Spanish Bilbo Circa 1700

fernando · 1st January 2018, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madnumforce

That's extremely interesting. Well, I'm not so interested in maker's marks, but discovering the Spanish tradition is something new to me. It's amazing to see typically Spanish designs surviving in renewed, late 18th century forms.

Personally i am a passionate of marks. It is a vast universe to dive in. Just don't push me into it

..

Cathey · 2nd January 2018, 12:18 AM

Hi Fernando

I am also passionate about marks but find them very frustrating. The only H I could find that vaguely resembled the mark on this sword was listed as Maria Hortuna 17th Century Esoana (Toledo) Ref LENKIEWICZ-Zygmunt 1000 Marks of European Blade Makers Pp29. I have attached the extract.

As for this H or whatever it is, looks like a squat H to me though, I am hoping someone out there has seen it before and can shed some light on it.

With regard to this sword, what appears to be unusual is that it is a backsword blade, not broadsword. All of these swords in my reference books are broadswords. This might be why the previous owner was of the opinion that the blade predates the hilt and that the original engraving has been removed or altered to accommodate a latter monarch.

Any other examples of these swords with backsword blades would be appreciated.

Also, this example has straight quillons, any thoughts about when these came in or where they around at the same time as the curved ones.

Cheers Cathey and Rex

fernando · 2nd January 2018, 05:43 PM

Let me still take some shots before more knowledged members show up to correct me ... which is not so difficult.
Hortuño Maria instead of Maria Hortuño makes all the difference ... in gender.
Hortuño being male, is not uncommon to have (female) Maria as a second name over here. Still i gather that this smith doesn't figure within this issue, nor he figures in listings by Palomares, Leguina, Gestoso or even Lhermite, who has been in Toledo around 1600 and listed its smiths and their marks. It could well be a less published smith, working for a contract; however his ambiguous mark (a H or maybe a small animal) on a rapier doens't appear to to fit in your case.
I had a further reading on these swords, a subject as vast as a bottomless well. The Boca de Caballo (assymmetrical shells) hilt had its beginnning in the XVII century, with the so called modelo 1650. It is also registered that such model had straight quillons.
Concerning blade markings ant their meddling with, authors like Juan L. Calvó admit the possibility of blades imported from Germany (Solingen) (before the opening of the Toledo factory in 1760) having their original inscriptons changed to more fit Spanish (Castillian) legends, but also possible that smiths installed in Spain marked their blades as produced in Germany to favour their commercialization.

http://www.elgrancapitan.org/foro/viewtopic.php?t=14794

On the other hand, one may notice that the Carlos IV initials (Cs. IV) in blades are rather identical to the one you have in your example, as may be seen in swords mounted for other military branches like Infantry, and such blades having a square back along more than 1/3 and double edgded until the point.
So for the approach of the blade predating the hilt, in another angle is the hilt that predates the blade. Definitely the (doubtful) H mark in the ricasso from (misterious ) Hortuño Maria would give a great push to cracking the riddle.

.

Foxbat · 2nd January 2018, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathey

Hi Fernando

With regard to this sword, what appears to be unusual is that it is a backsword blade, not broadsword. All of these swords in my reference books are broadswords.

Hello,

I can't see that in the pictures - to my eyes it looks like both edges are the same - no?

Cathey · 3rd January 2018, 05:08 AM

Hi Guys

the picture does not show it well but the blade is a back sword for 2/3 rd's and spear for the remaining length.

Cheers Cathey and Rex

Victrix · 3rd January 2018, 06:14 AM

Hi Cathey and Rex,

Lovely sword! Thanks for posting. I can see the flat edge in the top right photo. Lange messer springs to mind. It’s clearly intended as a cutting (chopping) weapon. Interesting that the blade has no fullers so the strenth is more important than agility. It seems to me that these Boca de Caballos or Espada de Conchas are all different, especially the blades. So production was not standardized and the customer was likely able to choose his favoured blade on which the hafters had fashioned a hilt. Is it possible that the ”H” is a picture of a small animal, like a perillo?

Best wishes for the New Year 2018.

fernando · 3rd January 2018, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victrix

...It seems to me that these Boca de Caballos or Espada de Conchas are all different, especially the blades. So production was not standardized and the customer was likely able to choose his favoured blade on which the hafters had fashioned a hilt...

Apparently efforts were made throughout first mid XVII century to obtain a definite normalization, but we have to consider that non rank and file versions were still of free choice

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victrix

... Is it possible that the ”H” is a picture of a small animal, like a perillo?...

It would have to be an atypical version

. Looking again into this, we see no trace of this punzon in the Catalogue of the Real Armeria, either. The only 'somehow' resembling this mark i spotted is in Gyngell's ARMOURERS MARKS (1959) as a secondary (?) mark for Juanes de la Huerta, AKA Juan de la Horta, or Orta, a famous master active in the XVI century. Don't ask me where in hell Gyngell found this mark, or a blade with it.

.

fernando · 5th January 2018, 12:01 PM

Time to rewind some previous assessments, as certainly contained erroneous conclusions.
I let myself concur with the mark in the ricasso being from a blade smith, forgetting that, the days in which this practice used to take place, were gone by the time the discussed sword was produced.
What actually started to appear with the founding of the Toledo Factory by Carlos III around 1760 was the inspection mark, that imposed by a Factory examining master. This was composed by a team of expert smiths, the first leading one being Dom Manuel Fernandez, as sourced by Juan José Pérez. This not meaning that this blade was produced in Toledo, at least until factual evidence is shown but, that circumstances appoint to such conclusion, is a point to consider. Its body inscriptions having probably been remarked, would not appoint to it being from a different origin but a swap of regimental allocations or an attitude of equivalent grade, for what this matters. Some remaining letters could denounce inscriptions relative to CABALLERIA DE LINEA, the broken D could be part of the King's crowned R, you name it. On the other hand, it remains hard to accept that this remarking operation was not not done by the Toledo Factory; even the 'asterisks' are precisely the same as those in other blades.
We may eventlly find in Calvó's ARMAMENTO ESPAÑOL ... blades of such extensive length as the one discussed, mounted in what he calls 'Arms for Personal Equipment', swords with blades with a square back in a little more than two thirds; this meaning that there were blade profiles for all tastes.
Nothing much to add to the discussed hilt; only that, having its shells fixed by four screws, would then be a Toledo Factory issue. The previous version of this 1728 model sword had such improvement from two screws introduced when starting its production in the Factory. It was already approached that, the straight quillons in this 'later' version was not common ... but possible. It is even registere that, in some cases, was the owner that had them straightened up.

.

2nd January 2018, 12:18 AM	#2
Cathey Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: adelaide south australia Posts: 284	Boca de Caballo Sword Hi Fernando I am also passionate about marks but find them very frustrating. The only H I could find that vaguely resembled the mark on this sword was listed as Maria Hortuna 17th Century Esoana (Toledo) Ref LENKIEWICZ-Zygmunt 1000 Marks of European Blade Makers Pp29. I have attached the extract. As for this H or whatever it is, looks like a squat H to me though, I am hoping someone out there has seen it before and can shed some light on it. With regard to this sword, what appears to be unusual is that it is a backsword blade, not broadsword. All of these swords in my reference books are broadswords. This might be why the previous owner was of the opinion that the blade predates the hilt and that the original engraving has been removed or altered to accommodate a latter monarch. Any other examples of these swords with backsword blades would be appreciated. Also, this example has straight quillons, any thoughts about when these came in or where they around at the same time as the curved ones. Cheers Cathey and Rex Attached Images

2nd January 2018, 05:43 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Let me still take some shots before more knowledged members show up to correct me ... which is not so difficult. Hortuño Maria instead of Maria Hortuño makes all the difference ... in gender. Hortuño being male, is not uncommon to have (female) Maria as a second name over here. Still i gather that this smith doesn't figure within this issue, nor he figures in listings by Palomares, Leguina, Gestoso or even Lhermite, who has been in Toledo around 1600 and listed its smiths and their marks. It could well be a less published smith, working for a contract; however his ambiguous mark (a H or maybe a small animal) on a rapier doens't appear to to fit in your case. I had a further reading on these swords, a subject as vast as a bottomless well. The Boca de Caballo (assymmetrical shells) hilt had its beginnning in the XVII century, with the so called modelo 1650. It is also registered that such model had straight quillons. Concerning blade markings ant their meddling with, authors like Juan L. Calvó admit the possibility of blades imported from Germany (Solingen) (before the opening of the Toledo factory in 1760) having their original inscriptons changed to more fit Spanish (Castillian) legends, but also possible that smiths installed in Spain marked their blades as produced in Germany to favour their commercialization. http://www.elgrancapitan.org/foro/viewtopic.php?t=14794 On the other hand, one may notice that the Carlos IV initials (Cs. IV) in blades are rather identical to the one you have in your example, as may be seen in swords mounted for other military branches like Infantry, and such blades having a square back along more than 1/3 and double edgded until the point. So for the approach of the blade predating the hilt, in another angle is the hilt that predates the blade. Definitely the (doubtful) H mark in the ricasso from (misterious ) Hortuño Maria would give a great push to cracking the riddle. . Attached Images

3rd January 2018, 05:08 AM	#5
Cathey Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: adelaide south australia Posts: 284	Yes it's a backsword Hi Guys the picture does not show it well but the blade is a back sword for 2/3 rd's and spear for the remaining length. Cheers Cathey and Rex

5th January 2018, 12:01 PM	#8
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Time to rewind some previous assessments, as certainly contained erroneous conclusions. I let myself concur with the mark in the ricasso being from a blade smith, forgetting that, the days in which this practice used to take place, were gone by the time the discussed sword was produced. What actually started to appear with the founding of the Toledo Factory by Carlos III around 1760 was the inspection mark, that imposed by a Factory examining master. This was composed by a team of expert smiths, the first leading one being Dom Manuel Fernandez, as sourced by Juan José Pérez. This not meaning that this blade was produced in Toledo, at least until factual evidence is shown but, that circumstances appoint to such conclusion, is a point to consider. Its body inscriptions having probably been remarked, would not appoint to it being from a different origin but a swap of regimental allocations or an attitude of equivalent grade, for what this matters. Some remaining letters could denounce inscriptions relative to CABALLERIA DE LINEA, the broken D could be part of the King's crowned R, you name it. On the other hand, it remains hard to accept that this remarking operation was not not done by the Toledo Factory; even the 'asterisks' are precisely the same as those in other blades. We may eventlly find in Calvó's ARMAMENTO ESPAÑOL ... blades of such extensive length as the one discussed, mounted in what he calls 'Arms for Personal Equipment', swords with blades with a square back in a little more than two thirds; this meaning that there were blade profiles for all tastes. Nothing much to add to the discussed hilt; only that, having its shells fixed by four screws, would then be a Toledo Factory issue. The previous version of this 1728 model sword had such improvement from two screws introduced when starting its production in the Factory. It was already approached that, the straight quillons in this 'later' version was not common ... but possible. It is even registere that, in some cases, was the owner that had them straightened up. . Attached Images

3rd January 2018, 06:14 AM	#6
Victrix Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Sweden Posts: 755	Hi Cathey and Rex, Lovely sword! Thanks for posting. I can see the flat edge in the top right photo. Lange messer springs to mind. It’s clearly intended as a cutting (chopping) weapon. Interesting that the blade has no fullers so the strenth is more important than agility. It seems to me that these Boca de Caballos or Espada de Conchas are all different, especially the blades. So production was not standardized and the customer was likely able to choose his favoured blade on which the hafters had fashioned a hilt. Is it possible that the ”H” is a picture of a small animal, like a perillo? Best wishes for the New Year 2018.