Sword hilt for ID

[Atlantia]

Ok chaps.
New game.

Those quillion terminals are rather distinctive.
What is that one the ends? A leaf, feathers a tuft of grass?
What do we see those representing? Anyone seen ones like them bofroe?

[M ELEY]

Yawn...OK, I seem to remember that this is a forum that is open to all opinions, not only one's own ( ). Whereas some Forums which will remain nameless choose to scorn any theories but those of the chosen, I feel that this Thread points out that NONE of us have really pinned this bird down. I acknowledge that this might be an eagle, it might be a crane, it might be Woody Wood Pecker...but I still hold that I believe, IMHO, that it probably is Spanish colonial or Mexican.
Eagle hilts were indeed common and popular throughout Europe, in the Americas and Spanish outposts. Although the Chinese and Japanese used cranes and other fowl in their art, not so much on their sword hilts. Likewise, hanger-type blades were extremely rare in those cultures.
Arabic? Please! It's a hanger-type sword, hardly popular or common in the Arab world. If you postulate that it is such, it would be a one-off. Note the classic Euro guard and opposite-facing quillons. We see these on Dutch, French, British, Spanish, German, etc, etc. We also see them in a very similar style from 19th century American (yes, I said it...American) eagle heads. NO, I no longer think this is N. American, but I do feel it is an early 19th c, piece. I think by pinning down the time-line, we eliminate some of the candidates. Some German hirschfanger continued to have opposing animal heads on their quillons, but by the end of the 18th century, most countries found it passe. Gone were the Dutch hangers and early English hangers with lion/eagle quillons. On the other hand, Mexican swords and espada continued to have animal-type hilts featuring eagle heads, snakes, etc.
As far as other ethnographic interpretations of this sword, I still doubt that a sword with a (read carefully) fine cast hilt with such detail in the feathers would appeal. Likewise, the hilt styling is Euro/American/Span colonial, the blade type is also. Note on this hilt the raised area on the pommel where the tang is located. This is a feature I have never seen on an Arabic, Chinese, Malay, etc, sword. Hence, my reasoning.
Regarding the Medicus Collection, I have the most profound respect to this world-reknowned collection and do not challenge its authenticity or merit. In bringing up the Lattimer collection, for which I too have the book, I believe some of the swords owned by the family are, in fact, mislabeled. This happens in all great collections and should not detract from the value these artifacts have in regards to educating. Case in point (for those who have Hartzler's book)-
Fig 54, labeled as "Spanish or French naval dirk, late 18th" is, in fact, a wavy-bladed Philippine bolo commonly identified on this forum.
Fig 57, labeled a "French style dirk", is a common mid/late 19th century Mexican eagle-pommel dirk seen on this forum.
Fig 58- see above.
Fig 129, listed as a European short sword, is another common 19th c. Philippine bolo.
Fig 210, a hunting sword from the mid-Atlantic colonies, is blatantly Spanish colonial or Mex period.
Fig 211- ditto.
I could go on, but my point is two-fold. One, when I mentioned 'Mexican' pieces in the Lattimer collection, this is what I was referring to. More importantly, I was trying to point out that eagle-head swords were MOST popular and repeated in N America and in Span colonies into the 19th century. Many of the eagle head swords in this collection bear swords with Spanish inscriptions. This doesn't mean they were Spanish made, but it does elude to the fact that here in the Americas, figural hilts were extremely popular. Is it really such a stretch to see that the new Mexican Republic would not look to the American eagle-head swords from the same period for inspiration?

That is my argument and you can take it for what it's worth. Now, I will batten down the hatches and wait for the grievous onslaught that is sure to follow. Please forgive any misspellings and such as I have been up for almost 36 hours. Time for bed

[laEspadaAncha]

I think when one takes into consideration not just the bird's head pommel and rendering of the feathers, but also the stylings of the rest of the hilt and the blade - in totality - it is likely to be of European Colonial origin.

I have never seen anything attributed to the Middle East that looked even remotely similar, and I would challenge the claim of use of this motif in Japanese or Chinese sculpture as well. To equate a questionable attribution to a published collection to an unqualified attribution to cultural complexes to which there is no stylistic input that would merit such a consideration is a false equivalency at best, as while this bird (head) rendering deos not resemble any of the published examples in the Medicus collection, there are plenty of obvious attributes IMO - the hangar blade, the s-curve quillons, the guard - to suggest a Colonial attribution.

Neither is what bird is represented on the pommel a red herring IMO, as recognized stylistic similarities are helpful - if not important - in helping identify from region of influence this sword came.

To my eye, a Spanish Colonial attribution seems most likely, though 'Nando's last post does introduce the interesting possibility of Indian manufacture, as there is a 'character' about the brass casting that for whatever reason recalls Indian brasswork to me.

[Hotspur]

Yawn...OK, I seem to remember that this is a forum that is open to all opinions, not only one's own ( ). Whereas some Forums which will remain nameless choose to scorn any theories but those of the chosen, I feel that this .......

Which is very much the same type of cliquish behavior here Mark. Why drag any board through the mud?

What I have not offered is my opinion of either the Hartzler book nor The Flayderman/ Mowbray publication but instead have rebutted your thoughts of exacting details of plates you have mentioned in regard to the subject sword.

I was fairly clear in my initial post to this and agreed there may be a cause to think southern American colonial types. So, we are trotting the globe once again.

As to Chinese and Japanese art, I mention it in regard to how many ways a feather might be depicted, so certainly you will the same see stylings of feathers worldwide.

Cheers

GC

[M ELEY]

Hello, gentlemen. I'm up again...

Sorry for my earlier 'broadside' ( ). Lack of sleep and working much these days in a bad economy. I truly don't like to ruffle people's feathers (sorry for the bad pun), it's just that I wished to keep the thread going and with all possible considerations still open. Likewise, again, I cannot over-emphysize the importance of Mr hartzler's work (I have his Tomahawks book as well). My rather rambling point to all that was that even among experts and collectors (I am the latter, don't claim to be the former), you will still have differences in opinion. I also welcome criticism, was just defending my position, but PERHAPS a little too caustically. If I was rude, I apologize.
Please continue this discussion on this enigmatic sword.

Fernando, where are the pictures!!!! Just kidding! I know...you are working on it. I really like this sword, regardless of what its origin might end up being.

[fernando]

So, Gentlemen,
Back to a smooth path ... which could only be, with the fine members involved in this rather interesting discussion.
No Mark, according to recent feedback, i am afraid no further pictures wil be available. .
... Which is pity, though

[Jim McDougall]

WOW! Mark, thats what I call a broadside!!!! and brilliantly written for someone well rested, let alone without sleep for 36 hours!
You have really well stated that we need to openly receive all opinions expressed here, and carefully review all supporting evidence in considering evaluations toward analysis of the weapon in discussion.

Here we have had some great input, including the material you presented from those collections. My inclinations were toward Spanish colonial as well, but were admittedly becoming tenuous as I tried to find explanations for the appearance of the birdhead on this hanger. The 'Arabic' suggestion for this hanger was as far as I can see eliminated at the outset.

The detail in this birdhead is indeed well done, and seems to faithfully represent the species intended, rather than the rather stylized forms often seen on native examples in Africa such as the example Fernando posted. The image of the hornbill against the hilt of this sword was of course resoundingly compelling, and these birds were keenly important in the cultures of West Africa.

As Gene has pointed out, and you have reminded us, these alternating quillons in form as well as finely featured terminals seem far from the brass hilts of those West African regions, as does the scalloped shellguard.
Despite rebuttal toward the notable high relief feathers, they do still seem Spanish colonial. I completely agree with the influence of eagleheads of North America on Spanish colonial arms, but the conundrum of the distinctly un-eagle look of the birdhead on such an extremely well executed hilt remains.

I think another factor which may being this closer together is the prevalent trade routes from Spains colonies in North Africa, which of course actively traded into West Africa. Many of the curious edged weapons we have thought to be North African have ended up being Spanish colonial, such as the 'Berber' sabres and the fingerstalled swords, both turning up identified from Brazil to Cuba. The Spanish Main which prevailed well through the 19th century included these African areas as well as the Spanish colonies in South, Central America and Mexico all the way to the Philippines in the west.
Just as the unique beak and appearance of the toucan might have had an influence on an eaglehead style hilt, so too could the hornbill.

Here I'll batten my hatches too, and hope for responses good or bad
Its all discussion and open thinking so gentlemen...fire at will !!!