A rapier by Pietro Hernandez

[Cerjak]

A rapier by Pietro Hernandez

This rapier has a faceted olive shaped pommel, the hilt with rest of gold decoration also an half-moon punch on the ricasso.
Any comment on it will be welcome.

Best
Cerjak

[fernando]

Great sword, Jean-Luc.
This is the first time we see here the inscription ESPADERO DEL REY on the ricasso spine of a sword; as we read DEL REY in the side you pictured, naturally the word ESPADERO appears on the other side.
Notably this master smith is not contemplated by neither Palomares nor del Canto in their works ... go figure why :confused:.
Another riddle is why this, being a Toledan famous master with his own prestige, uses the Italianized version of his first name, Pietro instead of Pedro; as we start from the principle that such spelling doesn't originate in forgeries introduced in the market by less famous competitors.
It seems as, although hardly discerned, there are other marks in your blade, which wouldn't surprise you, as apparently Pedro Hernandez used a few symbols all together, as you may see in Gyngel's work, for one.

.

[mariusgmioc]

Whether it was made by Pedro Hernandez himself or not, I cannot say, but it certainly is a very well made rapier! :)

[Cerjak]

Great sword, Jean-Luc.
This is the first time we see here the inscription ESPADERO DEL REY on the ricasso spine of a sword; as we read DEL REY in the side you pictured, naturally the word ESPADERO appears on the other side.
Notably this master smith is not contemplated by neither Palomares nor del Canto in their works ... go figure why :confused:.
Another riddle is why this, being a Toledan famous master with his own prestige, uses the Italianized version of his first name, Pietro instead of Pedro; as we start from the principle that such spelling doesn't originate in forgeries introduced in the market by less famous competitors.
It seems as, although hardly discerned, there are other marks in your blade, which wouldn't surprise you, as apparently Pedro Hernandez used a few symbols all together, as you may see in Gyngel's workl, for one.

.
Fernando,

Many thanks for your interesting comment, It “s a real opportunity to receive an answer from the specialist of the Spanish swords.

Best
Jean-Luc

[fernando]

Ne rigole pas, Jean-Luc.
What i know of these things is next to nothing. It won't take too long before real knowledged members correct my humble assumptions.

[Jim McDougall]

It is really hard to determine a match to these rapiers with their variations in guard systems, but in going through Norman (1980, "The Rapier and Small Sword 1460-1820") one of the most compelling in similarity is #69 (p.141). This is listed as c.1560-1640, a considerable range for a 'type' but the earliest example seen is in the portrait of Fernando Alvarez de Toledo, 3rd Duke of Alba (by Alonso Sanchez Coello date, 1567).


The pommel of elongated olive form (see #36, Norman, p.256) date of 1625-45, is shown as smooth, but faceted types seem well known in most of the forms.

The Hernandez family, according to Eric Valentine ("Rapiers", 1968. p.67) were Toledo swordsmiths with Sebastian the elder working c. 1570-1600.
Pedro (the younger) worked about 1610-1630.
Interestingly, in this reference, plate #38 is a Spanish cuphilt with date estimate c.1660, and inscribed SEBASTIAN HERNANTZ (note spelling).
Clearly a German use, as indicated in references that claim his was one of Spanish smiths whose name was often spuriously used.

Other references note spellings such as HEERNENTEEZ (Kinman, 2015), another clearly German example.
This reference notes Pedro as of Toledo 1610-30. It also notes the use of the crucifix by him, which was also used by Hannes Cleles.

Turning to rapier here, and the comments of Pedro not being mentioned by Palomares or del Canto may have been that he was absent from there.
I would note that the Gyngell compendium, much as some of the others, is often a grouping of known markings used by a maker, not necessary all at once.

I may be reaching (and I expect Jasper will correct me if wrong) but perhaps Pedro either was in Italy, or a maker in Italy chose to use his name, obviously the PIETRO a compelling note. It is also known that in Italy the half moon of this same style (with rostrillo) was used in this fashion (Kinman, p.133) to signify the espadero del rey.
This rapier seems to have Italian characteristics, but that is mere free association on my part.

With spellings, it seems that the Hernandez was more likely to be misspelled in the German cases with Sebastian's name. The Pietro is not a misspell, but a linguistic variation, which suggests contemporary with or perhaps by the maker himself in other location.

All of these ideas and so on are simply my ideas and observations which may be incorrect, but I place them regardless, and emphasize, I am NOT presuming to have any expertise of these subjects. I am however a very fascinated student of them. I hope these notes might help.

[Cerjak]

Thank you Jim

It is nice to have your always well documented comment.
Best

Jean-Luc

[fernando]

... I am NOT presuming to have any expertise of these subjects...
Jim, you can not presume that simply beause you are an expert; all we common mortals can do, is tease your faculties ;).
I don’t have Valentine’s work, or any other source from where i could have learnt that the Hernandez family was composed with Sebastian and Pedro and not of two Sebastians. My daring questioning such assumption is firstly because, according by both Palomares and also common sense, calling one person the older (el viejo) and the other the younger (el mozo) implicate that both had the same name. Not that Palomares nomina is not full of imprecisions but, so are other authors namely, for one, on what touches smiths ages and or their acting periods. Sebastian the elder could not have worked until 1600 (per Valentine) as also could not be alive in 1637 (per Palomares); according to a source i repute as accurate, he died in 1584.
This also takes somehow to questioning the working period of Pedro, if he were Sebastian’s son he could well have started working some time during (and learning with) his father’s activity, and not so much later. More consistent is the listing of Sebastian the younger, so much because, besides the said nomination of 'el mozo' he was entitled to use the same mark … whereas Pedro had a completely different array of punzones.
On the other hand, the spotting of blades made by Sebastian el mozo seem to be (for me) a hard task, as also that of his actual age or working activity, which would help a better confrontation of data.
The suggestion that Pedro is not mentioned by Palomares and del Canto (?) having as a reason the probability that he was absent from Toledo, may have some 'competition'; Palomares resourced the data one or two centuries after 'all' smiths existence and, what he did was checking on their archived marking irons and mostly on their blades, at least on (both) those he got hand of. It seems as, surprinsingly both Palomares father and son, despite having access to archives, including vital eclesiastic ones, didn’t resource much on such means. Perhaps a useful detail for perusal is to remind that it was Francisco Santiago Palomares who advanced with the material for the nomina but it was his son Francisco Javier who actually made it; and it was only several decades afterwards that this work was echoed, by Achille Jubinal whom, being a French man, corrupted some the smiths names spellings.
On the other hand, and as already mentioned in my previous post, it is clear that Pietro is not a mispelling of Pedro but an intentional attitude; whether being Pedro using an italianized version of his name to 'please' Italian clients with his export blades, an hypothesis suggested by a member in an earlier thread, or some Italian smith’s atempt to take advantage of the Spanish master prestige. It is simply implausible that Pedro Hernandez, as illiterate as he might (might) have been, made such surgical confusion with his own name.
Concerning Jean-Luc's discussed beautiful sword and waving considerations on its style and typology, is something i can not reach, due to ignorance and laziness to compare it to those in books, like Walace and Norman. But when brain storming on marks and smiths, we are aware that those are about blades, independently from the hilts they are mounted on as, so often the smith that forges the blade and takes historical advantage of having attached his mark and name on the result of his work, is not the same who makes the guards, or grips, or pommels or scabbards for the sword.

Attached a picture of Dom Francisco Santiago Palomares, at the age of 48.


.
.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Fernando!
It is very interesting to learn that there are even more players and compounding in this litany of intrigue, as I had no idea the Palomares factor was doubled and that the son had a hand in compiling this data. I had forgotten about Jubinal who came in later as well.
It seem as though historical record is of course typically recorded later, by individuals searching contemporary sources and narratives with people like ourselves doing the same thing in later generations.

This is very much the reason that history itself is always 'a work in progress', and as described by some as 'always changing'. We cannot realize in the moment that what we are seeing, doing, and witnessing is indeed history, so we are not likely to record things we see as every day or significant. Even unusual events we do not think to record as the stir of it wears away. Most of these records we are observing were administrative matters which were perused by these later writers, and as we know, such records are often disheveled and inaccurate (I look at my own financial records! eek!).

[fernando]

Ipse se nihil scire id unum sciat :shrug: .

[Jim McDougall]

The well known paradox of Socrates seems well placed here, as we struggle with these conundrums and feel very much the same as challenged by these perplexing dilemmas.

In my latest round of research, I discover we have had this very discussion on the Hernadez' before, in 2014, but this time I think we have much better traction.

I think I most agree with Fernando's suggestion ( post #8) in that the use of the 'PIETRO' alternate for PEDRO in Italian parlance was likely a condition of attitude, meant as a pretense toward the fashion of the times toward the art of fencing. While Italy had been a leader in arms and armour design and fashioning as well as development of fencing, the Spaniards were by the advent of the 17th century developing their own abstruse mathematically oriented style of swordsmanship.
In 1561, the Spanish Royal Court moved from Toledo to Madrid, and the demise of industry, particularly the premiere sword production factor was quickly faltering.
We know that Sebastian Hernandez (el Viejo) was working in Toledo c. 1570, as of course were so many of the old masters, but by 1594, Toledo's population had been decimated. Accordingly, the swordsmiths had decreased but in what numbers is unclear.
It does seem that movement of many of them to other Spanish centers was likely, and with Sebastian Hernandez, the compelling (but unproven) suggestion that the crowned '3' he used may have been the letter 'Z' (presumably Zaragoza, one of the other centers). In any case, according to Fernando's notes (which I consider most reliable), Sebastian had passed in 1584.
This date is significant because of the numbers of blades attributed to him well through the 17th century and positively illustrating the spurious use of his name by German makers long after he was gone .
Accordingly, the German makers applied known Spanish punzones and other marks incongruently with his name. These same 'mismatched' conditions occur on numbers of other blades known to be German as is well known.

Turning to Pedro Hernandez, though not listed in Palomares and el Canto, he is in other sources as of Toledo 1610-30. What is most significant with Pedro is that he (or someone using his name) used a punzon of a crucifix, and that (or variations) was also used by several other known German makers. This suggests either he was indeed in Solingen working, or other German makers were using his name, just as with Sebastian's.

The Renaissance had placed Italy at the fore in many aspects in addition as mentioned besides arms, and it would seem that in early 17th century, these influences would have been well in place. If Pedro was in fact in Germany, and using his already influential name, Hernandez, perhaps a pretentious attitude might have compelled the use of PIETRO in the inscription on this blade. The very attractive hilt here, as I mentioned, does seem to carry a certain Italian gestalt, particularly the pommel and asymmetrical 'attitude', and coupled with the name, Italianized, would have been a remarkably stylish choice for a gentleman of the period.
This emphasis on style would be heightened with the quality by the 'espadero del rey' on the blade, along with the significant 'half moon' which apparently was in itself well associated with that honorific.

It is important to note here that the Duchy of Milan was a Spanish province until the 18th century. With the decline of Toledo, not only the loss of its masters, but the dramatically increased use of famed Spanish names and well known marks and punzones became keenly established not only in Germany but Italy and other centers as described in the early to mid 17thc.
These circumstances provide many scenarios which may explain the inscription on this fine rapier.However only close hands on examination and comparison of its physical characteristics to other examples with known provenance or propensity of form to other identified examples will tell us more on its probable identity.

[Jim McDougall]

In my previous post, I neglected to respond to Fernando's well placed note on observing on swords such as this much agreed, very nice example posted by Jean Luc....in that our focus on the markings on the blade may very well be quite independent of the circumstances of the hilt.

Swords, particularly rapiers, were often refurbished numbers of times in their working lives, and these instances may have been to repair a damaged sword; to refurbish a blade with a new hilt aligned with changes in style or fashion. ..these were not only weapons, but status oriented accoutrements.

While the most common reason, other than damage or change in fashion, may have been a heirloom blade, there are numbers of cases where old hilts much more vintage than the blade are used. These cases are seen in a number of the swords in the Wallace Collection (Mann, 1962), where an 18th century German blade is mounted on a 17th century Spanish hilt etc.

When AVB Norman wrote his "The Rapier and Small Sword" in 1980, he noted that his focus was on the styling of the hilts, as blades were mostly a matter of trade and various acquisition while hilts were local and personal preference. He innovatively used portraiture primarily and some other art to establish the period and general locations for various hilt styles, and much in the same manner attended to pommels. The pommels are another hilt element subject to variation and acquisition often separate from its other components.

Therefore our observations on this blade may well be entirely incongruent with the hilt, thus provenance for the separate components might be notably different, even from different countries and periods.

[fernando]

Hi Jim, i just meant to say that Socrates knew nothing about these swords ... but he sure was a brain in other areas ;).

Just before jean-Luc decides he had enough of this hijacking his thread, let me post some loose notes on Pedro Hernandez.

---
Starting by the sword sample of Jean-Luc we may discern the inscription in thr blade as being PIETRO HERNAN, one of the names variations connotated with the master, eventually one seen in two swords at the Instituto Valencioa de Don Juan, # 68 and 70. Being this collecction and sponsor of great prestige, one should consider this name variation to be a genuine one.
---
Being of general knowledge that Italy and Spain interchanged in the period, among other stuff, sword blades, one may easily guess the logic in the two directions; Spanish blades moving to Italy due to their quality and those from Italy moving to Spain due to their medium/low cost. Assuming that blades would not serve final clients by their own, one may clearly realize that they would be imported with the purpose to garnish them with hilts (and scabbards) before being introduced in the market. While in the case of Italians mounting Spanish blades with local hilts, one may admit that they went on sale with high prices with all justice, we may guess (guess) how deceptive or trasparent would be the business with Spanish swords mounted with Italian blades.
Do not forget that, the difference in price between Spanish blades and those of other regions was dramatic.
According to Rafael M. Girón Pascual, in his work "Cruzando aceros", price of blades in reales, between 1627 - 1680, were the following per origin:

Toledo ....... 24 - 30
Germany ... 13 - 18
Toulouse
& France ... 11 - 11
Génova ...... 9 - 10

So far so good but, what one might not expect is who was importing these Itaian blades in Spain to increase their value were not general traders but actual smiths (Espaderos).... and prestigious ones.
See an example of Italian blades imported in Toledo between 1587-1621:
.

Year -Quantity -Origin ------------- ----Seller --------------------Buyer ------------------------Price in reales
.
1587 ... 338 ... Génova ................ Ansaldo ...............Pedro Hernández, espadero .......... ?
1590 ... 360 ... Génova ... Bocangelino y Baba ........... Pedro Hernández, espadero ........... 4

1593 ... 250 ... Milán ...... Juan Bautista Dosio ........... Lorenzo de la Fuente, espadero .......... ?
1621 ... 200 ... Génova ... Esteban Cebolín y A. Dungo ........ Francisco Díaz, espadero ......... 4,5

This information is enequivocal, as may be read in "La Monarquia Hispanica en tiempos del Quijote", there is an obligation of Pedro Hernandez, espadero in favor of Bocangelino-Baba, for the buying of two bales with 360 blades from Genova, at price 4 reales each, to be paid in two instalments, three and six months.
---
According to Don Enrique de Leguina, en "Los Maestros Espaderos", containing an extensive list of smiths from all cities, we may read:
Hernández (Pedro) or Pietro (?). Sevilla. XVI century. Mark: big cross with two equal arms.
(Besides the two Sebastians father and son, not referenced as being Pedro's family).
Also we spot Pedro Hernandez in J. Gestaso Y Perez work, an epic compendium of all craftsmen of Seville, listing this espadero as having died in 1596. This is somehow confusing as Pedro was importing blades in Toledo 1590.
Could it be a different Pedro ... or has he first moved to Toledo and later came back to Seville for his last days?
And the 'Pietro' alias; was it because Pedro trade with Italy made him adopt such 'second' name ?.
Riddle, riddle, riddle :shrug:


.

[fernando]

Sorry my ignorance but, looking at Jean-Luc's sword grip, we see that the ferrules are not the traditional turks heads. Could this be another period 'locking' version in its genuine wired grip? :o .

[Jim McDougall]

Absolutely outstanding detail and research Fernando!!!! Thank you!!!
Thank you as well for the explanation on the quote, these pithy philosophical axioms in Latin can be pretty cryptic.

Actually I am unclear on how this discussion is 'hijacking' this thread, as we are covering material which directly applies to the name inscribed on this blade, in variant manner, markings, the hilt styling etc.. The fact that we are adding detailed material on the circumstances of the times, conventions in use in application of marks and names and the very economic climate of the times which might bring certain conditions to bear.

While examining items posted by participants here for comment, it seems that observation and discussion, as we have shared here and on others have given us remarkable historic perspective through these very items.
In the case of these Spanish swords, you have shared amazing detail from resources most of us have no access to, and kindly translated and qualified the material to help us understand these weapons better.

Again, my sincere thanks, and I am getting writers cramp from furiously adding all this to my sheaves of notes!

P.S on the unusual ferrules.....I hadn't noticed! The plot thickens!

[fernando]

... and with Sebastian Hernandez, the compelling (but unproven) suggestion that the crowned '3' he used may have been the letter 'Z' ...


.

[fernando]

... P.S. on the unusual ferrules.....I hadn't noticed! The plot thickens!
I was thinking of posting my rapier to discussed Jean-Luc's example, as to presume both hilts have significant similarity. Mine is clearly marked and signed Alonzo Simon, a Toledo master recorded in 1608-1617.
Perhaps the grip wiring and the turk's heads are not the original; you never know, with folks out there able to re-do these things so well.
Speaking of hilts not being original to the blades, i came across an essay by Virgilio Martinez Enamorado on the protocol sword of Nasrid Sultan Muhammed V (1338-1391), which blade has epic inscriptions, those apparently trancribed in the walls of the Alhambra Patio de los Arraianes. When it came to comment on the sword hilt assumedly not being the original one, the author reminds the Arab concept in that (in my words), it is the blade that has primary significance and not the hilt, as also in man is not his turbant that counts but the man himself.


.

[Jim McDougall]

Excellent Fernando! So it is a 'Z' QED!!!!
NO, not 'Zorro'!!! but compelling to think of Zaragoza!!!
There are numbers of initials used which do not seem to necessarily align with the Christian names of the master using the punzon, so that I must look into more.

Your example is amazing as well! and the pommel indeed very much is like Jean Luc's only truncated. As you note, turks heads are often later added, much like changing gaskets when valve cover is off on engine.
On that note.....that analogy is outstanding on hilt/blade.... and well placed in present context.......not the TURBAN but the man.....not the hilt....but the blade!!! :)

[Andreas]

Hi Jim, i just meant to say that Socrates knew nothing about swords ... but he sure was a brain in other areas ;).

As a veteran of several battles, in which he served with distinction, he must have known a thing or two about them… ;)

[fernando]

... As a veteran of several battles, in which he served with distinction, he must have known a thing or two about them… ;)
Yes, Andreas, i should/could have said these sords but, in the context, i took it that my expression would be considered accordingly; i appologize for such flaw :o .
I realize that Socrates, not being a military by career, but appointed General for the Peloponese wars, due to his ascendence abilities, would have had serious engagements with his high end κοπίς , and has even realized that, the evolution of such Kopis woud turn into the Iberian falcata but, would have hardly envisaged the characteristics of the Iberian rapiers, that appeared two thousand years afterwards.
In any case, and for the record, i will edit my previous post, so that pointed contingencies don't prevail :cool:.

[Foxbat]

I believe the sword in question is a composite piece, the guard appears to be an Italian munition-grade one, the blade is of better quality. One most likely could see non-original peening on the pommel.

Fernando's rapier seems to be an all-original solid piece of good quality. Would be nice to see the blade.

[Cerjak]

I believe the sword in question is a composite piece, the guard appears to be an Italian munition-grade one, the blade is of better quality. One most likely could see non-original peening on the pommel.

Fernando's rapier seems to be an all-original solid piece of good quality. Would be nice to see the blade.

Composite ?
The blade is fitting perfectly like a glove in the quillon block .
There is no sign that the blade and hilt have been separated The tang button seem perfect as it should be.
The rest of gilding decoration on the hilt and pommel in order to have a nice looking hilt to match with this beautiful blade.
The style of hilt and blade are both correct for period and can be from the same period.
Other German rapier with beautiful blade in the MET.
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/34787?img=1
BEST

CERJAK

[Foxbat]

The one in the last picture is a very different sword.

[Cerjak]

The one in the last picture is a very different sword.
of course the hilt is different type but the blade geometry is quite similar

[Foxbat]

Yes, but that was very typical (don't want to use the word common) style at the time, with many blades of that style also made in Germany. The main reason I think it is a composite (without being able to actually see it in person) is the large discrepancy in the quality of the blade and the hilt, and the poor fit of the hilt parts. But of course you have the benefit of having it in your hand, I am just commenting on the pictures I see.

[Cerjak]

The one in the last picture is a very different sword.
I don't see any problem with this pommel

[fernando]

... Fernando's rapier seems to be an all-original solid piece of good quality. Would be nice to see the blade.
Lousy pictures; not so good as those taken by Jean-Luc :shrug:

[Foxbat]

Very nice rapier, I have a somewhat similar piece.

[Cerjak]

Lousy pictures; not so good as those taken by Jean-Luc :shrug:
Fernando

In Portugal you have sun so good light ,you should try with day light.
Or you could send me your best swords but I'm not sure that I will send you back !

Best
Jean-Luc :D

[fernando]

Fernando

In Portugal you have sun so good light ,you should try with day light.
Or you could send me your best swords but I'm not sure that I will send you back !

Best
Jean-Luc :D
The problem is not the light, but the photographer's ability and his modest equipment. Ah ... mon cher, i would only risk to send you my swords linked to a rope ;) .

[fernando]

Very nice rapier, I have a somewhat similar piece.
Very nice; who is the smith ?

[Foxbat]

I was not able to determine, but thare is what appears to be a wolf mark on both sides, so likely a Solingen blade.

[Jim McDougall]

This seems to me a most unusual rendition of what purports to be the 'running wolf' of Passau, later Solingen. While these marks, while indeterminate as far as actual significance symbolically, certainly do appear in varied, almost abstract sometimes, configurations....this one seems to face the opposite direction from most I have seen. I am not saying this is not a Solingen rendition, just that it is very atypical from most I have seen.

[Foxbat]

Well, if you ask me, it looks more like a mule, than anything else, but I am not sure that was the idea. :)

Here's the other side.

[fernando]

I admire your guys sharp eye; i can see neither a woolf nor a mule :o :shrug: .
... But the sword is excelent :cool:.

[Jim McDougall]

It seems that in observing these 'running wolf' marks in many examples which cover several centuries, there is far more than variation in the exemplars, and many reach the point of abstraction. In my opinion these figures were chiseled into the blades by shop workers rather than the artisans who were charged with inscribing them.

These workers were not skilled artistically (obviously) but the marks were probably intended as talismanic imbuement which derived from conventions such as that known as 'Passau Art', in which the running wolf 'of Passau' was one of the leading devices as far as sword blades.

The notion seems to have been that despite the artistic deficiency of the application, the talismanic factor would stand in effect simply by the act of the marking. The superstitious fervor that existed with weaponry in these times is something often deeply underestimated in studies of them, which is why markings and inscriptions are most often not well attended to.

[Iain]

I admire your guys sharp eye; i can see neither a woolf nor a mule :o :shrug: .
... But the sword is excelent :cool:.

Looks like a bull to me...

[ulfberth]

Looks like a bull to me...

well maybe not a wolf but it looks like a dog to me
;)

the blade looks indeed German, the position of the stamps on the ricasso and the running K9 all point in that direction

[Foxbat]

Well, your picture clearly explains why we have three protrusions where the hind legs are, and only two in the front. :)

[Iain]

well maybe not a wolf but it looks like a dog to me
;)

the blade looks indeed German, the position of the stamps on the ricasso and the running K9 all point in that direction

Sure, I wasn't disagreeing that it's a German blade, but I think often we are too quick to designate any vaguely four legged depiction of an animal as a running wolf. From memory the unicorn crops up from time to time as well on Passau blades.

[fernando]

Sure, I wasn't disagreeing that it's a German blade, but I think often we are too quick to designate any vaguely four legged depiction of an animal as a running wolf...
Amen ;) .

[Jim McDougall]

The perplexing case of these abstract animals depicted in these blades for yet unknown significance has been a notable feature for as many years as I can recall in my own research, as well as clearly included in the work of many writers.

Ewart Oakeshott in 1960, ("Archaeology of Weapons". N.Y. p.223) notes,
"...a mark which can easily be mistaken for the 'wolf' of Passau is a unicorn; since both wolf and unicorn are only very summarily sketched wth a few inlaid strokes; it needs the eye of faith to distinguish an animal at all; the examples of the unicorn I have met with look exactly the same as the wolves except they have a long straight stroke sticking out in front".

To carry the analogy further, in the well established cases of German trade blades imported into Sudan, Reed ("A Kaskara from Darfur", JAAS, 1985) notes that in examining a blade with a Fur chief, the chief thought the wolf was a hippopotamus!

[kronckew]

Well, your picture clearly explains why we have three protrusions where the hind legs are, and only two in the front. :)

yup, it's obviously a male animal! ;)

[Gonzalo G]

I don´t know if this can be useful, but according with the icollector web site, and I quote: "Excellent quality Victorian decorated rapier with period blade signed Pietro Hernandez. This rapier was probably a military issue and plain style which was embellished in the 19th Century; 47-1/2” overall with a 38” blade; good condition with normal aging. The hilt and blade show quality forging and the decorative chiseling and engraving are almost an exact simulation of 17th Century work but just not quite as fine or detailed enough." You can find the reference here:


It seems that there was made an intent to to imitate a very well known mark or stamp used on Spanish blades from the 15th and 16th Centuries, consisting in a small running dog, made with very elementary lines. For this reason, those swords were commonly called "Espadas del Perrillo" (Swords of the Little Dog). The mark belonged originally to Julián del Rey, known as Julián el Moro, a moorish converse from Granada, supposedly baptized by the king Ferdinand the Catholic. It is to be noted that, according with some people, this swordsmith made the famous jineta sword of Boabdil exhibited in the Museo del Ejército in Toledo, but latter the mark was imitated by other swordsmiths in Spain. Maybe even by those of Passau, and it most be taken care to not confuse the marks, since some people, not knowing this facts, misatribute a Espada del Perrillo to those of the running wolf from Passau. I was unable to load the image of this mark or stamp, since when I try to insert the image in this post, it appear a text "Enter the text to be formatted", and I don´t know how to upload, but you can see the image of the stamp here:


Regards

[fernando]

... The hilt and blade show quality forging and the decorative chiseling and engraving are almost an exact simulation of 17th Century work but just not quite as fine or detailed enough." You can find the reference here: ... I was unable to load the image of this mark or stamp, since when I try to insert the image in this post, it appear a text "Enter the text to be formatted", and I don´t know how to upload, but you can see the image of the stamp here:...
Hola Gonzalo,
It is visible that you have not been around for some time (years). Let's try and update you.
You should not link to web life auctioners; i did save the sword you wish to show and will upload it here with the appropriate forum attachment pictures.
Concerning the second link in your post, It is not difficult, contrary to what you have experienced, to upload the perrillo mark, as also you should not get it by linking it to ephemeral blogs; also here i will upload this famous symbol with appropriate features. However if you have a quick view to recent threads or browse the forum archives, you will notice that much has been discussed about the perrillo mark; starting by the fact that the very image you have atempted to post is the one figuring in Palomares nomina; a chart often posted in recent (and earlier) discussions. One less dicussed detail but still present in our discussions on this subject is that, while the perrillo would have been a symbol used by Julian del Rey in his blades, such may have been a sort of quality contrast punzon, his personal sword smith mark, one eventually disputed in court by his son and also present and recognized in his blades in museums, is one associated with his name.
Obviously these are all perspectives; always subject to better judgement.

Abrazo

.

[Gonzalo G]

You overwhelm me, Fer. I will ask you via private message how to uoload images, since in the past I didn´t have problems to do it. Julián del Rey seems to have used at least three stamps, but I am under the impresion that the perrillo mark, present in the Palomares relation, was not his personal stamp, but I can be wrong. Don´t forget that the relation from Palomares is unaccurate and have some mistakes. The matter must be researched.

Sorry if I repeated statements already clarified in this forum. You are right, I was absent seven years from this and other forums, I am obsolete. :shrug:

[Gonzalo G]

According with the sources, the mark of the perrillo always appear in authentic spanish blades accompanied by other stamps, seemingly personal stamps particular to each swordmaker. Some of those blades are not from Julián del Rey. All indicates that the perrillo mark was a sort of garantee of the quality of the steel of the respective sword, used by Spanish swordsmiths in the 16th Century and it was not the personal stamp from Julián del Rey. Probably the mark of the perrillo was used by the Hipanic-Arab swordsmiths since at least the 15th Century, if not before. Julián del Rey worked at the end of the 15th Century, beginnings of the 16th Century. It is possible that this mark was not invented by him, but taken from a common practice on that time. The scarcity of Hispano-Arabic pieces of quality from the period, makes it difficult to have certainty. Also, it most be considered that the animal was not really a dog, but a different species, though the Spanish people in time, would considere it a perrillo, a small dog, because of its resemblance.
Regards

[Gonzalo G]

On the other side, probably the running wolf from Passau was a mark developed independently of the "perrillo" mark, and I quote:

"The sign of a wolf was used by the swordsmiths from the German town of Passau, as it is confirmed in a charter from 1340. Herzog Albrecht of Austria gave permission to the guild of swordsmith in this southeastern Bavarian town to
put the sign of a wolf from the town coat of arms on the blades they produced. Albert III, bishop of Passau confirmed this right in a new charter from 1368: ‘That stamp, which we call wolf we restore, verify and acknowledge. And it is our will that also our swordsmiths here in Passau engrave the same sign of a wolf on each blade’."

from Marko Alecsic´s Maediaeval Swords from Southeastern Europe.

Regards

[fernando]

According with the sources, the mark of the perrillo always appear in authentic spanish blades accompanied by other stamps, seemingly personal stamps particular to each swordmaker. Some of those blades are not from Julián del Rey. All indicates that the perrillo mark was a sort of garantee of the quality of the steel of the respective sword, used by Spanish swordsmiths in the 16th Century and it was not the personal stamp from Julián del Rey. Probably the mark of the perrillo was used by the Hipanic-Arab swordsmiths since at least the 15th Century, if not before. Julián del Rey worked at the end of the 15th Century, beginnings of the 16th Century. It is possible that this mark was not invented by him, but taken from a common practice on that time. The scarcity of Hispano-Arabic pieces of quality from the period, makes it difficult to have certainty. Also, it most be considered that the animal was not really a dog, but a different species, though the Spanish people in time, would considere it a perrillo, a small dog, because of its resemblance.
Regards
You may well regard his subject as a "two ends stick", or a point of discord, yet to be clarified.
Assuming this 'quality contrast' mark represents the zoomorphic figure of a perrillo (little dog) ...
The canine is considered by Muslims as an impure animal, almost as maligne as swines. If Julian del Rey was indeed born a Moor, how could he use this symbol in his swords? was he so deeply converted that this was a way to show Christian stalkers he really changed his faith ?
On the other hand when we read Leguina's work, according to Maindron, who followed Babelon's perspective, Julian would never use the dog mark 'even' after being christianized.

[kronckew]

ah, yes, the koran says somewhere that 'thou shall not suffer a black dog to live'.

normal city dogs are indeed, to the islamic faithful, unclean foul and nasty scavenger animals.

the running hound depicted on blades however is likely in islamic cases anyway, a saluki, which is not considered a dog, and actually lives in the bedu tents as a family member. in the traditional home, they are never sold, but given as gifts (for which a large 'gift' is expected in return)., they are noble creatures loved by, and bonded to their humans, and used to hunt gazelle, and rabbits, and raced for status. again i mention that they are known for their feathering on the feet, legs, tail and especially their ears. see my avatar. :)

human, horse, falcon, saluki - living together still, a team that are the beduin, masters of the desert.

[Jim McDougall]

First thing...........................Gonzalo, ITS GOOD TO HAVE YOU BACK!!!!! :)

Wayne, outstanding rendition on the Bedouin, and their dogs. I personally cannot see anything derogatory about dogs, in fact quite the contrary. They are outstanding and amazing beings, very much an important part of our world.

Getting to the 'perillo' dilemma, very interesting points Fernando makes, but looking at that image, I cannot see how it can be determined what this creature is (as Gonzalo has noted). It seems important to note that the 'running wolf' is always rendered in a four legged stance, not in the 'rampant' stance up on hind legs seen here. That seems more for lions , horses etc.
I think the 'perillo' moniker owes more to Cervantes colorful imbuement than actual intention , and has been described, its presence seems rather irregular as other marks are better known.

I had once thought that perhaps the perillo might be a perception toward the running wolf of Passau, which was of course known by this time, but since have regarded that unlikely.

While leaning toward these sorts of esoterica, I have always wondered about
the 'Lobera' sword of Fernando III of Castile of the 13th c. His grandson writing of his exploits in 1337 described his sword as "Lobera", (=the wolf hunter"). Could there be any sort of commemorative or honorific allusion?

[Gonzalo G]

Though I repeated the common statement that Julian del Rey was a converse (probably baptized by the king Ferdinand the Catholic), other sources points in other direction. Germán Dueñaz Beraiz, in "Julián del Rey: Nuevos Datos sobre su Figura" (Gladius Vol. XX, 2000), states that, according with legal documentation found in the archives of the city of Zaragoza (Libro de Actas de Zaragoza, 1549), there was a fight among Julián del Rey and his elder brother, named Miguel, for the exclusive use of the same stamp belonging to their father, also named Miguel. For which it can be concluded: first, Julián was not a converse, since his father and his brother bear christian names (so his baptism by the king as godfather is a myth); second, the stamp in question was possibly already prestiged, since both brothers were fighting for its use, though it is also possible that Julián gave it greater prestige. It must be noted that the sentence favoured Julián.

It remains open the question about if Julián and his ancestors were really moors and when did they convert, or if the "moor" apelative was only a nickname derived from the color of his skin, as it is not an unusual practice in Spain, Italy and Mexico (in Mexico the very dark skinned persons are called affectionately "negro", a black person, nigro, without a derogatory meaning, and it must be remembered also Ludovico Sforza, Duke of Milan, nicknamed "Il Moro", the moor, by the color of his skin and hair).

The peoples from the desertic areas consider impure certain animals on sanitary grounds. Muslims and jews prohibit the consume of the pig, and the dog is considered impure, as Kronckew has said, because it loves to eat garbage and rotten corpses, which is a potential source of infections, specially in hot climates.

Nevertheless, the moors in Spain were very lax in their practice of Islam, a motive of criticism and fury from the fundamentalist berber Almohads, who came latter. I personally disagree with the statement, made by some French authors in the 19th Century (Maindorm, Les Armes, 1890, cited by J.J. Rodríguez Lorente), that a converse would not use this mark, if the mark actually represents a dog. Specially if the mark is already in use by the swordsmiths of the era, considering also that the sources also points out that this mark was not invented by Julián del Rey but used by him.

Since the mark of the "perrillo" had been in use for a considerable lapse of time, it had some variants. Not all of them represent a prancing animal. In fact, the older known marks do not represent a prancing animal. The sword of Boabdil, which is a "espada a la jineta", represented by Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer in her article "Introduction to the History of the European Sword" (Gladius Vol. I, p.49), carries the mark of el perrillo, which is represented in the article of J.J. Rodríguez Lorente, "La Marca del Perrillo del Espadero Español Julián del Rey" (Gladius Vol. III, 1964). It is not a prancing animal, but a running animal with the tail laid straight behind at the level of the corpse, not a tail naturally curved, like in some dogs. More Spanish marks of "el perrillo" representing a running animal and not a prancing animal, can be found on other Spanish swords, as it can be seen in the figure No.5, p.96, of the last cited article. Some have raised tails, but lions in heraldry are also represented with raised tails.

Dueñaz Beraiz also points out that, though the ordinances for the swordsmiths of Zaragoza does not mention a quality garantee mark from the city, the ordinances for the knifesmiths of the city does, indicating that it should be the heraldic symbol of the city, a lion. We can suppose that, if the mark of "el perrillo" is an old one already in use, primitively representing as a lion in a very schematic way with only straight lines made by a chisel, since an appropiate stamp made by hand would be costly, it is perfectly possible to infer that the animal could be a lion and not a dog.

About the mark of "el perrillo" beign a quality mark and not the personal mark of a specific swordsmith, diverse Spanish specialists consider it so, among them, José Maria Florit y Arizcun, Francisco Javier Sánchez Cantón, Enrique de Leguina, Germán Dueñas Beraiz and J.J. Rodríguez Lorente. Enrique de Leguina, Barón de la Vega de Hoz and one of the greates Spanish specialists from the 19th Century, gives more specifics about this mark. In his book Los Maestros Espaderos, p.32, Don Enrique says that from the mines of Peña de Udala, in Gupúzcoa, was extracted a "natural steel", from which supposedly were made the swords with the mark of "el perrillo", without a core of iron, in other words, a pure steel blade.

It must be noted that when the Real Fábrica de Armas Blancas in Toledo was established in the 18th Century, the documents mention that the old way of making blades was entirely lost, except for one swordsmith. The "new" way of making, quenching and tempering sword blades since time ago, was made with a composite of iron and steel, some authors as Leguina saying "con alma de hierro" (core iron wrapped in steel), others, like Palomares saying that the steel was sanwiched among two outer layers of iron, like the san mai knives. The fact is that it was a composite, in which the iron gave thoughtness and the steel hardness to the blade. So it is relevant the distinction with the blades made with pure steel, which are more difficult to make, since the steel alone is more prone to breaking, if the carbon content is not adecuate and the thermal treatment is not made correctly. Anyway, we don´t know for sure how it was the “old way” technique of making swords.

Among these references, sometimes contradictory, the problem of the “perrillo” mark seems not be a simple one, since the available information raises more questions than answers. So, without more original information from the primary sources and a more detailed and guided study of the swords from this period, it is difficult to make valid generalizations. I am personally more interested in the knowledge on construction and uses of the edged weapons than in collecting, so my perspective could be a little different.

JIM: THANK YOU FOR YOUR WELCOME. IT IS GREAT TO READ YOU, FERNANDO AND OTHERS AGAIN, SINCE I LEARN MUCH FROM ALL OF YOU!!!

[Jim McDougall]

As we do from you Gonzalo!!! Fantastic dissertation and very well described. Definitely puts much needed perspective on this dilemma.

[fernando]

Waine, thank you for your contribution towards cracking the doggy riddle.
Noteworthily renaissance smiths were not skilled enough to shape a silhouette more in accordance with the saluki figure ... except for the feathers ;).


.

[fernando]

... I think the 'perillo' moniker owes more to Cervantes colorful imbuement than actual intention ...
You are right Jim; imbuement or conviction, were it not for Cervantes, who later decided to imortalize the mark as being a doggy Julian, for one, could have intended to shape a different animal ... be iy symbolic or phisical. Lorente suggests a jackal, more in acordance with Moorish tendences, if such were the case.

... While leaning toward these sorts of esoterica, I have always wondered about the 'Lobera' sword of Fernando III of Castile of the 13th c. His grandson writing of his exploits in 1337 described his sword as "Lobera", (=the wolf hunter"). Could there be any sort of commemorative or honorific allusion?.
Ah, esoterica, your cup of tea ;).Apparently Spaniards did not come to a conclusion, the doubt being whether it was a hunting sword or just a name, as per period custom to sttribute names to swords. It could also be that such status was already given by previos owner as, according to what is written, the sword originaly belonged to the great Count Fernán González.
I deeply regret having been twice in the cathedral of Seville and not get visual contact with this sword, which is kept in the Capilla Real. Probably it is not at sight.

[fernando]

Great input, Gonzalo, with thoughts and data confirming points already focused in these (three) recent threads around such subject.

...Though I repeated the common statement that Julian del Rey was a converse (probably baptized by the king Ferdinand the Catholic),
Speaking of which, the other day someone in a Spanish blog was asking how such person managed to be personaly baptized by the Catholic Kings and it was suggested (or assumed) that these baptisms were collective, you know, rites were processed before a number of gathered ones to be converted.. An interesting view.

...other sources points in other direction. Germán Dueñaz Beraiz, in "Julián del Rey: Nuevos Datos sobre su Figura" (Gladius Vol. XX, 2000), states that, according with legal documentation found in the archives of the city of Zaragoza (Libro de Actas de Zaragoza, 1549), there was a fight among Julián del Rey and his elder brother, named Miguel, for the exclusive use of the same stamp belonging to their father, also named Miguel. For which it can be concluded: first, Julián was not a converse, since his father and his brother bear christian names (so his baptism by the king as godfather is a myth); second, the stamp in question was possibly already prestiged, since both brothers were fighting for its use, though it is also possible that Julián gave it greater prestige. It must be noted that the sentence favoured Julián.
And, if i recall correctly, the dspute was not about the perrillo but their personal mark, the one shown in post # 45.

...It remains open the question about if Julián and his ancestors were really moors and when did they convert, or if the "moor" apelative was only a nickname derived from the color of his skin ...
Indeed the term Moor/Moro/Mouro, comes from the greek, meaning black, as dark.


...Nevertheless, the moors in Spain were very lax in their practice of Islam, a motive of criticism and fury from the fundamentalist berber Almohads, who came latter. I personally disagree with the statement, made by some French authors in the 19th Century (Maindorm, Les Armes, 1890, cited by J.J. Rodríguez Lorente), that a converse would not use this mark, if the mark actually represents a dog. Specially if the mark is already in use by the swordsmiths of the era, considering also that the sources also points out that this mark was not invented by Julián del Rey but used by him.
Good and plausible points, Gonzalo; namely your last paragraph.

...Since the mark of the "perrillo" had been in use for a considerable lapse of time, it had some variants. Not all of them represent a prancing animal. In fact, the older known marks do not represent a prancing animal.
Let's upload those variants in here.

...We can suppose that, if the mark of "el perrillo" is an old one already in use, primitively representing as a lion in a very schematic way with only straight lines made by a chisel, since an appropiate stamp made by hand would be costly, it is perfectly possible to infer that the animal could be a lion and not a dog...
Another theory; maybe not so strong but, not to be discarded.


.

[Gonzalo G]

And, if i recall correctly, the dspute was not about the perrillo but their personal mark, the one shown in post # 45.


Yes Fernando, it is correct. I did not intend to say that the mark in dispute was the one of the "perrillo", as I know that the personal mark of Miguel and Julián del Rey was another one. My point was to show that the members of the family all bear christian names. Also, I did not want to explore further subjects and to upload images, as I saw that my post was already loo long. Thank you for doing it, it is very useful to illustrate the point.

Other subject that dreserves to be explored in relation with the personal mark of those swordsmiths, is the fact that some swords attributed to Julián, could be in fact be made by his father, since it was the same mark, according with the information from Dueñas Beraiz. It is to be noted that the legal document of the dispute is dated as late as 1549, many years since the fall of the Kingdom of Granada and the exile of Abu `Abdallah Muhammed XII, known as Boabdil. So, the sword of Boabdil was made by Julián, or by his father Miguel, as other jineta swordsl?

The statement that the animal could be also a lion, refers only to a possibility, it is not a theory. The animal could belong to other species. As I said, the subject is complex and there is a void in the available information.

Regards

[Gonzalo G]

While leaning toward these sorts of esoterica, I have always wondered about the 'Lobera' sword of Fernando III of Castile of the 13th c. His grandson writing of his exploits in 1337 described his sword as "Lobera", (=the wolf hunter"). Could there be any sort of commemorative or honorific allusion?

I forgot. According with the Catálogo Histórico-Descriptivo de la Real Armería de Madrid, by the Count of Valencia de Don Juan (1898), p.201, perhaps the term "Lobera" was used in the sense that the sword was to be carried with the costume used in the medieval Castile, known commonly as "Loba", which is more properly called a "traje talar" (search Internet with this words). The hilt with its guards is not the original, and the inscription on the blade can be interpreted as a way to say that a knight must keep his word, or as a quote from the bible (Mathew 5,37).

Regards

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I forgot. According with the Catálogo Histórico-Descriptivo de la Real Armería de Madrid, by the Count of Valencia de Don Juan (1898), p.201, perhaps the term "Lobera" was used in the sense that the sword was to be carried with the costume used in the medieval Castile, known commonly as "Loba", which is more properly called a "traje talar" (search Internet with this words). The hilt with its guards is not the original, and the inscription on the blade can be interpreted as a way to say that a knight must keep his word, or as a quote from the bible (Mathew 5,37).

Regards

Salaams Gonzalo ~ An interesting thread! I note we enter the whats in a word connotation around Lobera which comes out as being related to wolves and other fractions of that meaning such as;

1. Ana María García, la Lobera, who appeared before the Inquisition of Toledo in 1648 accused of controlling seven demonic wolves.

2. Wolf trap, funnel-like walls leading to a pit with stakes for hunting wolves in Spain
3. Wolf-slayer Lobera (sword)
4. A wolfs lair.

Naturally I would swerve toward its meaning as a powerful sword..

[fernando]

I forgot. According with the Catálogo Histórico-Descriptivo de la Real Armería de Madrid, by the Count of Valencia de Don Juan (1898), p.201, perhaps the term "Lobera" was used in the sense that the sword was to be carried with the costume used in the medieval Castile, known commonly as "Loba", which is more properly called a "traje talar" (search Internet with this words). The hilt with its guards is not the original, and the inscription on the blade can be interpreted as a way to say that a knight must keep his word, or as a quote from the bible (Mathew 5,37).

Regards
Yes, the author mentions such possibility using the term "acaso" (by chance), with fair consistence with naming swords on a context and not referring to them by their use on the field. So we would have that, in such case, the Lobera term doesn't originate in Lobo (wolf) from the latin Lupu, but from Loba, originating in latin Alba, by french L'aube (alb) =white dress, such ancient judicial and clerical attire, to which this type of sword would be connected.

[Gonzalo G]

As it is the case of the ropera sword (rapier), since the castilian word "ropa", in this context, is the civil attire, by opposition to the uniforms used by the military. Originally the "espada ropera" was a civil sword, though latter it could have also uses on the battlefield.

The french word "L'aube" is pronounced more or less as "lob", which became "loba" in castilian, since in this language we don´t have words ending in "b", and a vocal "a" is added to naturalize it.

[fernando]

It's Loba also in portuguese ... and is the name of a Magistrate's robe.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I was tricked by this wolf in sheep's clothing !! :)

[fernando]

:eek:

.