A cup hilt sword for coments.

M ELEY · 13th June 2014, 12:15 AM

WOW! I want to be friends with Miqueleter!! I love shipwreck pieces, as they define a moment captured in time and usually under terrible (but historic) circumstances. Very nice piece!

BTW, anyone out there happen to have a copy of "Spanish Military Weapons in Colonial America"? I have a xerox copy of that hard-to-find manual given me by an exceptional gentleman (thanks, Jim McD!!), but would like the book.

dana_w · 16th June 2014, 04:26 PM

Now that I have had a chance to peruse “Spanish Military Weapons in Colonial America 1700-1821”, I still have a question or two. On page 72, the authors use the term “Colonial Rapier” to describe a cup hilt much like the one I posted here:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...0&postcount=63

I wouldn’t have described this as a rapier. It seem more like a “broadsword”. The blade width at forte: 1 inch || 2.54 cm.

The Oxford Dictionary defines a rapier as “A thin, light, sharp-pointed sword used for thrusting”. The Dictionary goes on to say this about the origin of the word.

Early 16th century: from French rapière, from râpe 'rasp, grater' (because the perforated hilt resembles a rasp or grater).

Just how wide can a cup hilts blade be before it is no longer considered a rapier?

Jim McDougall · 16th June 2014, 10:09 PM

Hi Dana,
Again, there are typically no set specifications per se' for classification terminology (they are more 'guidelines' ), and one of the most frustrating issues is that semantics and parlance are often at play with descriptions . The term rapier is of course associated with the thin thrusting swords such as cuphilts and swept hits and thought of in fencing and dueling. The term broadened somewhat at the opening of the 18th century (much as the blades) when these typically civilian hilts became more prevalent in military circumstances. The hilts often remained much the same but the heavier blades were 'arming' swords so vernacular terms became entwined.

The term broadsword for example is typically regarded as meaning double edged, however in the 18th century the term was often universally used for both single and double edged swords. "By the Sword" by Cohen, and "Schools and Masters of Fence",by Egerton Castle, often touch on these curious terminology conundrums .

I prefer to classify using more descriptive terms rather than the general classifications which as can be seen, are not always properly used. For the colonial cuphilts I would use probably 'Spanish colonial cuphilt' and describe the blade. Classifications using strictly categorized terms are often better used with required descriptive qualification to define variation.

dana_w · 16th June 2014, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I prefer to classify using more descriptive terms rather than the general classifications which as can be seen, are not always properly used. For the colonial cuphilts I would use probably 'Spanish colonial cuphilt' and describe the blade. Classifications using strictly categorized terms are often better used with required descriptive qualification to define variation.

That is helpful Jim. Maybe I am trying too hard to find generally agreed upon classifications for something that has too many exceptions. The problem I run into is a cup hilt like the one shown below.

fernando · 17th June 2014, 04:39 PM

I would call this one a beautiful bowl cup hilt rapier

dana_w · 17th June 2014, 10:02 PM

Thanks fernando, I am glad you like it.

I have searched in vain for the term "bowl cup hilt" being used to describe a rapier. Is that a translation of some Portuguese description.

It is true that the cup hilt of this sword is more shallow and also offset to one side. It is obviously designed for a right handed user. The cup seems to be cast with floral decorations in high relief. The pommel is decorated with a with floral pattern too. The quillons are attached to small extensions on the lip of the cup. What do you think, Portuguese, Spanish, Italian? For some reason it looks almost French to me. Maybe from some place near the Pyrenees?

The blade would seem to be one of those German imports that Jim has often mentioned.

Blade length: 36 3/16 inches || 91.916 cm
Blade thickness at forte: 3/8 inch || 0.953 cm
Blade width at forte: 5/8 inch || 1.588 cm
Quillons extension: 2 3/16 inches from cup edge on the knuckle bow side || 5.556 cm
Cup width: 4 7/16 inches where Quillon meet the cup || 11.271 cm
Total length: 42 inches || 106.68 cm
Point of balance: about 4 inches from the bottom of the cup
Weight: 1 lb, 8 1/2 oz || 0.695 kg

Photos are copyright (c) 2014 by Dana K. Williams. All Rights Are Reserved.

fernando · 18th June 2014, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana_w

... I have searched in vain for the term "bowl cup hilt" being used to describe a rapier. Is that a translation of some Portuguese description ...

Yes, this is the translation for 'copos de tigela' This way you can distinguish the 'basic' bowl (tigela) from other shapes of cups (copos), like the 'margarida' (daisy-flower) or 'conchas' (shells).

,

fernando · 18th June 2014, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana_w

... The blade would seem to be one of those German imports that Jim has often mentioned...

Certainly a German blade, possibly from the XVIII century. Can't you figure out the name between Iohannes and Solingen ?

13th June 2014, 12:15 AM	#1
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,165	WOW! I want to be friends with Miqueleter!! I love shipwreck pieces, as they define a moment captured in time and usually under terrible (but historic) circumstances. Very nice piece! BTW, anyone out there happen to have a copy of "Spanish Military Weapons in Colonial America"? I have a xerox copy of that hard-to-find manual given me by an exceptional gentleman (thanks, Jim McD!!), but would like the book.

16th June 2014, 04:26 PM	#2
dana_w Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Southeast Florida, USA Posts: 436	Now that I have had a chance to peruse “Spanish Military Weapons in Colonial America 1700-1821”, I still have a question or two. On page 72, the authors use the term “Colonial Rapier” to describe a cup hilt much like the one I posted here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...0&postcount=63 I wouldn’t have described this as a rapier. It seem more like a “broadsword”. The blade width at forte: 1 inch \|\| 2.54 cm. The Oxford Dictionary defines a rapier as “A thin, light, sharp-pointed sword used for thrusting”. The Dictionary goes on to say this about the origin of the word. *Early 16th century: from French rapière, from râpe 'rasp, grater' (because the perforated hilt resembles a rasp or grater).* Just how wide can a cup hilts blade be before it is no longer considered a rapier?

16th June 2014, 10:09 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,295	Hi Dana, Again, there are typically no set specifications per se' for classification terminology (they are more 'guidelines' ), and one of the most frustrating issues is that semantics and parlance are often at play with descriptions . The term rapier is of course associated with the thin thrusting swords such as cuphilts and swept hits and thought of in fencing and dueling. The term broadened somewhat at the opening of the 18th century (much as the blades) when these typically civilian hilts became more prevalent in military circumstances. The hilts often remained much the same but the heavier blades were 'arming' swords so vernacular terms became entwined. The term broadsword for example is typically regarded as meaning double edged, however in the 18th century the term was often universally used for both single and double edged swords. "By the Sword" by Cohen, and "Schools and Masters of Fence",by Egerton Castle, often touch on these curious terminology conundrums . I prefer to classify using more descriptive terms rather than the general classifications which as can be seen, are not always properly used. For the colonial cuphilts I would use probably 'Spanish colonial cuphilt' and describe the blade. Classifications using strictly categorized terms are often better used with required descriptive qualification to define variation.

17th June 2014, 04:39 PM	#5
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	I would call this one a beautiful bowl cup hilt rapier

17th June 2014, 10:02 PM	#6
dana_w Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Southeast Florida, USA Posts: 436	Thanks fernando, I am glad you like it. I have searched in vain for the term "bowl cup hilt" being used to describe a rapier. Is that a translation of some Portuguese description. It is true that the cup hilt of this sword is more shallow and also offset to one side. It is obviously designed for a right handed user. The cup seems to be cast with floral decorations in high relief. The pommel is decorated with a with floral pattern too. The quillons are attached to small extensions on the lip of the cup. What do you think, Portuguese, Spanish, Italian? For some reason it looks almost French to me. Maybe from some place near the Pyrenees? The blade would seem to be one of those German imports that Jim has often mentioned. Blade length: 36 3/16 inches \|\| 91.916 cm Blade thickness at forte: 3/8 inch \|\| 0.953 cm Blade width at forte: 5/8 inch \|\| 1.588 cm Quillons extension: 2 3/16 inches from cup edge on the knuckle bow side \|\| 5.556 cm Cup width: 4 7/16 inches where Quillon meet the cup \|\| 11.271 cm Total length: 42 inches \|\| 106.68 cm Point of balance: about 4 inches from the bottom of the cup Weight: 1 lb, 8 1/2 oz \|\| 0.695 kg Photos are copyright (c) 2014 by Dana K. Williams. All Rights Are Reserved.