A composite 17 th century sword for comment.

Cerjak · 18th January 2016, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cornelistromp

this is an example of the 16th century sword that belongs to your pommel, the same type of drawing of Hans Doering in post # 5
the blade with two short and one long Fullers characterizes several one+ a half handers in the 16th century.

Thank you Jasper,
There is no doubt that you have a large documentation and also an outstanding knowledge about the typology of swords components from this period.

Best
Jean-Luc

cornelistromp · 18th January 2016, 01:11 PM

Iam still learning, Jean Luc

attachement: Jacob de Gheyns Wapenhandelinghe van Roers Musquetten ende spiessen, 1607

if you look to the hiltform a simple cross and a knuckle guard, in the 17th century.

CSinTX · 29th January 2016, 02:05 AM

Please forgive me and I hate to be a negative Nancy but I just dont see an early piece here.

The pommel- Looks 20th or maybe 19th century. Look at the sharp edges that appear modern machine made.

The blade- The metal appears old but the script in the blade looks like a modern 20th century font that you would see on something modern. I dont think I've ever seen a script or font like this on anything older than 19th C.

cornelistromp · 30th January 2016, 12:01 PM

I found out in the meantime, that there's not many study for the simple crosshilted sword in the post-medieval period.
according to Claude Blair ( An English sword with an ottoman blade in the swiss national museum) this hiltvorm was in the civilian and military dress till the mid of the 16th century but there after seems to have gone out of fashion, until in the beginning of the 17th century it returned again mainly in the civilian dress.
the available evidence for the use of Such swords in the 17th century actually only comes from England.

See attached a simple English cross hilted sword with a similar paddle shaped guard as the sword under discussion, simple in form of course not the decoration.

me fecit salingen seems a corruption of mefecit solingen, I do not believe salingen is the name of a sword maker, because often the first and last name of the sword maker was mentioned in the inscription.See an example of a rapier, 1630 in the V & A museum, monogram; inscribed ‘Me Fecit Salingen’ and inlaid with a running wolf.
Also an example inscribed mefecit Solingen.

best,
jasper

Cerjak · 30th January 2016, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cornelistromp

I found out in the meantime, that there's not many study for the simple crosshilted sword in the post-medieval period.
according to Claude Blair ( An English sword with an ottoman blade in the swiss national museum) this hiltvorm was in the civilian and military dress till the mid of the 16th century but there after seems to have gone out of fashion, until in the beginning of the 17th century it returned again mainly in the civilian dress.
the available evidence for the use of Such swords in the 17th century actually only comes from England.

See attached a simple English cross hilted sword with a similar paddle shaped guard as the sword under discussion, simple in form of course not the decoration.

me fecit salingen seems a corruption of mefecit solingen, I do not believe salingen is the name of a sword maker, because often the first and last name of the sword maker was mentioned in the inscription.See an example of a rapier, 1630 in the V & A museum, monogram; inscribed ‘Me Fecit Salingen’ and inlaid with a running wolf.
Also an example inscribed mefecit Solingen.

best,
jasper

Hi Jasper
You did a perfect job I can see that your thought about the type of pommel compatible with this sword in post 7 was exact:
A Globular pommel would be perfect with this sword.
Thank you again for the pictures.

best
Jean-Luc

cornelistromp · 30th January 2016, 05:17 PM

have you seen the last pictured hilt with the guard finals in the form of moor heads and the pommel where a lion was cut out.

really beautiful transitional small sword and probably Dutch, blade has master mark of meves berns.

RobertGuy · 30th January 2016, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSinTX

Please forgive me and I hate to be a negative Nancy but I just dont see an early piece here.

The pommel- Looks 20th or maybe 19th century. Look at the sharp edges that appear modern machine made.

The blade- The metal appears old but the script in the blade looks like a modern 20th century font that you would see on something modern. I dont think I've ever seen a script or font like this on anything older than 19th C.

I must admit that I agree. The cross piece also seems nicely detailed but is a casting rather than being chassed/engraved. If it were the patterning would continue around the arms. The lettering looks to be acid etched rather than properly engraved as well. How deep is the lettering? I'm thinking an oldish blade strangely dressed up to be something better.

ulfberth · 31st January 2016, 10:46 AM

Detailed pictures of the pommel, the crossguard and the blade could help.
The sword also seems to be covered in old varnish or hardened oil.
Its best to remove this as it does not ad to the intrinsic value of the sword and it would allow to take clear pictures .... its not like removing an old patina and
in this case ther is no old patina under the varnish or grease.
These are just suggestions of course.

kind regards

Ulfberth

cornelistromp · 31st January 2016, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertGuy

I must admit that I agree. The cross piece also seems nicely detailed but is a casting rather than being chassed/engraved. If it were the patterning would continue around the arms. The lettering looks to be acid etched rather than properly engraved as well. How deep is the lettering? I'm thinking an oldish blade strangely dressed up to be something better.

as far as I know, scrolling foliage paterns engraved ensuite, actually never passes through the narrow edges of flat guards to the reverse side.
however in rare cases on the narrow up and down side sometimes is a border of points, hammered in or encrusted.

RobertGuy would you please post an example where the engraved foliage pattern continues around the flat arms of a hilt, that would be very interesting ?

re: inscription in the blade
this must be engraved in relief and not etched on the surface of the blade of course.
maybe Jean Luc can post high res pictures which could provide more clarity of all the components as proposed by Ulfberth

best,

Cerjak · 31st January 2016, 05:46 PM

here some extra pictures

ulfberth · 31st January 2016, 07:16 PM

Hi Jean Luc thank you for posting extra pictures,

from what i can see on the structure of the metal the blade seems 16th C.
The blade looks to be thoroughly cleaned at one point in time because the lettering is partly worn out but there is little or no pitting in the blade.
The cross guard could be late 16th or early 17th C , the engraving is good for the period. I cant say nothing about the pommel.

kind regards

Ulfberth

18th January 2016, 01:11 PM	#2
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	Iam still learning, Jean Luc attachement: Jacob de Gheyns Wapenhandelinghe van Roers Musquetten ende spiessen, 1607 if you look to the hiltform a simple cross and a knuckle guard, in the 17th century. Attached Images Last edited by cornelistromp; 18th January 2016 at 01:26 PM.

30th January 2016, 12:01 PM	#4
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	I found out in the meantime, that there's not many study for the simple crosshilted sword in the post-medieval period. according to Claude Blair ( An English sword with an ottoman blade in the swiss national museum) this hiltvorm was in the civilian and military dress till the mid of the 16th century but there after seems to have gone out of fashion, until in the beginning of the 17th century it returned again mainly in the civilian dress. the available evidence for the use of Such swords in the 17th century actually only comes from England. See attached a simple English cross hilted sword with a similar paddle shaped guard as the sword under discussion, simple in form of course not the decoration. me fecit salingen seems a corruption of mefecit solingen, I do not believe salingen is the name of a sword maker, because often the first and last name of the sword maker was mentioned in the inscription.See an example of a rapier, 1630 in the V & A museum, monogram; inscribed ‘Me Fecit Salingen’ and inlaid with a running wolf. Also an example inscribed mefecit Solingen. best, jasper Attached Images Last edited by cornelistromp; 30th January 2016 at 12:17 PM.

30th January 2016, 05:17 PM	#6
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	have you seen the last pictured hilt with the guard finals in the form of moor heads and the pommel where a lion was cut out. really beautiful transitional small sword and probably Dutch, blade has master mark of meves berns. Attached Images

31st January 2016, 05:46 PM	#10
Cerjak Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: FRANCE Posts: 1,065	extra pictures here some extra pictures Attached Images

29th January 2016, 02:05 AM	#3
CSinTX Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Posts: 233	Please forgive me and I hate to be a negative Nancy but I just dont see an early piece here. The pommel- Looks 20th or maybe 19th century. Look at the sharp edges that appear modern machine made. The blade- The metal appears old but the script in the blade looks like a modern 20th century font that you would see on something modern. I dont think I've ever seen a script or font like this on anything older than 19th C.

31st January 2016, 10:46 AM	#8
ulfberth Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 413	Detailed pictures of the pommel, the crossguard and the blade could help. The sword also seems to be covered in old varnish or hardened oil. Its best to remove this as it does not ad to the intrinsic value of the sword and it would allow to take clear pictures .... its not like removing an old patina and in this case ther is no old patina under the varnish or grease. These are just suggestions of course. kind regards Ulfberth

31st January 2016, 07:16 PM	#11
ulfberth Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 413	Hi Jean Luc thank you for posting extra pictures, from what i can see on the structure of the metal the blade seems 16th C. The blade looks to be thoroughly cleaned at one point in time because the lettering is partly worn out but there is little or no pitting in the blade. The cross guard could be late 16th or early 17th C , the engraving is good for the period. I cant say nothing about the pommel. kind regards Ulfberth