Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

fernando · 26th March 2011, 01:57 PM

Hi Spunjer,
I am surprised with the silence of our experts; but they will end up coming in, i am sure.
For a start, i would suggest that this blade was originaly longer, belonging to a sword, judging by the extension of the fuller almost reaching the tip of the blade, which is not normal, and also by the blade base (forte), typical to a sword hilt mount.
Let's see if this humble 'diagnosis' calls for the guys with much more knowledge of these things.
On the other hand, it would be nice that you post better pictures of the Franzini inscription and the maker's mark, for better appreciation of this fine loooking blade.

26th March 2011, 01:57 PM	#4
fernando Lead Moderator European Armoury Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,642	Hi Spunjer, I am surprised with the silence of our experts; but they will end up coming in, i am sure. For a start, i would suggest that this blade was originaly longer, belonging to a sword, judging by the extension of the fuller almost reaching the tip of the blade, which is not normal, and also by the blade base (forte), typical to a sword hilt mount. Let's see if this humble 'diagnosis' calls for the guys with much more knowledge of these things. On the other hand, it would be nice that you post better pictures of the Franzini inscription and the maker's mark, for better appreciation of this fine loooking blade.