A cup hilt sword for coments

M ELEY · 22nd March 2010, 11:45 AM

Yes, a wonderful piece. I understand from speaking to Manolo on other posts the differences in opinion between the Old World "true" (??) cup-hilts and those post-1700 pieces sometimes referred to as bilbos. Where my confusion comes in is that this piece does appear to have the ridged over-lap to the bowl. Isn't this typically found on Spanish pieces vs those found over here? I remember discussing this on a past thread, but I could be wrong. I guess one could surmise that parts in the Old World made it to the west, as did occur, but I would have trouble believing this piece to be a put-together, like some primitive espada. Perhaps I need the definition on a 'bilbo' one more time so I can understand it. Is it based solely on time period, form/construction, or locale that it was used in????

celtan · 22nd March 2010, 02:03 PM

Howdy guys,

"Bilbo" is an English catch-all word used to very generally refer to the Spanish "Utilitarian" cup-hilt swords, so often found all over America. They usually had a wide, _relatively_ short sturdy and well tempered blades, very practical and unadorned. The grip was more often than not wood, sometimes covered with wire.

The term comes from the Spanish Basque city of Bilbao, where a significant number of them were made and exported to the New World. In Basque that name is actually "Bilbo", although there's also a basque town by that name. I understand these swords were also sold to merchants of every european nation, including England.

The type was very popular aboard ships, where it was used on a similar role as the cutlass was among other nations. Needless to say, this sword was also used in Europe, but curiously, seem to have survived better in America. Probably because in the colonies these were better taken care of, since they were more difficult to acquire, and thus more valuable.

"Bilbo" if often misused by neophytes to refer to *any* spanish sword.

And Nando, I'm just goading you. : ) I'm certain this sword is not gallega, nor made by a galician Vulcano. It has to be portuguesa, and a fine sample it is.

I seldom drink, but I'll be looking forward to try a Alvarinho portugues. Since you claim is as good as the galician ambrosia (Ambrosia La Gallega "), then it surely must be el nectar de los dioses.

The term used today in Spain for this type of hilt is, IIRC, "Taza". Although, as a kid they were rather called "Toledanas" amd "Estoques".

Galicia was famous for ax-making and the antenna-swords the romans eventually adopted as the Gladius, but I don't know of any renowned Galician espadeiro, in fact, the term is currently used to refer to fishermen, of all things!

Mike, the ring you mention is called a rompe-puntas, a (blade) point-breaker.

Best regards to y'all

: )

M

Quote:

Originally Posted by M ELEY

Yes, a wonderful piece. I understand from speaking to Manolo on other posts the differences in opinion between the Old World "true" (??) cup-hilts and those post-1700 pieces sometimes referred to as bilbos. Where my confusion comes in is that this piece does appear to have the ridged over-lap to the bowl. Isn't this typically found on Spanish pieces vs those found over here? I remember discussing this on a past thread, but I could be wrong. I guess one could surmise that parts in the Old World made it to the west, as did occur, but I would have trouble believing this piece to be a put-together, like some primitive espada. Perhaps I need the definition on a 'bilbo' one more time so I can understand it. Is it based solely on time period, form/construction, or locale that it was used in????

fernando · 22nd March 2010, 06:07 PM

Amazing !
I would swear that the Bilbo was a determined type of hilt, and not a generic term.
If you ever decide to test/taste portuguese alvarinho, try Palacio da Brejoeira; maybe this is the more expensive one, but it is definitely the best... well, not counting with those home made private harvests that eventually we come across with.
We also have the term espadeiro here, to refer to fishermen of peixe-espada (sword-fish).
The rompe-puntas (quebra pontas here) is also found in portuguese bowl cup hilt swords. Let's call it a peninsular characteristic ... until i (we)find some reading about its specific origin, local and date
Concerning perservation of these swords until later dates, also in Portugal they survived for a long period, having actually become emblematic. They kept being made until the XVIII century and their utility lasted long as the begining of the XIX century, due to absence of a better resource, by the population, during the various conflicts and civil wars.
I wonder why Jim doesn't come around; knowing that he is also a cuphilt lover

Fernando

.

Marc · 23rd March 2010, 12:41 PM

Well, that's a typical question of nomenclature. Without a standard, each community ends up developing its own terminology.
So, to the question "what is a Bilbo?", the answer would be "Well, it depends who you ask", as it's already being seen here

.
The sword posted by Fernando wouldn't never be classified as a "Bilbo" by a knowledgeable Spanish collector (nor as "colonial", either, by the way). In Spain this kind of swords, which are indeed considered as belonging to the same "family" as the ones posted by Manuel (Celtan), are known, generically, as "Tazas a la Portuguesa", or "Portuguese cup-hilts", with a chronology that, as Fernando said, spans from the end of the 17th c. to the beginning of the 19th, featuring a wide variety of blades -usually quite sturdy cutters-, many of them with German marks and inscriptions in Portuguese or related to Portuguese subjects. Distinctive -read "usual", you know how this goes- features are the thick, solid cups, frequently featuring the "rompepuntas" or "point-breaker", short sturdy quilllions with pear-shaped finials and frequently soldered to the cup itself, lack of inner finger-rings ("pas d'ane" you call them), and the pear-shaped pommel, usually faceted, and with the knuckle-guard attached to it with a screw.
The grip is usually of bare wood, barrel-shaped and with horizontal decorative carved lines (that one in in Manuel's first pictures would be an archetypical example), but I've seen many variations. I don't think the brass one in Fernando's exemplar is out of place in any way.
In Spain, the label "Bilbo" for swords is taken as a loan word from Anglo-saxon collectors and referred normally to swords with hilts featuring bilobulated shells, be them 17th c. rapiers or 18th c. Spanish Cavalry Swords. You may find them in dealer's descriptions meant for international audiences, in fact, but the term is kind of catching in the collectors community.
As I said, all of this is not about anyone being right or wrong, but about how sometimes things we give for granted may not be so when dealing with the international community. You wouldn't believe the amount of discussions I have had about what can be considered a rapier and what not, which invariably end up dealing with what *each of us* feels comfortable calling a rapier...

fernando · 23rd March 2010, 01:49 PM

Ah,
Here came the cavalry; i'm safe

.
Thank you so much for the splendid dissertation, Marc

.
Bona salut.
Fernando

M ELEY · 23rd March 2010, 02:01 PM

Thanks, all, for the information on what I also consider one of my favorite sword types. I had failed to remember that as Marc has said, when it comes to the international community, terms may vary. This crosses over into the culture itself sometimes, with various groups having their opinions on what constitutes what. Case in point, colonial spike axes. Many of these saw service in their home countries before being exported to the Americas. Once they were here, they were certainly used by the explorers and traders to survive. Finally, they were popular among the Native Americans. So when it comes to existing examples, opinions as to what specifications make a spike axe an Indian piece, opinions fly and terminologies can be confused. Anyway, I digress-

Nice sword, nice info by all.

Jim McDougall · 23rd March 2010, 04:08 PM

Fernando, thank you so much for the notation, and it is true, the cuphilts are very much a knee weakening affinity for me, but at the moment I really could not add much to the great discourse you and Manolo had going. The question of terminology and semantics clearly come to the fore as described here, and prompted me to return to notes to reconfirm my perspective.

When returning to the thread it was delightful to see that Marc had written a superb treatment on this dilemma of the term 'bilbo', and its application in traditional Spanish swords. In the eloquence that is his hallmark, I think this is a perfect explanation of the developed use of this term as well as well placed observations on the classic Spanish and Portuguese cuphilt swords (I know you hate the collective term Iberian Fernando !

It seems to me that in the 17th century and of course through the 18th, there was prolific import of German trade blades to these markets, which as you pointed out, may well account for the spelling variation in the inscription.

In Shakespeare's time it does appear that 'bilbo' had become a somewhat universally applied term for rapier or sword, as seen in "The Merry Wives of Windsor" (1602, III, v.) , "...to be compassed like a good bilbo, in the circumference of a peck, hit to a point, heel to head". These terms of course seem to allude to the very geometric fencing theorems that were known in Spanish as "Destreza" which would suggest a rapier, but case in point is the use of the term.
Other references suggest the term pertaining to a sword from Bilbao, which is as noted the capital of the Biscay province in Basque Country. In Shakespeare again (Othello, v, 2) mention is made of swords of 'ice brook temper' where the Spaniards used the brook Salo near Bilbilis in Celtiberia to harden the steel, and produce swords of the highest quality.
Whether this Bilibilis might have anything to do with the possibly related term 'bilbo' remains a question, but corrupted words in transliteration or colloquial parlance can sometimes lead to situations such as the term 'bilobate' becoming shortened to bilbo.

It should be noted here that the term 'fox' is also a term used in Shakespeares works to describe an esteemed sword blade, in this case referring to the 'running wolf' of Germany or perhaps even the 'perillo' (little dog) of Toledo.

While these terms joined the ethereal 'scimitar' term in describing swords in literature, it seems that the popularization of antique weapons collecting in the 19th century borrowed some of these terms in descriptions. In the case of the bilbo term, it seems to have become associated with the bilobate military type swords noted, while the cuphilt was distinctly described as just that.

Returning to the cuphilts, these examples shown are indeed beautiful examples of the tradition of the cuphilt rapier maintained proudly in these arming type swords. If I understand correctly, most of the colonially mounted examples (often termed Caribbean) do not have the rompepuntas, nor the guardopolvo within the cupguard.

All very best regards,
Jim

22nd March 2010, 06:07 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Amazing ! I would swear that the Bilbo was a determined type of hilt, and not a generic term. If you ever decide to test/taste portuguese alvarinho, try Palacio da Brejoeira; maybe this is the more expensive one, but it is definitely the best... well, not counting with those home made private harvests that eventually we come across with. We also have the term espadeiro here, to refer to fishermen of peixe-espada (sword-fish). The rompe-puntas (quebra pontas here) is also found in portuguese bowl cup hilt swords. Let's call it a peninsular characteristic ... until i (we)find some reading about its specific origin, local and date Concerning perservation of these swords until later dates, also in Portugal they survived for a long period, having actually become emblematic. They kept being made until the XVIII century and their utility lasted long as the begining of the XIX century, due to absence of a better resource, by the population, during the various conflicts and civil wars. I wonder why Jim doesn't come around; knowing that he is also a cuphilt lover Fernando . Attached Images

23rd March 2010, 12:41 PM	#4
Marc Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Madrid / Barcelona Posts: 256	Well, that's a typical question of nomenclature. Without a standard, each community ends up developing its own terminology. So, to the question "what is a Bilbo?", the answer would be "Well, it depends who you ask", as it's already being seen here . The sword posted by Fernando wouldn't never be classified as a "Bilbo" by a knowledgeable Spanish collector (nor as "colonial", either, by the way). In Spain this kind of swords, which are indeed considered as belonging to the same "family" as the ones posted by Manuel (Celtan), are known, generically, as "Tazas a la Portuguesa", or "Portuguese cup-hilts", with a chronology that, as Fernando said, spans from the end of the 17th c. to the beginning of the 19th, featuring a wide variety of blades -usually quite sturdy cutters-, many of them with German marks and inscriptions in Portuguese or related to Portuguese subjects. Distinctive -read "usual", you know how this goes- features are the thick, solid cups, frequently featuring the "rompepuntas" or "point-breaker", short sturdy quilllions with pear-shaped finials and frequently soldered to the cup itself, lack of inner finger-rings ("pas d'ane" you call them), and the pear-shaped pommel, usually faceted, and with the knuckle-guard attached to it with a screw. The grip is usually of bare wood, barrel-shaped and with horizontal decorative carved lines (that one in in Manuel's first pictures would be an archetypical example), but I've seen many variations. I don't think the brass one in Fernando's exemplar is out of place in any way. In Spain, the label "Bilbo" for swords is taken as a loan word from Anglo-saxon collectors and referred normally to swords with hilts featuring bilobulated shells, be them 17th c. rapiers or 18th c. Spanish Cavalry Swords. You may find them in dealer's descriptions meant for international audiences, in fact, but the term is kind of catching in the collectors community. As I said, all of this is not about anyone being right or wrong, but about how sometimes things we give for granted may not be so when dealing with the international community. You wouldn't believe the amount of discussions I have had about what can be considered a rapier and what not, which invariably end up dealing with what each of us feels comfortable calling a rapier... Last edited by Marc; 23rd March 2010 at 03:19 PM.

22nd March 2010, 11:45 AM	#1
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,175	Yes, a wonderful piece. I understand from speaking to Manolo on other posts the differences in opinion between the Old World "true" (??) cup-hilts and those post-1700 pieces sometimes referred to as bilbos. Where my confusion comes in is that this piece does appear to have the ridged over-lap to the bowl. Isn't this typically found on Spanish pieces vs those found over here? I remember discussing this on a past thread, but I could be wrong. I guess one could surmise that parts in the Old World made it to the west, as did occur, but I would have trouble believing this piece to be a put-together, like some primitive espada. Perhaps I need the definition on a 'bilbo' one more time so I can understand it. Is it based solely on time period, form/construction, or locale that it was used in????

23rd March 2010, 01:49 PM	#5
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Ah, Here came the cavalry; i'm safe . Thank you so much for the splendid dissertation, Marc . Bona salut. Fernando

23rd March 2010, 02:01 PM	#6
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,175	Thanks, all, for the information on what I also consider one of my favorite sword types. I had failed to remember that as Marc has said, when it comes to the international community, terms may vary. This crosses over into the culture itself sometimes, with various groups having their opinions on what constitutes what. Case in point, colonial spike axes. Many of these saw service in their home countries before being exported to the Americas. Once they were here, they were certainly used by the explorers and traders to survive. Finally, they were popular among the Native Americans. So when it comes to existing examples, opinions as to what specifications make a spike axe an Indian piece, opinions fly and terminologies can be confused. Anyway, I digress- Nice sword, nice info by all.

23rd March 2010, 04:08 PM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,356	Fernando, thank you so much for the notation, and it is true, the cuphilts are very much a knee weakening affinity for me, but at the moment I really could not add much to the great discourse you and Manolo had going. The question of terminology and semantics clearly come to the fore as described here, and prompted me to return to notes to reconfirm my perspective. When returning to the thread it was delightful to see that Marc had written a superb treatment on this dilemma of the term 'bilbo', and its application in traditional Spanish swords. In the eloquence that is his hallmark, I think this is a perfect explanation of the developed use of this term as well as well placed observations on the classic Spanish and Portuguese cuphilt swords (I know you hate the collective term Iberian Fernando ! It seems to me that in the 17th century and of course through the 18th, there was prolific import of German trade blades to these markets, which as you pointed out, may well account for the spelling variation in the inscription. In Shakespeare's time it does appear that 'bilbo' had become a somewhat universally applied term for rapier or sword, as seen in "The Merry Wives of Windsor" (1602, III, v.) , "...to be compassed like a good bilbo, in the circumference of a peck, hit to a point, heel to head". These terms of course seem to allude to the very geometric fencing theorems that were known in Spanish as "Destreza" which would suggest a rapier, but case in point is the use of the term. Other references suggest the term pertaining to a sword from Bilbao, which is as noted the capital of the Biscay province in Basque Country. In Shakespeare again (Othello, v, 2) mention is made of swords of 'ice brook temper' where the Spaniards used the brook Salo near Bilbilis in Celtiberia to harden the steel, and produce swords of the highest quality. Whether this Bilibilis might have anything to do with the possibly related term 'bilbo' remains a question, but corrupted words in transliteration or colloquial parlance can sometimes lead to situations such as the term 'bilobate' becoming shortened to bilbo. It should be noted here that the term 'fox' is also a term used in Shakespeares works to describe an esteemed sword blade, in this case referring to the 'running wolf' of Germany or perhaps even the 'perillo' (little dog) of Toledo. While these terms joined the ethereal 'scimitar' term in describing swords in literature, it seems that the popularization of antique weapons collecting in the 19th century borrowed some of these terms in descriptions. In the case of the bilbo term, it seems to have become associated with the bilobate military type swords noted, while the cuphilt was distinctly described as just that. Returning to the cuphilts, these examples shown are indeed beautiful examples of the tradition of the cuphilt rapier maintained proudly in these arming type swords. If I understand correctly, most of the colonially mounted examples (often termed Caribbean) do not have the rompepuntas, nor the guardopolvo within the cupguard. All very best regards, Jim