Quote:
|
Originally Posted by midelburgo
Very nice sword Fernando.
I believe these swords were the Spanish (Portugal) current infantry soldier swords between 1660-1710. Kept longer in the Americas. In a similar function to infantry Waloon types in northern countries. The introduction of the Borbon dinasty probably eliminated them. The first picture is of a soldier of the Guardia Chamberga (1669-1676).
It is possible to identify an evolution for the hilts differentiated from the blades. Similar hilts have different blades, sometimes in flamigerous shape. And similar blades appear with different hilts.
They often have brass pieces of horn or exotic wood grips, something not common in the European counterparts of that period. I think it is not possible to distinguish between naval and colonial weapons (the so-called Caribbean rapiers), because the troops could be moved around, and the navy was often the source of weapons for the colonies.
Some of them have survived with a coat of thick black paint, possibly made with coal and hooves, for rust resistance. Some are even tinned with that aim. This was convenient both for the navy and Caribbean coasts.
Lamina 79 from the Naval Album of Marquis de la Victoria, represents the armament carried by the crew of a Spanish man of war of around c1725s-1735s. There are no cup hilts there, but possibly it is a late period for that.
https://docplayer.es/42280723-Analis...nal-naval.html |
Thank you for this well placed and nicely supported overview as we examine the character and forms of potentially 'colonial' sword forms. As has been pointed out, while those 'mounted' in colonial context MAY have somewhat more austere components, if indeed fashioned by blacksmiths or metal workers in these 'New World' regions.
It must be remembered that there were not any great number of armorers or skilled sword slippers (as termed in 17th-18thc) in colonial settings. While occasionally they did exist in the larger cities and metropolitan areas, most locations were relatively remote and such work was typically in effect, the work of field armorers and blacksmiths.
Also, in the 'colonies', many presume that the military presence in many locations suggested predominance of current types of arms and armor.
Actually, from the earliest exploration times, most individuals were not necesarily 'military', in fact private and with commercial or personal interests such as syndicated investors, and adventurers. These individuals were of course privately outfitted and armed themselves often with heirloom,surplus and otherwise collected items.
This is why many weapons and forms long obsolete in Continental and Peninsular context remained in use for not only generations, but centuries, in the New World. As these arms became damaged or otherwise unserviceable, their components were of course recycled and put to use as possible in newly fabricated weaponry.
There were no facilities for the fancy wire wrap, Turks heads, and other other finer touches of the beautifully produced weaponry of the European world.
Materials that were available were of course, soft yellow metals (which also did not rust) and various animal hides ( the galuchat described earlier simulated rayskin using horse hide etc and seeds).
The blades, unless broken, were the most durable and available components for these colonial makers, in fact the well known 'Spanish motto' dragoon blades were exported from Solingen to them in large volume.
I have personal knowledge of this from one well known collector who had acquired a large bundle of them (featured in "Spanish Military Arms in Colonial America 1700-1821"). Also I knew individuals who had found a bundle of Solingen produced rapier blades on a Spanish shipwreck off a Central American coast.
Also as noted previously, japanning (black paint) and russeting (using a browning method) were commonly practiced on these arms to withstand the damp tropical climates in the new world. This made these weapons MOST serviceable aboard vessels as well.
This fact was a notable factor in the support of the Scottish basket hilt finding its place as a maritime sword in degree, as thier hilts were typically treated in this fashion due to the damp Scottish climate.
Naturally, the long use of many sword types entirely, or thier components brought together many otherwise notably incongruent pairings. For example broadsword blades on saber hilts, broad arming sword blades on cup hilts etc.
In these often unusually contrived weapons, it is surprising to see such things as crossguard quillons mounted UNDER a cup guard ( entirely vestigial and redundant).
I have (somewhere) a colonial cut down Spanish motto blade, mounted with a brass briquet hilt, and a three bar saber guard. This is no logical reason for this 'frankenstein'
, however in very rural regions in Mexico, the use of components in this manner to create a sword for unknown purpose well illustrates the conventions of many more extreme 'colonial' circumstrances (though an obvious exaggeration).