Heavy Sword 1602 for discussion

AHorsa · 12th October 2015, 08:39 AM

Dear All,

I am very interested in you opinion about this sword. The blade is engraved with "VDACES TORTUNA IVAT 1602" and "ME FECIT PETHER MUNSTEN" as well as two markers (maure heads). The overall length is 90cm, Blade is 73cm and 5cm wide
Do you think this is a genuine and matching piece or a composite or later replic?

Looking forward to your thoughts!

Best
Andreas

fernando · 12th October 2015, 12:54 PM

Hi Andreas,
The right spelling would be AUDACES FORTUNA JUVAT, a latin proverb meaning FORTUNE FAVORS THE CORAGEOUS.
Peter Munsten, a German swordsmith who later immigrated to England, to work at 'Honeslau'.
Hopefuly members with a better knowledge may be able to comment on your sword's authencity.

fernando · 12th October 2015, 04:27 PM

By the way Andreas, don't you think the point of that blade looks odd ?

.
Meanwhile, these are the usual marks of Peter Munster.

.

CSinTX · 12th October 2015, 05:25 PM

Better pictures would help but I think the blade looks newer to me. I could be wrong though. My experience is fairly limited.

Maybe we can get a detailed pic of the end of the blade?

AHorsa · 12th October 2015, 06:48 PM

Thanks for the replies so far. Indeed, for me also the point of the blade looks a bit strange. I requested better pictures.

Cheers
Andreas

Jim McDougall · 13th October 2015, 04:35 AM

While I am hoping that Ulfberht and Jasper might comment on this as their exposure to these weapons is far greater than mine, I wanted to add what I can.
The blade is indeed somewhat disturbing as far as the curiously and dramatically reprofiled point, as if the blade had been cut down and the point added.
Also I would expect to see Turks heads on the wire wrapped grips rather than ferrules.

In checking the usual compendiums of markings, it seems the Munsten family had interesting complexities.
I would note that the markings Fernando shows in post #3 were puzzling to me (they are in Gyngell, 1959, which I always thought reliable) as the date 1516 is too early for the recorded Munstens. Andreis and his brother Peter were born in 1547 and 1552, respectively. Thus the Gyngell date is far too early and the head mark seems more attributed to Andres than his brother Peter.

While Andres went to Toledo in 1587, Peter remained in Solingen where he died in 1628. His son Peter (the younger) lived 1580-1629.

Though a Peter Munsten is supposed to have gone to Hounslow, the name does not appear in the records of the makers there as far as I found. Also, the Hounslow factory began around 1620-34. But as this sword is presumed to be Solingen made, the point is moot.

As for this 'PETHER MUNSTEN' the only one I found using that spelling of Peter was 'the younger', His mark was the Virgin and child, and his stamped markings included xx IHN x SOLINGEN.
The 'Solingen' in all of the markings I located was always properly spelled without use of the majuscule 'A', though the 'V' in place of 'U' was used in the according words.

I am assuming the 'maures' heads intends to mean 'moors' heads or 'blackamoor', marking symbols which were only used by Andres, but not by the Peter's.

The placement of these stamped marks paired at the ricasso as what seems part of the profiling lines on the ricasso 'shoulders' seem unusual to me also.
The date '1602' seems incongruent with the rest of the lettering, as if placed as addition, but does correspond to the period for this maker.

While there are compelling aspects of this sword, these are the elements I find uncomfortable, and as noted, I look forward to observations from the others.

12th October 2015, 08:39 AM	#1
AHorsa Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Rhineland Posts: 367	Heavy Sword 1602 for discussion Dear All, I am very interested in you opinion about this sword. The blade is engraved with "VDACES TORTUNA IVAT 1602" and "ME FECIT PETHER MUNSTEN" as well as two markers (maure heads). The overall length is 90cm, Blade is 73cm and 5cm wide Do you think this is a genuine and matching piece or a composite or later replic? Looking forward to your thoughts! Best Andreas Attached Images

12th October 2015, 12:54 PM	#2
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Hi Andreas, The right spelling would be AUDACES FORTUNA JUVAT, a latin proverb meaning FORTUNE FAVORS THE CORAGEOUS. Peter Munsten, a German swordsmith who later immigrated to England, to work at 'Honeslau'. Hopefuly members with a better knowledge may be able to comment on your sword's authencity.

12th October 2015, 04:27 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	By the way Andreas, don't you think the point of that blade looks odd ? . Meanwhile, these are the usual marks of Peter Munster. . Attached Images Last edited by fernando; 14th October 2015 at 01:39 PM.

12th October 2015, 05:25 PM	#4
CSinTX Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Posts: 233	Better pictures would help but I think the blade looks newer to me. I could be wrong though. My experience is fairly limited. Maybe we can get a detailed pic of the end of the blade?

12th October 2015, 06:48 PM	#5
AHorsa Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Rhineland Posts: 367	Thanks for the replies so far. Indeed, for me also the point of the blade looks a bit strange. I requested better pictures. Cheers Andreas

13th October 2015, 04:35 AM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,950	While I am hoping that Ulfberht and Jasper might comment on this as their exposure to these weapons is far greater than mine, I wanted to add what I can. The blade is indeed somewhat disturbing as far as the curiously and dramatically reprofiled point, as if the blade had been cut down and the point added. Also I would expect to see Turks heads on the wire wrapped grips rather than ferrules. In checking the usual compendiums of markings, it seems the Munsten family had interesting complexities. I would note that the markings Fernando shows in post #3 were puzzling to me (they are in Gyngell, 1959, which I always thought reliable) as the date 1516 is too early for the recorded Munstens. Andreis and his brother Peter were born in 1547 and 1552, respectively. Thus the Gyngell date is far too early and the head mark seems more attributed to Andres than his brother Peter. While Andres went to Toledo in 1587, Peter remained in Solingen where he died in 1628. His son Peter (the younger) lived 1580-1629. Though a Peter Munsten is supposed to have gone to Hounslow, the name does not appear in the records of the makers there as far as I found. Also, the Hounslow factory began around 1620-34. But as this sword is presumed to be Solingen made, the point is moot. As for this 'PETHER MUNSTEN' the only one I found using that spelling of Peter was 'the younger', His mark was the Virgin and child, and his stamped markings included xx IHN x SOLINGEN. The 'Solingen' in all of the markings I located was always properly spelled without use of the majuscule 'A', though the 'V' in place of 'U' was used in the according words. I am assuming the 'maures' heads intends to mean 'moors' heads or 'blackamoor', marking symbols which were only used by Andres, but not by the Peter's. The placement of these stamped marks paired at the ricasso as what seems part of the profiling lines on the ricasso 'shoulders' seem unusual to me also. The date '1602' seems incongruent with the rest of the lettering, as if placed as addition, but does correspond to the period for this maker. While there are compelling aspects of this sword, these are the elements I find uncomfortable, and as noted, I look forward to observations from the others.