![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Eastern Sierra
Posts: 436
|
![]() Quote:
Here are some blades that Norman references in regard to the Hampden hilt. First are a couple of hilts in the Wallace Collection that are stylistically related in components. https://wallacelive.wallacecollectio...ype=detailView https://wallacelive.wallacecollectio...ype=detailView This is the one we have been looking for! Norman claims (P. 189) this is from the same workshop as the "so-called Hampden sword". https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O...apier-unknown/ Sadly, the Victoria and Albert Museum also has this hilt being from an unknown workshop. Though they do say France as its place of manufacture. The blade appears to have pierced work. It is amazing how such artists can fade into the mists of time so quickly. I wonder if they felt unappreciated by their patron during their lifetimes? Last edited by Interested Party; 19th August 2024 at 06:55 PM. Reason: Resizing photos |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,896
|
![]()
Thanks again I.P! I had to dig into the archives, found my well weathered old copy of "Arms and Armor Annual" (ed. Robert Held, 1973),
In "English Swords 1600-1650" John F. Hayward, (V&A; Sothebys), I think we have it! ROBERT SOUTH, "...the only hilt so far attributed to ROBERT SOUTH is that of Henry Prince of Wales (this sword we are discussing) this follows the fashion ofv the 17th c. but is of higher quality. Another hilt that can be attributed to South is the sword of James I with blade by CLEMENS HORN in the Windsor Castle armory. It is not unlikely that SOUTH was the importer of the Horn blades and that all the hilts originally furnished with such blades CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO HIM" !!! Further noted, South was the leading cutler during first half of 17th c. was appointed cutler to James I, and held office under Charles I. His name first appeared in records of cutlers company 1603. It seems that some of the sources we have been citing somehow missed this important attribution by the late Mr. Hayward. Looks like ROBERT SOUTH is the artisan we're looking for. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,896
|
![]()
Returning to the original post and question by Rob.
What artisan made this hilt ? The tradition attributing this hilt to Benvenuto Cellini (d1571) is of course incorrect, but of course the neoclassical and Biblical themes may have inspired the maker, who it appears was likely Robert South. He was leading cutler appointed to James I and later held office under Charles I. He was highly esteemed first half of 17th c. but it seems curious that while producing work for the Royal House, he produced this hilt for Hampden who was apparently Parliamentarian during the later troubled times. Perhaps that would put the date of this sword earlier c. 1605-10? Hayward (1973) Arms & Armor Annual, "English Swords 1600-1650" also notes South was likely the importer of the prestigious blades from Solingen maker Clemens Horn. Hayward also notes little is known of South, but in 1603 he was a member of the yeomanry of the Cutlers Co. In these highly detailed and high station regalia type swords it seems these kinds of themes and subjects were well known. It is unclear why this hilt would be attributed to Cellini, though perhaps the theme detail was from work by him. It would take much more research into the works of Cellini to discover why South close this theme. Last edited by Jim McDougall; 20th August 2024 at 06:32 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Eastern Sierra
Posts: 436
|
![]() Quote:
https://wallacelive.wallacecollectio...objectId=61004 wow Jim with our reliance on print you and I both missed the obvious. I need to remember to cross check my sources. I have found a record of another South Sword from 1610 https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O...-south-robert/. Unfortunately, there is not a picture to go with the description. This second South sword listed a partner in its manufacture named John Bushnell. That said Norman (p. 373) links the Hampden hilt to "One workshop active from perhaps the late 1630s, seems to have specialized in mythological and biblical scenes with rather large figures among foliage which includes bursting pomegranates.... Its works include the type 39 hilt, said to have belonged to John Hampden at Windsor.... " Norman goes on to list swords in the group mostly housed continental collections minus several in the Victoria and Albert Museum including the sword mentioned in my previous post attributed to a French workshop (Norman p 189). On page 190 he mentions a sword in Copenhagen Inv. No. C329/42 "with decoration again resembling that of the Hampden sword at Windsor" that I also have not been able to locate an image of. Norman is conditional in both his inclusion of these swords into one production facility and his attribution of the OP sword to John Hampden. As noted in a previous post there is no record of the sword being Hampden's till over 150 years after his death. Mr. Norman has a discrepancy in the passage quoted above of calling the Hampden sword a type 39 where earlier he discussed it as a type 40. With the production period of the Prince's sword being between 1610 (when he was created the Prince of Wales) and his subsequent death in 1612, and the attribution of the other group beginning in the 1630s and continuing till at least 1655. Robert South did produce royal swords from at least 1610 till a period between 1625-1649. With a documented career beginning in 1603. Objectively, to me with Robert South being English based and at least one of the other group of swords with a style resembling Hampden's being attributed to France in 1655, and souths career needing to be 52 years long, the relation of the Prince of Wales sword and Hampden's seems tenuous. Subjectively when I look at the three blades previously pictured, they do not look like the same maker both stylistically and thematically. Two are large, elongated figures one biblical the other mythological. They are fluid and evocative. Hampden's speaks of righteousness. Both with the defeat of of the giant Goliath and his later conquest of the morally fallen king Saul. Both victories were through his belief in the righteous power of God and for he who belief amounts to even a grain of mustard all things are possible. The beheading of Goliath is sadly prophetic of 1649. The Prince's sword is more sparse in decoration. It is static and dark. The theme here is his right to rule through a lineage descending from Aneas and London being the new Rome, inheriting its empire of not religion. He will rule through tradition. Let us remember laurels are for the victor and that in later Roman tradition might creates right. These two hilts are diametrically opposed and offer a simplified overview of the conflict between the parties in the civil war. I am sorry Rob I am sure this is not what you hoped for when you asked if anyone "knows anything about this sword, the sculptor, and the accuracy of attributing this to a date in the first half of the 1600s." All parties in this discussion have been using transitive proprieties very freely and I not sure if the current sources can be reconciled. They have left us with a generous supply of good data points, but no consensus for a conclusion. For a final note of this missive there is a book I cannot find by Leslie Southwick "London Sliver Hilted Swords" that may have information pertaining to our search. Bezdek may also have information on South particularly when he died and where he finished his career. Thanks to all for helping to occupy my mind while I recover from a minor injury. IP |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Eastern Sierra
Posts: 436
|
![]()
Here is more synopsis of sword history with a section on Robert South. He beat the odds and was alive in the 1630s!
http://myarmoury.com/feature_engswords.html |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,896
|
![]()
Here are the pages from these references,
"London Silver Hilted Swords" Leslie Southwick, 2001 "Swords and Sword Makers of England and Scotland" Richard Bezdek, 2003 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,896
|
![]()
With these pages from Southwick and Bezdek, it seems these records are about the sum of what is known about South. In looking further into the sword we are discussing (OP) the questions remain, if South indeed fashioned this hilt, where did he get the inspiration for the themes?
Why was this hilt presumed Cellini? Did Cellini produce hilts? or was there some other work which might have inspired South to follow this theme? Next stop, checking 'Boccia & Coelho' to see if any work by him shown there. Then, WHY the tradition that this sword belonged to Hampden? It is interesting that he was the cutler to both James I and Charles I. South was furnishing swords to Parliamerntary forces. We know South was instrumental in convincing Charles I to begin the German swordsmith enterprise at Hounslow Heath in 1629, as this was South's own home neighborhood. In 1632 he was granted a mark for his blades by the Cutlers Company. As a cutler, and dealing in blades and mounting, it is curious that South would have been the one who created this delicate art work. Others creating silver hilts etc. were often jewelers and goldsmiths, yet South seems focused on the supply of swords. Last edited by Jim McDougall; 22nd August 2024 at 05:08 PM. Reason: Incorrect sentence confusing Hampden with South changed |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Eastern Sierra
Posts: 436
|
![]()
Jim thank you for the pages!
I have little to contribute today. I am more mobile and getting caught up on business. I am still looking for more images of South hilts and hilts that are said to be similar to Hampden's for comparison to the works we have been discussing. I think the blade made by South for James I could be of use if I can find an image. I have been surprised that it has so far been so elusive to find online. My sole contribution today is what I believe might be the armor that was possibly en suite to the Pince of Wales sword and a portrait of him wearing said armor but with a very different sword. Does that poke a hole in the theory that sword and armor were delivered together? I had suspected that the encrustation on the blade were not actual "laurels" as described in The Wallace Collection but pomegranates. This suspicion is given some credence by the pomegranate fruit show repeatedly throughout the armor. What is the significance of the pomegranate here? I know in colonial setting the motif was slightly altered to be a squash blossom that had indigenous religious connotations through central and north America. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,896
|
![]()
You bet I.P. ! and likewise thank you for these images and more intriguing ideas...pomegranites etc? hadnt noted these details.
Found this: from "Swords and Daggers" John Hayward, 1951, p.5, "...during the first half of the 17th century, a number of hilt constructions were developed in England that were peculiar to this country." further, "...the decoration of these hilts was executed in silver and gold encrustation and damascene, often of high quality. Some of the 'damaskers' mentioned in contemporary English documents were probably foreigners, but there is good evidence, for example in the Royal Wardrobe Accounts, to show that such native CUTLERS AS ROBERT SOUTH AND THOMAS CHESHIRE were supplying work like this kind in the early 17th c.". I checked Boccia & Coelho ("Armi Bianche Italiene", Florence, 1975) and found no evidence of Cellini work on hilts. Reading his biography however, thus guy was one of the most dynamic, scandalous characters ever. So it seems that the elaborate work in these hilts is quite likely by South. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
cellini, chiseled, hampden, rapier |
|
|