![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 607
|
![]()
Anthony Tirri's book on Islamic weapons doesn't have any weapons with a similar grip.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 607
|
![]()
Jim, here's what a WWII Patton-bladed dagger looks like. There are variations, this particular one is by Anderson.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,510
|
![]()
Hi Dmitry,
Thanks very much for the photos......looks like a cast bayonet hilt. Not exactly a Fairburn-Sykes ![]() All the best, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,184
|
![]()
www.apacheria.com/images/ew204.jpg
www.apacheria.com/images/ew204b.jpg www.apacheria.com/images/ew204c.jpg OK, so is this Spanish/Mexican colonial work? It sure looks like later 19th century Mex piece to me, complete with classic hilt shape and 3 barred guard. Forgot to mention that it is listed as a Mex sword on the website. Note the turned quillon on this piece and how it compares to mine. I have since seen another late-Mex piece in an old Fagan catalog that likewise had some type of tin/nickol wrap-around. Gaudy-looking, but an espada, none-the-less. Likewise, I have been pouring through web-sites and our onw forum, ut have yet to encounter a W. African sword with a hilt like mine. This isn't a pride-thing, I assure you. I'm neutral on it's origin, I just want some closure!! ( ![]() ![]() ![]() Last edited by M ELEY; 8th January 2010 at 12:48 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,184
|
![]()
Bump. Anyone? Does this sword I posted lend some credence to Mex/Colonial Spanish or is there any proof that this new posting is ALSO of W African origin?? Note how even the D-guard grip are similar.
Here's another Mex sword with the same curve to the quillon, similar to the one on mine- www.ambroseantiques.com/swords/mexican.htm Last edited by M ELEY; 9th January 2010 at 08:07 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,510
|
![]()
Hi Mark,
Well theres another interesting example! Again, this looks very much like the makeshift work representing established traditional sword types in Mexico, but post colonial period. Sabres similar to these are described in the Adams article on espada anchas as 'round tang' espadas, and they typically had multibar guards ('gavilan'). The blade on this is of espada ancha type but later, along with the very modern elements on the hilt with copper and aluminum. It is not hard to imagine West Africa brought into the picture with some of these types of one off pieces which are all the more difficult to identify as there are seldom parallel items with which to compare them. Without actual handling of these, by appearance they have typological characteristics of the Mexican espadas, but the very modern components create concerns about likely refurbishing in more modern times. All the best, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,184
|
![]()
Hello Jim and Happy New Year!
Thanks for responding. Did Adams establish if the so-called round tang espadas were a relatively late development in these swords, or were they seen on earlier pieces as well? You are right on when you mention the trade-routes and intricate cross-over of styles between some cultures. I'm still willing to believe W African...just too bad no exact examples forthcoming. I find it interesting that the one characteristic which really makes one pause with classifying it (the alloy grip) is also the very thing that attracted me to it and makes it stand out. Without that, it would have been an extremely plain piece, less eye catching, yet with it, an anomaly. Seems like the next step I might take is in testing the grip for metal type. If it does turn out to be tin or pewter, I imagine it could be older vs nickel (mid- 19th) vs zinc (late 19th/early 20th). Does anyone have any recommendations for tests? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|