More a partisan than a spontoon

fernando · 16th August 2010, 12:07 AM

The blade tip is reinforced for armour piercing like no other.
The steel looks nice and well forged ... i would say

I am waiting for a written record from the seller, but his first approach was that it is North European, XVII-XVIII century; probably mid XVIII, i would say.
We can see a similar specimen in G.C. Newmann (picture 105 PA, page 218).
I wouldn't know if the haft is the original one, but it surely looks rather nice ... and not made the other day.
Would anyone care for coments?
Thanks

-

Jim McDougall · 16th August 2010, 08:39 PM

Interesting to see armor piercing on American spontoon, and this is indeed fashioned in the partisan style of Europe (16th-18thc.) with the shaped, cusped wings. In Stone, a Flemish example of 18th century (p.483, fig. 616, #18); and an Austrian (op. cit. #11) of c.1740. Neither have the armor piercing feature.
In the Wallace collection a Saxon example c.1700 similar, again no armor piercing.

fernando · 16th August 2010, 09:20 PM

Hi Jim,
Thanks for your input

.
I wouldn't know how certain G.C. Newmann was when he labeled example 105.PA as an American spontoon.
In page 210 he calls the one in picture 65.PA an European partizan.
Probably he has his reasons

.
I confess i don't have the knowledge to distinguish the difference, although i am convinced that my example is European ... for obvious reasons.

junker · 29th August 2010, 01:47 PM

Hi ferando,

one more time a very good piece and the first time i may can help.
Because i like polearms very much.

I will call it european too.

In Blankwaffen of Heribert Seitz there is a picture of a swedish partisan from around 1625 on page 229. This is very close to yours an with thick tip also. This one has engravings of Gustav Adolph II.

In Lyle price guide of milaria there is one on page 284 an caled it as a early 18 th century with no origin.

If i have the posibility i will scann the pages

Dirk

fernando · 29th August 2010, 06:14 PM

Hi Dirk,
Thanks a lot for your input.
To tell you the true, the seller also mentioned it would be Suedish, but he said he would have to consult his files for confirmation ... but i had no answer yet

.
It was i who decided to use the term north european, instead of Suedish.
I would be most thankfull if you could scan those pages.

junker · 30th August 2010, 05:00 PM

Hi fernando,

of course here are the pictures.
Little poor quality because i had to make it by a fax.

First one from Seitz which called it a swedish partisan 1620-1630.
This one seem to have a swolen tip. it has a octagonal (?) base and engravings of Gutav Adolph.

Second one some older auction results from Lyle which mentioned no country but the swollen tip. One 17 th century the other 18 th .

An by the way, i like your item very well

best regards

Dirk

junker · 30th August 2010, 05:03 PM

sorry, the decoration was not engraved but etched

junker · 30th August 2010, 05:06 PM

this one is maybe a little better

fernando · 30th August 2010, 09:16 PM

Excelent info Dirk,
Surely my piece is a Swedish 17th century partisan.
Thank you very much indeed.
... and thank you for finding it an interesting item

.
Fernando

29th August 2010, 01:47 PM	#4
junker Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 140	swedish Hi ferando, one more time a very good piece and the first time i may can help. Because i like polearms very much. I will call it european too. In Blankwaffen of Heribert Seitz there is a picture of a swedish partisan from around 1625 on page 229. This is very close to yours an with thick tip also. This one has engravings of Gustav Adolph II. In Lyle price guide of milaria there is one on page 284 an caled it as a early 18 th century with no origin. If i have the posibility i will scann the pages Dirk

30th August 2010, 05:00 PM	#6
junker Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 140	pictures Hi fernando, of course here are the pictures. Little poor quality because i had to make it by a fax. First one from Seitz which called it a swedish partisan 1620-1630. This one seem to have a swolen tip. it has a octagonal (?) base and engravings of Gutav Adolph. Second one some older auction results from Lyle which mentioned no country but the swollen tip. One 17 th century the other 18 th . An by the way, i like your item very well best regards Dirk Attached Images

30th August 2010, 05:03 PM	#7
junker Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 140	decoration sorry, the decoration was not engraved but etched

30th August 2010, 05:06 PM	#8
junker Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 140	better pic maybe this one is maybe a little better Attached Images

16th August 2010, 12:07 AM	#1
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	More a partisan than a spontoon The blade tip is reinforced for armour piercing like no other. The steel looks nice and well forged ... i would say I am waiting for a written record from the seller, but his first approach was that it is North European, XVII-XVIII century; probably mid XVIII, i would say. We can see a similar specimen in G.C. Newmann (picture 105 PA, page 218). I wouldn't know if the haft is the original one, but it surely looks rather nice ... and not made the other day. Would anyone care for coments? Thanks - Attached Images

16th August 2010, 08:39 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,948	Interesting to see armor piercing on American spontoon, and this is indeed fashioned in the partisan style of Europe (16th-18thc.) with the shaped, cusped wings. In Stone, a Flemish example of 18th century (p.483, fig. 616, #18); and an Austrian (op. cit. #11) of c.1740. Neither have the armor piercing feature. In the Wallace collection a Saxon example c.1700 similar, again no armor piercing.

16th August 2010, 09:20 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Hi Jim, Thanks for your input . I wouldn't know how certain G.C. Newmann was when he labeled example 105.PA as an American spontoon. In page 210 he calls the one in picture 65.PA an European partizan. Probably he has his reasons . I confess i don't have the knowledge to distinguish the difference, although i am convinced that my example is European ... for obvious reasons.

29th August 2010, 06:14 PM	#5
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Hi Dirk, Thanks a lot for your input. To tell you the true, the seller also mentioned it would be Suedish, but he said he would have to consult his files for confirmation ... but i had no answer yet . It was i who decided to use the term north european, instead of Suedish. I would be most thankfull if you could scan those pages.

30th August 2010, 09:16 PM	#9
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Excelent info Dirk, Surely my piece is a Swedish 17th century partisan. Thank you very much indeed. ... and thank you for finding it an interesting item . Fernando