Sinhala / Sri Lankan Swords?

[Gustav]

Dear Ibrahiim,

I am forced to respond to this, becouse you "quoted" my post #187 in this, according to Jim, "Interesting recap on the Hasekura example", #237.

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Forum is advised that though these are early examples that one is artwork and the other is a sword of as yet "uncertain provenance" and that it has been moved in and out of Japanese official ownership several times (private collection/museum) thus placing some doubt as to its authenticity.

Since the return of Hasekura Tsunenaga in Japan, the Kastane was stored by Date clan in Sendai until 1951, when an amount of artifacts were donated to the state, since then in a rang of National Treasure. These artifacts are the reason for foundation of Sendai City Museum and the stock of it. The provenance is as impeccable as it could be for an 17th century object in a curiosity chamber collection in Renaissance Europe. Actually it's the best possible provenance.

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

I hope to show that the weapon was not only presented "as is"... to Hasekura Tsunenaga but that the owner and his stamp can be named even though the pictures at thread are a little grainy...

It may be known that the sword was presented on behalf of the King of Spain(actually according to Gustavs #187
Quote "Sasaki Kazuhiro has the oppinion, both keris and kastane are presented to Hasekura Tsunenaga by Philip III.) whilst the Japanese delegation was in the Philippines prior to their final return leg of their journey to Japan".Unquote.

I (or better Sasaki Kazuhiro) never have said, that the weapons were presented to the delegation in Philippines. The opinion of Sasaki Kazuhiro is the absolute contrary of it. Here oncemore the passage of question from my post #187:

"Sasaki Kazuhiro has the opinion, both keris and kastane are presented to Hasekura Tsunenaga by Philip III. Here in short he's points and other interesting details:

Among the 52 mementos that Hasekura brought to Japan, only three were presented to Date clan: portrait of Pope Paul V, kastane and keris.

Date Masamune drafted official letters only to Pope, the mayor of Sevilla and King Philipp III.

Masamune allowed Hasekura to take care of all official contacts with dignitaries in other countries.

Masamune obviously had great interest in the messages and gifts these figures bestoved on Hasekura.

Then Sasaki Kazuhiro writes:

"If we suppose Masamune requested only the articles from the three men he deemed most critical, then the two swords should have come from one of these three men. (...) it seems much more likely the Namban swords were a gift from Philipp III. This would also explain the reason these gifts made their way to the Masamune collection, while presents from dignitaries in other locales were allowed to remain in the Hasekura collection."

End of the quote.

Actually in his article Sasaki Kazuhiro represents the opinion (and it's a scholar oppinion), the weapons are presented to Hasekura Tsunenaga in Madrid, possibly in one of the two audiences he had with the King of Spain.

Please, when you are quoting your favorite source of knowledge Wikipedia (there:"and a set of Ceylonese and Indonesian daggers acquired in the Philippines"), don't mingle it with a contrary opinion of a scholar. The dish resulting of this is unpalatable.

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

See below the blade stamp and the coat of arms of the Japanese ambassador...(Hasekura Tsunenaga) Originally he was Buddhist but converted to Christianity during his trip...and before arriving at the Philippines. This was no mean feat since Christians in Japan were being persecuted at the time...Also shown below are the blade stamps/engravings. It may be noted also that silver and gold and presumably exotic and rich weapons etc were forbidden to be imported to Japan thus if the sword could be presented to an individual rather than a country it perhaps skirted around that order?

Thus I suggest that the blade mark belongs to Hasekura Tsunenaga and was altered before being struck onto his sword.. and therefor the Museum weapon was actually presented and is real, genuine and actual for that timescale.

Sorry, but I don't see the slightest resemblance between the blade stamp and the coat of arms of Hasekura Tsunenaga.

In your post #201 you say, the blade stamp is an M, now it supposedly is an H (as in an earlier version of your #237). The literate people in this world see it as N.

Anyway, bringing the personal stamp on an artifact, which is to be presented to this persons feudal lord is absolutely unthinkable in medieval Japan. Oncemore - this sword belongs not to the Hasekura's collection. It belongs to the Date's collection and was one of the three artifacts (out of a total of 52) officially presented to Date.

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

There is a powerful lobby to indicate Chinese blade provenance and that is well received, however, it is my view that the blade having been presented from the Spanish Royal Household at embassy level that it must have been a genuine piece of steel and more likely to be Spanish than anything else...It is certainly not a Kastane blade... and has the deep multiple grooves of the Spanish blade (see below)....

As I already wrote in my post #187, the presentation of Spanish arms to a foreigner was then prohibited by law.

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

The Popham is intriguing but illustrates a remarkable fact... That at the same time as the Japanese weapon another was being carried on the armour shown. This is not any old armour but the highly respected and very elaborate private armour of a VIP; not an artists prop thus the Kastane must have been an original ...but vitally in the same time period as the Japanese variant. The hilt can perhaps be seen to be serpent/ makara/ gargoyle in fashion and with accompanying deities quite unlike the very recognizable Lion type.

All handles presented in your outstanding post #237 are lionheads of different carving schools, with the sole exception of the Makara hilted hilt from Malay Peninsula from the very end of 19 cent./beg. 20. cent., described in your post as "A Malaya/Javanese hilt".

Dear Jim, sorry, but to call #237, besides a lot of harmless wishful thinking containing also a false quotation, an interesting recap on Hasekura example is quite an indecent joke.

Regards,
Gustav

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Gustav

Dear Ibrahiim,

I am forced to respond to this, becouse you "quoted" my post #187 in this, according to Jim, "Interesting recap on the Hasekura example", #237.



Since the return of Hasekura Tsunenaga in Japan, the Kastane was stored by Date clan in Sendai until 1951, when an amount of artifacts were donated to the state, since then in a rang of National Treasure. These artifacts are the reason for foundation of Sendai City Museum and the stock of it. The provenance is as impeccable as it could be for an 17th century object in a curiosity chamber collection in Renaissance Europe. Actually it's the best possible provenance.



I (or better Sasaki Kazuhiro) never have said, that the weapons were presented to the delegation in Philippines. The opinion of Sasaki Kazuhiro is the absolute contrary of it. Here oncemore the passage of question from my post #187:

"Sasaki Kazuhiro has the opinion, both keris and kastane are presented to Hasekura Tsunenaga by Philip III. Here in short he's points and other interesting details:

Among the 52 mementos that Hasekura brought to Japan, only three were presented to Date clan: portrait of Pope Paul V, kastane and keris.

Date Masamune drafted official letters only to Pope, the mayor of Sevilla and King Philipp III.

Masamune allowed Hasekura to take care of all official contacts with dignitaries in other countries.

Masamune obviously had great interest in the messages and gifts these figures bestoved on Hasekura.

Then Sasaki Kazuhiro writes:

"If we suppose Masamune requested only the articles from the three men he deemed most critical, then the two swords should have come from one of these three men. (...) it seems much more likely the Namban swords were a gift from Philipp III. This would also explain the reason these gifts made their way to the Masamune collection, while presents from dignitaries in other locales were allowed to remain in the Hasekura collection."

End of the quote.

Actually in his article Sasaki Kazuhiro represents the opinion (and it's a scholar oppinion), the weapons are presented to Hasekura Tsunenaga in Madrid, possibly in one of the two audiences he had with the King of Spain.

Please, when you are quoting your favorite source of knowledge Wikipedia (there:"and a set of Ceylonese and Indonesian daggers acquired in the Philippines"), don't mingle it with a contrary opinion of a scholar. The dish resulting of this is unpalatable.




Sorry, but I don't see the slightest resemblance between the blade stamp and the coat of arms of Hasekura Tsunenaga.

In your post #201 you say, the blade stamp is an M, now it supposedly is an H (as in an earlier version of your #237). The literate people in this world see it as N.

Anyway, bringing the personal stamp on an artifact, which is to be presented to this persons feudal lord is absolutely unthinkable in medieval Japan. Oncemore - this sword belongs not to the Hasekura's collection. It belongs to the Date's collection and was one of the three artifacts (out of a total of 52) officially presented to Date.



As I already wrote in my post #187, the presentation of Spanish arms to a foreigner was then prohibited by law.




All handles presented in your outstanding post #237 are lionheads of different carving schools, with the sole exception of the Makara hilted hilt from Malay Peninsula from the very end of 19 cent./beg. 20. cent., described in your post as "A Malaya/Javanese hilt".

Dear Jim, sorry, but to call #237, besides a lot of harmless wishful thinking containing also a false quotation, an interesting recap on Hasekura example is quite an indecent joke.

Regards,
Gustav

Salaams Gustav, Your input earlier was very useful to forum exploration and research. The fact is...we don't know... that is why I have used plentiful "maybe" and "possibly" and "perhaps"... largely since many reports are conflicting but of course if you have some more details then we shall naturally soak them up into the discussion and there is no need to take offence...I maen hang on Gustav we are trying our best here...but are only human. Sometimes in supposition I make mistakes...but its a forum and very little is carved in stone.

The crossed arrows and swastika with the cross above make a very interesting discussion so it is only a well aimed possibility... maybe we ought to get the page you placed translated? It could help... as would perhaps be better photographs. I am a little far from Japan but would relish a visIt to the Museum..

I continue to absorb volumes of detail about the famous Japanese tour and shall continue to do so. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT MY FAVOURITE SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE.. FORUM IS.

When you state categorically;
All handles presented in your outstanding post #237 are lionheads of different carving schools, what evidence do you place for that please? Have you details on the Sri Lankan carving schools within the Royal Workshops? Are you saying that proof exists of a time based solution to Makara heads versus Lion Heads...? (I insert here the caution that insofar as the potential of the two styles there is always the chance that "PERHAPS" there is only one... and that the final shape was down to artisan freedom of expression/client choice and that history is playing a joke on all of us..

Sometimes probing and detective work uncover more questions than they solve ... this may be a case in point but we work together actually and the final product is a Forum one. Some would say its like making an omelet...and you know? ... we have to break a few eggs along the way. Either way you ought never to feel forced to enter a thread discussion as always input is sought from all... The ink is free.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

Gustav, thank you so much for your thorough and edifying clarifications on these previous entries by myself and Ibrahiim. I am not sure where we fell off course with thinking this intriguing sword was somehow obtained in the Philippines, but clearly that assumption is incorrect as you have gratefully noted that the Hasekura mission indeed was present in Madrid. I admit I relied unfortunately on memory from research some time ago and this I fear may have given traction to that assumption. Thank you so much for this correction. It is so important of course to reconfirm and verify facts and evidence, and I failed to do that.

Can you detail the article by Kazuhiro so that I may obtain a copy? clearly I need to reread it

I think the reference to the provenance referred to the questions surrounding the peculiar nature of the elements of this example as opposed to more familiar blades and other features of kasthane, that is, toward where the sword may have been produced. One of the key points in examining this sword was originally to establish a terminus ante quem for the lionhead kasthane hilt . Any impunity toward the Sendai Museum was not intended and apologies for that perception.

I would also respond to my post terming the 'recap' on the Hasekura example, and explain that I meant this as a reference to reviewing the material previously posted . While I admit that I often extend ideas and observations which are admittedly sometimes fanciful in degree or by analogous description, and I often respond to other posts which are in kind, I would respectfully disagree that my efforts are any kind of indecent joke, and aside from that unfortunate remark, I very much appreciate your beautifully written and extremely helpful post.

Now, returning to some of the questions I have, I had wondered about the interesting guard configuration and discovered that similar exist on forms of the 'spada schiavonesca' from c. 1480-1500 (Boccia & Coelho, 1975, p.345) in the early hilts of schiavona. The basic guard and quillon structure is of that and of course other European forms which later developed into the often more complex guards.
It is interesting to consider these hilt systems in their influence on those of the 'nimcha' as well as of course, the kasthane (as discussed in A. North, 1975, "A Late 15th Century Italian Sword, 'The Connoisseur'). In another article by the late Mr. North in 1989 ("17th and 18th Century Europe", Ed, M. Coe p.68-69) he notes with regard to the wares brought to Europe by Dutch traders from the Far East, "...they included some extraordinary sword hilts based on contemporary European forms- local craftsmen clearly had European hilts to copy from but decorated and constructed them in local and traditional styles".

It is clear that many features of European swords, particularly from North Italy filtered through trade routes from the late 15th century onward, and that that these often profoundly influenced the indigenous weapons of many ports of call. It seems that perhaps, conversely some features of weapons or material culture in these 'exotic' ports indeed influenced that of many other visited ports as well of course as their destined European trade centers.

There are a good number of European hangers which have lionheads and other grotesque creatures in their theme which date around 17th and 18th centuries clearly reflecting these influences. Some of the 'makara' head example swords often mistaken for Sinhalese are actually from Malaya, Thailand, Viet Nam and other SE Asian regions, but these reflect usually their own traditional symbolism..it is primarily the zoomorphic pommel concept which is notable toward comparison.

Great discussion here, and Gustav, thank you again for the clarification and extremely helpful notes.

All best regards,
Jim

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams All… Note to Library;

I add the following interesting detail from http://civitavecchia.co.uk/hasekura.html

Quote”Hasekura Tsunenaga, the Samurai Ambassador
Hasekura Rokuemon Tsunenaga (or "Francisco Felipe Faxicura", as he was baptized in Spain) (1571–1622) (Japanese: 支倉六右衛門常長, also spelled Faxecura Rocuyemon in period European sources, reflecting the contemporary pronunciation of Japanese) was a Japanese samurai and retainer of Date Masamune, the Daimyo of Sendai. In the years 1613 through 1620, Hasekura headed a diplomatic mission to the Vatican in Rome, traveling through New Spain (arriving in Acapulco and departing from Veracruz) and visiting various ports-of-call in Europe. This historic mission is called the Keichō Embassy (慶長使節), and follows the Tenshō embassy (天正使節) of 1582. On the return trip, Hasekura and his companions re-traced their route across Mexico in 1619, sailing from Acapulco for Manila, and then sailing north to Japan in 1620. He is conventionally considered the first Japanese ambassador in the Americas and in Europe .

The Japanese Embassy went on to Italy where they were able to meet with Pope Paul V in Rome in November 1615, the same year Galileo Galilei was first confronted by the Roman Inquisition regarding his findings against geocentricism. Hasekura remitted to the Pope two gilded letters, one in Japanese and one in Latin, containing a request for a trade treaty between Japan and Mexico and the dispatch of Christian missionaries to Japan. These letters are still visible in the Vatican archives. The Latin letter, probably written by Luis Sotelo for Date Masamune, reads, in part:
"Kissing the Holy feet of the Great, Universal, Most Holy Lord of The Entire World, Pope Paul, in profound submission and reverence, I, Idate Masamune, King of Wôshû in the Empire of Japan, suppliantly say: The Franciscan Padre Luis Sotelo came to our country to spread the faith of God. On that occasion, I learnt about this faith and desired to become a Christian, but I still haven't accomplished this desire due to some small issues. However, in order to encourage my subjects to become Christians, I wish that you send missionaries of the Franciscan church. I guarantee that you will be able to build a church and that your missionaries will be protected. I also wish that you select and send a bishop as well. Because of that, I have sent one of my samurai, Hasekura Rokuemon, as my representative to accompany Luis Sotelo across the seas to Rome, to give you a stamp of obedience and to kiss your feet. Further, as our country and Nueva España are neighbouring countries, could you intervene so that we can discuss with the King of Spain, for the benefit of dispatching missionaries across the seas."
-Translation of the Latin letter of Date Masamune to the Pope.
The Pope agreed to the dispatch of missionaries, but left the decision for trade to the King of Spain. The Roman Senate also gave to Hasekura the honorary title of Roman Citizen, in a document he brought back to Japan, and which is preserved today in Sendai. Sotelo also described the visit to the Pope, book De ecclesiae Iaponicae statu relatio (published posthumously in 1634):
"When we got there by the aid of God in the Year of Our Salvation 1615, not only were we kindly received by His Holiness the great Pope, with the Holy College of the Cardinals and a gathering of bishops and nobles, and even the joy and general happiness of the Roman People, but we and three others (whom the Japanese Christians had specially designated to announce their condition with respect to the Christian religion) were heard, rested, and just as we were hoping, dispatched as quickly as possible."
-(Sotelo, De ecclesiae Iaponicae statu relatio)
Besides the official description of Hasekura's visit to Rome, some contemporary communications tend to indicate that political matters were also discussed, and that an alliance with Date Masamune was suggested as a way to establish Christian influence in the whole of Japan:
"The Ambassador strongly insisted that the authority and power of his ruler was superior to that of many European countries"
-(Anonymous Roman communication, dated 10 October 1615)
"The Franciscan Spanish fathers are explaining that the King of the Ambassador [Hasekura Tsunenaga] will soon become the supreme ruler of his country, and that, not only will they become Christians and follow the will of the church of Rome, but they will also in turn convert the rest of the population. This is why they are requesting the dispatch of a high eclesiastic together with the missionaries. Because of this, many people have been doubting the true purpose of the embassy, and are wondering if they are not looking for some other benefit."
-(Letter of the Venetian ambassador, 7 November 1615).” Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[VANDOO]

DANGER CONJECTURE AHEAD. THE JAPANESE AMBASSADOR WAS PRESENT IN SPAIN FOR TWO YEARS SO PERHAPS A SWORD COULD HAVE BEEN SPECIALY COMISSIONED AND MADE. HE MAY HAVE SEEN THE VARIOUS SWORDS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES PRESENT IN SPAINS MUSEUMS. THOSE ACCOMPANING HIM WOULD HAVE REPORTED TO THE KING ANYTHING HE FOUND MOST INTERESTING AND COMENTED ON. THE LAW AGAINST GIVING SPANISH ARMS TO A FORIGNER MAY HAVE BEEN BYPASSED BY HAVING A SWORD COMISSIONED ESPECIALLY FOR THE AMBASSADOR INCORPORATING THE FEATURES AND TYPES HE MOST ADMIRED WHEN LOOKING AT THE EXAMPLES IN SPANISH COLLECTIONS.
THE CARVING ON THE BACK OF THE BLADE AS WELL AS ITS FORM DOES NOT RESEMBLE A SIRI LANKAN KASTANE BLADE IT LOOKS MORE LIKE THE SPANISH BLADE SHAPE. THE DRAGON OR MONSTER CARVED INTO THE BLADE LOOKS MORE LIKE WHAT IS SEEN ON CHINESE OR OTHER ASIAN COUNTRIES POLE ARM BLADES. THE HANDLE IS CLOSE TO THE KASTANE FORM BUT A BIT DIFFERENT. THERE DOSENT SEEM TO BE A SCABBARD FOR THE SWORD AND THE ONE IN THE PAINTING HAS A SCABBARD LOOKING MORE LIKE A LEATHER EUROPEAN FORM THAN ONE FROM CEYLON. MOST KASTANE DO NOT HAVE A SCABBARD AS THEY ARE USUALLY MADE OF THIN WOOD AND ARE VERY FRAGILE. THE SILVER ONES HOLD UP BETTER BUT ARE OFTEN MISSING AS WELL. IF THERE WAS A KASTANE PRESENT IN THE COLLECTIONS IN SPAIN PERHAPS ITS SCABBARD WAS MISSING AS WELL.
WHAT WOULD PROVIDE SOME GOOD INFORMATION AND NOT JUST CONJECTURE WOULD BE TO HAVE SOMEONE FAMILIAR WITH FORGED BLADES FROM SPAIN LOOK AT THE SWORD AS WELL AS SOMEONE EXPERT IN SIRI LANKAN WORKMANSHIP. UNTIL THEN WE MUST DIG AND SPECULATE AND PERHAPS HIT ON SOME FACTS ALONG THE WAY .
I DON'T HAVE A PICTURE OF A BLADE WITH A CARVED MONSTER BUT INCLUDE TWO CHINESE BLADES A POLE ARM BLADE AND A SWORD.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by VANDOO

DANGER CONJECTURE AHEAD. THE JAPANESE AMBASSADOR WAS PRESENT IN SPAIN FOR TWO YEARS SO PERHAPS A SWORD COULD HAVE BEEN SPECIALY COMISSIONED AND MADE. HE MAY HAVE SEEN THE VARIOUS SWORDS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES PRESENT IN SPAINS MUSEUMS. THOSE ACCOMPANING HIM WOULD HAVE REPORTED TO THE KING ANYTHING HE FOUND MOST INTERESTING AND COMENTED ON. THE LAW AGAINST GIVING SPANISH ARMS TO A FORIGNER MAY HAVE BEEN BYPASSED BY HAVING A SWORD COMISSIONED ESPECIALLY FOR THE AMBASSADOR INCORPORATING THE FEATURES AND TYPES HE MOST ADMIRED WHEN LOOKING AT THE EXAMPLES IN SPANISH COLLECTIONS.
THE CARVING ON THE BACK OF THE BLADE AS WELL AS ITS FORM DOES NOT RESEMBLE A SIRI LANKAN KASTANE BLADE IT LOOKS MORE LIKE THE SPANISH BLADE SHAPE. THE DRAGON OR MONSTER CARVED INTO THE BLADE LOOKS MORE LIKE WHAT IS SEEN ON CHINESE OR OTHER ASIAN COUNTRIES POLE ARM BLADES. THE HANDLE IS CLOSE TO THE KASTANE FORM BUT A BIT DIFFERENT.

Salaams Vandoo... Like Hasekura and the Pacific our posts crossed... Yes I dont give a lot of weight to the illegality of the weapon since he was given a European name on Baptism and later even made a Roman citizen...and since he was gifted it by the King himself I dont really think it was a problem. I do agree that more weight to a Spanish weapon would be plausible and I note your point on the hilt as well as the blade fullers and odd monster.
Thank you for your post.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

Pics from Boccia & Coelho ("Armi Bianche Italiene", 1975, #516-519), this is an Italian sword presented to Philip III of Spain by Carlo Emanuel I of Savoy (1562-1630) apparently in 1603.

Worthy of note, the lionhead, and the 'monster head' on the scabbard tip.
While the blade is more of a narrow type with yelman rather than the form on the Hasekura example, these other features are interesting in considering influences present in Spain prior to the mission's arrival.

[Jim McDougall]

This is a falchion stated German from Stone (1934, p.224, #276) and stated 15th century. There is little information in text in Stone on this sword, its reference is shown as "A Cyclopedia of Costume or Dictionary of Dress" (James R. Planche, N.Y. 1877).

Please note the pronounced peak on this example, resembling this notable feature on the Hasekura sword. While the German provenance is of course distracting from our focus on Spain, and Italy, it is important to note that going through Calvert (1907, "Spanish Arms & Armour") there are profusely examples of German armour supplied to Spanish nobles and monarchs.
Armourers were typically actually 'brokers' and assembled harness components from many subcontracted artisans. With this they often furnished swords in many cases.

The 15th century classification is of course considerably earlier than the period we are discussing, but these blade profiles remained prevalent for many generations, even centuries with tradition bound Spain .

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams All ~ Note to Library.

From http://www.artsales.com/ARTistory/Xavier/Hasekura.html

I quote"Having just crossed the Pacific Ocean Hasekura Tsunenaga had an audience with the Mexican viceroy in 1614. After traversing Mexico between Acapulco and Vera cruz and the Atlantic Ocean in 1615 he sailed for Spain where he met with the Spanish monarch Philip III (1598-1621). While in Spain he was baptized a Christian. The ceremony was conducted by the Archbishop of Toledo and the Duke of Lerma was designated as Hasekura's Godfather. Hasekura'a delegation stayed in Spain for eight months before traveling on to Italy".Unquote.

Thus since got the weapons presented there it would seem plausible that there could have been some Spanish influence in the case of a weapon having apparently a mixed provenance?

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.