A late 16th century Dussack for comment

Tordenskiold1721 · 25th November 2016, 03:59 PM

Quote:

From a theoretical point of view the matter could be more complex with regard to the way the southern Germans weapon took to Norway. That both the Scottish and the Norwegian peasants could be equipped with such weapons. There is nothing known about it.

We do have archives confirming that delivery from 1589 up until around 1611(17) of this swords to Bergen in Norway. I will try to give a short as possible answer to your statement that I inter-pit as a question as there is a lot of details, dates numbers and archives documenting the below:

04 December 1604 King Christian IV passed a law "In The Book of Christian IV Norwegian law" detailing what type of arms the peasant militia must be armed with. There is also archives that confirms numbers and types of weapons in the different districts and areas of Norway. Based on this we know the Norwegian militia at Kringen 26 August must have been armed with Tessack's. We know pretty much in detail how the Norwegian militia was armed from 1604 based on the law passed making all Peasant part of the militia and their size of land and position / financial status details what type of arms they should carry. Inspections of the weaponry was done every Sunday outside Church where those that was not armed according the law of 1604 would be fined. This was a serious matter !!

If we want to approach this law from an academical angle it is probably Professor. Brandt literature from The Institute for Archaeology and History in Norway that is most detailed about the law it self as it is a modernization of the "Leidang" from the Viking age and early middle ages on arming and taxation for arming of the Kings "army".

Some of the literature you are referring to is unfortunately a bit outdated. The examples you show above from Sweden was collected by The Swedish national museum in Norway during the period Norway was part of Sweden 1814 - 1905. The Swedes took the "matter fairly easy" and mixed some of this weapons with Venetian Schiavona etc as you show in your literature. Just because it is written it is not necessarily always the truth...

On the Leidang law on arming and taxation for financing arms, later modified in Christian IV law for Norway 04 December 1604(The law leading to the Tessack and other arms being exported to Norway) :

Use google translate:

https://snl.no/leidang

Use google translate:

http://www.hf.uio.no/iakh/forskning/...ilder/chr4web/

Use google translate:

http://www.wikiwand.com/no/Tessak

So, we have the law(Document) and the archives that documents the Tessack's delivery to Norway and the documentation on what the law is built on. Date and numbers of delivery and inventories held in Church books and archives from districts.

What is correct in what you assume that there is nothing that confirms that the Scott's where armed with the Dussage, other than some examples in museums that is said to be captured at Kringen 26 August 1612 but this examples could be misgivings and actually weapons from the militia.

The term "Sinclair Sabre" could very well have come to be because the Tessack was the sword type used against the Scott's just as in Denmark and Norway certain types of swords are called "Schwedendegen" as they where intended to be used against the Sweds. There is a lot of literature on this but unfortunately not in the English language.

The good thing about history and antique weapons is when we Digg deep enough we find the answers or the right questions in most cases.

Here is one of my Tessak's with a Solingen blade that I bought from a Scottish dealer. We call this "A" type(Per Terje Norheims Typology) This hilt type is the most commonly found in Norway. We see this type with both straight and curved blades:

Jim McDougall · 25th November 2016, 05:16 PM

While I cannot add much to the connoisseur's discussion on wines (most wine I ever drink is from a box

)....I can clarify that my note on corrections was toward the fact that I often correct myself as new findings or comments from others provide more compelling evidence. In my view that is all part of learning and sharing information.
Personally I think it is good to allow a wide berth where interactions involve cultural and linguistic differences.

Getting back to this valuable and constructive discussion on the 'Sinclair sabre' case, thank you gentlemen for the additional notes and references.

Again, it remains inconclusive on whether or not any tessaks were among the Scots ranks in this unfortunate event at Kringen in 1612. References as noted, suggest that the Scots were 'lightly' armed as they expected to receive more arms upon arrival in Sweden.
It is clear that as a matter of record, the tessaks were used by the Norwegian forces at this time, and these had been supplied from Germany.

I think that the examples of these swords in the museum being among battlefield debris after Kringen may be labeled as from the Scottish forces as a typical assumption, perhaps supporting tacitly the 'Sinclair' legacy.
It is noted that the Scots did have some basket hilts, and while curved blade types were known ('turcael'), it does not seem that these troops' swords had those, nor that one of these tessaks would have been confused with such examples.

The only, and tenuous, explanation for the possibility of tessaks being among the Scottish forces would be that they had long prior been quite familiar with the Norwegian regions where they landed. In fact, Sinclair's heritage and ancestry had come from these areas, and it seems odd that the Scots were sided with Sweden. With that history of contact, it is tempting to consider that the tessak was at least somewhat known to the Scots prior to 1612, and perhaps some had been diffused to Scotland in degree.

Getting back to the association of the tessak to the Kringen battle by the Sinclair moniker, again, that was strictly a romanticly oriented case commemorating Sinclair due to his peerage and connections to Norway.
It would seem that the term presumed the Scots were actually armed with these.

The idea that the term would have been given to these swords from the intent to use them against Sinclair, in the manner of the swords termed to schwedendegen does not seem likely to me. The use of such colloquial terms for a weapon may apply more broadly as toward the Swedes as noted, but not likely toward a past event or a vanquished leader.

Tordenskiold1721 · 25th November 2016, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The idea that the term would have been given to these swords from the intent to use them against Sinclair, in the manner of the swords termed to schwedendegen does not seem likely to me. The use of such colloquial terms for a weapon may apply more broadly as toward the Swedes as noted, but not likely toward a past event or a vanquished leader.

I think you summarize it all very well.

I would like to see more examples of the Dussack's used in the low countries and know more about by who and when they where introduced and who used them for what purpose as this type seemingly originates from Styria, Southern Germany, today Austria and some parts of today Northern Italy. Before spreading in central Europe and Northern Europe.

More photos of good examples like Jean's would be great to see !!

.

cornelistromp · 26th November 2016, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tordenskiold1721

I think you summarize it all very well.

I would like to see more examples of the Dussack's used in the low countries and know more about by who and when they where introduced and who used them for what purpose as this type seemingly originates from Styria, Southern Germany, today Austria and some parts of today Northern Italy. Before spreading in central Europe and Northern Europe.

More photos of good examples like Jean's would be great to see !!

.

on nomenclatur weapons often kept their original name after being exported.
early basket hilts 1550-1580 in german language pferdemaulkorb-gefaess swedish Mulekorgs-fæste.
later dussage and variations thereof, probably derived from the( tjech?) word dusaken, an early form of steel alone.

schwedendegen the term refers to me to a later Type Felddegen around 1640, a kind of early Walloon type. see attcachement
the weapon count (Våpenting) you mentioned went over a long period of time over 150 years.

Are there early records known just after 1604 where these swords are described and was the term schwedendegen known before 1640 ?

I will later post some examples of basket hilts which I believe originated in the Netherlands

best,
Jasper

cornelistromp · 28th November 2016, 10:49 AM

for early possible Dutch basket hilt form see

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ht=basket+hilt post #135

P. Norheim Type C.
there was a type C sword with a Dutch name in the blade in the Visser collection and several baskets only of this type have been found in the Netherlands, probably spare parts or perhaps this type was assembled in the Netherlands.

best,
Jasper

picture copyright by Carl koppeschaar

cornelistromp · 29th November 2016, 08:38 AM

the dussage of post 1 and below dussage 1570/80 are both of type F ( Norheim -Army museum's Yearbook 1971 ?), nevertheless there are significant differences in the hilt design.

the dussage of #1 has an open structure hilt design, such as the earliest examples, and small protective plate with two additional bars at each side of the plate.
later developed, these 2 bars and plate were probably replaced by a bigger shell plate, as below example. therefor the dussage of post #1 can be dated a little earlier.

a classification of its own for the type dussage of #1 instead of placing it as a subtype under F could be justified.

best,

Cerjak · 29th November 2016, 04:59 PM

Jasper,
This beautiful dussage would fit much better with his sister in a French collection than in your collection.
The three together would make a nice set And I don’t have Dussage sabre !

Best
Jean-Luc

28th November 2016, 10:49 AM	#5
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	for early possible Dutch basket hilt form see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ht=basket+hilt post #135 P. Norheim Type C. there was a type C sword with a Dutch name in the blade in the Visser collection and several baskets only of this type have been found in the Netherlands, probably spare parts or perhaps this type was assembled in the Netherlands. best, Jasper picture copyright by Carl koppeschaar Attached Images

29th November 2016, 08:38 AM	#6
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	the dussage of post 1 and below dussage 1570/80 are both of type F ( Norheim -Army museum's Yearbook 1971 ?), nevertheless there are significant differences in the hilt design. the dussage of #1 has an open structure hilt design, such as the earliest examples, and small protective plate with two additional bars at each side of the plate. later developed, these 2 bars and plate were probably replaced by a bigger shell plate, as below example. therefor the dussage of post #1 can be dated a little earlier. a classification of its own for the type dussage of #1 instead of placing it as a subtype under F could be justified. best, Attached Images Last edited by cornelistromp; 29th November 2016 at 08:50 AM.

29th November 2016, 04:59 PM	#7
Cerjak Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: FRANCE Posts: 1,065	Jasper, This beautiful dussage would fit much better with his sister in a French collection than in your collection. The three together would make a nice set And I don’t have Dussage sabre ! Best Jean-Luc Attached Images

25th November 2016, 05:16 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,467	While I cannot add much to the connoisseur's discussion on wines (most wine I ever drink is from a box )....I can clarify that my note on corrections was toward the fact that I often correct myself as new findings or comments from others provide more compelling evidence. In my view that is all part of learning and sharing information. Personally I think it is good to allow a wide berth where interactions involve cultural and linguistic differences. Getting back to this valuable and constructive discussion on the 'Sinclair sabre' case, thank you gentlemen for the additional notes and references. Again, it remains inconclusive on whether or not any tessaks were among the Scots ranks in this unfortunate event at Kringen in 1612. References as noted, suggest that the Scots were 'lightly' armed as they expected to receive more arms upon arrival in Sweden. It is clear that as a matter of record, the tessaks were used by the Norwegian forces at this time, and these had been supplied from Germany. I think that the examples of these swords in the museum being among battlefield debris after Kringen may be labeled as from the Scottish forces as a typical assumption, perhaps supporting tacitly the 'Sinclair' legacy. It is noted that the Scots did have some basket hilts, and while curved blade types were known ('turcael'), it does not seem that these troops' swords had those, nor that one of these tessaks would have been confused with such examples. The only, and tenuous, explanation for the possibility of tessaks being among the Scottish forces would be that they had long prior been quite familiar with the Norwegian regions where they landed. In fact, Sinclair's heritage and ancestry had come from these areas, and it seems odd that the Scots were sided with Sweden. With that history of contact, it is tempting to consider that the tessak was at least somewhat known to the Scots prior to 1612, and perhaps some had been diffused to Scotland in degree. Getting back to the association of the tessak to the Kringen battle by the Sinclair moniker, again, that was strictly a romanticly oriented case commemorating Sinclair due to his peerage and connections to Norway. It would seem that the term presumed the Scots were actually armed with these. The idea that the term would have been given to these swords from the intent to use them against Sinclair, in the manner of the swords termed to schwedendegen does not seem likely to me. The use of such colloquial terms for a weapon may apply more broadly as toward the Swedes as noted, but not likely toward a past event or a vanquished leader.