![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,159
|
![]()
Thanks, all, for the information on what I also consider one of my favorite sword types. I had failed to remember that as Marc has said, when it comes to the international community, terms may vary. This crosses over into the culture itself sometimes, with various groups having their opinions on what constitutes what. Case in point, colonial spike axes. Many of these saw service in their home countries before being exported to the Americas. Once they were here, they were certainly used by the explorers and traders to survive. Finally, they were popular among the Native Americans. So when it comes to existing examples, opinions as to what specifications make a spike axe an Indian piece, opinions fly and terminologies can be confused. Anyway, I digress-
![]() Nice sword, nice info by all. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,284
|
![]()
Fernando, thank you so much for the notation, and it is true, the cuphilts are very much a knee weakening affinity for me, but at the moment I really could not add much to the great discourse you and Manolo had going. The question of terminology and semantics clearly come to the fore as described here, and prompted me to return to notes to reconfirm my perspective.
When returning to the thread it was delightful to see that Marc had written a superb treatment on this dilemma of the term 'bilbo', and its application in traditional Spanish swords. In the eloquence that is his hallmark, I think this is a perfect explanation of the developed use of this term as well as well placed observations on the classic Spanish and Portuguese cuphilt swords (I know you hate the collective term Iberian Fernando ! ![]() It seems to me that in the 17th century and of course through the 18th, there was prolific import of German trade blades to these markets, which as you pointed out, may well account for the spelling variation in the inscription. In Shakespeare's time it does appear that 'bilbo' had become a somewhat universally applied term for rapier or sword, as seen in "The Merry Wives of Windsor" (1602, III, v.) , "...to be compassed like a good bilbo, in the circumference of a peck, hit to a point, heel to head". These terms of course seem to allude to the very geometric fencing theorems that were known in Spanish as "Destreza" which would suggest a rapier, but case in point is the use of the term. Other references suggest the term pertaining to a sword from Bilbao, which is as noted the capital of the Biscay province in Basque Country. In Shakespeare again (Othello, v, 2) mention is made of swords of 'ice brook temper' where the Spaniards used the brook Salo near Bilbilis in Celtiberia to harden the steel, and produce swords of the highest quality. Whether this Bilibilis might have anything to do with the possibly related term 'bilbo' remains a question, but corrupted words in transliteration or colloquial parlance can sometimes lead to situations such as the term 'bilobate' becoming shortened to bilbo. It should be noted here that the term 'fox' is also a term used in Shakespeares works to describe an esteemed sword blade, in this case referring to the 'running wolf' of Germany or perhaps even the 'perillo' (little dog) of Toledo. While these terms joined the ethereal 'scimitar' term in describing swords in literature, it seems that the popularization of antique weapons collecting in the 19th century borrowed some of these terms in descriptions. In the case of the bilbo term, it seems to have become associated with the bilobate military type swords noted, while the cuphilt was distinctly described as just that. Returning to the cuphilts, these examples shown are indeed beautiful examples of the tradition of the cuphilt rapier maintained proudly in these arming type swords. If I understand correctly, most of the colonially mounted examples (often termed Caribbean) do not have the rompepuntas, nor the guardopolvo within the cupguard. All very best regards, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 214
|
![]()
This is what I had thought a Bilbo is.
I believe this is what Mark mentions. Theres one on the Cover of Swords and Hilt Weapons. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,284
|
![]() Quote:
All best regards, Jim |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
Hi Jim, thanks a lot for getting in with such vast considerations.
Concerning the localization of the guarda polvo (guarda pó) and the rompe puntas (quebra pontas) i also wish i could come to an efective conclusion. However the first step for me would be to define whether these devices were used more by civilians than by military, or in an indescriminate manner. At first sight the dust keeper appears to me an added value optional. You know that this piece, so often perforated with luxury decorations, had the purpose to fix the cup (bowl) interior lining, a textile (velvet) or leather material. One could speculate that this would be for the wealthy or noble owner ... military or civilian, both being the same individual at this period. The point breaker would, in my fantasy, be a fencing resource (of doubtful efectiveness), more appointed to the street fighting than to campaingn battling. But of course all such considerandums without solid evidence ... so far. On the other hand, maybe your reasoning is correct in that these two details didn't reach the colonies ... at least massively. Fernando |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,284
|
![]()
Hi Fernando,
Its my pleasure to see a great discussion going on, as you noted, one of my favorite sword forms. I think you have really placed a very astute observation on these cuphilt features, the guardopolvo and the rompepuntas. It makes very good sense that these somewhat cosmetic and questionably effective features would likely be embellishments in the civilian versions of these swords. It seems rather by extension of tradition that the beloved cuphilt was kept on the heavier bladed military swords, and that the more finished appearance added by the rompepuntas would have been more of a vestigial application. I believe the idea of its function as a blade catcher falls very much into the category of the left hand 'sword catcher' and notches in blades to foul the opposing blade. The colonial versions of these cuphilts seem to have been very much 'working versions' of these traditionally revered swords, and there are many examples of swords patterned after the swords of the gentry and nobility. The espada ancha itself is a frontier version of the hunting hangers of 17th century Europe fashioned originally for use by hidalgos in New Spain. The later became mounted with heavier blades for use in the thick vegetation of the desert regions as well as secondary weapons of the presidial soldiers. Personally these rugged frontier swords hold a distinct charm as functional weapons carrying vestigially the traditional elements and style of thier elegant ancestors. All best regards, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|