Thanks Tom,
I thought I was too young for senior moments, but I should have remembered the bolster...if that's what it is.
One thing that Andy can straighten out is the construction of the handle. I'm having trouble believing it was cast in lost wax, given that the handle is at least partially hollow. Certainly, the decorations are engraved, rather than cast in--the lines seem to all be one width, and it's a lot easier to have raised decorations rather than incised ones in lost wax, especially incised ones that are so crude and look like they were incised... More to the point, I'm trying to figure out how to make a three-part mold that could be used to cast this handle, a failing miserably. It would be a real chore to create the wax master of that hilt, especially if it's mostly hollow.
Anyway, about the "bolster": my hypothesis is that part is what is connecting the blade to the hilt. I suspect there is little if any tang, and that little bit protruding behind the bolster and under the grip might be the back end of the blade or tang. I'm not sure what you call such a thing. Positionally it's a bolster, but it's not an applied scale, which is what I thought bolsters were.
Andy can help out with that. The other question is how hollow the hilt is: is it simply the pommel, or does the hilt ring hollow into the grip? If so, I suspect it was brazed together from pieces (actually, I think that anyway), rather than being cast in one piece around the blade. An accomplished brass worked could have assembled that from 3-4 pieces: one for the bolster, one for the handle, one for the flat bottom of the pommel, and one for the knuckle guard.
Fearn
|