European bladed takouba

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.

Jim McDougall · 23rd December 2011, 08:16 AM

As previously mentioned there is no doubt that the 'forked cross' or cross fourchee appeared encircled as a known blade marking in 1590, but who actually used it remains unknown...it was likely used by a number of makers on blades as was the case with many of these marks. The use of crosses on blades, particularly along with names and invocations was well established with the Vlfberht, Ingelrii and Gicelin blades of Frankish origin from mid 10th to mid 11th centuries, usually encapsulating the words or names. These were typically Greek crosses (potent) with serif type arm ends also known as the kruckenkruez (crutch cross) in later times (Jerusalem cross by the time of the crusades).

In the 6th and 7th centuries crosses were placed on scabbards for the protection of the sword, blessing it and guarding it in battle (Ellis-Davidson, 1962, p.93). It is known that earlier, various symbols including crosses were inlaid in blades usually in gold or brass (latten).

It seems that the nature of the cross appearing on this blade is distinguished by the forked ends as discussed, and that while crosses have appeared on blades over many centuries, this form is somewhat distinctive. These forked ends are seen on cross & orb marks on German blades assessed by Sir James Mann (Wallace Coll. A524, p.269) as 16th century. In previous discussions it has been noted that the forked end cross fourchee is seen on several examples of swords of justice of presumably 16th to 17th century. These are attributed typically to the Vehmic courts or tribunals of Westphalian regions primarily and the cross fourchee occurs between the letters 'S' configured as S+S .
(Sacrificum Sanctum). These courts were well in place by the 15th century having been established in Charlemagnes time.

While this type of cross cannot be firmly attributed to these secretive groups it is interesting to note the use of this type cross. The form can also be associated as previously mentioned to sacredotal instances concerning clerical vestments, and the use of the cross fourchee (or moline) on the chausuble worn. It is interesting that the 'pall cross' or Y shaped cross is seen in paintings of the Crucifixion in the 13th century and later. This perhaps may have been considered in the use of these forked terminals on the cross, of course along with other possibilities.

Whatever the case, it would seem quite likely that this type of cross inlaid in this manner predates the 1590 estimate as discussed in markings references.
Regarding the cross and orb, these date far into antiquity and were well in use in variation from Byzantine times (used even in Egypt by the Coptic Christians) and in Germany in the 15th century in printers guild marks, in Venice on blades in examples c.1520 and 1560 (Boccia & Coelho, 1975).
Interestingly this device was used in the badge of the Carthusian Order in Cologne c. 1084. Cologne of course was the precedent of Solingen in arms production and it seems possible this could be significant in its use by these makers, but clearly speculatively speaking.

In summary, I do not believe that earlier date for this blade than 1590 is compromised at all by the cited markings references shown. Typically these authors simply lifted the material from previous authors thus various entries cannot necessarily be considered supportive of each other. What would be excellent would be finding similar marking on well provenanced example which is dated.

Iain · 23rd December 2011, 10:14 AM

Thanks guys for all the great information and comments.

Wolf,

Thank you for checking for me. Does the book mention a particular maker or workshop that started this mark? Also did I notice on the illustration that there should be sword in the main museum in Berlin with this mark? If so I will try to contact them so we can see it.

A big question still for me is to find something with both marks and a similar blade style. I didn't think this blade style was very typical for late 16th century, but I am no expert.

Anyways, I would not be unhappy with the 1590 date. For me it is still very old and perhaps the oldest complete takouba I have seen.

Jim,

I agree with you completely that sometimes the marking reference books don't give a complete history of the mark, they are very useful but often are citing single examples to provide a date. I am not sure if this is the case for this cross mark, which is why I would like to find some other swords with the mark to compare with.

The second mark I found nothing so far, I looked through the usual resources for takouba but I do not think anyone documented it. I don't have many resources for just European marks.

I am usually as skeptical as you and Lee, which is why when Lee suggested an early date I was surprised, but I know neither of you would entertain the idea unless you had pretty strong reasons to do so.

I think the next step is to find some other examples marked similarly and see if anything that has been dated shows a) the second mark and b) the same profile. I think this will help to pin down if this potentially came from a workshop and the mark is as specialized as the book Wolf has says.

Again, thank you guys and I want to make clear I am not date crazy and don't like arguing with the sources

I just like to know as much as I can.

Iain

Lee · 23rd December 2011, 03:51 PM

Not the same as Iain's marks, but executed in a similar manner, are a pair of 'cross in circle' marks from either side of the blade of a great sword of war that Christie's opined to be 14th century that subsequently met the fate of being tarted-up in the late 16th century into a bearing sword, though some of the structurally shabby decorative mountings are probably even later. Or maybe the whole thing is an atavistic exercise from the late 16th century, though I feel Christie's interpretation is quite plausible.

Jim McDougall · 23rd December 2011, 05:00 PM

Thank you Iain, and Lee for addding the additional example. I am inclined to agree with approximate 14th century period for this blade shown in Christies, as these kinds of crosses (various forms of Greek cross) were well emplaced during the crusades. As earlier explained, the placement of crosses were not only a component of ecclesiastic authority in signatures of bishops and abbots which appeared on blades, but attained probable talismanic properties, as noted in the practice of placement on scabbards and blades.

While the cross and orb is known to have presence into antiquity, it seems that these medieval interpretations carry similar allegorical symbolism, which of course the orb, or in this case circle represents encompassing the world..the triumphant cross concept. The placement of the lines on the arm terminals on this Greek cross is simply another of the many variations used with the fourchee (forks or more embellished 'moline') being another.

I am inclined to doubt that the use of these types of marks can be attributed to a particular workshop or exact period, but a range of period may be established in grouping examples which have similar types. As far as makers, there are cases where certain ones have been associated with having been known to favor certain types...such as Heinrich Koll (Coll) often used the cross and orb..to the point that observers felt it notable. The case of the flourished 'anchors' which likely developed from cross and orb symbolism seem to have signature type embellishments which may be attributed to certain makers, but that is far from being accomplished as far as I am aware.

As Iain has noted, and Lee is keenly aware, the character of the blade becomes one of the prevalent identifying factors in cases like these. While many marks can offer compelling evidence, they were of course used extensively and often relatively randomly by many makers over extended periods as well as being copied widely. This is in no way diminishes thier importance, but often requires considerable supporting evidence by other comparitive examples and detail to accurately use them in identification.

As Lee has noted, atavistic renovation using heirloom or venerable blades was practiced in western settings much as is typically the case in ethnographic native situations. Blades often had extensively long working lives and were often remounted through many generations. In looking through the Wallace Collection reference by Sir James Mann it is interesting to see how many instances there are of older blades on later hilts, and incongruent nationality in blades and hilts. Often many swords described as 'composite' are actually these kinds of weapons, refurbished with components of other usually similar weapon types during thier working life to maintain serviceability.
Many venerated old blades which had become in degree 'relics of combat' were remounted and did become as I understand, bearing type swords used ceremonially as symbols of authority.

Wodimi · 23rd December 2011, 08:03 PM

Iain, they don't mention in the book a maker or workshop. You're right with your meaning, they have an example of this mark in this Berliner Zeughaus, which is this museum today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsch...risches_Museum

and another example in Coburg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veste_Coburg

23rd December 2011, 08:16 AM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	As previously mentioned there is no doubt that the 'forked cross' or cross fourchee appeared encircled as a known blade marking in 1590, but who actually used it remains unknown...it was likely used by a number of makers on blades as was the case with many of these marks. The use of crosses on blades, particularly along with names and invocations was well established with the Vlfberht, Ingelrii and Gicelin blades of Frankish origin from mid 10th to mid 11th centuries, usually encapsulating the words or names. These were typically Greek crosses (potent) with serif type arm ends also known as the kruckenkruez (crutch cross) in later times (Jerusalem cross by the time of the crusades). In the 6th and 7th centuries crosses were placed on scabbards for the protection of the sword, blessing it and guarding it in battle (Ellis-Davidson, 1962, p.93). It is known that earlier, various symbols including crosses were inlaid in blades usually in gold or brass (latten). It seems that the nature of the cross appearing on this blade is distinguished by the forked ends as discussed, and that while crosses have appeared on blades over many centuries, this form is somewhat distinctive. These forked ends are seen on cross & orb marks on German blades assessed by Sir James Mann (Wallace Coll. A524, p.269) as 16th century. In previous discussions it has been noted that the forked end cross fourchee is seen on several examples of swords of justice of presumably 16th to 17th century. These are attributed typically to the Vehmic courts or tribunals of Westphalian regions primarily and the cross fourchee occurs between the letters 'S' configured as S+S . (Sacrificum Sanctum). These courts were well in place by the 15th century having been established in Charlemagnes time. While this type of cross cannot be firmly attributed to these secretive groups it is interesting to note the use of this type cross. The form can also be associated as previously mentioned to sacredotal instances concerning clerical vestments, and the use of the cross fourchee (or moline) on the chausuble worn. It is interesting that the 'pall cross' or Y shaped cross is seen in paintings of the Crucifixion in the 13th century and later. This perhaps may have been considered in the use of these forked terminals on the cross, of course along with other possibilities. Whatever the case, it would seem quite likely that this type of cross inlaid in this manner predates the 1590 estimate as discussed in markings references. Regarding the cross and orb, these date far into antiquity and were well in use in variation from Byzantine times (used even in Egypt by the Coptic Christians) and in Germany in the 15th century in printers guild marks, in Venice on blades in examples c.1520 and 1560 (Boccia & Coelho, 1975). Interestingly this device was used in the badge of the Carthusian Order in Cologne c. 1084. Cologne of course was the precedent of Solingen in arms production and it seems possible this could be significant in its use by these makers, but clearly speculatively speaking. In summary, I do not believe that earlier date for this blade than 1590 is compromised at all by the cited markings references shown. Typically these authors simply lifted the material from previous authors thus various entries cannot necessarily be considered supportive of each other. What would be excellent would be finding similar marking on well provenanced example which is dated. Last edited by Jim McDougall; 23rd December 2011 at 05:15 PM.

23rd December 2011, 03:51 PM	#5
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 932	Not the same as Iain's marks, but executed in a similar manner, are a pair of 'cross in circle' marks from either side of the blade of a great sword of war that Christie's opined to be 14th century that subsequently met the fate of being tarted-up in the late 16th century into a bearing sword, though some of the structurally shabby decorative mountings are probably even later. Or maybe the whole thing is an atavistic exercise from the late 16th century, though I feel Christie's interpretation is quite plausible. Attached Images

23rd December 2011, 05:00 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	Thank you Iain, and Lee for addding the additional example. I am inclined to agree with approximate 14th century period for this blade shown in Christies, as these kinds of crosses (various forms of Greek cross) were well emplaced during the crusades. As earlier explained, the placement of crosses were not only a component of ecclesiastic authority in signatures of bishops and abbots which appeared on blades, but attained probable talismanic properties, as noted in the practice of placement on scabbards and blades. While the cross and orb is known to have presence into antiquity, it seems that these medieval interpretations carry similar allegorical symbolism, which of course the orb, or in this case circle represents encompassing the world..the triumphant cross concept. The placement of the lines on the arm terminals on this Greek cross is simply another of the many variations used with the fourchee (forks or more embellished 'moline') being another. I am inclined to doubt that the use of these types of marks can be attributed to a particular workshop or exact period, but a range of period may be established in grouping examples which have similar types. As far as makers, there are cases where certain ones have been associated with having been known to favor certain types...such as Heinrich Koll (Coll) often used the cross and orb..to the point that observers felt it notable. The case of the flourished 'anchors' which likely developed from cross and orb symbolism seem to have signature type embellishments which may be attributed to certain makers, but that is far from being accomplished as far as I am aware. As Iain has noted, and Lee is keenly aware, the character of the blade becomes one of the prevalent identifying factors in cases like these. While many marks can offer compelling evidence, they were of course used extensively and often relatively randomly by many makers over extended periods as well as being copied widely. This is in no way diminishes thier importance, but often requires considerable supporting evidence by other comparitive examples and detail to accurately use them in identification. As Lee has noted, atavistic renovation using heirloom or venerable blades was practiced in western settings much as is typically the case in ethnographic native situations. Blades often had extensively long working lives and were often remounted through many generations. In looking through the Wallace Collection reference by Sir James Mann it is interesting to see how many instances there are of older blades on later hilts, and incongruent nationality in blades and hilts. Often many swords described as 'composite' are actually these kinds of weapons, refurbished with components of other usually similar weapon types during thier working life to maintain serviceability. Many venerated old blades which had become in degree 'relics of combat' were remounted and did become as I understand, bearing type swords used ceremonially as symbols of authority. Last edited by Jim McDougall; 23rd December 2011 at 05:15 PM.

23rd December 2011, 01:45 AM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	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	#2
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.

23rd December 2011, 10:14 AM	#4
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,708	Thanks guys for all the great information and comments. Wolf, Thank you for checking for me. Does the book mention a particular maker or workshop that started this mark? Also did I notice on the illustration that there should be sword in the main museum in Berlin with this mark? If so I will try to contact them so we can see it. A big question still for me is to find something with both marks and a similar blade style. I didn't think this blade style was very typical for late 16th century, but I am no expert. Anyways, I would not be unhappy with the 1590 date. For me it is still very old and perhaps the oldest complete takouba I have seen. Jim, I agree with you completely that sometimes the marking reference books don't give a complete history of the mark, they are very useful but often are citing single examples to provide a date. I am not sure if this is the case for this cross mark, which is why I would like to find some other swords with the mark to compare with. The second mark I found nothing so far, I looked through the usual resources for takouba but I do not think anyone documented it. I don't have many resources for just European marks. I am usually as skeptical as you and Lee, which is why when Lee suggested an early date I was surprised, but I know neither of you would entertain the idea unless you had pretty strong reasons to do so. I think the next step is to find some other examples marked similarly and see if anything that has been dated shows a) the second mark and b) the same profile. I think this will help to pin down if this potentially came from a workshop and the mark is as specialized as the book Wolf has says. Again, thank you guys and I want to make clear I am not date crazy and don't like arguing with the sources I just like to know as much as I can. Iain

23rd December 2011, 08:03 PM	#7
Wodimi Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Germany Posts: 75	Iain, they don't mention in the book a maker or workshop. You're right with your meaning, they have an example of this mark in this Berliner Zeughaus, which is this museum today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsch...risches_Museum and another example in Coburg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veste_Coburg