COURT SWORDS
(page 3)
It is fair to say that court swords,
which came into vogue during the second
half of the seventeenth century, were
of extraordinary merit as objects
of art. They were beautiful in lines,
rich and varied in ornament, designed
by distinguished painters, engravers,
and medallists; they furnished even
a brilliant point of interest in the
court circle of baroque times - giving
the final touch to the personal equipment
of the courtiers of the Louis in France,
of the pretentious nobles who thronged
Italian palaces, of the ceremonious
magnates of Germany and Poland, or
of the wealthy lords and commoners
of England. In fact, there can be
no question that as an object of personal
adornment a sword of the richest type
occupied a high place in the minds
of many personages of those days;
we have only to examine their state
portraits to be convinced that this
"side-arm was receiving great attention
as an object of beauty. We may even
infer that many a seigneur who sat
for his portrait was as keenly interested
in recording for posterity the details
of his sword hilt as the features
of his face.
On the other hand, as an arm(1) the
court sword had no longer the functional
importance of the rapier or back-sword
of the first half of the seventeenth
century; it had entered a period of
decadence and was becoming less a
weapon than an adornment of caste
(just as a scepter became the ornamental
and symbolic survivor of the early
military mace). From 1650 onward,
as a "dress" sword, it underwent a
series of changes in every direction
and in every part. (page 4)
For one thing, it was subject to enrichment
to such a degree that its maker, the
fourbisseur, could with profit not
only give his own effort to produce
specimens of great beauty, but pay
adequate sums for the help of artists
in kindred lines - designers, sculptors,
goldsmiths, seal cutters, especially
medallists (cf. the trade-card of
about 1770 shown in fig. 1). In tracing
the development of the court sword
from the severely tested sword of
the earlier centuries, our series
is of especial value. The student
will even discover that many of the
present swords, beautiful as they
are, have greater interest as special
stages in a gamut of changes which
decade by decade was dictated by fashion,
manuals of fence, codes, or local
taste.
 |
|
Fig.
1. TRADE CARD OF ROUSSEL
FOURBISSEUR
|
In examining these swords as members
of a progressive series it is seen
that some of the changes could have
been of no direct functional value;
in fact, quite the reverse. Thus the
hilt of the sword is shown to deteriorate
in the strength of its material: the
stout steel of earlier days, which
was functionally correct (furnishing
an excellent defence for the hand),
gave place in time to materials less
suited for their purpose: thus steel
was apt to be superseded by bronze,
bronze by silver, by gold, and in
turn by such fragile or brittle materials
as tortoise-shell, thin plaques of
ivory, porcelain, glass-even by lace-like
filigree set with paste or diamonds.
This degeneration is even clearer
when details are examined. Thus the
branch of the hilt, originally a stout
band of steel protecting the knuckle,
gradually decreased in thickness,
becoming a wisp-like rod or even a
decorative row of beads before it
disappeared utterly. Also the loops
of the guard (pas d'âne), which in
earlier hilts admitted the index and
middle fingers and thus gave support
to the hand, dwindled progressively
to so small a size that the fingers
could not enter them, becoming in
the end mere straight and flattened
twigs which gave little hint of their
early function. The pommel, too, which
served originally as the counterpoise
of the heavy blade, lost its globular
shape and great size as the blade
became slender and light. Finally
the quillons (or cross-guard), which
were earlier of great length and strength
in order to turn aside a heavy thrust,
dwindled to short processes which
in the end curled up as though through
senile changes.
1) Court swords for which large sums
were paid are noted by A. Maze-Sencier
in Le Livre des Collectionneurs (Paris,
1885). Louis XIV paid for presentation
swords: 28.000 livres to the Elector
of Brandenburg (1668), over 20.000
to the Prince of Savoy (1669), about
41.000 to Buckingham (1670), nearly
40.000 to Monmouth (1673), for himself
24.000 livres (1684), to the Duke
of Mantua 36.000 (1704), to the Count
of Lusace (son of Augustus the Strong)
76.000 (i7i 5). Likewise Louis XV
paid: 40.000 Iivres to the Elector
of Bavaria (1725), 66.ooo to Don Carlos
(1731). When we consider that at the
beginning of the eighteenth century
one to two livres would pay the day
wages of a laborer, we may gain an
idea of the high estimation in which
rich court swords were then held.
|
