Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Examples of later bastard sword hilts Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next 
Author Message
Anders Backlund




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: Sweden
Posts: 628
PostPosted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 12:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nathan Robinson wrote:
Random additions. Details unknown.


*squints* Is that first one as backsword?

The sword is an ode to the strife of mankind.

"This doesn't look easy... but I bet it is!"
-Homer Simpson.
View user's profile Send private message
Sean Flynt
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 12:56 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It is! Very interesting, but possibly not original.
-Sean

"Everywhere I have searched for peace and nowhere found it, except in a corner with a book"- Thomas a Kempis (d. 1471)
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Thu 28 Jul, 2011 7:21 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Sean Flynt wrote:
It is! Very interesting, but possibly not original.


Looks like a composite of parts, at best.

.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Sat 30 Jul, 2011 4:32 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I recently posted a topic asking for source of examples of this type and thought I should include it in this topic for the sake of posterity.






.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Evan G.




Usergroups: None

Location: Kentucky
Posts: 5
PostPosted: Fri 02 Sep, 2011 10:37 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nathan Robinson wrote:

A Fine German Hand-and-a-Half Sword, circa 1530
Note the "back of the hand" protection
Copyright Hessink's Auction House


Do you happen to have any information as to where that particular sword (or one of that style) may reside now? That's seriously one of the best looking swords I've ever seen. I especially like the back-of-the-hand guard, I don't think I've seen that before, and the complex hilt is really well done.
View user's profile Send private message
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Sat 03 Sep, 2011 1:07 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Evan G. wrote:
Do you happen to have any information as to where that particular sword (or one of that style) may reside now? That's seriously one of the best looking swords I've ever seen. I especially like the back-of-the-hand guard, I don't think I've seen that before, and the complex hilt is really well done.


There is one very close in the Rothenburg Collection.

See this topic.

.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Roger Hooper




Usergroups: 
Donating Members
Premier Members

Location: Northern California
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 2,027
PostPosted: Thu 09 Feb, 2012 12:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Here are a few more late bastards - photos from the Wallace Collection. I really like A492.

Edited to add - the published weight of 3.13 kg for A491 (almost 7 lbs.) must be wrong. It can't be that heavy.



 Attachment: 36.52 KB, Viewed: 4804 times
A482s.jpg
A482 - c. 1525 - length 99.8cm - 2.17kg

 Attachment: 43.4 KB, Viewed: 4804 times
A491s.jpg
A491 - c. 1615 - length 95.4cm - 3.13kg

 Attachment: 32.67 KB, Viewed: 4804 times
A492s.jpg
A492 - c. 1530 - length 103cm - 1.3kg


Last edited by Roger Hooper on Thu 09 Feb, 2012 6:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Thu 09 Feb, 2012 1:08 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Roger Hooper wrote:
Here are a few more late bastards - photos from the Wallace Collection. I really like A492.


I also like the A492 sword as well! I'd like to see a replica made of it. It's fantastic.

Longsword
Unknown Artist / Maker
Germany
c. 1530 - c. 1540 (pommel and guards (German))
probably late 16th century (blade)
Iron or steel, rope and leather, blackened
Length: 103.5 cm
Length: 17.5 cm, grip
Width: 2.8 cm
Weight: 1.3 kg
Inscription: 'SIGNOR' with a cross on both sides
A492
European Armoury I



 Attachment: 51.39 KB, Downloaded: 250 times
Longsword, A492
Copyright © The Wallace Collection
[ Download ]

.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Roger Hooper




Usergroups: 
Donating Members
Premier Members

Location: Northern California
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 2,027
PostPosted: Thu 09 Feb, 2012 1:37 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nathan Robinson wrote:


I also like the A492 sword as well! I'd like to see a replica made of it. It's fantastic.



I wonder where one can find more photos of the A492? - close-ups of the hilt, and a view of the other side. Perhaps the new Wallace Collection book + USB has multiple pictures of it.
View user's profile Send private message
Michael R. Black




PostPosted: Sat 11 Feb, 2012 8:20 am    Post subject: Type seventeen or nineteen?         Reply with quote

So, is there a consensus as to whether the first sword in this thread is a seventeen or a nineteen in type? I ask because I started a thread some time ago asking for examples of complex hilted type seventeen swords, and this sword from the V and A came up. However, the opinion at that time was it is probably a nineteen.

I had a chance to take a look in person when visiting London in September of last year, and the mid-section looked flatter to me than say, my replica Albion type 17. On the other hand the edges taper more acutely toward the point than I believe most type 19 sword would.

Any opinions?

Michael
View user's profile Send private message
Eric W. Norenberg




Usergroups: None

Location: Edmonds, Washington, U.S.A.
Posts: 210
PostPosted: Sat 11 Feb, 2012 9:43 am    Post subject: Re: Type seventeen or nineteen?         Reply with quote

Michael R. Black wrote:
So, is there a consensus as to whether the first sword in this thread is a seventeen or a nineteen in type? I ask because I started a thread some time ago asking for examples of complex hilted type seventeen swords, and this sword from the V and A came up. However, the opinion at that time was it is probably a nineteen.

I had a chance to take a look in person when visiting London in September of last year, and the mid-section looked flatter to me than say, my replica Albion type 17. On the other hand the edges taper more acutely toward the point than I believe most type 19 sword would.

Any opinions?

Michael


Hi Michael,
Oakeshott's typology is (as oft said) really more a framework, a topic-specific language, intended to provide a handy way to discuss these artifacts- rather than being a rigid set of boxes with labels into which every sword must fit one box better than another. Basically, don't loose sleep over a sword that seems like it ought to be a type XIX except for the fact that it tapers like a type XVII. For every sword that perfectly fits the description of one type, there is another that blends qualities of two or more types.

That said... Oakeshott's description of the XIX (and his chosen examples for illustration) seem to always have less profile taper than the typical type XVII - blade edges are usually almost parallel. The most significant bit, in my mind, tho', is the lack of ricasso. A short ricasso seems to be a universal feature on the XIX. Lacking that, the blade in question seems to me to pretty definitely not be a type XIX.
The entire piece is late enough to fall outside of the rather narrow time period that the type XVII was very popular in, but that alone doesn't disqualify the type. The Albion example you own is probably based on a range of surveyed artifacts and represents the essence of the type, as determined by the designers, by which I mean to say that a less robust cross section than your in-hand example doesn't disqualify it either.

My verrrrrry long way of saying - type XVII, that's my vote. But it sure is hilted like a lot of XIX's are, and how that came to be is something we will probably never know.

Vivat Orbium Phonographicorum Theca!!!
View user's profile Send private message
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Sat 11 Feb, 2012 10:49 am    Post subject: Re: Type seventeen or nineteen?         Reply with quote

Michael R. Black wrote:
So, is there a consensus as to whether the first sword in this thread is a seventeen or a nineteen in type? I ask because I started a thread some time ago asking for examples of complex hilted type seventeen swords, and this sword from the V and A came up. However, the opinion at that time was it is probably a nineteen.

I had a chance to take a look in person when visiting London in September of last year, and the mid-section looked flatter to me than say, my replica Albion type 17. On the other hand the edges taper more acutely toward the point than I believe most type 19 sword would.

Any opinions?

Michael


Michael,
I'd say it's not a XVII, if only because Oakeshott's typology covers medieval swords, not swords of this late date. Looking at info on the Type XVII blade family (like our Spotlight Article):

I wrote:
Blades on swords of this type, which were popular between 1355 and 1425, often possess a fuller in their upper third, though this is not a defining feature of the type. These blades can be slender and, in Oakeshott's words, "reminiscent of 16th century rapier blades" or they can be wider at the base, similar to other types of swords. No matter the width, they taper to an acute point.


It's easy to say it looks an awful lot like a Type XVII, except that it postdates the family by at least 3/4 of a century. Much of the Type XVII's fall into one of two families in terms of hilting (see Albion's Sempach and Landgraf as examples of the two). So it fits neither the normal dating for the blade type nor the most common hiltings. It also falls after the period Oakeshott's entire system focuses on.

So call it a XVII if you want, understanding you're applying a label that didn't exist in period and also a label meant to describe earlier swords.

But one could have a wicked repro made using Albion's XVII blade and a custom hilt. Happy

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric W. Norenberg




Usergroups: None

Location: Edmonds, Washington, U.S.A.
Posts: 210
PostPosted: Sun 12 Feb, 2012 2:27 pm    Post subject: Re: Type seventeen or nineteen?         Reply with quote

Chad Arnow wrote:

It's easy to say it looks an awful lot like a Type XVII, except that it postdates the family by at least 3/4 of a century. Much of the Type XVII's fall into one of two families in terms of hilting (see Albion's Sempach and Landgraf as examples of the two). So it fits neither the normal dating for the blade type nor the most common hiltings. It also falls after the period Oakeshott's entire system focuses on.

So call it a XVII if you want, understanding you're applying a label that didn't exist in period and also a label meant to describe earlier swords.


Hi Chad,
I'm going to respectfully (and cautiously, I know who wrote that feature article on the Oakeshott type XVII!) disagree with your thoughts on confining the Oakeshott typology to the medieval period - my layman's understanding was that the typology ended such that it did not cover developments that came after the post-medieval period (therefore no direct application to rapier and saber -type blades, nothing with parrying hooks, etc), but that, as an artificial (not used in period) construct intended to facilitate study and discussion, it ought to be valid for use on any blade that seems to fit the typology, regardless of date. The type XIX is a good example of this, its use ranging from the late 14th well into the 16th century (which might be post-medieval, depending on who you ask!), hilted to fit the form and function of the day.

But (and everybody I know has a big... well, you know)! You're absolutely right about this specific (XVII) type being out of place for the 16th C. Any thoughts on this being a remounted older blade? That's where my chips are.

Yours,
Eric

Vivat Orbium Phonographicorum Theca!!!
View user's profile Send private message
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Sun 12 Feb, 2012 4:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Type seventeen or nineteen?         Reply with quote

Eric W. Norenberg wrote:

Hi Chad,
I'm going to respectfully (and cautiously, I know who wrote that feature article on the Oakeshott type XVII!) disagree with your thoughts on confining the Oakeshott typology to the medieval period - my layman's understanding was that the typology ended such that it did not cover developments that came after the post-medieval period (therefore no direct application to rapier and saber -type blades, nothing with parrying hooks, etc), but that, as an artificial (not used in period) construct intended to facilitate study and discussion, it ought to be valid for use on any blade that seems to fit the typology, regardless of date. The type XIX is a good example of this, its use ranging from the late 14th well into the 16th century (which might be post-medieval, depending on who you ask!), hilted to fit the form and function of the day.



Eric,
Disagreement often sparks great discussion. Happy In Oakeshott's The Sword in the Age of Chivalry he notes "It [the typology] is for the straight, two-edged, cross-hilted sword of the kind which is generally (and very rightly, if somewhat romantically) called 'Knightly.'" Since this is compound hilted, that's a strike against applying the typology to it (though not a very good one as the hilt isn't too compound Happy ).

In Records of the Medieval Sword he says "...I had to take into account the the form of the whole sword, not just the hilt, because the only way to make a workable typology of these very variable swords dating between c. AD 1050-1510 was to use an aesthetic standard..." Group 1 of the typology (X-XIV) covers circa 1050-1350. Group 11 (XV+) covers circa 1350-1550, according to SAC.

Sure the V&A dates this to circa 1510 and Oakeshott covers to 1510 (ROTM) or 1550 (SAC). But it seems Oakeshott's intent was to make this for cruciform-hilted swords of the High Middle Ages.

But, yes, it is a tool for discussing parts (at least partly). But its usage needs to be as precise as we can make it. Calling the V&A sword a Type XVII is dangerous since it doesn't fit the dating or common hilting of the Type. Saying it "has a blade reminiscent of the earlier Type XVII" puts you on surer ground. That may seem like splitting hairs. But you could look at Masonic swords of the 20th century and find a place to put them into the typology if you tried. But simply labeling a Masonic sword as such doesn't take into account if it and a 15th century sword have any common origins and doesn't tell us much about either sword in general.

The point of the system is not to slap labels on things but to describe them and, better yet, place them into context. This sword doesn't fit the context of the Type XVII.

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mark T




PostPosted: Mon 13 Feb, 2012 2:22 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hi Eric,

Have you checked out Oakeshott's European Weapons and Armour: From the Renaissance to the Industrial Revolution? Helpful for late medieval/early renaissance blades ...

Chief Librarian/Curator, Isaac Leibowitz Librarmoury

Schallern sind sehr sexy!
View user's profile Send private message
Eric W. Norenberg




Usergroups: None

Location: Edmonds, Washington, U.S.A.
Posts: 210
PostPosted: Mon 13 Feb, 2012 10:46 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Chad,
I hadn't considered dating as being an inextricable component in contemplating blade type. Since Oakeshott has other taxonomies for hilt components, I figured it was fair to consider the blade typology as applying really only to the blade in it's physical form. But the extreme example you used (the Masonic sword) is, I think, quite right and proves your point. If a blade type is really tied to a finite time period and a number of discernible hilt styles (and they really all are, aren't they?) then calling this sword a type XVII is to misunderstand Oakeshott's system.

Mark,
Thank you for the recommendation - I am embarrassed to admit that I didn't know of the title you mentioned until I started mulling over Oakeshott's typology, as it might be applied to this particular sword. Now I have to spend more money on books (the horror...)!

Vivat Orbium Phonographicorum Theca!!!
View user's profile Send private message
Mark T




PostPosted: Mon 13 Feb, 2012 11:57 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hi Eric,

No problem! For me, that book is something of a 'missing link' ... or, at least, it picks up from where the others left off, chronologically, so is useful when thinking about later blades. It's a while since I looked at it, but from memory he gives some broad later typologies, based on hilt design than blade shape ... and that hilt designs expanded so quickly that any typology will only be very broadly indicative. So, it's a funny mix of both covering ground the other texts don't, while only feeling like a little taste ...

Chief Librarian/Curator, Isaac Leibowitz Librarmoury

Schallern sind sehr sexy!
View user's profile Send private message
Nat Lamb




Usergroups: None

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Likes: 1 page
Posts: 310
PostPosted: Thu 16 Feb, 2012 8:04 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nathan Robinson wrote:
Frankly, I'm in love with the first one in this topic:



I'd really enjoy seeing this recreated.





I have a far less experienced eye than other round these parts, but that sword (esp the hilt) looks very similar to the concept artwork for the "Hauptmann" sword on Albion's website. Certainly is a sweet looking combination.
View user's profile Send private message
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Thu 16 Feb, 2012 8:43 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nat Lamb wrote:
I have a far less experienced eye than other round these parts, but that sword (esp the hilt) looks very similar to the concept artwork for the "Hauptmann" sword on Albion's website. Certainly is a sweet looking combination.


Yup. Sounds good to me!

.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Bjorn Hagstrom




PostPosted: Tue 23 Apr, 2013 2:39 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nat Lamb wrote:
Nathan Robinson wrote:
Frankly, I'm in love with the first one in this topic:



I'd really enjoy seeing this recreated.





I have a far less experienced eye than other round these parts, but that sword (esp the hilt) looks very similar to the concept artwork for the "Hauptmann" sword on Albion's website. Certainly is a sweet looking combination.


Not too far from some of Lutel's offerings either:

http://www.lutel-handicraft.com/?p=productsMo...word-15020

They could probably make a great custom job with such a piece as well with a better suited blade.

There is nothing quite as sad as a one man conga-line...
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Examples of later bastard sword hilts
Page 3 of 4 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum



All contents © Copyright 2003-2013 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum