Mr. Oakeshott's Sword

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I had puzzled over side rings and found this useful video which explains it very well Please see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfQmVQIgwa4 and below I add for interest...others.

Develop your own swordmine...at https://www.pinterest.com/search/pins/?q=ring%20hilt%20swords&rs=typed&0=ring|typed&1=hi lt|typed&2=swords|typed

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

That's not a Hilt... This is a Hilt!!!

[kronckew]

side rings? THIS is a ring: recent munitions grade german side sword based in a late 16c design. (i gotta clean off that black stuff)

no fancy schmancy frills and superfluous extra rings on the palm side. finger ring for mingering per the video. note longer 'upper guard branch and curved lower branch to further protect your hand.

[Jim McDougall]

Yikes!!!
This is getting to the "....now THIS is a knife" !!! syndrome
-Croc Dundee

Excellent entries, discussion and fantastic images. Interesting to see how these side rings developed along with fighting techniques, and how more complex hilts evolved (i.e, rapiers and baskets).

Great hilt there Ibrahiim!! and again thank you for the art and images.

Jasper, thank you for the insight into development of these rings, and I concur as well.

[Ed]

If in early post medieval Europe, a certain thing or object was common enough to become "popularized" in manuscripts, for how many years had these objects in question been circulating?

The point is that appearance in a manuscript (or in art generally) is nothing more than a terminus ante quem and might well be associated with something that had been in existence for many years prior.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Ed

If in early post medieval Europe, a certain thing or object was common enough to become "popularized" in manuscripts, for how many years had these objects in question been circulating?

The point is that appearance in a manuscript (or in art generally) is nothing more than a terminus ante quem and might well be associated with something that had been in existence for many years prior.

Meaning that, the swords depicted by Vasco Gonçalo (circa 1450) in the panels of São Vicente de Fora, being consistent enough to represent real swords, could be examples of models already used in earlier times ?


.

[cornelistromp]

Generally speaking, in paintings and etchings from +- 1450 onwards (or so) there is no time difference between the displayed weapons and what was worn at the time of painting.
especially in commissioned orders from individuals, they wanted to be depicted to the latest fashion and with most modern weapons.
if I take the night watch of Rembrandt, every town guard had to pay an amount and the most wealthy guards who paid the most are clearly illustrated in the light on the foreground.with their weapons and beautiful clothes clearly in focus.
(there is one guy on the night watch, who did not want to pay the agreed amount, he is depicted behind a outstretched arm and therefore unrecognizable.)

if I see the landsknecht etchings of Hopfer, Graf, CB, Schoen, Beham, Amman and others, the swords shown, are all from the time of the etching.



when in the 16th century Romans were painted they were often depicted with 16th century weapons. I suspect that old weapons just were not known
by the artist. So he painted weapons from his time, the arms he knew.

@ Fernando the swords in the panels of São Vicente de Fora are mid 15thC, and with the finger guards, the 'pas d'ane, very progressive for the time.
the knights keep their sword visibly pride in their hand as a symbol of beauty, status, dedication and ecclesiastical power and perhaps modernity .

Compare this with how the Dutch guards of the white flag are showing their ultramodern small swords in 1648, painting by JA Rotius

[fernando]

Duly noted, Jasper.
Great painting.