Would you call this a lance or a pike ?

fernando · 25th September 2008, 12:46 AM

Well, i was considering some points that lead in a contrary direction to that of these marks been the smith's own (or traditional) symbol (isms).
I place myself in those days where rural civilian smiths were not allowed to make weapons from their own willing, but only if they were comissioned by (big shot) clients, for their house defences or private armies.
In such context, how could the smith have the impertinency of striking such show off marks in both sides of the blade and, instead, not the client's symbols ?
I once had a sugestion (Rainer Daehnhardt) that these could be the initials of a family with houses in three different places ... or i didn't catch the correct sense.
I would also guess that multiple equal letters may appear in the construction of coats of arms, indicating various family branches; there are ancestral families with their names starting by an S, such as the Sousas and the Silvas.
... Not that the client couldn't instruct the smith to strike the weapons with 'public' symbolisms, instead of those from his private universe.
Concerning the piece itself, i can assimilate it is a pike later modified into such quoted house defence lance. I may even admit that the iron head and the but spike actually belonged to different weapons and the seller had the idea to join them, makig a composite from his imagination.
... Just wondering. In fact i allways go for actual names or representation marks, by default, and only consider esoteric stuff when supported by actual or consensual evidence

.
Fernando

Ed · 25th September 2008, 06:48 PM

Just sayin'

Jim McDougall · 25th September 2008, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed

Just sayin'

Context?

Ed · 25th September 2008, 09:25 PM

I'm trying to age a new chain mail coif to match an authentic jacket. The rust marks (totally accidental) on the porcelain head looked familiar.

Point is that as humans, meaning can be read into a lot of stuff.

Jim McDougall · 26th September 2008, 02:28 AM

"..the other side of Ulfberhts blades is inlaid similarly with a pattern, no two of which are identical. These patterns consisted of arrangements of upright strokes, diagonal crosses, interlaced bands and isolated letters. We have no clue as to thier meaning, though there can be no doubt they had meaning, for we must remember that at this period names and words and symbols had a great and god like potency".
"The Archaeology of Weapons", E. Oakeshott,p.144

25th September 2008, 06:48 PM	#2
Ed Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 260	Just sayin' Attached Images

25th September 2008, 09:25 PM	#4
Ed Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 260	I'm trying to age a new chain mail coif to match an authentic jacket. The rust marks (totally accidental) on the porcelain head looked familiar. Point is that as humans, meaning can be read into a lot of stuff. Attached Images

25th September 2008, 12:46 AM	#1
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Well, i was considering some points that lead in a contrary direction to that of these marks been the smith's own (or traditional) symbol (isms). I place myself in those days where rural civilian smiths were not allowed to make weapons from their own willing, but only if they were comissioned by (big shot) clients, for their house defences or private armies. In such context, how could the smith have the impertinency of striking such show off marks in both sides of the blade and, instead, not the client's symbols ? I once had a sugestion (Rainer Daehnhardt) that these could be the initials of a family with houses in three different places ... or i didn't catch the correct sense. I would also guess that multiple equal letters may appear in the construction of coats of arms, indicating various family branches; there are ancestral families with their names starting by an S, such as the Sousas and the Silvas. ... Not that the client couldn't instruct the smith to strike the weapons with 'public' symbolisms, instead of those from his private universe. Concerning the piece itself, i can assimilate it is a pike later modified into such quoted house defence lance. I may even admit that the iron head and the but spike actually belonged to different weapons and the seller had the idea to join them, makig a composite from his imagination. ... Just wondering. In fact i allways go for actual names or representation marks, by default, and only consider esoteric stuff when supported by actual or consensual evidence . Fernando

26th September 2008, 02:28 AM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	"..the other side of Ulfberhts blades is inlaid similarly with a pattern, no two of which are identical. These patterns consisted of arrangements of upright strokes, diagonal crosses, interlaced bands and isolated letters. We have no clue as to thier meaning, though there can be no doubt they had meaning, for we must remember that at this period names and words and symbols had a great and god like potency". "The Archaeology of Weapons", E. Oakeshott,p.144