16th Century Style Broad Sword
 

Hi Guys

I am in the process of cataloguing a friend’s collection, and among his swords is this one which was sold to him many years ago as medieval. I personally have no idea with this one, the orb and cross look original to the blade but the squiggly scrip looks out of place. The pommel is also unusual. Any thought on what this actually is or how I might best describe it would be gratefully received. At this stage I have just listed it as 16th Century Style Broad Sword.

Overall Length: 43 ½” 100.5 cm
Blade length: 36 ½” 92.5 cm
Blade widest point: 1 ¾” 4.4 cm
Hilt widest point: 6 ½” 6.6 cm
Inside grip length: 4 ¾” 2.2 cm
Marks, etc.: Orb and Cross, squiggly scrip starts about 3” below Orb and Cross mark.

Cheers Cathey

croix fourchée on one side of pommel and bend shield with two points on the bend, on nice little rounded square/oval engraving plates... feels very french, maybe 14th c. same for the quillons? And maybe you get a somewhat long handle for the sword length with a concave bevel like that that early? Just guessing here. Not sure about the blade. Feels off. Perhaps a married piece?

As Helleri said, the shape and the quality of the blade look really off. All the real medieval swords I have seen and handled until now had nice clear and crisp lines, and that wobbly fuller just looks wrong in my opinion.

EDIT : to add, that top knob on the pommel looks really weird (very different from what can be found on some XIVth, XVth century swords). However, that pommel shape, described as type H1 by Oakeshott do exist, and, according to him, was used between 1350 and the first quarter of the XVth century.

I tend to agree with both of you, my visual impression matches the points you raise.

Isn't that "bottleneck" profile of the grip more appropriate on the longer, "bastard" or hand-and-half hilts, and particularly those from the German lands?

The cross and orb symbol is typically German, 16th cent.

The fuller at the axis of the blade is quite irregular (not a match to the quality of the hilt) even by the less-than-perfect standards of pre-industrial production cutlery. However, the blade shows signs of age and apparently heavy use too since the edges have the irregularity associated with extensive sharpening, with heavy grinding locally to remove deep notches.

The tang button makes me suspicious and only helps cement my suspicion that the sword may be a composite.

Cathey, just out of curiosity what is the point of balance on the blade? Could you please post images showing the tang peening, and the blade-to-crossguard fit?

I just got an idea, does it looks like something was sawed off the guard ? Or is there even some small irregularities or differences in patina and polish ?


I think it might actually be a kaskara rehilted as a medieval like sword in the XIXth, XXth century. The shape of the blade and of the guard (excluding the sawed off parts, middle langets and flared ends of the quillons), and the fact that the guard is made out of bronze (which isn't unheard of in medieval swords, but is unusual) are consistent with this hypothesis. It would explain the shape and finish of the blade (maybe even the inscription, perhaps Amharic ?) and the general proportions of the sword (guard too short, and weird blade length for an allegedly XIVth century one hander). The pommel, nut, and grip probably are of modern making.

I think you have a point, here. The proportions of the crossguard do appear "off" in relation to what is expected for authentic examples. And it being made of bronze: as said previously, non-ferrous hilt fittings are not unknown in medieval swords but shouldn't the pommel and guard be of the same metal in such case?

As to whether this guard is a recycled and altered kaskara crossguard, I'm not a kaskara expert so won't venture a definite opinion. But, in looking at an exhibition catalog (Splendeur des Armes, Paris, 1988) in front of me, there are 2-3 kaskaras but their quillons flare out quite notably, so if sawed off shorter, the ends would still be wider than what we see here. However, I leave it to someone who knows kaskaras to tell if there is enough of a variation in their guards to fit with your suggestion. Interesting!

There is some medieval swords with bronze pommel and guard, or bronze pommel and steel guard (even had the chance to take a look at one myself) to benefit from the weight of the bronze and the strenght of the steel, but I've never heard of one where it's the other way around.

Regarding the guard, it could indeed be a newly made element too, but I feel like grinding excess material with a file would be way more easy than making a new guard from scratch (but again, I could be wrong, and it might be a newly made one !)

Also see : http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=24259 , especially figure 10 exhibiting similar globus cruciger, but also some guards that could easily be modified into what we got here.

Very astute observation, thanks!

Although these type of swords is not my field 16th c is , and this is not 16th C style.
So for the description I would use"13th C style".
kind regards
Ulfberth

I am inclined to go along with the suggestions this sword may have certain composite elements, and may have to do with such practices of use of same from Sudanese swords, as per Oakeshott in "Records of the Medieval Sword".

As noted, the shape of the grip does resemble 'two hander' style, but it is not to say could not have been used on a more regular size in the 'bastard' sense.
Also, the pommel is with the cross fourchee and heraldic shield on the opposing side, which it seems I have seen in illustrations in Boeheim and other late 19thc. references describing 'crusades' period swords.

The blade does seem to be of unusual character as noted, and certainly the cross and orb seems so as well. This device was popularly adopted on many native kaskara blades, and seen by the tribesmen as drum and sticks, a symbol of authority or standing (Briggs, 1965).
The unusual script may be psuedo Arabic? unsure on that, but surely atypical for European application with cross and orb. The 'crusades' trophy swords from Alexandria seem to have had somewhat similar 'inscriptions'.

The guard being bronze/brass is also something seen on kaskaras, but not always. It seems there may have been apotropaic properties involved, as suggested to me by certain authorities in London. The cross section here seems unusual but not unlikely. Earlier examples may have had this beveled character, but most seemed lozenze rather than hexagonal in section.
In Darfur guards often flared at the ends in the Funj fashion of earlier 19th c. so if there is evidence of these being trimmed off..........but cannot see why.

I am surely no expert on medieval nor Sudanese swords, but these are things I have noted in my limited experience with them and research on them.

16th Century Style Broad Sword
 

Hi Guys

Sorry for not responding sooner, I don't have the sword at home so can only work from the photographs I took when I last visited the owner. The hilt is Iron not bronze, just look brown in the pictures but I think you are on to something with the possibility of a Kaskara blade etc. I actully really dislike this sword, it feels horrible, however it does have an interesting pommel. It has been very difficult for me to catlaogue this one, the best I could say was 16th century STYLE, and we all know what Style means. I have been trying to gently let the owner know he has been sold a dud. He did tell me the sword came from someone by the name of Skollard in the USA I think, has anyone heard of this chap. I know a number of very questionable swords and items of armour came to Australia via his business many years ago.

Thanks for the information you have all contributed to date.

Cheers Cathey

Hi, Cathey

To address your comments:

Thanks for the clarification on hilt materials and construction. A picture is worth a thousand words, as they say, but looking at pictures can't compare with looking at the object itself. So... iron all around.

If a sword has a lousy balance in your hands, and it's purported to be a fighting weapon as opposed to a bearing-sword or something ceremonial, that pretty much brands it as a dud. Another problem with buying things only via images in a catalog or online auction listing.

Regarding the late Wm Scollard (a near-neighbor of mine, living about 20 miles away), let's just say that the assessment in your closing sentence pretty much sums things up. A number of decades ago, he had a very fine collection and inventory of European and Oriental arms and armor; I used to buy from him on occasion, he had a world-class collection of gun locks, a major study resource, spanning the 16th through 19th cent. including some very rare types -- that eventually sold as a lot to a collector in Europe. He was much respected in those days, a few of his pieces were loaned to exhibitions and published in reference books. One of the highlights of any visit was his impressive library, occupying its own small pavilion; marvelous. I wish more collectors and dealers at least made the effort to be as erudite as he was.

Later on, his career as a dealer ended up on a different note, as alluded to in your post. Why, I don't really know. By 2007, the date of my last visit, virtually everything was Victorian or later, often much later. The sword which is the subject of this thread is representative of the material he used to trot out to arms fairs in those final years. I find it all rather sad.