Firangi

Kubur · 5th May 2020, 07:51 AM

Ariel,
I agree with all the points that you developed above.
My points were:
Portuguese and Venetians were not friends and not business partners.
The 16th c. trade is much more complicated than the 19th c. colonial trade.
It was not White Europeans and the others.
BTW you have a very nice Indian sword!
As it was said by Jim these marks are not necessarily Italians.

Lee · 5th May 2020, 11:31 AM

I have shown this firangi in previous threads, noting that I believed the blade to be of European origin on the basis of its flexibility, presence of 'blisters' (forging flaws) and marks in the fuller (unfortunately rubbed beyond being deciphered).

Since then I have had the opportunity to make a few elemental evaluations by XRF and found that the blade proper shows measurable traces of manganese and sulfur, while the stiffener (presumably of 'local' Indian origin) does not show detectable traces of these two elements. Lesser distinctions were seen for some other elements.

fernando · 5th May 2020, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

... My points were:
Portuguese and Venetians were not friends and not business partners.
The 16th c. trade is much more complicated than the 19th c. colonial trade.
It was not White Europeans and the others...

You are right in that the competition was dealt in a different mode; but not necessarily tougher or trickier than in the XIX century. Money rules remain in privilege... and merchants have a blind sight for politics. You will read that many a time both adversaries fought (and fight) with weapons of same provenance.
Still your source is not far from the truth in that:

" Initially, after the arrival of Vasco da Gama in Calicut in 1498, the Portuguese only intended to establish their economic dominance, having created several factories in Cochin, Cananor, Coulão, Cranganor, Tanor and Calecute. However, feeling the hostility on the part of several Indian kingdoms and other potentates (the Grand Sultan of Cairo, the Republic of Venice, the Sultan of Cambaia and the Samorin of Calicut), who allied themselves to expel them from India, ended up for making Portuguese rule official, strengthening the factories and creating a sovereign state (Goa, 1512)".

And we can add that the dance of power was in favor of Genoese long before that:

" In 1317 D. Dinis made an agreement with the navigator and Genoese merchant Manuel Pessanha (Emanuele Pessagno), appointing him the first admiral of the royal fleet with commercial privileges with his country, in exchange for twenty ships and their crews, in order to defend the country's coasts against (Muslim) piracy attacks, laying the foundations of the Portuguese Navy and for the establishment of a Genoese merchant community in Portugal. Forced to reduce their activities in the Black Sea, merchants in the Republic of Genoa had turned to the North African trade for wheat, oil (also a source of energy) and gold - sailing to the ports of Bruges (Flanders) and England. The Genoese and Florentines then settled in Portugal, which profited from the initiative and financial experience of these rivals of the Republic of Venice."
In 1453, with the taking of Constantinople by the Ottomans, trade in the Mediterranean between Venice and Genoa was very low. The benefit of an alternative commercial route proved to be rewarding. Portugal would directly link the spice-producing regions to its markets in Europe. When the project for the discovery of the sea route to India was signed, Portuguese expansion without forgetting the religious aspect is also dominated by commercial interest ...

fernando · 5th May 2020, 01:24 PM

Jim, indeed the sickle/eyelash symbol is not necessarliy Genoese. In fact, and observing (as quoted) Boccia & Coelho's work, we notice that the largest number of those pictured are Venetian (or Veneto); only one from Beluno and another from Genova. But far from such little 'inconsistence', how would we compare rustic marks made in massive trade blades with those perfectly engraved in fine weapons signed by master smiths; unless we judge them as counterfeits ... and hardly rely on them as being their true geographic origin.

.

Jim McDougall · 6th May 2020, 07:26 PM

As mentioned in the original post, and with the nice example of Indian basket hilt sword, there has been a notable absence of Indian swords of late. With that it seems terminology and classification debates always ensue, with the term FIRANGI being one of the key topics.

In this case, we have focused on the blade markings, which resemble the well known 'sickle' (eyelash, hogs back etc.) type which occur often on blades from numerous sources. As I previously mentioned, early writers typically regarded these as having originated in Genoa, while they actually occurred on blades from other North Italian centers as well, and collectively used variations. There were examples which had the name GENOA actually bracketed by the sickle marks, further fueling the classification as Genoan.

In "Armi Bianch Italiene" (Boccia & Coelho), this most important reference is basically a catalogue which presents many weapon examples from various sources and holdings. As noted, many of the examples' markings are variations of the 'sickle' type, and indeed from Venice...without consulting my copy, I believe there were other locations shown with such marks as well.

Mostly, the 'Genoan' attribution I would consider a generally held notion derived from the case of these Genoan ports and stations being the source of many trade blades, which often bore these type markings.

In time artificers in other locations began spuriously copying these marks, most often the dentated arcs typically seen with three dots at each end of the arcs. In East Europe, these often bracketed the FRINGIA term; and these often are seen in variation on Styrian swords, with Solingen also using them to bracket terms such as ANDREA FERARA.

Having noted all of this, and returning to the topic of the classification 'firangi' and assessment of examples in order to warrant such classification, here we are viewing the markings on this blade as one means of doing this.

It is difficult at best to assess a sword blade to determine whether it is European or a native made example by photos, but the excellent entry by Lee using the metallurgic approach is one viable means.

As suggested, with the preponderance of markings on blades, especially trade blades, there is a degree of fallibility in using these as a determining factor for the geographic origin of blade manufacture. However, making observations on the character of a marking offers some insights based on the method of application and execution, content and positioning of such marks.

In many cases of spurious markings, they are often detected as such by superfluous or incongruent other markings which accompany them. The German use of famed Spanish markings accompanied by other marks which would never have been paired, as well as misspellings etc. is one case in point.

I just wanted to add this perspective with regard to methods used in which to assess 'firangi' blade. In one closing point I must remind that the term 'firangi' is just that, a term denoting in general 'foreign' (blade) and used mostly in collectors parlance. It is not a sword 'type' but more accurately describes a swords 'condition' (that is with foreign blade). Though technically it CAN be applied to many sword types (Indian, with foreign blades), it is typically limited to the Hindu basket hilt form.

ariel · 7th May 2020, 02:03 AM

Jim,
I understand your points, but having handled a lot of Indian blades I am virtually certain that the blade is European.
I do not think I have seen such wide and shallow Fuller on Indian blades and the general appearance of the steel, its sheen, are distinctly not Indian. Together with markings it supports the European origin. And, yes, we cannot pinpoint the origin of the blade other than a general feeling of North Italy.

Jim McDougall · 7th May 2020, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Jim,
I understand your points, but having handled a lot of Indian blades I am virtually certain that the blade is European.
I do not think I have seen such wide and shallow Fuller on Indian blades and the general appearance of the steel, its sheen, are distinctly not Indian. Together with markings it supports the European origin. And, yes, we cannot pinpoint the origin of the blade other than a general feeling of North Italy.

I am really glad my points are understood, from my opinion in post #12 indicating I thought the blade was European (North Italian) as well as my subsequent posts supporting that. I am unclear on where I am to have suggested the blade was Indian.

ariel · 7th May 2020, 08:06 AM

Jim,
I have interpreted your saying “It is difficult at best to assess a sword blade to determine whether it is European or a native made example by photo” as such. Obviously, it was my mistake. Glad we are in agreement.

5th May 2020, 11:31 AM	#2
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 937	Technical confirmation of suspicions I have shown this firangi in previous threads, noting that I believed the blade to be of European origin on the basis of its flexibility, presence of 'blisters' (forging flaws) and marks in the fuller (unfortunately rubbed beyond being deciphered). Since then I have had the opportunity to make a few elemental evaluations by XRF and found that the blade proper shows measurable traces of manganese and sulfur, while the stiffener (presumably of 'local' Indian origin) does not show detectable traces of these two elements. Lesser distinctions were seen for some other elements. Attached Images

5th May 2020, 01:24 PM	#4
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Jim, indeed the sickle/eyelash symbol is not necessarliy Genoese. In fact, and observing (as quoted) Boccia & Coelho's work, we notice that the largest number of those pictured are Venetian (or Veneto); only one from Beluno and another from Genova. But far from such little 'inconsistence', how would we compare rustic marks made in massive trade blades with those perfectly engraved in fine weapons signed by master smiths; unless we judge them as counterfeits ... and hardly rely on them as being their true geographic origin. . Attached Images

6th May 2020, 07:26 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	As mentioned in the original post, and with the nice example of Indian basket hilt sword, there has been a notable absence of Indian swords of late. With that it seems terminology and classification debates always ensue, with the term FIRANGI being one of the key topics. In this case, we have focused on the blade markings, which resemble the well known 'sickle' (eyelash, hogs back etc.) type which occur often on blades from numerous sources. As I previously mentioned, early writers typically regarded these as having originated in Genoa, while they actually occurred on blades from other North Italian centers as well, and collectively used variations. There were examples which had the name GENOA actually bracketed by the sickle marks, further fueling the classification as Genoan. In "Armi Bianch Italiene" (Boccia & Coelho), this most important reference is basically a catalogue which presents many weapon examples from various sources and holdings. As noted, many of the examples' markings are variations of the 'sickle' type, and indeed from Venice...without consulting my copy, I believe there were other locations shown with such marks as well. Mostly, the 'Genoan' attribution I would consider a generally held notion derived from the case of these Genoan ports and stations being the source of many trade blades, which often bore these type markings. In time artificers in other locations began spuriously copying these marks, most often the dentated arcs typically seen with three dots at each end of the arcs. In East Europe, these often bracketed the FRINGIA term; and these often are seen in variation on Styrian swords, with Solingen also using them to bracket terms such as ANDREA FERARA. Having noted all of this, and returning to the topic of the classification 'firangi' and assessment of examples in order to warrant such classification, here we are viewing the markings on this blade as one means of doing this. It is difficult at best to assess a sword blade to determine whether it is European or a native made example by photos, but the excellent entry by Lee using the metallurgic approach is one viable means. As suggested, with the preponderance of markings on blades, especially trade blades, there is a degree of fallibility in using these as a determining factor for the geographic origin of blade manufacture. However, making observations on the character of a marking offers some insights based on the method of application and execution, content and positioning of such marks. In many cases of spurious markings, they are often detected as such by superfluous or incongruent other markings which accompany them. The German use of famed Spanish markings accompanied by other marks which would never have been paired, as well as misspellings etc. is one case in point. I just wanted to add this perspective with regard to methods used in which to assess 'firangi' blade. In one closing point I must remind that the term 'firangi' is just that, a term denoting in general 'foreign' (blade) and used mostly in collectors parlance. It is not a sword 'type' but more accurately describes a swords 'condition' (that is with foreign blade). Though technically it CAN be applied to many sword types (Indian, with foreign blades), it is typically limited to the Hindu basket hilt form. Attached Images Last edited by Jim McDougall; 6th May 2020 at 08:08 PM.

5th May 2020, 07:51 AM	#1
Kubur Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,145	Ariel, I agree with all the points that you developed above. My points were: Portuguese and Venetians were not friends and not business partners. The 16th c. trade is much more complicated than the 19th c. colonial trade. It was not White Europeans and the others. BTW you have a very nice Indian sword! As it was said by Jim these marks are not necessarily Italians.

7th May 2020, 02:03 AM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Jim, I understand your points, but having handled a lot of Indian blades I am virtually certain that the blade is European. I do not think I have seen such wide and shallow Fuller on Indian blades and the general appearance of the steel, its sheen, are distinctly not Indian. Together with markings it supports the European origin. And, yes, we cannot pinpoint the origin of the blade other than a general feeling of North Italy.

7th May 2020, 08:06 AM	#8
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Jim, I have interpreted your saying “It is difficult at best to assess a sword blade to determine whether it is European or a native made example by photo” as such. Obviously, it was my mistake. Glad we are in agreement.