European bladed takouba

Iain · 22nd December 2011, 09:09 PM

Hi Wolf,

Probably we have a small misunderstanding. I am sure fairly sure it is an original mark and my understanding is this is an old symbol. I don't see why it could only be attributed to 1590? Are there any more details in your book you found the mark in? For example a photo of a blade from around 1590 with the mark? Its something like the running wolf maybe or the cross and orb, you can find many versions in different periods, so just because there is one match from 1590 doesn't mean it can't be the same mark older or newer - like you said copies of marks from the 10 or 11th centuries.

There is also the question of the second mark, I cannot find very much information about it.

I am familiar with the practice of copied marks for talismanic value but I honestly don't think this is one of those cases. I am about 99% sure original.

So I agree it is not a mark that some smith put on an old blade, it is original to the blade.

No copper, but I have to say you don't always find copper. You can look at these two old swords from Louis-Pierre: http://blade.japet.com/takouba.htm these are absolutely Tuareg swords. So I am still not sure. It could also be from Bornu regions...

Tim Simmons · 22nd December 2011, 09:14 PM

We could be getting uncomfortably close to Richard Widmark and "The Long Ships"?

Iain · 22nd December 2011, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

We could be getting uncomfortably close to Richard Widmark and "The Long Ships"?

Must say the reference is going over my head at the moment Tim?

Lee · 22nd December 2011, 10:41 PM

I favor that this takouba has a 14th or 15th century European blade based upon the nature of the marks and the appearance of the background steel.

I have known so many owners certain they had a medieval European blade remounted as a kaskara or takouba. This is the first one, albeit based upon pictures, that I believe in. So my certainty in dismissing these claims on general principal and following the experience of Briggs is now broken.

...Unless it is a brilliant forgery targeted to set me drooling all over myself, but I do not think so.

Iain · 22nd December 2011, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

I favor that this takouba has a 14th or 15th century European blade based upon the nature of the marks and the appearance of the background steel.

I have known so many owners certain they had a medieval European blade remounted as a kaskara or takouba. This is the first one, albeit based upon pictures, that I believe in. So my certainty in dismissing these claims on general principal and following the experience of Briggs is now broken.

...Unless it is a brilliant forgery targeted to set me drooling all over myself, but I do not think so.

Just to add to this... those that know my history with takouba will know I am usually the first to chuck out any ideas of medieval blades and extremely critical of blade marks and perhaps overly prone to suggesting native copies. To be honest I bought this piece with the vague hopes the blade might be 17th century at best. To that end I am not interested dates just for the sake of dates, if anyone really wants to know I bought this because of the pommel...

However I have to say, even with relatively limited experience this one is different, in look, feel and presence.

I'm still intrigued by the second mark, the little sword like one...

Jim McDougall · 23rd December 2011, 01:45 AM

This is absolutely amazing! and well said by Lee...the Holy Grail of takoubas... I am very much in accord with his observations. Actually, there are few who can match Lee's knowledge and expertise on medieval blades and thier metallurgy. The character of the metal and shape of the well worn blades' fullering suggests a quite early blade, and these lattened markings are most certainly European. Actually these 'cross fourchee' correspond to the type markings that were placed on blades in the times when ordnance and war materials were typically controlled by the Bishop in church establishments.
Often these type crosses were a component of the signature or marks of those individuals, and seem to have become adopted singly as a kind of blessing or talismanic imbuement.

The marking itself, much as in the case of most others, is recorded in various compilations of markings as shown along with a date, which is more of a presumed date or period than accurately recorded notation. Most of these are taken from collected weapons and the approximate period of use and so on are captioned with them. These were of course transcribed into many subsequent works of later writers, so while of course plausible, they must be regarded as largely speculative unless they can be proven with wider range of provenanced examples carrying similar marks.

It has been me understanding that the origins of the cross and orb remain unclear as well as the period which they came into use. I believe the Swiss attribution derives most likely from the many Landsknecht blades which had these and other cross oriented markings as previously noted. Most of these of course were probably from German workshops.

How this early blade, which can likely predate the 16th century, perhaps even some time earlier, came to be in Saharan regions can only of course be speculated. It is well worn and clearly an esteemed blade which seems to have likely been handed down for many generations. It has been refurbished by a skilled smith, and the care in emplacing the blade into the bolstering block forte with even the detail of the dentated edge shows it was done for an important figure in my perception. The old style of hilt as noted by Iain suggests its last 'incarnation' was some time ago, and the sword has probably been 'static' for a very long time.

This is a breathtaking sword Iain!!! and all the more so because it is quite literally a historic icon and clearly holds so many of the secrets of these Saharan swords. Thank you so much for sharing it here!!!

All the very best,
Jim

Wodimi · 23rd December 2011, 02:38 AM

Iain, they say in the book clear that they started with the producing of this special mark in 1590. That's why I think, could not be before. They don't say in this book when they stopped with this mark.

22nd December 2011, 10:41 PM	#4
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 937	Holy Grail of Takouba I favor that this takouba has a 14th or 15th century European blade based upon the nature of the marks and the appearance of the background steel. I have known so many owners certain they had a medieval European blade remounted as a kaskara or takouba. This is the first one, albeit based upon pictures, that I believe in. So my certainty in dismissing these claims on general principal and following the experience of Briggs is now broken. ...Unless it is a brilliant forgery targeted to set me drooling all over myself, but I do not think so.

22nd December 2011, 09:09 PM	#1
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,717	Hi Wolf, Probably we have a small misunderstanding. I am sure fairly sure it is an original mark and my understanding is this is an old symbol. I don't see why it could only be attributed to 1590? Are there any more details in your book you found the mark in? For example a photo of a blade from around 1590 with the mark? Its something like the running wolf maybe or the cross and orb, you can find many versions in different periods, so just because there is one match from 1590 doesn't mean it can't be the same mark older or newer - like you said copies of marks from the 10 or 11th centuries. There is also the question of the second mark, I cannot find very much information about it. I am familiar with the practice of copied marks for talismanic value but I honestly don't think this is one of those cases. I am about 99% sure original. So I agree it is not a mark that some smith put on an old blade, it is original to the blade. No copper, but I have to say you don't always find copper. You can look at these two old swords from Louis-Pierre: http://blade.japet.com/takouba.htm these are absolutely Tuareg swords. So I am still not sure. It could also be from Bornu regions...

22nd December 2011, 09:14 PM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,855	We could be getting uncomfortably close to Richard Widmark and "The Long Ships"?

23rd December 2011, 01:45 AM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,285	This is absolutely amazing! and well said by Lee...the Holy Grail of takoubas... I am very much in accord with his observations. Actually, there are few who can match Lee's knowledge and expertise on medieval blades and thier metallurgy. The character of the metal and shape of the well worn blades' fullering suggests a quite early blade, and these lattened markings are most certainly European. Actually these 'cross fourchee' correspond to the type markings that were placed on blades in the times when ordnance and war materials were typically controlled by the Bishop in church establishments. Often these type crosses were a component of the signature or marks of those individuals, and seem to have become adopted singly as a kind of blessing or talismanic imbuement. The marking itself, much as in the case of most others, is recorded in various compilations of markings as shown along with a date, which is more of a presumed date or period than accurately recorded notation. Most of these are taken from collected weapons and the approximate period of use and so on are captioned with them. These were of course transcribed into many subsequent works of later writers, so while of course plausible, they must be regarded as largely speculative unless they can be proven with wider range of provenanced examples carrying similar marks. It has been me understanding that the origins of the cross and orb remain unclear as well as the period which they came into use. I believe the Swiss attribution derives most likely from the many Landsknecht blades which had these and other cross oriented markings as previously noted. Most of these of course were probably from German workshops. How this early blade, which can likely predate the 16th century, perhaps even some time earlier, came to be in Saharan regions can only of course be speculated. It is well worn and clearly an esteemed blade which seems to have likely been handed down for many generations. It has been refurbished by a skilled smith, and the care in emplacing the blade into the bolstering block forte with even the detail of the dentated edge shows it was done for an important figure in my perception. The old style of hilt as noted by Iain suggests its last 'incarnation' was some time ago, and the sword has probably been 'static' for a very long time. This is a breathtaking sword Iain!!! and all the more so because it is quite literally a historic icon and clearly holds so many of the secrets of these Saharan swords. Thank you so much for sharing it here!!! All the very best, Jim

23rd December 2011, 02:38 AM	#7
Wodimi Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Germany Posts: 75	Iain, they say in the book clear that they started with the producing of this special mark in 1590. That's why I think, could not be before. They don't say in this book when they stopped with this mark.