Schiavona markings

[Jim McDougall]

Just to say thank you to Schiavona fleck! Its not often we have these kinds of insightful comments on the mysteries of Balkan oriented weapons!
It makes perfect sense that a Croatian master made this hilt, and I have often wondered just what the situation was with the Croatians who served as bodyguards and auxiliary forces for the Doge of Venice. This arrangement has remained in place for centuries as part of a treaty in early conflicts between the Venetian State and Croatia.

I would like to know more of course on when this blacksmith worked and where. As the schiavona evolved being a primary form in Venice with these forces (the more developed trellis guard from basic Hungarian S guard hilts) there was of course focused production of these through the centuries.

With the pommel, the replacement example of the more correct 'cats head' and in brass in NO way diminishes the value of this important example, especially historically. It is not often a schiavona example can be placed exactly with the famed Croatian (Slovonian et al) forces for the Doge.
The earlier pommel appears to have been another Balkan, East European type known as the 'kosarice', for resemblance to a type of Balkan pastry.

The markings, as I have noted, are distinctly Italian, and of varying examples of what Sir James Mann (Wallace Collection, 1962) terms the 'twig' mark. These often in subtle variation but always the triple lines across a horizontal bar, were common on Italian blades from the late 15th century, through the 16th and later continued as approximations spuriously as often the case.

"..these twig marks were commonly found on Italian blades, as well as occurring singly" (Mann, 1962, p.255 op cit), as he notes they often appear in groupings of three. It should be noted that these also occurred in various configurations and groupings with other marks (such as the indistinguishable punzone on this blade).

Mann (p.255) also notes "loop shaped marks at base of the blade" as possible (probable) variations of the well known 'sickle' marks typically (and incorrectly) distinguished as exclusively Genoan. It is noted that these marks (presumably the 'loops') and 'sickle' are often found on swords to the armory of the Doge in Venice.

Here I would note that markings on blades are not necessarily to a certain blade maker, though certain ones seem favored by particular makers. In actuality, while we cannot know exactly what these sundry markings meant or represented, it may have been as simple as a certain stamp being at hand or other. Makers either had their own forge and shop, or worked in those of others, in which case, the markings or their variations/groupings may have distinguished a certain worker and accounted for his work to his master.

Many markings may have had deeper, more complex talismanic or other origin, but over time they suggested quality that became associated with a certain makers blades, with the known meaning lost over time. Often markings are suggested to have guild associated distinction, and while this is somewhat correct, typically it was only registered punzones with this case.
Other markings like the sickle or 'Passau wolf' were simply long recognized symbols in the quality imbuement convention noted.

In all, a wonderful example with remarkable history to the notable State of Venice and its Doge's. While most examples to the notorious and feared 'Council of Ten' are typically marked, this example is with that context in degree.

[urbanspaceman]

Here's a thought: could the pommel have belonged to the blade prior to the re-hilting?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Here's a thought: could the pommel have belonged to the blade prior to the re-hilting?

It seems unlikely as the kosarice pommel was not as characteristic or popular on the schiavona proper, though it was more common on varying other swords of the times. If the catshead pommel was original to the sword I cannot see why it would be removed for a kosarice. Also if flashing remained on the end product it would be unseemly for a product of the times.

The blade and hilt are most likely homogenous unless otherwise told by handling. Hilts are often dismantled when grips are being restored, a common occurence as these are not as durable of course.
Quite possibly the original pommel might have been damaged in this process and a more correct one in its place.

Blade and hilt associations are quite often encountered as shown in Mann(1962) where often there are hilts much older than the blades, which seems unusual. However the heirloom situation is not just restricted to blades. Often a heirloom sword (hilt) has had blade broken and simply needs a new one.

The Italian center of Belluno (where Andrea Ferara and his brother worked but in a forge of another maker) was just one of a network of several blade makers in various towns. The blades from these were produced and sent to key locations (Milan etc.) for hilting and sheathing. Just as with blades from all the known centers, they were seldom mounted in the same location.
Blades were highly valued and often remounted numerous times from their original furbishing.

[urbanspaceman]

Looking through rapier hilts in Norman showed a few examples of that pommel (note the hole to accept an arm) so I wondered if the blade had originally had that pommel and a typical rapier hilt was subsequently changed for the schiavona basket.
I don't know if the spiral fluted, leather covered, wooden grip was ever used on rapiers in the early days; I have seen it frequently on schiavonas, so maybe that was added as well.

[urbanspaceman]

The cat's head pommel is very obviously a recent casting and patinating, as Schiavonafleck indicated. It's a fine job, despite the flashing, and completes the hilt perfectly.

[urbanspaceman]

Following - again - Victorix' link to an early thread I came across this in post number 46:

[urbanspaceman]

My apologies werecow, it was your link, not Victorix's