Smallsword hilted Spadroon
 

Hi,
A new addition. An unusual, from what I can find, Smallsword mounted with a Spadroon type blade. I can find references to military smallswords but all the illustrations are of double edged diamond section blades and none are of single edged blades with a false back edge. If anyone has any photographs or illustrations of a similar set up to the one in these photos I would be really interested to see them. The hilt is gilded brass with quite a good bit of the gilding remaining. The pas d'ane is for looks only, the double quillions appear to be less than usual, the grip is bound in copper wire and copper ribbon. I would suggest a date C1760. Unusually there is also a tricolour silk 'sword knot' still attached although this is in rather a delicate state. The blade is 32 3/4 inches long, width 1 inch at widest and 3/8 inch at its thickest. The false edge is 8 inches with the first 5 inches sharpened. The blade is decorated as per the photos and is not maker marked though I suspect it's probably German. In conclusion my thoughts are that this is a Military Smallsword C 1760. I would of course be interested in your thoughts and comments.
Regards,
Norman.

Wonderful addition, Norman :cool: .
Yeah, the blade looks Solingen ... and a bit earlier than the hilt ? :o .

Hi Fernando,
Thanks, I'm not sure about the age of the blade. I was going to comment on your Portuguese smallsword that the blade looked to be older than early 19thC but you beat me to it. :)
My Regards,
Norman.

Hi,
Some more blade details including a photo of a mark on the spine, does anyone have a blade with the same/similar spinal marking?
Regards,
Norman.

In case it helps, I see infantry officer's swords with "smallsword style" hilts and spadroon blades every now and then here in Sweden. The hilt here doesn't really look like the Swedish fashion though. The earliest example of one with a spadroon blade I could find in Berg's book was from 1830, though there's a cavalry officer's sword (different hilt) with a similar blade from 1810, and the style remains in use to ca 1860. The example in the white-background picture here is ca 1850.

The practice of officer's swords with these "smallsword like" hilts goes back to the late 17th century in Sweden, originally as swords for officer's in general, but it quickly (ca 1720) became somethign just for the infantry, since the cavalry already had their own distinctive hilt. The blades mated with these hilts, and the overall size of the swords, goes from smallswords to full sized cavalry swords. I'm attaching a picture form the Army Museum in Stockholm showing a few examples, the spadroon-bladed one (second form the bottom) is ca 1840.

The blade seems to me to have most of the characteristics of those "Runkel" blades of the early 19th Cent.
Regards
Richard

Hi Kisak,
Many thanks for the images, not ones I have seen before. :)

Hi Richard,
Although this type of blade and decoration extended into the early 19thC I'm certain this blade is contemporary with the hilt C1760. :)

My Regards,
Norman.

The little squiggle on the base of the blade seems like a Solingen specific mark, just as the wolf had been for Passau. A guild mark (my thoughts).

Cheers

GC

Hi Glen,
Seems possible, I'm sure I've seen the same or similar on other blades, still trying to find some more examples.
My Regards,
Norman.

I do have a few buried in files somewhere for Soligen made swords up into the 19th century. Some have stated it specifically regards Schnitzler&Kirshbaum (iirc, one of them anyway), as an export agent but considering the variety I have seen it on I don't believe it to be a specific company. Possibly a single bladeworks but my gut says it represents the entire city and all the forges. It does sometimes show up on Soligen stamped in along with the spine mark but often without and waht seem to be earlier blades. I think Solingen blade history could be a life study in and of itself.

Wagner may have notes in his book but I do not own his tome that also shows the Passau marks.

Cheers

GC

Hi Glen,
Thanks for the further suggestions. I'm sure I've seen this or similar on older blades but for the life of me I can't remember where :( It seems too complex for a makers mark also it's engraved and not stamped, quality or guild mark maybe? Probably I'll come across a clue when I least expect it but to me that's part of the game and the chase :eek: Thanks again.
My Regards,
Norman.

Hi,
Some striking similarities in hilt decor and construction.
Regards,
Norman.

Yes indeed :cool:

Wow! breathtaking barrage of response here in less than an hour!!! I likes that:)
In looking at this I began to suspect this might be Dutch, probably much in line with the notes by Kisak reflecting those characteristics.

The 'spadroon' blade was becoming popular around 1780s while by 1790s the traditional smallsword was waning, despite military traditions carrying the theme forward with its officers. The British introduced the hilt styles familar on the spadroon models of c.1780, and there are silver hilt types with similar fluting on tall pommels and the four slot guard with fouled anchor from 1780s (one has hallmark of 1787). Perhaps the naval association might comply with the compelling comparison shown in the Morris sword. The style of decoration in hilt is very similar.

It is interesting that the smallsword style hilt was used in the British M1796 infantry officers dress sword which was used until 1822. These did not follow the true smallsword hilt however in that they did not have the pas d'ane rings. It does seem that the officers truly disdained this sword as was described in accounts of Peninsular campaigns. It does seem that the blades were single edged like this and indeed were imported by Runkel, but most of these blades were so marked.

The magic/talismanic motif is indeed Solingen oriented, and as mentioned often seen on officers blades brought into England by J J Runkel in the late 18th c. into 19th. He was actually an importer working as an agent in London for Solingen if I am not mistaken.
The squiggle on the spine is indeed a Solingen mark and seems to have been discussed by Glen some time ago. I am inclined to agree with him that it is either some sort of trademark or signature symbolic pertaining to either guild or contractual circumstances.

Glen, I have Wagner and will check further. I am also looking through Dean and Aylward.

Norman, you are truly a discerning collector, and the items you come up with certainly tantalize the researcher in all of us! Fantastic teamwork here everybody, and definitely fun to see results like this.

Thanks Guys :) :cool: :D

The 1796 infantry sword was as described, without donkey hoofs but was a prescribed field service form (not a dress sword).

The last sword entry by Norman has a boat shell type guard, which would later be used in the form of the 1796 heavy cavalry dress sword . The 1796 heavy cavalry dress sword then also having a doubled edge blade with a short fuller, a nod to the older palasch blades.

So, right there, kidney vs boat as a difference but a beautiful and notable sword.

Cheers

GC

The mysteries of Solingen are indeed a lifes work! and though I feel like I have learned a great deal, it still doesnt scratch the surface.
Actually John Justus Runkel was actually a German dealer based in London on Holborn street, and imported blades into England to sell to other cutlers (1780-1808). It is believed his blades came primarily from one particular family in Solingen, and this was all during the notorious 'sword scandals' contesting German vs. English blades.

While the magical/talismanic motif does resemble some of the themes on a number of his blades, it seems typically he would inscribe his name 'J J Runkel' on the back of the blade. This is the somewhat standard location for makers names stamped in block letters in that period.

It would appear to me that the inscribed motif on this blade is quite similar to blades (also of Solingen make) done in the Cassaignard fashion, a Nantes France cutler (1774-1812), whose engraver used these magical style sigils and devices along with panoplies and astral symbols. It seems often these were well aligned with Masonic and fraternal orders which were of course quite popular with the gentry and nobility of these times. Swords were very much status oriented and fashion well connected between France and England through these fraternal channels.

As has been noted, the 'squiggle' could very well have a 'signature' type demeanor as it is placed in the location on blade back where names of makers were typically placed. It may also be perceived as a simple flourish to complete the overall decoration on these neoclassical themed weapons, however it would be interesting to learn more on this apparantly deliberately placed device, especially if it does occur with names.

This is a fascinating anomaly, a traditional smallsword hilt in style at least with vestigial pas d'ane and a distinctly fighting type blade of heavier 'spadroon' type of 1780s, and of course quite possibly earlier as suggested. Often when sword types were introduced in regulations the form had already been in use for some time.
To add to the interest is the blade decoration , including the diagonal strapwork panel at forte often seen on the Caissagnard blades. It should be noted perhaps that the French eventually copied the English 1780 type spadroon swords with urn type pommels and often five ball hilts, terming them l'Anglaise (of the English style).

Thanks guys, really appreciate the input. :) :) :)

Flag of the Seven United Netherlands 1581-1795.

Well, ha

There you go
:)

GC

Hi, this doesn't look like a sword knot, but I have another idea. How wide and how long is this fabric?

Hi Dmitry,
The material is 35 1/2 inches long and 2 1/2 inches wide. The ends are quite frayed and I couldn't guarantee that there hasn't been loss to the length. The colours on close inspection do look like orange, white and blue rather than what I assumed at first i.e faded red with white and blue but as I am not at all familiar with dyes, silk and the effect of 200yrs plus exposure I cant be sure. I did photograph the silk at the point where it was knotted/folded where the colours were not totally exposed to daylight but on the other hand time may be an issue with some dyestuffs as well as exposure to light. Hope this is of help.
My Regards,
Norman.

Hi, Norman.
2 1/2 inches is too wide for a sword knot lanyard. I think it maybe an officer's sash or a scarf, or a civilian patriotic sash, like a town mayor's, assembly members, etc., or a medal/order shoulder sash, or something along those lines.
35 1/2 inches is a few inches short for a sash, but like you said, it may have been torn off at the ends.
Sometimes the red dye fades to orange over time, being that it was probably dyed in some type of organic substance.

Look at this example, also silk. Red is pretty much gone.

http://www.sailorinsaddle.com/media/...0385585000.jpg
http://www.sailorinsaddle.com/media/...0387928750.jpg

I think 1760s is a bit earlier than I would put on it, l'd date it from the 1780s-1790s.

Hi Dmitry,
Many thanks for your input. When I first saw this piece my initial thoughts were that the silk was some sort of patriotic display with faded red, white and blue and my first instinct pointed to revolutionary France but of course red, white and blue is in a way the worst of all combinations in that many countries have these three in some form or other, U.K., Rev. France, Netherlands after 1795 and of course North America amongst others. I think I will have to see if I can contact the textile expert at Kelvingrove Museum to determine if the original colour is indeed red or orange. The orange colour is quite even where the cloth was knotted/folded and I did think that if it had been red some vestiges, however small, of red would have remained in these folds and if not at least a noticeable progression of fading. I tend to agree that the silk is not a sword knot but more of a show of patriotism or expression of loyalty etc,. Thanks for your interest.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. I based my dating on similar pieces on the net, albeit very few, and indeed the sword in the Man at Arms article, although of course not an exact match, is described as typical for pieces 1750-1770 but I suppose a certain fluidity of style was quite common throughout the 18thC and therefore exact dating somewhat speculative. You of course have the advantage over me having handled many more pieces of this vintage. :) :cool:

Hi,
Today I've been in touch with the textile conservator to the Burrell Collection and asked her advice with regard to the original colour of the silk. Her considered opinion is that orange would have been the original colour therefore we have an orange, white and blue tricolour. Red pigment of this vintage would, according to her, have left a noticeable pinkness however slight and vestiges of red however small and faded would be apparent in the knotted/folded part of the material. With the aforementioned in mind it is now possible there is a Dutch association with this sword. Many thanks to all who have contributed to this thread and if you have any more ideas or opinions please let's hear them.
My Regards to All,
Norman.

I think the suggestion of this attached material is indeed most likely a patriotic sash, as well described by Dmitry. This period of the American and French revolutions was of course wrought with such devices displayed on weapons and aparrel.
It also seems that some British officers swords of c.1780 were also constructed of gilt brass, and similarly 'gadrooned' (the spiral fluting on this pommel, often on grips and guard bars/knuckleguards). I had one of these with a blade inscribed on the back with the French makers name, so it would seem that French purveyors were indeed supplying British in these times.
It seems that I read somewhere (I believe it was AVB Norman as I cannot relocate in Aylward) that the Dutch often followed British styles in swords in this period.
I still hold to the idea that this is quite likely a Dutch weapon with a French supplied blade, and c.1780-90.

This would seem the most likely attribution with the current available evidence. :cool: Thanks again to all who contributed. :)
Regards,
Norman.

British officers in 1780 buying French-supplied swords...highly unlikely. :shrug:
Much like British officers buying German-supplied pistols in 1940..

Stylistically this hilt could date to as early as 1750, the blade, however, is of later style. If Norman's sword is an authentic period piece with undisturbed tang button, then for me the blade outweighs the hilt in dating the sword.
Hilts of this type are not infrequently seen on European officers' swords. For a similar hilt, refer to the Piedmontese Modello 1770 officer's spada a Frantopino. Silver-plated, not yellow brass, but otherwise not too far apart.

Hi,
Tang button photo attached, it looks undisturbed to me but you never know?
Regards,
Norman.

Actually, once again. I might have better worded my comment. Rather than French 'supplying' blades for British officers swords in 1780, perhaps it may have been better to say....French marked blades existed on some British swords in the period around 1780. Obviously the Revolution in America in which the French were virtually allied with the colonists would have discouraged such trade.
The sword which I was thinking of was actually a brass hilted cavalry officers half basket hilt which I once owned, with a blade with French purveyors name inscribed on the back. It was presumed c.1780 or slightly earlier and virtually identical hilt in iron is shown in "The British Basket Hilted Cavalry Sword" , A.D.Darling , Canadian Journal of Arms Collecting", Vol.7 #3, 1974, fog. 16, p.95.
This hilt, nearly identical to mine in brass, was diagonally gadrooned on the hilt branches as well as the pommel. It is dated 1765 as shown in a painting of that date of Henry Herbert, Earl of Pembroke as Colonel of the 1st Dragoons, painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds. It is noted by the author that these 'wavy' three bar hilts were also adopted by the 2nd Irish Horse (5th Dragoons) in the last quarter of the 18th century.

Naturally in a stylistic sense hilts with these neoclassic characteristics recall much earlier designs reflecting late baroque fashion , so similar examples may be seen not only far earlier but in those of other countries.
Of course the blade form would take precedence, and as noted it does appear of the 1770s-80s period spadroon forms.

Returning to Normans example, the reference to British style hilts aside, I had noted that the Dutch in this period seem to have in degree followed British type forms. Perhaps this could be broadened to neoclassic styles of earlier hilts of varying countries.

I just found the reference in "The Rapier and Smallsword 1460-1820", A.V.B Norman , London, 1980, p.206.
The author describing hilts around 1779 (with one being noted having Amsterdam mark for that year) notes that , "...Dutch hilts seem to have followed English fashions", with the detail noting adoption of certain elements and 'vestigial claws' on the hilt. While not specifically with regard to the gadrooned fluting, the suggestion of English influence, likely including those of the sword previously described, may well have been included in the fashioning of this hilt in the Netherlands.