Alonso Perez

Sword Maker of Toledo

By Abraham Lopez

One of the best examples of the craftsmans art in the XVI and XVII century in Spain, were the famous steel sword blades made at the city of Toledo. Since the last quarter of the XV century these blades became the most notorious in the Old World because of the singular metal quality they possessed at the time, determined by 3 basic qualities: hardness, flexibility and consistence.

The new methods and technology of sword making were introduced in Spain around 1478 by the Moorish ironsmiths. These specialists worked in the service of Islam in the city of Granada before the Catholic Kings expelled them in 1492.The artisans learned and brought the new technology to the Iberian peninsula from the famous city Damascus, in Syria. Iberian Islamics had extensive contacts and trade with the famous creators of the legendary Damascus steel. Some of the first swords made in Toledo were called damasquine swords because of the similarity with the Syrian blades.

Basically, the early technology for this type of steel consisted of hammering three or more twisted iron rods of different carbon contents at a specific temperature to conform a compact mass of different metal layers. Although the steel technology by forging was widely known in Europe, the old sword blades were too brittle, broke easily, too soft, or bent under certain stress. Soon, the Spanish masters in Toledo learned the secret of the new technology. Once they adopted this method, the process was soon changed into a new system that they called a “steel blade with iron soul” (hard steel blade with the inner iron). It was basically a wrought iron nucleus, the kind of metal the XVI century ironsmiths called “hierro dulce” (sweet iron), a very flexible iron composition with longitudinal striations. The ironsmith would cover the “sweet iron” with a high carbon content iron or steel layer and than weld both metals together by hammering them at a specific temperature.

This system of mixtures granted a hard and sharp exterior property to the blade and at the same time a flexible and strong forged quality. The technology soon spread through continental Europe but the secret of the procedure and casting was kept secret by the Spanish artisans, decreasing the quality of the rest of the European production for at least two centuries. Some authors state that the secret was the temper of metal in which they used a mixture of sand and clay with “special” thermic properties from the Tajo River, next to Toledo, which played an important role in the finished temper process.

By the middle of the XVI century the Toledo blades reached the splendor period. Kings, princes, noblemen, gentleman and many different types of acquisitive people with power were carrying Toledo swords around the world. The swords, separate from its utilitarian use as a combat war weapon, became part of the civilian wear and a symbol of social status. The most common fashion was to hold a rich decorate sword hilt, or at least one with a high quality blade, making sure the Toledo’s hallmarks on the blade were visible.

Logically, at the same time, as the swords started to flourish in the market, many falsifications surfaced and the first royal decree was issued in December of 1567, in which King Philip II established a mandatory order: …do not allow or permit to import any kind of sword in our kingdom from the exterior, and the ones made in Toledo wear the mark and signal of the master who made it and manufactured it, and the place where they are made, and whoever violates this they will be condemned as false…As the Spanish crown would demand to keep the quality standards of these blades.

As resembling the artisan communities at these times, the most prosperous sword makers were concentrated in a particular neighborhood. In the case of Toledo they settled in an urban area, delimited by a road called: Calle de Armas (Weapon Street). Along this urban arterial there were shops for ironsmiths, crossbow, knife and axe makers, arquebus dealers, but principally the famous sword and dagger blade shops.

One of the more prestigious artisans of the time was Alonso Perez. He began to work near the end of the XVI century as an officer in Toledo at the shop of the famous master, Gil de Almau. Under the renowned Almau’s name, several swords were produced for Emperor Carlos V and his son King Felipe II of Spain, as the records of Spanish museum collections state. It appears that after a few years at that prominent shop, Alonso Perez, became a master sword maker, signing blades and stamping his own mark on them. According to the guild of artisan regulations in Toledo and the King’s stipulation, those seeking to be masters must pass a test evaluated by a board of expert artisans and “veedores” (government officers), before they are recognized and granted permission to mark and sign any blade. There has been no record found stating when Alonso Perez’s proud vocation came to an end.

The sword recovered from the wrecksite of the Nuestra Senora de Atocha, sunk in 1622, resembles the style of the transition period between the XVI and XVII centuries. The blade is called estoque, but recognized popularly with the French name of rapier, which differs from the common sword used by soldiers as a longer, lighter blade with fine decoration. The hilt of this sword is difficult to identify because of the degradation caused by the ocean. It appears to be an Italian style and it was originally plated in silver and gold. This observation was made when gold and silver particles were found during the cleaning and conservation process. A Toledo blade mounted on a rich foreign decorated hilt was common in Spain. (Important customers would buy the blades in Toledo and send them to another country’s shop, by famous artist on custom decorated hilts, or the specials hilts were brought to the shops at Toledo, to be mounted there on a good “Toledo” blade.)

Fig.1-Encrusted sword (a-53046) before conservation, as found on the Atocha wreck.

Fig.2-Stamp appears on both sides of the blade at the end of the inscription:

Alonso Perez en Toledo.

Fig.3-Drawings of the inscriptions and marks on the blade.

(scale in centimeters)

Conservation

Once the artifact was identified as XVI century typology, it was recorded on the technical data sheet according to its physical attributes, measurements and weight. Preliminary evaluation of the sword indicated the possibility of an acceptable metal core in the concretion. Several studies were done on the object to confirm this observation and develop a conservation process plan. Preliminary study of the inner core was started in a dual non-destructive method using x-ray radiography and magnetic response.

From the x-ray image analysis it was possible to determine the exact physical configuration of the artifact and determine the possible areas with physical damage by corrosion.

Fig-1: Sword hilt, shows the possible non metallic areas

Fig-2: Sword hilt reverse shows possible non metallic areas

Fig-3: Sword blade, scabbard section and buckles show the non-metallic areas

Fig-4: Sword pommel section and quillons shows a poor metal core area

Fig-5: Sword blade point and scabbard guard

As a result of the examination a configuration plan of the artifact was created to determine the methodology of the cleaning process. The results of the magnetic response study shows several small areas with very low signals of metal core, indicating the zones damaged by corrosion activity. As a conclusion of this analysis, a positive evaluation of the artifact was approved.

Prior to the cleaning stage, but also a part of it, a conductivity test was carried out. Small perforations (5 mm) were made along the artifact body surface using an air scribe until the metal core was reached. Using a voltmeter, small electrodes were placed for electric contacts. Conductivity was tested this way between prints, marking the areas with poor or no response, which coincide with the areas checked by x-ray and magnetic sources.

Mechanical cleaning was alternated with chemical methods, especially areas that were in critical condition. Once the sword was free of coral concretions the next step was to separate the organic materials forming this piece from the metal areas. The scabbard, composed of layers of leather on wood, was dissembled in parts. The wood material was conserved in a bath of polyetilene glycol 600 in an isopropanol solution. The leather process was submersed in a bath with glycerol and a 20% isopropanol solution. The processing period was 4 weeks followed by a drying stage under controlled temperature and moisture conditions for 3 weeks. Consolidation was applied with Rembrandt Formulation.

Metal:

Decontamination or –CL removal on the blade and hilt was started with a water diffusion method. This is not an aggressive process considering the poor condition of the metal core and the possibility of finding markings at the surface of the artifact. The sword was submerged in a bath of 5 % sodium sesquicarbonate in deionized water heated at 100° F. Alternate cold baths of sodium sesquicarbonate in 10% isopropanol was used every two days. For the next 35 days the amount of

-CL released was monitored and the solution was changed every 48 hrs. This information was recorded on a chart, shown below. (Fig-8)

Fig-8: -CL Decontamination levels by water diffusion.

Once the –CL levels decreased, the object was submitted to a surface analysis to study the markings and inscriptions on it. The next step was to place the artifact in a solution of alkaline sulfite treatment for 2 weeks. Once this was finished a drying took place in a bath of acetone and was consolidated with a coat of phosphoric tannin in isopropanol, and finally sealed with B-72.

Buckles that were found on the scabbard part, which were part of the sword’s belt, were submitted to a casting process to obtain a record of the original form of the artifact. The concretion interior was cleaned with air and water pressure, dried and lubricated with liquid carnauba wax acting as an inhibitor. Casting material was used as a low viscosity epoxy resin (prime rez -1000 ®) and was injected in the concretion under vacuum conditions. After 24 hours an excellent recreation of the original artifact was obtained.

Abraham Lopez is an Archaeologist/Conservator employed with Mel Fisher Enterprises. His e-mail address is Atocha6@bellsouth.net

Photo credits: Jose Nelson and Morgan Perkins

Bibliography:

Albert F. Calvert, John Lane: “Spanish Arms and Armour, Historical and descriptive account of the royal armory of Madrid.” London-NY.1907

Almeida, Manuel: “Conservacion de Bienes Culturales de Origen Metalico”. La Havana, Cuba.1998

Altamira y Cervea, Rafael: “Ensayo sobre Felipe II, Hombre de Estado”,-Madrid.1959

“Arte antiguo, Los maestros espaderos”,- Sevilla .1897

“Espadas Historicas”,-Madrid.1898

Bratli, Carl G.: “Biografia de Felipe II”. Madrid .1940

Carmona de, Mendez: “Libro de la Destreza Verdadera de las Armas”. Spain, 1640

Don Luis P. de Narvaez: “Libro de las Grandezas de la Espada.” Spain 1599.

Gelid, Jacopo: “L’arte dell’armi in Italia, Bergamo.” Instituto italiano D’arti grafiche, 1906

Leguina, de Enrique: “La espada, apuntes para su historia”,- Sevilla.1885

Norman, A.B: “The Rapier and small sword 1460-1820.Arno press, NY, 1980

Mosen Diego Valera: “Espejo de verdadera nobleza”. Spain, 1441

: “Ceremonial de Principes”. Spain, 1449

: “ Tratado de Armas” Spain, 1462

Pearson, Colin: “Conservation of Marine Archaeological Objects”. Butterworth & Co. Oxford.1987

Real Armeria de Madrid: “Inventario Iluminado” ca.1544