My "new" cup hilt sword for your kind comments

[Lee]

Originally Posted by M ELEY

...Going back to the screw-tang, did we ever determine when this practice was started?

Bladesmiths of my acquaintance have always warned that threaded tangs were failures waiting to happen, sharply cut threads being a failure point just as is the small deliberately placed cut along the sealed edge of a bag of crisps. In Fernando's picture of the threaded tang above, I note that the threads are very rounded and I wonder if the sharp taper is also of some special function.

I will present a British sword dated to within a few decades of 1600 that employs a threaded tang in these forums soon - once pictures are prepared.

[M ELEY]

Thank you, Lee. I'd love to see pictures of this early example of a threaded tang for reference. Didn't know for sure how long the practice of threading was going on for-

[midelburgo]

Very nice sword Fernando.

I believe these swords were the Spanish (Portugal) current infantry soldier swords between 1660-1710. Kept longer in the Americas. In a similar function to infantry Waloon types in northern countries. The introduction of the Borbon dinasty probably eliminated them. The first picture is of a soldier of the Guardia Chamberga (1669-1676).

It is possible to identify an evolution for the hilts differentiated from the blades. Similar hilts have different blades, sometimes in flamigerous shape. And similar blades appear with different hilts.

They often have brass pieces of horn or exotic wood grips, something not common in the European counterparts of that period. I think it is not possible to distinguish between naval and colonial weapons (the so-called Caribbean rapiers), because the troops could be moved around, and the navy was often the source of weapons for the colonies.

Some of them have survived with a coat of thick black paint, possibly made with coal and hooves, for rust resistance. Some are even tinned with that aim. This was convenient both for the navy and Caribbean coasts.

Lamina 79 from the Naval Album of Marquis de la Victoria, represents the armament carried by the crew of a Spanish man of war of around c1725s-1735s. There are no cup hilts there, but possibly it is a late period for that.

https://docplayer.es/42280723-Analis...nal-naval.html

PS. I have just found out that the guard print is a 1828 copy of the uniforms in a previous one of 1670. I am searching for the original.

PS2. The original is page 30 of
https://archive.org/stream/teatrodel...e/n29/mode/1up

But I do not see cuphilts there.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by midelburgo

Very nice sword Fernando.

I believe these swords were the Spanish (Portugal) current infantry soldier swords between 1660-1710. Kept longer in the Americas. In a similar function to infantry Waloon types in northern countries. The introduction of the Borbon dinasty probably eliminated them. The first picture is of a soldier of the Guardia Chamberga (1669-1676).

It is possible to identify an evolution for the hilts differentiated from the blades. Similar hilts have different blades, sometimes in flamigerous shape. And similar blades appear with different hilts.

They often have brass pieces of horn or exotic wood grips, something not common in the European counterparts of that period. I think it is not possible to distinguish between naval and colonial weapons (the so-called Caribbean rapiers), because the troops could be moved around, and the navy was often the source of weapons for the colonies.

Some of them have survived with a coat of thick black paint, possibly made with coal and hooves, for rust resistance. Some are even tinned with that aim. This was convenient both for the navy and Caribbean coasts.

Lamina 79 from the Naval Album of Marquis de la Victoria, represents the armament carried by the crew of a Spanish man of war of around c1725s-1735s. There are no cup hilts there, but possibly it is a late period for that.

https://docplayer.es/42280723-Analis...nal-naval.html

Thank you for this well placed and nicely supported overview as we examine the character and forms of potentially 'colonial' sword forms. As has been pointed out, while those 'mounted' in colonial context MAY have somewhat more austere components, if indeed fashioned by blacksmiths or metal workers in these 'New World' regions.

It must be remembered that there were not any great number of armorers or skilled sword slippers (as termed in 17th-18thc) in colonial settings. While occasionally they did exist in the larger cities and metropolitan areas, most locations were relatively remote and such work was typically in effect, the work of field armorers and blacksmiths.

Also, in the 'colonies', many presume that the military presence in many locations suggested predominance of current types of arms and armor.
Actually, from the earliest exploration times, most individuals were not necesarily 'military', in fact private and with commercial or personal interests such as syndicated investors, and adventurers. These individuals were of course privately outfitted and armed themselves often with heirloom,surplus and otherwise collected items.

This is why many weapons and forms long obsolete in Continental and Peninsular context remained in use for not only generations, but centuries, in the New World. As these arms became damaged or otherwise unserviceable, their components were of course recycled and put to use as possible in newly fabricated weaponry.

There were no facilities for the fancy wire wrap, Turks heads, and other other finer touches of the beautifully produced weaponry of the European world.
Materials that were available were of course, soft yellow metals (which also did not rust) and various animal hides ( the galuchat described earlier simulated rayskin using horse hide etc and seeds).

The blades, unless broken, were the most durable and available components for these colonial makers, in fact the well known 'Spanish motto' dragoon blades were exported from Solingen to them in large volume.
I have personal knowledge of this from one well known collector who had acquired a large bundle of them (featured in "Spanish Military Arms in Colonial America 1700-1821"). Also I knew individuals who had found a bundle of Solingen produced rapier blades on a Spanish shipwreck off a Central American coast.

Also as noted previously, japanning (black paint) and russeting (using a browning method) were commonly practiced on these arms to withstand the damp tropical climates in the new world. This made these weapons MOST serviceable aboard vessels as well.
This fact was a notable factor in the support of the Scottish basket hilt finding its place as a maritime sword in degree, as thier hilts were typically treated in this fashion due to the damp Scottish climate.


Naturally, the long use of many sword types entirely, or thier components brought together many otherwise notably incongruent pairings. For example broadsword blades on saber hilts, broad arming sword blades on cup hilts etc.
In these often unusually contrived weapons, it is surprising to see such things as crossguard quillons mounted UNDER a cup guard ( entirely vestigial and redundant).
I have (somewhere) a colonial cut down Spanish motto blade, mounted with a brass briquet hilt, and a three bar saber guard. This is no logical reason for this 'frankenstein' , however in very rural regions in Mexico, the use of components in this manner to create a sword for unknown purpose well illustrates the conventions of many more extreme 'colonial' circumstrances (though an obvious exaggeration).

[M ELEY]

"In these often unusually contrived weapons, it is surprising to see such things as crossguard quillons mounted UNDER a cup guard ( entirely vestigial and redundant)."

Not to take away from 'Nando's thread, but the tie-in with colonial weapons and the information being presented here is great! Jim, you mention this contrived assemblage on swords and I have personally seen several 'Frankenstein-type' Spanish swords with this exact pattern listed in a catalog as "pirate"! interesting that others have come across these. Also, thank you for that term I have been long searching for. "Russeting" is the process whereby swords are primered with a brown paint or substance to retard rusting. You might recall that old 1660's hanger I had with VOC connections that had a 'browned' blade for sea service.

Anyway, back to this amazing cup hilt!

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Mark!
Actually we are not digressing from the outstanding cuphilt Fernando has posted in the OP, but discussing various avenues toward classification and identifying it. Often a great deal of related material and comparisons, regardless of even tenuous observations, clues can be found in most unusual places!

Interesting about the contrived examples I mentioned with the odd crossguard UNDER the cup being cataloged as 'pirate'
I have one of these which was found with this seemingly cliche' classification as well (need to find pics of it).

[midelburgo]

For the identity of the German blade maker, possibly numbers 49 and 88 of this catalogue are relevant.

https://www.yumpu.com/es/document/re...a-de-andalucia

He could be Enrique Coel - Köhl.

As for quillions under the cup, they are a distinctive characteristic of Mexican revolutionary swords with archaistic and rustic aspect.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Lee

...In Fernando's picture of the threaded tang above, I note that the threads are very rounded and I wonder if the sharp taper is also of some special function...

I realize threaded tangs are one thing and actual screws are another. But based on their affinity i recalled these images of (very) early screws, once posted here by deceased Michael (Matchlock). The tapered examples are naturally what triggered my thoughts.


.

[midelburgo]

I would take Enrique Coel as a sort of Runkel, 80-100 years in advance, and along 80 years. However it is possible to group the graphics and caligraphies. For example, the blades in the 1728 model come in two flavours, although that only shows that they shared the model the engraver used.

[Oliver Pinchot]

Jim, regarding your note above in post 35:

The technique of making imitation shagreen (from Persian shagri or wild donkey hide) as you detail it, originated in Iran long before the 18th century. The skill was probably learned by Europeans who were posted there at about that time, as were other artistic techniques (and vice versa.)

Regarding the cuphilt shown, the skin is absolutely from a ray, it is not galuchat. Incidentally, shagri reputedly only came from the back of a wild donkey, thus it was quite rare. In addition to its attractive texture, it was originally prized for its toughness.

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Oliver,
Thank you so much for the clarification, I could not tell the difference of course but suggested the galuchat possibility more in consideration of the possible colonial context. When I first learned of the faux ray skin some time ago, it was it seems described in Caribbean settings, in turn of course from European.
It is not only interesting but expected that this technique would have come from the east , and popularized in Europe.
Good to hear from you!!! and thank you again for the response