Older Toledo? Blade, Makers Marks I.D.

Jim McDougall · 12th January 2017, 05:58 PM

Thank you Fernando, and actually I very much agree, my deductions were admittedly tenuous. Worse, I wrote after long hours of compiling research and did not elaborate on another important factor. The IB that was in horizontal next to the crown was actually a JB, however the J character was weakly representative and lacked prominent 'tail'.
That aside, I was relying on the early convention in written language of the times which typically used I for J. However while I know this applied in England, I am not sure how used in Europe.
In any case, another example of this makers mark uses a more distinct J.

Your observations are complete in noting the rapier in Wallace is a quite different blade, and as it was noted much earlier than the period I was suggesting as well as this being more of an arming blade, I thought that was in account to be a later blade.

It is well known of course that makers marks and the application of them was always in flux, even within given and recorded shops. As stamps wore down, the strike was often compromised as certain elements became degenerated. Given that these compendiums of markings are virtually always comprised of line drawings and sketches, the degree of variance becomes of even more concern.

A further instance is that even in specific shops, over time the marks recorded with guilds or otherwise accounted for, were subject to both alteration and change. It seems possible that such variations due to unknown reasons may have escaped the record keepers, but even more likely, such changes may have been intentional and covert.
Given the known practice of purloining of marks, it is possible that the maker may have deliberately altered or 'adjusted' their stamp, if their mark was compromised in such a way. The 'chop' of the tail on the J might have been such a case.
As noted, this example on Normans sword has a clear B, but might the I be less formative?
The alteration of configuration is also a notable consideration in addition to the triple application.

It is always good to examine these cases forensically, and a great exercise on deductive reasoning. The mysteries of markings have been my obsession for so many years, yet still so far from conclusions. Thank you for your well observed notes Fernando, and though a bit of a stumble...the game is still well afoot!!!

fernando · 12th January 2017, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

...That aside, I was relying on the early convention in written language of the times which typically used I for J. However while I know this applied in England, I am not sure how used in Europe...

If i well understand your question, yes, the I for a J was practiced all over, as enough to say it was a Latin trick.
Letter J was initially an alternative version to the letter I, and was the last one to be added to the Classic Latin Alphabet. The distinction between both letters became evident as from the middle ages. Pedro de la Ramée (1515–1572) was the first to explicitly distinguish both, representing different sounds... bla, bla, bla

.
Many a thing kept being written with a I for a J, when Latin script was used, namely in coins, like this beautiful XVIII century Portuguese gold piece.

.

cornelistromp · 14th January 2017, 09:51 AM

Hi Norman,
as you requested, my very little light on the blade

magnificent sword suitable for someone with a high degree in Freemasonry

the blades of Toledo were praised for the high quality and superb craftsmanship and therefore very popular.
the blade smiths from solingen and Pasau who actually made equivalent quality blades, imitated the Spanish toldedo marks and referenced through engravings to Toledo.
the two characters under a crown ( Toledo marks don't have two characters side by side) is such a German mark and symbolizes Toledo, symbolizing and the characters do not refer always to the initials of the maker.

The B underneath a crown is used extensively in the 17th and 18th centuries. fe Peter Tesche used this crowned B (rapier Historical Museum Dresden # 314). Albert Weyersberg Solinger Schwertschmiede des 16 und 17JH, 1926. P.46

The shape of the running wolf on the blade in combination with the two short Fullers and the absence of a ricasso, tend me to date this blade to the late 16thC, origin Passau or Solingen, the hilt 19th or 20th century

best,
jasper

Norman McCormick · 14th January 2017, 07:08 PM

Jim, Fernando, Ibrahiim and Jasper,
Many thanks guys for your interest and invaluable insight. I have a couple more, unusual to me, items which I think will be of interest and I look forward to your views on these. Thanks agains chaps

Kind Regards,
Norman.

Jim McDougall · 31st January 2017, 02:02 AM

Hi Norman,
While I think we have pretty much resolved this is a very old German blade, the mounts and Masonic symbolism on this piece are fascinating, and even more so with the deep esoterica of these fraternal regalia swords.

I found some interesting information regarding the cross guard on this hilt, which may well be of composite elements, just as the refurbishing of this old blade to the hilt itself. The neo classic pommel of latter 18th may be from a regulation military dress sword, but does not go with the cross guard.

The trilobate quillon terminal shape is termed 'botonee' and a form used on 'Tyler' swords . One of these with these 'cross botonee' pommels and quillon terminals is shown in " Material Culture of the American Freemasons" (John D. Hamilton, 1994, p.155, 4.63) described as a Tylers sword, made by P.Knecht of Solingen, and "...hilted on the Continent for use in a symbolic degree lodge".

While the symbols are different on your sword's guard than those seen on the example in this reference, it does seem important that some of the hilts of this design were produced in Germany. The example in the book is dated c. 1820-35, and the blade notably narrower of course.

In an earlier reference to Tylers swords, Mr. Hamiliton refers to another example of the trilobate pommel and guard decorated with symbols of the symbolic degrees ("Swords of the Masonic Orders", Man at Arms, Vol. 1, #3, May, Jun 1979, p26, John D .Hamilton). The sword described was made by P.Knecht, Solingen sword mfg. 1811-1830 , also very narrow blade.

In Masonic lodges, it was a great honor to have the sword held by the Lodge's Tyler, to have it a venerated battle weapon, or in some cases, the blade of one, remounted in the appropriate regalia hilt. In this case the cross potent, and probably the crown having to do with the Royal Arch (not fully knowing proper symbol for this) likely signify a Templar Lodge.

I would say the hilt crossguard may be from one of the early Knecht hilts, and the blade either trophy or heirloom, put together in the 19th century probably early, and used as a Tyler's sword in a Templar lodge.

Purely speculative deduction, but worth considering.

Norman McCormick · 13th September 2019, 07:23 PM

Hi Guys,
I found this image of an English School 19thC portrait of the Earl of Rosslyn. I don't know if the attribution is absolute but interestingly the sword in the portrait looks like a sibling of the sword I posted.
Regards,
Norman.

Casaubon · 13th September 2019, 07:42 PM

According to Wikipedia, the 2nd Earl of Rosslyn was 'Acting Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, on behalf of King George IV. '

I assume that's masonic regalia he's wearing in his portrait.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_...arl_of_Rosslyn

Jim McDougall · 14th September 2019, 12:05 AM

Excellent catch Norman!!!
It is always exciting to see portraiture with representation of a sword being studied, and to see these threads remaining active as new information is found.
Presently 'on the move' so resources not handy, but I wanted to make an entry anyway.
The Rosslyn name is highly represented in the complexities of the Masonic lore and this portrait of course clearly is profoundly of Masonic context.

While there was some great discussion here before on this, it will be great to see if we might be able to elaborate more now with this wonderful image.

14th January 2017, 07:08 PM	#4
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Jim, Fernando, Ibrahiim and Jasper, Many thanks guys for your interest and invaluable insight. I have a couple more, unusual to me, items which I think will be of interest and I look forward to your views on these. Thanks agains chaps Kind Regards, Norman. Last edited by Norman McCormick; 14th January 2017 at 11:24 PM.

13th September 2019, 07:23 PM	#6
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,613	Hi Guys, I found this image of an English School 19thC portrait of the Earl of Rosslyn. I don't know if the attribution is absolute but interestingly the sword in the portrait looks like a sibling of the sword I posted. Regards, Norman. Attached Images

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12th January 2017, 05:58 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,193	Thank you Fernando, and actually I very much agree, my deductions were admittedly tenuous. Worse, I wrote after long hours of compiling research and did not elaborate on another important factor. The IB that was in horizontal next to the crown was actually a JB, however the J character was weakly representative and lacked prominent 'tail'. That aside, I was relying on the early convention in written language of the times which typically used I for J. However while I know this applied in England, I am not sure how used in Europe. In any case, another example of this makers mark uses a more distinct J. Your observations are complete in noting the rapier in Wallace is a quite different blade, and as it was noted much earlier than the period I was suggesting as well as this being more of an arming blade, I thought that was in account to be a later blade. It is well known of course that makers marks and the application of them was always in flux, even within given and recorded shops. As stamps wore down, the strike was often compromised as certain elements became degenerated. Given that these compendiums of markings are virtually always comprised of line drawings and sketches, the degree of variance becomes of even more concern. A further instance is that even in specific shops, over time the marks recorded with guilds or otherwise accounted for, were subject to both alteration and change. It seems possible that such variations due to unknown reasons may have escaped the record keepers, but even more likely, such changes may have been intentional and covert. Given the known practice of purloining of marks, it is possible that the maker may have deliberately altered or 'adjusted' their stamp, if their mark was compromised in such a way. The 'chop' of the tail on the J might have been such a case. As noted, this example on Normans sword has a clear B, but might the I be less formative? The alteration of configuration is also a notable consideration in addition to the triple application. It is always good to examine these cases forensically, and a great exercise on deductive reasoning. The mysteries of markings have been my obsession for so many years, yet still so far from conclusions. Thank you for your well observed notes Fernando, and though a bit of a stumble...the game is still well afoot!!!

14th January 2017, 09:51 AM	#3
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	Hi Norman, as you requested, my very little light on the blade magnificent sword suitable for someone with a high degree in Freemasonry the blades of Toledo were praised for the high quality and superb craftsmanship and therefore very popular. the blade smiths from solingen and Pasau who actually made equivalent quality blades, imitated the Spanish toldedo marks and referenced through engravings to Toledo. the two characters under a crown ( Toledo marks don't have two characters side by side) is such a German mark and symbolizes Toledo, symbolizing and the characters do not refer always to the initials of the maker. The B underneath a crown is used extensively in the 17th and 18th centuries. fe Peter Tesche used this crowned B (rapier Historical Museum Dresden # 314). Albert Weyersberg Solinger Schwertschmiede des 16 und 17JH, 1926. P.46 The shape of the running wolf on the blade in combination with the two short Fullers and the absence of a ricasso, tend me to date this blade to the late 16thC, origin Passau or Solingen, the hilt 19th or 20th century best, jasper Last edited by cornelistromp; 14th January 2017 at 10:16 AM.

31st January 2017, 02:02 AM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,193	Hi Norman, While I think we have pretty much resolved this is a very old German blade, the mounts and Masonic symbolism on this piece are fascinating, and even more so with the deep esoterica of these fraternal regalia swords. I found some interesting information regarding the cross guard on this hilt, which may well be of composite elements, just as the refurbishing of this old blade to the hilt itself. The neo classic pommel of latter 18th may be from a regulation military dress sword, but does not go with the cross guard. The trilobate quillon terminal shape is termed 'botonee' and a form used on 'Tyler' swords . One of these with these 'cross botonee' pommels and quillon terminals is shown in " Material Culture of the American Freemasons" (John D. Hamilton, 1994, p.155, 4.63) described as a Tylers sword, made by P.Knecht of Solingen, and "...hilted on the Continent for use in a symbolic degree lodge". While the symbols are different on your sword's guard than those seen on the example in this reference, it does seem important that some of the hilts of this design were produced in Germany. The example in the book is dated c. 1820-35, and the blade notably narrower of course. In an earlier reference to Tylers swords, Mr. Hamiliton refers to another example of the trilobate pommel and guard decorated with symbols of the symbolic degrees ("Swords of the Masonic Orders", Man at Arms, Vol. 1, #3, May, Jun 1979, p26, John D .Hamilton). The sword described was made by P.Knecht, Solingen sword mfg. 1811-1830 , also very narrow blade. In Masonic lodges, it was a great honor to have the sword held by the Lodge's Tyler, to have it a venerated battle weapon, or in some cases, the blade of one, remounted in the appropriate regalia hilt. In this case the cross potent, and probably the crown having to do with the Royal Arch (not fully knowing proper symbol for this) likely signify a Templar Lodge. I would say the hilt crossguard may be from one of the early Knecht hilts, and the blade either trophy or heirloom, put together in the 19th century probably early, and used as a Tyler's sword in a Templar lodge. Purely speculative deduction, but worth considering.

13th September 2019, 07:42 PM	#7
Casaubon Member Join Date: Sep 2019 Posts: 2	According to Wikipedia, the 2nd Earl of Rosslyn was 'Acting Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, on behalf of King George IV. ' I assume that's masonic regalia he's wearing in his portrait. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_...arl_of_Rosslyn

14th September 2019, 12:05 AM	#8
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,193	Excellent catch Norman!!! It is always exciting to see portraiture with representation of a sword being studied, and to see these threads remaining active as new information is found. Presently 'on the move' so resources not handy, but I wanted to make an entry anyway. The Rosslyn name is highly represented in the complexities of the Masonic lore and this portrait of course clearly is profoundly of Masonic context. While there was some great discussion here before on this, it will be great to see if we might be able to elaborate more now with this wonderful image.