Zur Dresdner Armbrustmacherfamilie Hänisch und ihren „Zunftgenossen“
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The craft of the crossbow makers is shrouded in mystery. Today copyists fail in the attempt to achieve the quality of the old originals. The members of the Dresden Hänisch family were famous representatives of this profession. Since the 16th century they served as crossbow makers for the Electors and Kings of Saxony. For example Johann Gottfried Hänisch the Elder (1696 - 1778) was employed by Augustus the Strong. His signature was „IGH“. In the 64th Hermann Historica auction a crossbow (lot no. 2465) was sold, which is very meaningful in terms of the family tradition of Haenisch. This weapon with its „IGH“ signature apparently was made in the first quarter of the 18th century (fig. 1, 2). It shows features that appear also on Hänisch-crossbows of later production. These are the gilded bridle and the green pompons (their colors refered to the Wettin arms) and the grotesque masks around the channels for the pricker on the top and at the bottom of the tiller. A special feature of the above mentioned crossbow is that its decorative design refers to at least 100 years earlier forms. So this Baroque crossbow documents a family tradition in an unique way. Johann Friedrich Hänisch the Younger (1780 - 1836) was a grandson of the well-known Johann Gottfried Hänisch. He learned the profession of a gunsmith in his native town and served for the Saxon rulers. He was responsible for the care of the weapons of the Royal Arms Gallery, among them the crossbows. He died on 15th December 1836 in Dresden. The inventory of his estate gives an impression of the tools which were necessary for his craft. For comparison also the workshop inventory of the Leipzig crossbow maker Johann Heinrich Oelckers (1767 or 1768 - 1827) is cited in the article and one of his crossbows is depicted on fig. 3. After the inventory he could craft new crossbows completely. He was able to forge steelbows, to make tillers, locks, strings, bolts and so on. His successor, also from Leipzig, was Ferdinand Tell (1798 – 1863). In his letters he mentioned the adjusting procedure of crossbows. The same is to see on fig. 4, where the crossbow maker Oechslin from Schaffhausen is shooting an old crossbow in 1874. Ferdinand Tells rival was Johann Friedrich Rothe (1802 – 1833) from Leipzig. Beside strings and others Rothe offered bows of refined steel. Tell and Rothe were learnt wood turners and mechanics. They also traded with old crossbows. The craft of crossbow makers was free and in the German speaking countries apparently crossbow maker guilds didn't exist after the late Middle Ages. In the article some examples are given for craftsmen of other professions like smithes and textil-workers, who served as crossbowmakers in the 18th century. One example is the gunmaker Georg Friedrich Wolff in Freiberg/Saxony, who made a crossbow („Schnepper“) in late Baroque style (fig. 5).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 0.054 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".