Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 30th August 2022, 06:45 PM   #1
eftihis
Member
 
eftihis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chania Crete Greece
Posts: 500
Default Two handed sword

This sword is 1,70cm in length. It was claimed that dates from the 18th century. It is well tempered and holds an edge. But the wight is more than the usuall weight of the fighting swords of this type. It is 4,9kg. What do you think, is this a fighting sword, a ceremonial one, or a 19th century historismus piece?
Attached Images
            
eftihis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th August 2022, 09:39 PM   #2
cel7
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eftihis View Post
This sword is 1,70cm in length. It was claimed that dates from the 18th century. It is well tempered and holds an edge. But the wight is more than the usuall weight of the fighting swords of this type. It is 4,9kg. What do you think, is this a fighting sword, a ceremonial one, or a 19th century historismus piece?
I think it is a ceremonial sword also called Bearing sword. These were in use until the 17th century.
cel7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st August 2022, 11:53 AM   #3
NeilUK
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 122
Default

Almost certainly your sword is a 19th or even 20th century product. It is an imitation of a South German bearing/ceremonial two-hander in style but the details of the parrying lugs, crossguard and pommel are too crude to be the work of one of the great 16th century smiths of Munich and Passau. The weight is correct for a bearing sword of c.1600 - combat two-handers weighed roughly 2 to 3 kilos. I hope that helps.
Neil
NeilUK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th September 2022, 06:24 AM   #4
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,036
Default Victorian or later

I agree with Neil. The view of the pommel and tang mushroom says it all. Notice the sharp, precise demarcation between the mushroom (whose top is too neatly shaped to be true), and the crisp countersunk lip of the surrounding hole. This points to an assemblage that is fairly recent.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2022, 04:34 PM   #5
eftihis
Member
 
eftihis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chania Crete Greece
Posts: 500
Default

Thank you all! Very much appreciated!
eftihis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.