Scottish Ribbon Hilt Sword. Maker info

boberl · 3rd October 2015, 12:54 AM

I have just joined this forum because I saw Templarnight's ribbon hilt last weekend. I have its twin brother or at least a kissin' cousin.
The only significant difference I can see, aside from the decorative piercing is that while his blade has the name Peter Knaupf, mine has the unbiquitous Andria Ferara, along with armourer's marks of an arc with three stars at each end on both sides of the blade.
The dimensions are nearly identical. It suggests that these swords, at the least, came out of the same shop.
I believe they are late in the ribbon hilt series based on the ring that joins the arms of the guards under the pommel. I have an earlier ribbon hilt in which the joining piece is simply a thin piece of iron.
The welding of the plates inside is very well done and all but invisible on the outside.
Most of my swords are on a thread on SFI started by Cathey Brimage, who also launched one here. Cathey, Eljay Erickson and I have been posting swords there are the last few months.
I saw some beautiful pieces on the thread on this forum, which Cathey was also involved in. Hope we can all share the goodies.

boberl · 9th July 2018, 07:12 PM

Sorry not to have posted this warning sooner.

After studying my sword closely and comparing it with known authentic ribbon hilts I concluded that it was a beautifully made reproduction.

I returned it to the dealer who did not dispute my conclusions. I learned very recently that it was sold on to another collector to whom I have explained my reasoning.

First, it is simply more than coincidental to find two swords, purportedly made in the 17th Century, with the names of different makers -- one of whom is unknown -- that are identical in every respect.

Second, it is also more than coincidental that neither sword shows any marks of use, no dings or dents, which a real ribbon hilt has in abundance.

Handling the one sword in comparison with other, authentic, swords offers the "feeling" that it just isn't right.

I learned later that my sword came through an English dealer who has a reputation for distributing iffy pieces.

In my case at least its purchase was a matter of enthusiasm overcoming good sense because my firm belief now is that both swords were not made in the 1600s but in the late 1900s or early 2000s.

colin henshaw · 11th July 2018, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boberl

Sorry not to have posted this warning sooner.

After studying my sword closely and comparing it with known authentic ribbon hilts I concluded that it was a beautifully made reproduction.

I returned it to the dealer who did not dispute my conclusions. I learned very recently that it was sold on to another collector to whom I have explained my reasoning.

First, it is simply more than coincidental to find two swords, purportedly made in the 17th Century, with the names of different makers -- one of whom is unknown -- that are identical in every respect.

Second, it is also more than coincidental that neither sword shows any marks of use, no dings or dents, which a real ribbon hilt has in abundance.

Handling the one sword in comparison with other, authentic, swords offers the "feeling" that it just isn't right.

I learned later that my sword came through an English dealer who has a reputation for distributing iffy pieces.

In my case at least its purchase was a matter of enthusiasm overcoming good sense because my firm belief now is that both swords were not made in the 1600s but in the late 1900s or early 2000s.

Interesting. Not my area, but I've always admired Scottish broadswords and backswords. The two swords illustrated in this thread seem in an unusually good state of preservation compared to examples I have seen in museums. Looking forward to reading what other forumites with more knowledge have to say...

Roland_M · 11th July 2018, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boberl

Second, it is also more than coincidental that neither sword shows any marks of use, no dings or dents, which a real ribbon hilt has in abundance.

Yes, the absence of any marks of fighting on a battlefield-sword, which is no parade-sword or so, is always a warning sign.

These blades were made for combat, not as a wallhanger and no one in the past would have bought such a blade for collecting, this is like buying a Ford Escort as a collectors piece nowadays.

All of my authentic swords have more or less prominent traces of combat.

But I also have to say, the the artificial aging job on the two blades is awesome. The only thing that is strange is the total absence of black pitting.

Roland

Lee · 11th July 2018, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boberl

...I concluded that it was a beautifully made reproduction.

I have two 'Scottish' swords that I suspect are from the same forger as the one you presented; I believe he is called the 'Birmingham maker.' They fooled more than one expert and the collector who ultimately called them out suggested I just put them in an auction to recover my money, but I have chosen instead to use them as decorators on my wall, along with some other 'mistakes' I have made along the way as reminders.

Scottish swords are an even more treacherous minefield than medieval swords.

It takes courage to admit that one's self has been fooled, even if transiently, and I commend you.

midelburgo · 12th July 2018, 12:03 PM

Not just Scottish swords, also schiavonas, katzbalgers, dusaks, ritterschwerts from 1600 and walloon swords. This workshop touched everything. There was a post about them in swordforum. In 2009 maybe. I have tried with the search engine to no avail.

Very nice replicas, that handled also beautifully.

Taken one by one they did not raise suspicions, but as a group they did. A similar level of damage. Similar thread at the grips and turknots, very clear marks, sometimes repeated, same file marks. I got a Ritterschwert in 2005 that was sold to me as a Victorian replica. But I think the workshop was still working in the 2000s, maybe in East Europe. There were many connections to a Birmingham dealer, at a time he was selling a couple of these swords a month. And the level of damage was being increased. I was collecting the pictures and there was something sniffy there. If they are still active and have corrected their mistakes, you need short of metallographic techniques to find out.

Lee · 13th July 2018, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by midelburgo

Not just Scottish swords, also ... This workshop touched everything.

That does not surprise me. In the case of my examples, I never really suspected the first and after an experienced collector 'passed' it, I bought another from the same dealer and finding a few too many coincidences soon the seeds of suspicion began to sprout. I think that the blades on both of mine are actually good old German blades, but were taken from a sword of a style with less market value (so the greatest tragedy is if something genuine was vandalized rather than old dismounted blades merely remounted). One fell the other day when I was rehanging it and it remained standing upright after the tip buried over a half of an inch into wooden flooring. A good strong pull and it was free and there was no trace of any damage to the tip.

Cathey · 15th July 2018, 09:49 AM

Hi Bob, good to hear from you.

With regard to your ribbon hilt, of course I don’t have the luxury of having actually held your sword; however you may have been a little hasty believing it to be a fake. Often hilts and blades where of different manufacture and SOLINGEN was certainly a prolific blade maker at the time. Solingen also routinely added FARARA to their blades destined for the Scottish market. Hilts of this latter Ribbon hilt style do all look almost identical and it is reasonable to believe that if they came from the same maker this would be the case.

However, this being said, the feel of the sword is hard to ignore, if it doesn’t feel right in the hand or if the blade is un-tempered then it may well be a pretender. I am relieved to hear the dealer took it back as I know once you have any doubt over a piece it is hard to live with. Lack of evidence of use might just mean that, this sword saw little or no action. These larger blades are also pretty robust; those in my collection are in similarly good condition, lacking the usual nicks etc.

I have been unable to find a Peter KNAVFF or KNAVEE in any of my references and if someone was going to add a fake maker, I would have thought they would have picked one who is easily identified and/or more desirable. The grip on both of these is obviously a latter replacement, but again given the age this is also not unusual and swords passed down through generations would require some upgrades if still in use.

I have two ribbon hilts which I will post, one early version and another similar to the ones posted here, although mine has had a much harder life. The hilt has a period replacement pommel from a rapier and someone has added to the collar to fit the wrong pommel. Very sad, but I have left it as is at this stage. This sword feels absolutely wonderful in the hand, very light and balanced.

It is so sad the Baron of Earlshall has passed away, it would have been wonderful to get his thoughts on these swords. I was fortunate that he had already given mine the thumbs up, although he really hated the rapier pommel sitting on top of a Beak Neb as he called them.

Cheers Cathey and Rex

3rd October 2015, 12:54 AM	#1
boberl Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 2	Twin brothers, or at least Kissin' Cousins I have just joined this forum because I saw Templarnight's ribbon hilt last weekend. I have its twin brother or at least a kissin' cousin. The only significant difference I can see, aside from the decorative piercing is that while his blade has the name Peter Knaupf, mine has the unbiquitous Andria Ferara, along with armourer's marks of an arc with three stars at each end on both sides of the blade. The dimensions are nearly identical. It suggests that these swords, at the least, came out of the same shop. I believe they are late in the ribbon hilt series based on the ring that joins the arms of the guards under the pommel. I have an earlier ribbon hilt in which the joining piece is simply a thin piece of iron. The welding of the plates inside is very well done and all but invisible on the outside. Most of my swords are on a thread on SFI started by Cathey Brimage, who also launched one here. Cathey, Eljay Erickson and I have been posting swords there are the last few months. I saw some beautiful pieces on the thread on this forum, which Cathey was also involved in. Hope we can all share the goodies. Attached Images

9th July 2018, 07:12 PM	#2
boberl Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 2	Fake Sorry not to have posted this warning sooner. After studying my sword closely and comparing it with known authentic ribbon hilts I concluded that it was a beautifully made reproduction. I returned it to the dealer who did not dispute my conclusions. I learned very recently that it was sold on to another collector to whom I have explained my reasoning. First, it is simply more than coincidental to find two swords, purportedly made in the 17th Century, with the names of different makers -- one of whom is unknown -- that are identical in every respect. Second, it is also more than coincidental that neither sword shows any marks of use, no dings or dents, which a real ribbon hilt has in abundance. Handling the one sword in comparison with other, authentic, swords offers the "feeling" that it just isn't right. I learned later that my sword came through an English dealer who has a reputation for distributing iffy pieces. In my case at least its purchase was a matter of enthusiasm overcoming good sense because my firm belief now is that both swords were not made in the 1600s but in the late 1900s or early 2000s.

15th July 2018, 09:49 AM	#8
Cathey Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: adelaide south australia Posts: 284	Beak Ned Swords (Ribbon Hilts) Hi Bob, good to hear from you. With regard to your ribbon hilt, of course I don’t have the luxury of having actually held your sword; however you may have been a little hasty believing it to be a fake. Often hilts and blades where of different manufacture and SOLINGEN was certainly a prolific blade maker at the time. Solingen also routinely added FARARA to their blades destined for the Scottish market. Hilts of this latter Ribbon hilt style do all look almost identical and it is reasonable to believe that if they came from the same maker this would be the case. However, this being said, the feel of the sword is hard to ignore, if it doesn’t feel right in the hand or if the blade is un-tempered then it may well be a pretender. I am relieved to hear the dealer took it back as I know once you have any doubt over a piece it is hard to live with. Lack of evidence of use might just mean that, this sword saw little or no action. These larger blades are also pretty robust; those in my collection are in similarly good condition, lacking the usual nicks etc. I have been unable to find a Peter KNAVFF or KNAVEE in any of my references and if someone was going to add a fake maker, I would have thought they would have picked one who is easily identified and/or more desirable. The grip on both of these is obviously a latter replacement, but again given the age this is also not unusual and swords passed down through generations would require some upgrades if still in use. I have two ribbon hilts which I will post, one early version and another similar to the ones posted here, although mine has had a much harder life. The hilt has a period replacement pommel from a rapier and someone has added to the collar to fit the wrong pommel. Very sad, but I have left it as is at this stage. This sword feels absolutely wonderful in the hand, very light and balanced. It is so sad the Baron of Earlshall has passed away, it would have been wonderful to get his thoughts on these swords. I was fortunate that he had already given mine the thumbs up, although he really hated the rapier pommel sitting on top of a Beak Neb as he called them. Cheers Cathey and Rex Attached Images

12th July 2018, 12:03 PM	#6
midelburgo Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 264	Not just Scottish swords, also schiavonas, katzbalgers, dusaks, ritterschwerts from 1600 and walloon swords. This workshop touched everything. There was a post about them in swordforum. In 2009 maybe. I have tried with the search engine to no avail. Very nice replicas, that handled also beautifully. Taken one by one they did not raise suspicions, but as a group they did. A similar level of damage. Similar thread at the grips and turknots, very clear marks, sometimes repeated, same file marks. I got a Ritterschwert in 2005 that was sold to me as a Victorian replica. But I think the workshop was still working in the 2000s, maybe in East Europe. There were many connections to a Birmingham dealer, at a time he was selling a couple of these swords a month. And the level of damage was being increased. I was collecting the pictures and there was something sniffy there. If they are still active and have corrected their mistakes, you need short of metallographic techniques to find out.