A RECENTLY ACQUIRED CUP HILT SWORD FOR COMMENTS

[midelburgo]

In XVIIth century Spanish language, the half rings of the pas d'ane are called "orejas" (ears).
So I like to classify cup hilts as full ears, half ears and no ears. I believe than rather than to nationality, this is a question of evolution in time and purchasing power.
So closer to 1650, we have mostly full ears, closer to 1680, we have many half ears. And closer to 1700 and beyond we get often no ears.

No ears are cheaper because they do not have to add workmanship to screws, or ricasso plates. They can be sturdier and therefore rather military than civilian. the main disadvantage is that the blade has to fit better. And usually the same types of blades are found with these hilts. There is not the variation that is found with full ears or half ears. For example, as a military weapon, fewer no ears have a thin rapier blade. One of the types usually found is a flambergue. About how this blade works, IIRC Richard Burton has a chapter on it in his book on Swords.

These swords present often associations with Portugal, like the one with the inscription "VIVA O NOSO REI DOM IOSE O PRº DE PORTVGAL" (straight position). There are also exceptions to the ammunition grade, with even a guardapolvo (I own that one).

A curious step in the evolution has iron pieces from the cross at each side of the ricasso. This can be found with or without ears. Probably was the last step before welding the langlets to the cup.

I believe that Hortuño cup hilt has a remounted blade. The oldest cup hilt I know is in a portrait of King Phillip IV by Velazquez from 1627.

[ulfberth]

Congratulations on your new cup hilt Fernando, I like it because unlike most it has the Flamberge blade type and is a long one for this type of cup hilt.
Considering most rapiers of that period had a length around 120 cm or more im not that surprized to see this one with such a long blade, but yours is actualy wide to for a long blade, a very nice one!
kind regards
Ulfberth

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ulfberth

Congratulations on your new cup hilt Fernando, I like it because unlike most it has the Flamberge blade type and is a long one for this type of cup hilt.
Considering most rapiers of that period had a length around 120 cm or more im not that surprized to see this one with such a long blade, but yours is actualy wide to for a long blade, a very nice one!
kind regards
Ulfberth

Thank you so much ... Dirk, my friend .
Kreep safe .

[urbanspaceman]

I thought it looked familiar; I photographed this in the Lisbon Armoury Museum back in 2019. Don't know if it is of interest here but... anyway:

[fernando]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

I thought it looked familiar; I photographed this in the Lisbon Armoury Museum back in 2019. Don't know if it is of interest here but... anyway:

Thank you so much for that, Keith. Excelent call. This sword has been brought to attention in a previous thread a while back. Glad you have visited a museum in my neck of the woods.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by midelburgo

... I believe that Hortuño cup hilt has a remounted blade. The oldest cup hilt I know is in a portrait of King Phillip IV by Velazquez from 1627.

You certainly know better than me, and i will not refute that. It is just that according to public texts, there is in fact one of his swords in the Armeria with a remounted (XVIII century) small sword hilt, inventory nº 81, and the one dated 1604, inventory 80, Fig. 167, Pag. 230, the one of Filipe III, has no record of having been remounted .


.

[midelburgo]

Hello Fernando. I believe the Hortuño sword is artistically not in the style of early XVIIth century but rather c1650. The 1900 catalogue of Real Armeria is plagued with errors and legends.

Norman cites two portraits of Felipe IV with a cup hilt:

- Kunsthistorisches of Wien, dated 1632. (moustache).

- NY Metropolitan, dated 1623. But the sword is just a metallic reflection.

There is another portrait at Escorial with the future Felipe IV as a child, in 1612 by Bartolome Gonzalez.

Carlos II as a sickly child shall be about 1669.
It is a pity there is nothing as clear as Carreño de Miranda portrait of the Duke of Pastrana (c1679).

The "orejas" is what Luis Pacheco de Narvaez calls them in his work about Spanish Destreza "Nueva Ciencia" from 1642. "Patillas" sounds to me as XIXth century.
Actually I do not say Flambergue but Flamigera.
I have seen so many clues towards Portugal on those swords, specially when they have langlets finishing in balls and faceted pear shape pommels, that I think you are right. With the caveat that as Solingen made, they will sell them to any comer.
Burton book shall be easy to find as a pdf on internet. IIRC he planned a 3 volume work but he only finished the first one, with generalities and antiquity. A real pity.

[fernando]

[QUOTE=midelburgo;273216]Hello Fernando. I believe the Hortuño sword is artistically not in the style of early XVIIth century but rather c1650.
I trust your judgement, by all means. I don't have the knowledge to distinguish that, myself.

The 1900 catalogue of Real Armeria is plagued with errors and legends.
Norman cites two portraits of Felipe IV with a cup hilt:
- Kunsthistorisches of Wien, dated 1632. (moustache).
- NY Metropolitan, dated 1623. But the sword is just a metallic reflection.
There is another portrait at Escorial with the future Felipe IV as a child, in 1612 by Bartolome Gonzalez.
Carlos II as a sickly child shall be about 1669.
It is a pity there is nothing as clear as Carreño de Miranda portrait of the Duke of Pastrana (c1679).
Alright, the Armeria catalogue contains errors ... but so many others. Those dark portraits provided by Norman and his judgement may not be error proof, either. For a start, he assumes the cup hilt is (quote) confined to Spain and lands under Spanish influence, that is Southern Italy and the Spanish Nederlands (unquote), making the mistake to leave out Portugal which, by the way, has been under Spanish Monarchy between 1580-1640. The usual cultural flaw of a few scholars, and not only, who think Portugal was a part of Spanish territory.


The "orejas" is what Luis Pacheco de Narvaez calls them in his work about Spanish Destreza "Nueva Ciencia" from 1642. "Patillas" sounds to me as XIXth century.
Noted. i still can't find a term for that over here. The authors of Armeria de Bragança catalogue, attribute to such extensions the same name as the quillons (quartões), as when there are upper and lower ones.

Actually I do not say Flambergue but Flamigera.
Yes, we could also call them in my language flamigeras or flamejantes, but these sound more like Masonic lexicon, from where the terms seem to originate. I find names like ondeada (undulated) more suitable.


.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by midelburgo

... The "orejas" is what Luis Pacheco de Narvaez calls them in his work about Spanish Destreza "Nueva Ciencia" from 1642...
... Burton book shall be easy to find as a pdf on internet...

I have managed to get both PDF works for my perusal. Interesting that i use the search button in "Nueva Ciencia" and can only find "oreja" (single), but this referring to the actual phisical ear. To my frustration i fail to spot the cuphilt "orejas".
I have read the Burton's chapter on the waved blad, which is (sort of) consistent with the opinion of the book author i mentioned in post #7 ,as Burton says "The object seems to be that of increasing the cutting surface".

Attached ... and just for fun; fencers in the training floor (1685).


.

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by fernando

I have managed to get both PDF works for my perusal. Interesting that i use the search button in "Nueva Ciencia" and can only find "oreja" (single), but this referring to the actual phisical ear. To my frustration i fail to spot the cuphilt "orejas".
I have read the Burton's chapter on the waved blad, which is (sort of) consistent with the opinion of the book author i mentioned in post #7 ,as Burton says "The object seems to be that of increasing the cutting surface".

Attached ... and just for fun; fencers in the training floor (1685).


.

Are the wavy parts of the blade sharp at all?? If not, they are clearly not for cutting. Looks to me like its decorational for ceremonial use.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Victrix

Are the wavy parts of the blade sharp at all?? If not, they are clearly not for cutting. Looks to me like its decorational for ceremonial use.

It depends on whether you see it in pictures or with the naked eye. In the example in discussion, both 'upper' edges and identations are sharpened, with different techniques, so i notice; the sharpness on the lower parts appears more acute. I wonder if the pictures i took are elucidative ... not easy with my humble abilities.
This thing of (any) blades being operational or decorative depending on them being or not sharpen/ed, may not be a black or white issue ... i guess. There is a montante (two handed sword) in Lisbon military Museum, dated circa 1500, attributed to navigator Vasco da Gama, which the photographer (i guess also the caption) defines as being 'almost' decorative, judging by the XVI century period, and i read in period chronicles that the nobility in India, the social class that marched on the front of troops, used such montantes to open way among the opponents. Whether those were not sharpened, would that be a pertinent question ?


.

[fernando]

Swords with undulated blades from the Pindela Manor; a collection amassed by the 2nd. Viscount of Pindela (1852-1922). After he died, the widow has deaccessed the collection, which is now exhibited in the State owned Palace of the Dukes of Bragança.

.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by midelburgo

... In XVIIth century Spanish language, the half rings of the pas d'ane are called "orejas" (ears)...

I would not know whether such fixation extensions have a name in Portuguese swords lexicon. A.V.B. Norman simply calls them 'arms'. But i see more than one Spanish sources calling those 'patillas' (de sujeción) ...
"La espada del Museo Naval de Madrid es un acero de "cazoleta, atribuida por sus descendientes a Don Pedro Menéndez de Avilés. Hoja estrecha de dos filos, gavilanes rectos. De la cruz sale uno que forma el guardamanos y unas patillas que sujetan la cazoleta".

Originally Posted by midelburgo

I like to classify cup hilts as full ears, half ears and no ears. I believe than rather than to nationality, this is a question of evolution in time and purchasing power.
So closer to 1650, we have mostly full ears, closer to 1680, we have many half ears. And closer to 1700 and beyond we get often no ears...

As i previously noted, i had signs that Portuguese favoured 'more' the welding system. One thing i know is that certain authors, not willing to be compromised with risking to determine whether a (cup hilt) sword is Portuguese or Spanish, simply call them ... Iberian. Having a Portuguese inscription may not be enough to define their origin; i have a cup hilt rapier that i bought from a well known Spanish dealer, with the typical VIVA EL REY DE PORTVGAL and his firm opinion, this sword is Spanish. It is so possible that, due to the two countries proximity, you could order a sword from Spain and later have its blade engraved in Portugal.

Originally Posted by midelburgo

For example, as a military weapon, fewer no ears have a thin rapier blade...

As also military swords are 'hardly' of the 'rapier' type .

Originally Posted by midelburgo

... of the types usually found is a flambergue...

Flamberge, undulated, waved, whatever the name; again i would not know where this fashion apeared in a larger number. But we may be sure that there were designs and processing techniques for all tastes.

Originally Posted by midelburgo

... About how this blade works, IIRC Richard Burton has a chapter on it in his book on Swords...

Ah, how i would love to read that part; but i don't have Burton's work.


.