Schiavona markings

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Here's a thought: could the pommel have belonged to the blade prior to the re-hilting?

It seems unlikely as the kosarice pommel was not as characteristic or popular on the schiavona proper, though it was more common on varying other swords of the times. If the catshead pommel was original to the sword I cannot see why it would be removed for a kosarice. Also if flashing remained on the end product it would be unseemly for a product of the times.

The blade and hilt are most likely homogenous unless otherwise told by handling. Hilts are often dismantled when grips are being restored, a common occurence as these are not as durable of course.
Quite possibly the original pommel might have been damaged in this process and a more correct one in its place.

Blade and hilt associations are quite often encountered as shown in Mann(1962) where often there are hilts much older than the blades, which seems unusual. However the heirloom situation is not just restricted to blades. Often a heirloom sword (hilt) has had blade broken and simply needs a new one.

The Italian center of Belluno (where Andrea Ferara and his brother worked but in a forge of another maker) was just one of a network of several blade makers in various towns. The blades from these were produced and sent to key locations (Milan etc.) for hilting and sheathing. Just as with blades from all the known centers, they were seldom mounted in the same location.
Blades were highly valued and often remounted numerous times from their original furbishing.