gentlemen,

very nice discussion, I hope I don't put some oil on the fire with my opinion.
the sword is a composed sword but probably this has been done in the 16th century.
The blade is much older, probably late 14th early 15th century and marked with the Tau cross or St Antons cross. The Guard is very atypical , but like Oakeshott claims; that you never have seen it means nothing unless you have seen them all, anyway it looks 16th century to me, the patin corresponds with the pommel and it has the same mythical creature heads as some of the landsknecht katzbalgers have at their guards.
The bent tang however this could have been done recently or maybe not so recent who can tell ? Grip can be a replacement or authentic and 1cm shortened.

Best,

It really has been a great discussion, and all the better having you join us!!! The Oakeshott axiom is definitely well placed, as there always seem to be previously unknown variations of established forms, which usually makes it extremely hard to assess from photos. I admit I had originally thought these were as described in the catalog as 19th century refurbished but the views by you, Michael and his friend are compelling.

I am unclear about your note on the tau cross, which I thought looked like a T. Which of the markings do you mean?

All the best,
Jim

[cornelistromp]

Hi Jim,

this crux commissa was used by the knights of saint Antoine, sant Antonio, Sankt Anton, sant Antoni.
pictures of a similar cross on a 15thc sword and pictures of "a Ordre Militaire et Hospitalier de Saint-Antoine",knights of christ, painting of van Eyk.
look at the shield of the knight in the front with the cross of blood, it has the woording
D(OMINU)S FORTIS ADONAY SABAOT and from left to right EM(MANU)EL LH.S. XR. AGLA. and the in the middle of the shield...... the T-cross.

best,

[Matchlock]

Hi Jasper,

Thank you for this remarkable post!

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

From:

E. Heer: Der neue Stockel, 3 vols. with marks of international gun and crossbow smiths, Schwäbisch Hall, 1978.

Best,
Michael

[cornelistromp]

Hi Michael,

I belief, I have a 2 handsword with this A mark, I will post pictures later

best,

[Matchlock]

Hi Jasper,

I'm dying to see it!

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

Here is the Gothic majuscule A, struck as the Augsburg town mark above a decorative Gothic trefoil frieze on a heavy bronze cannon barrel, ca. 1520, from a German auction in 1982.

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

Hi there,

I am very glad to add that the exceptional two hand sword lot 164 illustrated in detail above has meanwhile also entered my friend's collection, so the two are together again after all. We have good reasons to assume this fine sword to date as early as ca. 1520!

All's well that ends well!

Best,
Michael

[Jim McDougall]

Yay!!!!
Good news all around! First, welcome home Michael, sure have missed you here!!!!
and outstanding news on the sword, Im extremely happy for this outcome.

I hope we can pick up where we left off on this, there's a lot to be learned from these swords.

All the very best,
Jim

[Matchlock]

Thanks beyond limits, Jim!!! (given this is anything nearing correct American English

I too missed all of you, plus the forum as my main universe - believe me!

And: yeah, it sure takes a lot of financial sacrifices to literally trace down a really exceptional piece over continents and a coupla weeks, just to carry it home at last.

My friend Ottmar is not rich so he will have to rid himself of some 17th c. items in order to be able and keep those earliest pieces! It's just been sorta my collecting concept for some 30 years anyway ...

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

Double post - could any of the mods please delete it? Lee?
Btw, I lost your email - please do email me!

Thanks and best,
Michael

[stephen wood]

see this post regarding the "A" marking...

ottoman flintlock