![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,281
|
![]()
I dont think there are really any set guidelines for where, how or who used various types of sword, nor the blades they chose to have them fit with.
As previously noted, foot soldiers were often aboard ships not only as protection en route, but for campaign or duties at destination. It seems clear by the motto as well as the patriarchal cross and the crown specifying Dom Joao IV that the blade was in use mid 17th to latter, so clearly a 17th c. type. The question then remains the hilt, which while a cup hilt style, its simplicity in character, quillon terminals non featured suggests later styling, as well as considering possible colonial involvement. However that assumption is not predicated on any sound evidence I could find. In notes I did find a mention of a 17th c. cuphilt, with VERY wide blade, but no picture or other record ![]() I am wondering if the 'Patriarchal cross' (Caravaca in Spain) might have association with military orders as it is so connected to religious and devotional motif of those times of Templars etc. I recall discussions many years back with MIN SINAL HES El SANTISSIMO CRUCIFIXIO , |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
Yes ... the four arms cross, allegedly shown up in CARAVACA (Murcia), after some legendary story, is one more symbol used for mystic purposes, like MIN SENAL HES ... and others, like Christ in a crucified position but without the cross. At this contextual stage, i gather that they are no more than 'marketing' symbols to entice the believer's preference. The combination of the four arms cross with the crucified Christ in it, occurred to me due to a sword that i owned having such dual motif (pictures attached not pretending to divert from the original subject). Whether the blade in discussion, so as the other two in the same context, are connected to actual religious lobbies, is something i would humbly decline. Also to remember something that we often tend to forget is that, blades come from one maker (even country of origin) and hilts come from another ... this right counting from the sword's original production date.
Concerning the concept of Colonial, i wonder how this typology may be attributed here, as 'Colonial' for Americans is one thing and for Portuguese is another; while i presume that, when such term is (often) approached in this venue, it refers more to Spanish Americas than to Portuguese India and other Asian territories. On the angle of judging the age of a (cuphilt) sword based on its construction simplicity, i would rather follow the reasoning that, high end Roperas for a noble man (or a street fencer) is one thing and austere Espadas for a soldier is another... whichever the period in question. . Last edited by fernando; 29th May 2020 at 09:04 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,281
|
![]() Quote:
Actually, I cannot imagine anyone who studies or collects swords forgetting that blades and hilts are separate entities. I have seldom, if ever, encountered a sword whose blade and hilt were from the same source. This is why books like "The Rapier & Small Sword" (AVB Norman, 1980) focused on the hilt designs, and Mr. Norman noted that blades were not addressed as they are from entirely separate sources and nothing to do with the study of hilts. Naturally the use of the symbolism, devices and invocations, mottos and phrases are known to have been used by various brotherhoods, orders and fraternities, so there are cases where particular ones were favored by certain ones. This was much in the way where certain devices such as cross and orb and others were favored by certain makers though not actually their marking as registered. The 'colonial' term is indeed a most relative term, and probably more often than not misused. For my own perspectives, pertaining mostly to Spanish colonial, these were weapons of notable simplicity, made in the fashion of the typically higher end examples. For me, these weapons which are in fact, often munitions grade, have a genuine rustic and rugged charm which I admire. This particular example is very much so, and regardless of where or when it was used, it is a remarkable sword. Much as with many forms of swords, heirloom or trophy blades are often remounted into all manner of hilts, so seeing older blades in later hilts is not uncommon. I always think of Spanish colonial sabers which have the Spanish motto dragoon broadsword blades (usually c. 1820s with three bar guards). Obviously it is strange to have a broadsword blade on a saber hilt. It is always good to see a nice sword example bring forth a good discussion on evaluating the particulars of the item ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sweden
Posts: 755
|
![]()
So what do the letters I A H I stand for?
Where would people date threaded pommel nuts generally? What’s the meaning of the ”double” patriarchal cross? Seems this cross originated in Byzance and spread to countries like Hungary, Russia and Lithuania. Why does it appear in Portugal (Byzantic connection)? The cross may have lost its meaning but for sure it had a meaning when it was put on the blade or the smith wouldn’t have bothered with the extra effort/expense. The cuphilts are associated with fencing. This blade is obviously not for diligent fencing techniques. So there must be a possibility that it was married to the hilt because 1) it was the only one available at the time, or 2) it was so customized for a purpose. Must also be possible that the blade was recycled in a colonial setting (e.g. Portuguese Brazil) where European products imported from afar was more scarce and precious and therefore not wasted. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | ||||||
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sweden
Posts: 755
|
![]()
Not sure how relevant this is but on patriarchal cross in Portugal from A Treatise On Ecclesiastical Heraldry by John Woodward: The title of patriarch was given to archbishops of metropolis, perhaps who had other metrolitans under them. Patriarchs have the right to use in the emblem of their dignity a cross with two bars. Roderid da Cunha, Archbishop of Braga and Primate of Portugal used such a cross. The patriarchal cross symbolises the powers of two offices in the same person: Metropolitan in own province but also having authority over other Metropolitans. The use of this symbol is very old. The patriarchate of Lisbon and the Indies was instituted by Clement XI in 1716. The archbishop of Toledo is the Primate of Spain since 1085 but the Archbishop of Braga in Portugal claims the Primacy of the whole peninsula and uses the double cross.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,156
|
![]()
I think the only reason that the "colonial" thought is still being tossed around is #1-the fancier types owned by private citizens, gentlemen, aristocrats, etc and #2-the confusion with the so-named colonial Spanish cup-hilt rapiers from the New World. These, as you know, are plainer than their European cousins, lack many of the design nuances such as the bowl rim, possess plainer grips (usually horn) and quillons and have specific characteristics marking them as from the New World (such as the mushroom-shaped pommels). In retrospect, yours does not have many of these features, so I agree that this is as you pointed out, a military version of it's richer cousin, but you can see why there were comparisons. Sometimes when one sees a piece that stands out and is not of the typical pattern (and your Goliath blade does that!!), one might assume it is from 'other ports'. I never stated how much I love this piece!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | ||
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Dom Rodrigo da Cunha 1577-1643 after being Bishop of Portalegre, Bishop of Oporto, and Archbishop of Braga, ended his career as Archbishop of Lisbon, where he was assigned deputy for the inquisition. The interesting part in context is that D. Rodrigo da Cunha, one of the strong opposers to the anexation of Portugal by Spain, having even refused the Cardinalate of Madrid, during the Restauration of Independence war supported the insurgent and, together with the then Archbishop of Braga, governed the kingdom until the return of Dom João IV. So this explains the engraving of the cross on these swords tang/ricasso; as i view it, more a motivation of patriotism and authority rather than for religious purposes... or perhaps in great part. Quote:
. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | ||
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
I take it as highly probable that the inscriptions were applied here in a special procedure. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]() Quote:
But Russia is Orthodox, and Russian cross has 3 crossbeams: the upper two are just like the one on Fernando’s sword, but the third one is positioned much lower and is slanted. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
It is clear that there are a few versions of 'multi' beam crosses. I realize that this or that version may be attributed to the wrong creed. I am no cross wizard either, but am glad i found that the cross on my sword is a determined one and the reason for its presence has a solid historic basis. I confess that, after browsing the Net on this cross issue, i craked my riddle as per post #30 (thanks to a Victrix lead) and since then have been done with whatever crosses.
Here are details of the threaed tang and rather faded cross on the other sword i know of same context. . |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|