European bladed takouba

[Iain]

I've cross posted this to the European Armoury board because of the marks. But I wanted to post it here as well and discuss the takouba aspects.

The sword has what I like to term a sandwich forte, where the blade has been pinned into two thick pieces of steel. This particular mount is very sturdy and thick. These fortes would fit well with how takouba were used, as even normal takouba blades are left unsharpened for about the first third of the blade. This blade is European with interesting marks and quite stiff. Heavy sharpening on the tip and most of the length of the blade. There are the remains of brass inlays in the marks.

The hilt is of an old style, large and heavy iron pommel and a guard made out of a similarly solid block. Brass plates are affixed to both sides of the guard. The grip was likely originally covered with leather.

I am not sure at the moment of an ethnic attribution, there are very few clues with this particular sword, I need to dig through a bunch of notes to see if the decorative pattern on the brass will reveal anything. A pity no scabbard came with the sword.

This is an interesting sword for me, not just because of the blade but because the hilt is solid and old. There is such a difference between these older takouba and newer ones in terms of how they handle and feel.

[Wodimi]

Iain, first congratulation to this sword. For me it's Haussa style. What you think or feel of the mark, could it be an old one, or more an imitation of this real old Solingen smithmark? Is it brass inside the cross?

[Iain]

Hi Wolf,

Not an imitation in my opinion. Lee has kindly pointed me in the direction of this thread and sword:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...91&postcount=7

The style of the marks and inlays are exactly the same. Also the profile of the blade, when taking into consideration the shortened length and rounded tip, is very, very similar. I'll let Lee say more on his impressions, only I can say that I think it is earlier than the 1590 date on the cross mark in your illustrations (thanks for posting them by the way!).

Perhaps Hausa I agree, unfortunately I see no way right now to say if it not Tuareg, Hausa or something else.

Best,

Iain

[Wodimi]

Hi Iain,

if the cross mark is no imitation, will say an original mark, than it makes no sense to me, that the blade could be earlier than 1590. Why should a German (Solingen) blacksmith made his sign on the blade, if he don't made the blade. I think the people at that time are very proud for their work and would not made their mark on an older used blade, no no. The other way had happen, in the 15./16 Cent. there are German sword makers who copy for example this ball with a cross, a Swiss mark from the 10.Cent., but very famous for their quality.

It makes more sense, if the blade is not so old, that somebody later made this mark because this quality European blades had for sure a bigger value and the believe of the people maybe also more power with such (magic) signs. This you can read in documents from Henry Lhote and also Jean Gabus told so. That's the reason why I asked for your feeling, original or later attached mark.

The question Hausa or Tuareg......have you copper parts at your new beautiful sword? If not, it would be for me one point for Hausa origin, because Tuareg normal use all three materials, iron, brass and copper.

only some thoughts.

Merry Christmas to all
Wolf

[Iain]

Hi Wolf,

Probably we have a small misunderstanding. I am sure fairly sure it is an original mark and my understanding is this is an old symbol. I don't see why it could only be attributed to 1590? Are there any more details in your book you found the mark in? For example a photo of a blade from around 1590 with the mark? Its something like the running wolf maybe or the cross and orb, you can find many versions in different periods, so just because there is one match from 1590 doesn't mean it can't be the same mark older or newer - like you said copies of marks from the 10 or 11th centuries. There is also the question of the second mark, I cannot find very much information about it.

I am familiar with the practice of copied marks for talismanic value but I honestly don't think this is one of those cases. I am about 99% sure original.

So I agree it is not a mark that some smith put on an old blade, it is original to the blade.

No copper, but I have to say you don't always find copper. You can look at these two old swords from Louis-Pierre: http://blade.japet.com/takouba.htm these are absolutely Tuareg swords. So I am still not sure. It could also be from Bornu regions...

[Tim Simmons]

We could be getting uncomfortably close to Richard Widmark and "The Long Ships"?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Wodimi

Hi Iain,

if the cross mark is no imitation, will say an original mark, than it makes no sense to me, that the blade could be earlier than 1590. Why should a German (Solingen) blacksmith made his sign on the blade, if he don't made the blade. I think the people at that time are very proud for their work and would not made their mark on an older used blade, no no. The other way had happen, in the 15./16 Cent. there are German sword makers who copy for example this ball with a cross, a Swiss mark from the 10.Cent., but very famous for their quality.

It makes more sense, if the blade is not so old, that somebody later made this mark because this quality European blades had for sure a bigger value and the believe of the people maybe also more power with such (magic) signs. This you can read in documents from Henry Lhote and also Jean Gabus told so. That's the reason why I asked for your feeling, original or later attached mark.

The question Hausa or Tuareg......have you copper parts at your new beautiful sword? If not, it would be for me one point for Hausa origin, because Tuareg normal use all three materials, iron, brass and copper.

only some thoughts.

Merry Christmas to all
Wolf

While not relevant to the marking on this sword directly (though the cross enclosed withing a circle may be perceived as a variant I suppose)...I am intrigued by the observation that the cross and orb is a Swiss mark from the 10th century. The marking indeed was used by German makers, but I am wondering what Swiss makers this refers to.

I have been searching through references and finally found a comment in Briggs (1965) citing Henri Lhote, who in 1954 wrote "...the cross and orb originated as a Swiss mark applied to blades made in Vienne in France, which was widely copied by German armourers in 15th and 16th c. In point of fact it seems to have been essentially a German mark".
In another reference to work by Lhote, Briggs is curious as to how he arrived at the conclusion that copper and brass inlaid markings are proof that these had to have been added in Africa, as there was no tradition in Europe for this practice with these metals? There was, the term in Europe was 'latten' and the practice dates into the early centuries of blade production.

I am truly curious on 10th century use of the marks by the Swiss and if for the sake of accuracy we might know what references state this. I have been under the impression, much as Briggs apparantly, that these cross and orb marks were used by Solingen makers primarily.

[Iain]

Still doing as much reading as possible, but thanks to a kind chap on a more European oriented forum, I was pointed to this sword that Christies auctioned off. Mid 14th century, same type of cross, same type of incised lines. Similar blade profile.

http://www.armsandarmourforum.com/fo...der-the-hammer

A photo of the mark attached here as well for forum archives. There are other examples as well I am finding, some with the double circles as in this case.

In light of this, I can only say I think Lee (and Jim) have been spot on and I am quite happy about being able to realistically say I think my example should date mid to late 14th century.