Interesting Unusual Rapier for comments

[Dmitry]

Originally Posted by Atlantia

Do you have any evidence at all to support that conclusion Dmitry?

Just my $.02.
I see no other purpose to them, other than decorative or theatrical.
19th c. markings on the blades were not removed in attempt to deceive.

[fernando]

Hi Gene,
Me too, i wouldn't reject the idea that someone bought a bundle of blades at the Klingenthal surplus depot and made a few 'appealing' swords for the noveau riche to ostentate in their brand new mansions.
The theatrical/movie prop is also a good theory.

[Atlantia]

I can't understand your reasoning Dmitry. Was yours badly made or deliberately blunted? Did it strike you as a cheaply produced, lightweight, suitable for stage use?

I think I've already said why I feel that it differs from the usual pieces made in this period for pure decoration ('wall hangers') but I agree with that being a somewhat subjective view.
However, made for theatre film? No chance.
I collect film props

This sword is too well made, far too heavy and dangerous, too expensive and not suitable for the purpose.
I have seen 'real' swords modified (see below) for possible use in this context and it is understandable that they would be because they were plentiful and cheap 100 years+ ago.
But to use a new, so more expensive, relatively heavy sword with a fine dangerous point would be nigh-on suicidal.

Hell even dropping it could nail someones foot to the floor!

Actors are not professional swordsmen so you don't give them deadly weapons or they will likely kill each other.
Many early stage/film swords had sporting blades, often Epee (or even foil). Often these were remounted in fancy repro or real hilts. Sporting epee blades are of course edgeless and button ended.
Some prop/stage swords had aluminium blades, some have steel 'non blades' etc. Occasionally old swords are used, usually with replacement blades or at least some nod to safety modifications presumably ones used in the cheapest amateur productions (the point removed and blunted edge). depending on the context of use. You get the picture.
Nobody would order prop swords to be made like this.

Also there was no need for 'quality' as there were no high-def close-ups and the combat was simulated.
My sword is too 'well made' for a prop.
Such quality and care of construction is not needed for a prop.

Fencing with a real sword is extremely physically demanding. Hell, fencing with a sporting foil is extremely physically demanding and they weigh almost nothing.
My sword weighs in at 820g. Now despite its excellent balance thats a fair old weight to 'swashbuckle' with.
Try it with one of yours of similar weight.
It's far to heavy and dangerous for stage use.
Try it for a few minutes then imagine that the slightest mistake and you will impale someone on the fine sharp point of this rigid steel military blade.

Even if I was wrong about ALL of that (which I don't think I am), then as an expensive item bought for that purpose, it would have seen extensive use in stage combat, resulting in a frighteningly chewed edge.
It has a few very minor edge clicks only.

The 'wall hanger' theory is possible despite my ideas to the contrary.
But film/theatre? No chance.

[Dmitry]

Originally Posted by Atlantia

I can't understand your reasoning Dmitry. Was yours badly made or deliberately blunted? Did it strike you as a cheaply produced, lightweight, suitable for stage use?

I think I've already said why I feel that it differs from the usual pieces made in this period for pure decoration ('wall hangers') but I agree with that being a somewhat subjective view.
However, made for theatre film? No chance.
I collect film props

This sword is too well made, far too heavy and dangerous, too expensive and not suitable for the purpose.
I have seen 'real' swords modified (see below) for possible use in this context and it is understandable that they would be because they were plentiful and cheap 100 years+ ago.
But to use a new, so more expensive, relatively heavy sword with a fine dangerous point would be nigh-on suicidal.

Hell even dropping it could nail someones foot to the floor!

Actors are not professional swordsmen so you don't give them deadly weapons or they will likely kill each other.
Many early stage/film swords had sporting blades, often Epee (or even foil). Often these were remounted in fancy repro or real hilts. Sporting epee blades are of course edgeless and button ended.
Some prop/stage swords had aluminium blades, some have steel 'non blades' etc. Occasionally old swords are used, usually with replacement blades or at least some nod to safety modifications presumably ones used in the cheapest amateur productions (the point removed and blunted edge). depending on the context of use. You get the picture.
Nobody would order prop swords to be made like this.

Also there was no need for 'quality' as there were no high-def close-ups and the combat was simulated.
My sword is too 'well made' for a prop.
Such quality and care of construction is not needed for a prop.

Fencing with a real sword is extremely physically demanding. Hell, fencing with a sporting foil is extremely physically demanding and they weigh almost nothing.
My sword weighs in at 820g. Now despite its excellent balance thats a fair old weight to 'swashbuckle' with.
Try it with one of yours of similar weight.
It's far to heavy and dangerous for stage use.
Try it for a few minutes then imagine that the slightest mistake and you will impale someone on the fine sharp point of this rigid steel military blade.

Even if I was wrong about ALL of that (which I don't think I am), then as an expensive item bought for that purpose, it would have seen extensive use in stage combat, resulting in a frighteningly chewed edge.
It has a few very minor edge clicks only.

The 'wall hanger' theory is possible despite my ideas to the contrary.
But film/theatre? No chance.

Hello, Gene.
The quality of construction really doesn't really carry much weight in this case. As far as the stage props go, there is a number of recent references about actors being injured/ran through/maimed/have eyes gouged out/etc. with stage props.
A simple internet search produced these, all on the first two pages of Google -

Actor Injured in Sword Fight Rehearsal; Hartford Stage Cancels "Antony and Cleopatra" Performance
http://blogs.courant.com/curtain/201...d-fight-r.html

Actor in Samurai Film Injured by Sword on Set
http://articles.latimes.com/1989-01-...1_samurai-film

Actor injury causes delay for Mad Cow's 'Rashomon'
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...-theatre-delay

Actor Is Injured in Irish Production of ‘Hamlet’
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ion-of-hamlet/

Those are all very recent cases, but I'm sure there are many others in the long history of the thespian arts.
Like this one -
Debutante Injured By Sword When Actor Falls
http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=2854,4748674

Basically I really don't see any other purpose to having a rapier in the mid to late 1800s, other than for theater or to hang on the wall. It's hard to imagine anyone actually wearing one in the streets as part of a dress.

Just my $.02, which I suggest you take, cause this is what I have left after buying a new house just now.

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Dmitry

Hello, Gene.
The quality of construction really doesn't really carry much weight in this case. As far as the stage props go, there is a number of recent references about actors being injured/ran through/maimed/have eyes gouged out/etc. with stage props.
A simple internet search produced these, all on the first two pages of Google -

Actor Injured in Sword Fight Rehearsal; Hartford Stage Cancels "Antony and Cleopatra" Performance
http://blogs.courant.com/curtain/201...d-fight-r.html

Actor in Samurai Film Injured by Sword on Set
http://articles.latimes.com/1989-01-...1_samurai-film

Actor injury causes delay for Mad Cow's 'Rashomon'
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...-theatre-delay

Actor Is Injured in Irish Production of ‘Hamlet’
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ion-of-hamlet/

Those are all very recent cases, but I'm sure there are many others in the long history of the thespian arts.
Like this one -
Debutante Injured By Sword When Actor Falls
http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=2854,4748674

Basically I really don't see any other purpose to having a rapier in the mid to late 1800s, other than for theater or to hang on the wall. It's hard to imagine anyone actually wearing one in the streets as part of a dress.

Just my $.02, which I suggest you take, cause this is what I have left after buying a new house just now.

Hi Dmitry,

Thanks for taking the time to try and evidence your theory. I think it means that we can now at least discount the prop theory.
You have clearly searched quite hard for some supporting evidence and not found any that supports your theory, but you have found cases that illustrate the points that I've already made.
You seem to be drawing the wrong conclusion?

Firstly of course there have been MANY injuries caused in stage combat over the years. But you don't seem to have found any that fit the criteria of the weapon we are discussing.
It seems that your 'evidence' actually supports my reasoning and undermines your argument that a weapon of this fine and solid construction would be made specifically for theatre use, especially in the time period in question.

Of course the first problem as you have admitted is that these are mostly modern cases so of limited relevance. But lets have a look at them anyway.

To quote your sources:


"An actor filming a samurai drama was seriously injured in a battle scene when a real sword was accidentally substituted for a fake one"

-Confirming what I've been saying in previous posts.

"the accident occurred with the point of the dulled but real sword"

-As I have already said, real swords are not left with sharp edges or fine points. It would also of course be illogical to make a prop with a real blade that would be more costly (at the time) than simply buying a genuine item and grinding the edge/point off or replacing the blade with a 'stunt' suitable one, or making a prop with a stunt blade to emulate a real sword etc.

"The actor was injured while rehearsing a sword-fight scene when he landed incorrectly on his foot."

-Um did you read your sources Dmitry? This one is essentially not connected to the weapon, it was more a twisted ankle by the sounds of it.

"sustained a palpable and frightening hit during a performance on Monday, resulting in his hospitalization (edit) a cut beneath his eye and collapsed on stage"

-Blade/sword type not mentioned. Faces can be cut by blunt force, or really any 'hit'. We can't determine if the blade was 'real' or a fencing blade or an aluminium one, or a fibreglass one.

"An actors sword jostled from his hand as he fell" (Injuring a Debutante)

-Nothing there really, sounds (again) like it was a real sword being used on set and he dropped it to me?

As I've said all along Dmitry, was it made to hang on the wall?
Possibly, but I'm not convinced (for the reasons outlined previously)

Was it a theatre/film prop?
Well, I think your 2c was well spent as I think you've shown now that it wasn't.

As for not being able to imagine other uses for a rapier-esq sword in the 19thC, have you read Jim's thoughts?

Thanks for your time. Congrats on the new house.
Gene

[Jim McDougall]

Gene! Sensational riposte!!!!! La!!!!!

All the best,
Jim

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Gene! Sensational riposte!!!!! La!!!!!

All the best,
Jim

LOL, Thank you kindy Jim

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Gene! I think we're still pretty much on the same page. I for some reason still feel there was a more sound purpose for these weapons, and I think my pursuit in this direction suggests my apparant 'Quixote syndrome'
I suppose that my often near delusional romanticism concerning arms causes my disdain for the categoric dismissal of these as simply wallhangers or 'theatrical' pieces, while that of course is the easy assessment. In what I have learned about our societies in these 18th and 19th century times there were far more romantic delusions in popular culture than typically perceived historically. It seems that the penchant for secret societies, magical allusions, unusual religious and political pursuits in almost cult like character and of course organizations with more regimented character such as the Masons, and many fraternal and military organizations was prevalent in those times.

Often in post war circumstances, while demand for weapons waned, there were notable increases in such societal groupings, and particularly veterans of the military were powerfully represented in these many variant organizations. Political situations also brought national groups into effect who sought to preserve their country's heritage and past glories. The extremely colorful pageantry of today's reeenactment groups have distinct antecedents almost ironically in the periods which they anachronistically represent, in an almost telescopic analogy.

In studying the arms and armour of colonial New Spain, of course with the Conquistadors in the beginning, the images typically issued in literary or art treatments are actually far from how these forces were equipped. There were no 'issue' materials and most individuals were privately supplied. They used all manner of inexpensive surplus and composite items as could be obtained in thier home country, or in arriving supplies brought in. I believe thier 'countenance' would have been almost 'Quixotesque'. In studies of the armour used it has been discovered that types long obsolete in Europe had survived in these colonial regions far beyond thier antiquity.

The point is that in most cases, cultures and societies seek to preserve and celebrate thier ancestral heritage, and often this involves unusual or even seemingly 'eccentric' use or anachronistic representation of materials and fashion. In mant instances traditional court and dress weaponry, while appearing ostentatious or ineffective combatively, in surprisingly numerous cases was actually quite serviceable.

As mentioned, sword makers in peacetime often sought related venues to augment diminished demand including of course various tools and implements. However, they were not far removed from the skills and tooling to fashion the swords previously produced nor variations of earlier forms as required. If there were stores of surplus blades still held as orders for certain sword types ceased at end of hostilities or in cases or supercession, then these could certainly have been used for custom requests in varying volume.

There would be no need for trying to 'duplicate' marks, nor to remove them and the makers of these composite classical creations would have been actual swordmakers, not artisans fabricating decorative pieces.

In my opinion the concept of 'theatrical' pieces is often a bit 'overplayed' and as many as it seems have been given such assessment would presume there were virtual hordes of theatrical troupes moving about with huge stockpiles of arms and props. Actually these groups were much more a novelty than even imagined, thus the accordingly notable reception they received when they appeared.
With the idea of wallhangers, it seems there was more attention given in earlier times in replicas to armour than to swords. Actually the availability of 'old swords' was considerably well supplied and it would seem curious that anyone who had the somewhat unusual need to display an old sword would have had ample opportunity to acquire authentic old pieces almost at random. Arms collecting is more a modern phenomenon, though it was practiced in earlier times among certain nobility and gentry in degree. It was not until the latter 19th century that souveniers were gathered and displayed more nominally and these were typically of 'exotic' weapons, while as mentioned the demand for vintage European armour of illustrious heritage was more high end.

BTW, I agree the script would most likely be as Fernando suggested originally and well worked out by he and Gene...Klingenthal.

I guess this typical tirade of mine would be a nickel or so worth but my thoughts.

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Gene! I think we're still pretty much on the same page. I for some reason still feel there was a more sound purpose for these weapons, and I think my pursuit in this direction suggests my apparant 'Quixote syndrome'
I suppose that my often near delusional romanticism concerning arms causes my disdain for the categoric dismissal of these as simply wallhangers or 'theatrical' pieces, while that of course is the easy assessment. In what I have learned about our societies in these 18th and 19th century times there were far more romantic delusions in popular culture than typically perceived historically. It seems that the penchant for secret societies, magical allusions, unusual religious and political pursuits in almost cult like character and of course organizations with more regimented character such as the Masons, and many fraternal and military organizations.

Often in post war circumstances, while demand for weapons waned, there were notable increases in such societal groupings, and particularly veterans of the military were powerfully represented in these many variant organizations. Political situations also brought national groups into effect who sought to preserve their country's heritage and past glories. The extremely colorful pageantry of today's reeenactment groups have distinct antecedents almost ironically in the periods which they anachronistically represent, in an almost telescopic analogy.

In studying the arms and armour of colonial New Spain, of course with the Conquistadors in the beginning, the images typically issued in literary or art treatments are actually far from how these forces were equipped. There were no 'issue' materials and most individuals were privately supplied. They used all manner of inexpensive surplus and composite items as could be obtained in thier home country, or in arriving supplies brought in. I believe thier 'countenance' would have been almost 'Quixotesque'. In studies of the armour used it has been discovered that types long obsolete in Europe had survived in these colonial regions far beyond thier antiquity.

The point is that in most cases, cultures and societies seek to preserve and celebrate thier ancestral heritage, and often this involves unusual or even seemingly 'eccentric' use or anachronistic representation of materials and fashion. In mant instances traditional court and dress weaponry, while appearing ostentatious or ineffective combatively, in surprisingly numerous cases was actually quite serviceable.

As mentioned, sword makers in peacetime often sought related venues to augment diminished demand including of course various tools and implements. However, they were not far removed from the skills and tooling to fashion the swords previously produced nor variations of earlier forms as required. If there were stores of surplus blades still held as orders for certain sword types ceased at end of hostilities or in cases or supercession, then these could certainly have been used for custom requests in varying volume.

There would be no need for trying to 'duplicate' marks, nor to remove them and the makers of these composite classical creations would have been actual swordmakers, not artisans fabricating decorative pieces.

In my opinion the concept of 'theatrical' pieces is often a bit 'overplayed' and as many as it seems have been given such assessment would presume there were virtual hordes of theatrical troupes moving about with huge stockpiles of arms and props. Actually these groups were much more a novelty than even imagined, thus the accordingly notable reception they received when they appeared.
With the idea of wallhangers, it seems there was more attention given in earlier times in replicas to armour than to swords. Actually the availability of 'old swords' was considerably well supplied and it would seem curious that anyone who had the somewhat unusual need to display an old sword would have had ample opportunity to acquire authentic old pieces almost at random. Arms collecting is more a modern phenomenon, though it was practiced in earlier times among certain nobility and gentry in degree. It was not until the latter 19th century that souveniers were gathered and displayed more nominally and these were typically of 'exotic' weapons, while as mentioned the demand for armour of illustrious heritage was more high end.

BTW, I agree the script would most likely be as Fernando suggested originally and well worked out by he and Gene...Klingenthal.

I guess this typical tirade of mine would be a nickel or so worth but my thoughts.

I'd say completely on the same page Jim.
Can't disagree with anything there mate.

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks Gene!
On the 'theatrical' front, most of what I was thinking of was the theatrical drama troupes in the 19th century or the occassional 'opera house' setting theaters in metropolitan areas.
When it comes to movies etc. the early days, silents and into the 30s it seems that there were plenty of authentic items lying around which ended up stockpiled into props warehouses in Hollywood and surrounding areas. I think quite a few authentic items were worn and used for close up shots and staging, however actual items used were suitably 'adjusted' for action shots. Some were still formidable in certain degree and some of the actors were indeed injured, but it seems usually blunt force type injuries.
Actually with the volume of actual items around, 'the Sheik' himself, Rudolf Valentino actually became a collector of antique swords himself and 'adopted' quite a few of them.
I recall back in the late 60s, early 70s growing up in Southern California some of the studios cleared out some of these warehouses, and some of the local collectors had dreams come true!

I recall in my early days back then fencing, and taking stage combat fencing. Ouch! You learned fairly quickly movements required as contact could be pretty convincing. ..but then I kept tripping over my cape!!!

All the best,
Jim

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thanks Gene!
On the 'theatrical' front, most of what I was thinking of was the theatrical drama troupes in the 19th century or the occassional 'opera house' setting theaters in metropolitan areas.
When it comes to movies etc. the early days, silents and into the 30s it seems that there were plenty of authentic items lying around which ended up stockpiled into props warehouses in Hollywood and surrounding areas. I think quite a few authentic items were worn and used for close up shots and staging, however actual items used were suitably 'adjusted' for action shots. Some were still formidable in certain degree and some of the actors were indeed injured, but it seems usually blunt force type injuries.
Actually with the volume of actual items around, 'the Sheik' himself, Rudolf Valentino actually became a collector of antique swords himself and 'adopted' quite a few of them.
I recall back in the late 60s, early 70s growing up in Southern California some of the studios cleared out some of these warehouses, and some of the local collectors had dreams come true!

I recall in my early days back then fencing, and taking stage combat fencing. Ouch! You learned fairly quickly movements required as contact could be pretty convincing. ..but then I kept tripping over my cape!!!

All the best,
Jim

LOL, I'm now picturing you swashbuckling your way across the stage Jim!
"take that you blaggard"

Fair comment, there were plenty of real swords and myriad other antiques used for background dressing, non combat roles and 'beauty' shots.

Many 'real' ones were cheap though. Often they'd have complete ones for non combat 'hero' props and modified ones of the same type for combat, switching when needed.


Best
Gene

P.S. Any pictures of you on stage in your cape?

[Dmitry]

Gene, I will definitely answer you, but in a short while. It's the Thanksgiving Day here in the old New England.
Tasty turkey to all, and peace!

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Dmitry

Gene, I will definitely answer you, but in a short while. It's the Thanksgiving Day here in the old New England.
Tasty turkey to all, and peace!

No worries. Happy thanksgiving.

[Dmitry]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I recall back in the late 60s, early 70s growing up in Southern California some of the studios cleared out some of these warehouses, and some of the local collectors had dreams come true!

I forget the name of that company, Hollywood House of Props or something like that; they auctioned off hundreds of swords, some newly-made, but many composites with antique hilts + new blades, and vice versa. Bannerman also sold composites assembled from new and old parts.

This company, Hollywood Prop Supply, sells film/stage props which have steel blades, not plastic.
http://www.hollywoodpropsupply.com/NewEdgedW.html

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Dmitry

I forget the name of that company, Hollywood House of Props or something like that; they auctioned off hundreds of swords, some newly-made, but many composites with antique hilts + new blades, and vice versa. Bannerman also sold composites assembled from new and old parts.

This company, Hollywood Prop Supply, sells film/stage props which have steel blades, not plastic.
http://www.hollywoodpropsupply.com/NewEdgedW.html

Hi Dmitry,
these are just modern reproduction swords being sold for movie costuming use. Indian made by companies like Windlass, they are primarily just reproductions, readily availabe to the public as such on various websites. Much cheaper now than using the real thing but again, these are NOT for stage combat. They are dressing props, costuming.

There is only a superficial connection to this discussion.

You correctly repeat from my earlier observations that it was commonplace to use real swords that were cheap and plentiful for costuming/dressing scenes and to have modified versions of those same swords (sometimes with their blades replaced) for stage/staged combat.

What you seem to be trying to say is that in a time when genuine swords were plentiful, cheap and readily available in bulk quantities of identical type, or that classic 'rapier' type swords were routinely made from marrying fencing blades with a variety of other hilts, that film/theatre costumers were instead opting for more expensive, intiricate and historically incorrect individually hand made swords that were basically unift for purpose in the configuration that you'd have us believe they were received.
Why order a deadly, unmodified, heavy, military blade on a 'fantasy' prop?
Why have the hilt hand made from steel and not instead opt for (as many were) a cast base metal of flashy design with a 'safe' fencing epee blade suitable for stage combat or costuming?
Show me some provenanced period examples?

[Atlantia]

So, I'm going to throw some other suggestions out there.
I personally feel that there are a few options for this sword. Clearly the hilt is not a copy of any particular style, especially when married with a military blade. This is not a typical copy or 19thC reproduction.

Heavy military blade, good balance, peened tang, solid construction, etc. Quite fit for purpose.
I believe that it was professionally made in this configuration, not cobbled together at some later date.

Was it (and possibly others like Dmitry/Valjhuns) made by a sword supplier trying to capitalise on the 'Historismus' movement by producing a 'blending' of the modern and archaic in a still usable weapon?
Well clearly it IS a blending of styles and clearly it IS a usable weapon, so that would fit.
Clearly the makers were not attempting a historical copy, or flashy reproduction.
But regardless, was it made simply for 'show'?
Possibly, but why not make it more 'flashy' or historically accurate?
Why bother making it so 'usable'?
Was it made for a fraternal organisation or other archaic group as Jim suggests?
Seems like a good bet!
Was it a private commission for purpose unknown?
Possibly.