Help with old Spanish? rapier

tom hyle · 23rd May 2005, 12:59 PM

I think of a humped surface ground down thru to make flat or concave bevels but remaining humped at the ricassoe as an older, not a newer, European feature.
The sword was never much longer, and that's obvious, but I never thought it was so early; I think it's an almost-a-smallsword rapier. If it's circa 1900 it's unusually nicely made; a handmade expensive high-quality reproduction/fake. such were certainly made, and it would tend to explain a descrepancy of period between blade and hilt (the art of fence being alive and fairly well in Europe at the time, the length and balance being fitted to a customer/contemporary would then make sense. But neither length nor hilt are quite "right" for c16, eh? perhaps because it is a reproduction with innacuracies/contemporaneities, but what if it is instead because it is a later descendant, altered by evolution?). I have certainly seen such high quality "Victorian" reproductions, mostly various broadswords in forged iron dress. They are a far cry from the mass produced wallhanging ones with their cast one piece hilts and weak, poorly joined, and sometimes also cast blades. Kind of like putting a fine differentially hardened folded steel bowie in the same category with a piece of laser-cut surgical stainless junk in a zinc handle, as (in this case) "modern fantasy knives". People do, too, but I think it a grievous error. An irate person told Therion that I make "perfectly good" (always an odd assumption) bayonets into fantasy daggers

daggers actually don't get much realer than the ones I've made out of bayonet blades

I don't have a detailed chronological knowledge of rapier hilts; that's for sure, as well. I've seen a lot of the things, but they're not my favourite swords, and specific date and place, though interesting, are always the least interesting things about a sword to me, so take my comments on this subject in that light

I certainly can't decide even to my own satisfaction; I can only provide thinking points.
I see a line that could be a fold line in the one photo of the tip, but it could be a lot of other things, too (scratch, glare, smeared oil; old or new....).

Justin · 24th May 2005, 12:53 AM

Tom:

'I don't think that I've read of Europeans exporting many unfinished sword blades, though I have read of the export of many unmounted sword blades. What can you tell me about this? '

I may have made a type-o but I meant unmounted blades were exported from Europe not unfinished.

The 'ricasso' has square edges and convex faces.I think that I can see forging flaws in the blade but I may have to go ahead and clean it to confirm that.I may very well also attempt a repair of the guard but it will be very difficult and I may not do it if I dont like what I find out about this sword.

Chris: I think the difference in the hilt and blade styles could be the result of several things but the hilt really was quite a piece of artwork and I seriously doubt it was meant for stage use.It could also be a marriage of blade and hilt from different swords {I bought it from a gentleman in Canada,who knows where its been}.Also the nicks to the edge aren't from playing around,this is a very hard and springy blade and to inflict the damage this blade has I think it would have taken a lot of force.

Chris Evans · 24th May 2005, 03:22 AM

Justin,

I'll start by acknowledging that it is very hard to be conclusive from photographs alone, without actually inspecting the piece.

That said, everything from those photos reeks of a Victorian era repro. I have never seen a period piece like that one, and I have seen quite a few.

And that sheath: It does not look right for a renaissance piece, what the hilt purports to be. More like a 19th century modified military sheath. Could we have some detailed photos?

The squareness where the edge grind terminates, near the hilt, is also suggestive of comparatively recent manufacture. It just looks too much like a rolled blade that was machine finished.

That blade would have been more in keeping with an early small sword and is completely inconsistent with the hilt. At 33", it is too short for even a transitional rapier. And by that time swept hilts were abandoned because they offered inadequate hand protection in the tight double time sword play of the era. Foining blades were reduced to that length by the late 1600s-early 1700 and invariably sported much simpler hilts, incorporating a disc or dish of some sort to protect against thrusts.

Re your assertion re hardness and flex: Most rapier and small sword blades were not particularly hard, seldom going beyond 45Rc, as they didn't need to be since they were not primarily cutters, rather thrusters. However, they were very springy. Edged thrusting swords that are used for fencing very quickly pick up dents and nicks because the edges have no strength in them against contact with other edges; And that would have been consistent with theatrical stage fighting - The hilt precludes dueling.

And how sharp is the blade, especially near the tip? If it still sports some nicks, that means that it hasn't been sharpened or dulled since used. If it was a real sword, it would have had a keen edge on the foible.

In closing, I suggest that you look in Norman's "The Rapier and Small Sword", the standard reference book for dating hilts. If that does not give a definitive answer, do consult with an expert.

Cheers
Chris

Conogre · 24th May 2005, 05:15 AM

When it comes to Victorian reproductions, I truly think that this is an oft maligned period in which some truly beautiful items were made (and also some horrific examples of just about everything) that manage to capture the flavor of old world skill and artistry as the age of industrialization went into full swing.
A sword such as yours might well have been used in a true "stage" setting, where it would have gotten a much more strenuous workout in repeated nightly performances as opposed to an early movie prop, which also are famous for butchering true antiques in their own right, but for use over much shorter lengths of time.
As I told you before, I suspect that it's from the early to mid 1800's, when Toledo, among other places was putting out some of its best and worst simultaneously.
Mike

Chris Evans · 24th May 2005, 05:43 AM

Hi Conogre,

I tend to agree with what you say. I have seen some rather attractive 19th century rapier and medieval repros. They were well made, but after handling them it was obvious that they were not meant for actual use; They had the usual flaws that plague repros: Over-heavy blades, poor edge geometry, and a general lack of strength in the furniture. Wall hangers.

Cheers
Chris

tom hyle · 24th May 2005, 01:38 PM

This hilt has lost either longer ends on the pas d'ans that would've come out (in?) to meet the blade right behind that little shoulder, or, which is what I had been thinking, there was a plate. Justin can probably tell us which. The sudden square plunge grinds with which the bevels end are not really unusual for late medieval European blades. Think of the daggers (eared, rondel, ballock, Basel, etc.) with a half-length false edge; it often, even usually ends in such a plunge, which is also usually seen at the base of the true edge. Think of how the grooves in cinquedeas often end in sharp square ends. These are examples of styles where it was usual. On rapiers it is more unusual, but certainly not nonexistant. What actually strikes me as odd and perhaps meaningful about the ricassoe is how long it is beyond the guard; usually they have no ricassoe outside the pas d'ans or a very short microricassoe under 1/2". This humped rebated edge area seems to be meant to somewhat make up for the slightness of the blade in making parries. What about this pommel shape? Any thoughts?

Justin · 24th May 2005, 02:58 PM

A note on the guard,it is BADLY damaged and missing several pieces including a quillion that looks like it would have followed the knuckle guard towards the pommel.The very end of the knuckle bow has a very small projection that enters a hole in the pommel.As to the edge it never had one,from what I have read on the ARMA page that doesnt seem inconsistant with the originals.

I wish I could provide better pics {I guess its my camera}but if I set the resolution any higher I have to virtually shrink the pics to thumbnails for the forum to upload them.

BTW,the sheath is definately a replacement it doesnt even take the entire blade,I agree that its probably from some sort of 19th cent military sword.

23rd May 2005, 12:59 PM	#1
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	I think of a humped surface ground down thru to make flat or concave bevels but remaining humped at the ricassoe as an older, not a newer, European feature. The sword was never much longer, and that's obvious, but I never thought it was so early; I think it's an almost-a-smallsword rapier. If it's circa 1900 it's unusually nicely made; a handmade expensive high-quality reproduction/fake. such were certainly made, and it would tend to explain a descrepancy of period between blade and hilt (the art of fence being alive and fairly well in Europe at the time, the length and balance being fitted to a customer/contemporary would then make sense. But neither length nor hilt are quite "right" for c16, eh? perhaps because it is a reproduction with innacuracies/contemporaneities, but what if it is instead because it is a later descendant, altered by evolution?). I have certainly seen such high quality "Victorian" reproductions, mostly various broadswords in forged iron dress. They are a far cry from the mass produced wallhanging ones with their cast one piece hilts and weak, poorly joined, and sometimes also cast blades. Kind of like putting a fine differentially hardened folded steel bowie in the same category with a piece of laser-cut surgical stainless junk in a zinc handle, as (in this case) "modern fantasy knives". People do, too, but I think it a grievous error. An irate person told Therion that I make "perfectly good" (always an odd assumption) bayonets into fantasy daggers daggers actually don't get much realer than the ones I've made out of bayonet blades I don't have a detailed chronological knowledge of rapier hilts; that's for sure, as well. I've seen a lot of the things, but they're not my favourite swords, and specific date and place, though interesting, are always the least interesting things about a sword to me, so take my comments on this subject in that light I certainly can't decide even to my own satisfaction; I can only provide thinking points. I see a line that could be a fold line in the one photo of the tip, but it could be a lot of other things, too (scratch, glare, smeared oil; old or new....). Last edited by tom hyle; 23rd May 2005 at 01:25 PM.

24th May 2005, 03:22 AM	#3
Chris Evans Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 685	Justin, I'll start by acknowledging that it is very hard to be conclusive from photographs alone, without actually inspecting the piece. That said, everything from those photos reeks of a Victorian era repro. I have never seen a period piece like that one, and I have seen quite a few. And that sheath: It does not look right for a renaissance piece, what the hilt purports to be. More like a 19th century modified military sheath. Could we have some detailed photos? The squareness where the edge grind terminates, near the hilt, is also suggestive of comparatively recent manufacture. It just looks too much like a rolled blade that was machine finished. That blade would have been more in keeping with an early small sword and is completely inconsistent with the hilt. At 33", it is too short for even a transitional rapier. And by that time swept hilts were abandoned because they offered inadequate hand protection in the tight double time sword play of the era. Foining blades were reduced to that length by the late 1600s-early 1700 and invariably sported much simpler hilts, incorporating a disc or dish of some sort to protect against thrusts. Re your assertion re hardness and flex: Most rapier and small sword blades were not particularly hard, seldom going beyond 45Rc, as they didn't need to be since they were not primarily cutters, rather thrusters. However, they were very springy. Edged thrusting swords that are used for fencing very quickly pick up dents and nicks because the edges have no strength in them against contact with other edges; And that would have been consistent with theatrical stage fighting - The hilt precludes dueling. And how sharp is the blade, especially near the tip? If it still sports some nicks, that means that it hasn't been sharpened or dulled since used. If it was a real sword, it would have had a keen edge on the foible. In closing, I suggest that you look in Norman's "The Rapier and Small Sword", the standard reference book for dating hilts. If that does not give a definitive answer, do consult with an expert. Cheers Chris Last edited by Chris Evans; 24th May 2005 at 04:18 AM.

24th May 2005, 02:58 PM	#7
Justin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 182	A note on the guard,it is BADLY damaged and missing several pieces including a quillion that looks like it would have followed the knuckle guard towards the pommel.The very end of the knuckle bow has a very small projection that enters a hole in the pommel.As to the edge it never had one,from what I have read on the ARMA page that doesnt seem inconsistant with the originals. I wish I could provide better pics {I guess its my camera}but if I set the resolution any higher I have to virtually shrink the pics to thumbnails for the forum to upload them. BTW,the sheath is definately a replacement it doesnt even take the entire blade,I agree that its probably from some sort of 19th cent military sword. Last edited by Justin; 24th May 2005 at 03:13 PM.

24th May 2005, 12:53 AM	#2
Justin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 182	Tom: 'I don't think that I've read of Europeans exporting many unfinished sword blades, though I have read of the export of many unmounted sword blades. What can you tell me about this? ' I may have made a type-o but I meant unmounted blades were exported from Europe not unfinished. The 'ricasso' has square edges and convex faces.I think that I can see forging flaws in the blade but I may have to go ahead and clean it to confirm that.I may very well also attempt a repair of the guard but it will be very difficult and I may not do it if I dont like what I find out about this sword. Chris: I think the difference in the hilt and blade styles could be the result of several things but the hilt really was quite a piece of artwork and I seriously doubt it was meant for stage use.It could also be a marriage of blade and hilt from different swords {I bought it from a gentleman in Canada,who knows where its been}.Also the nicks to the edge aren't from playing around,this is a very hard and springy blade and to inflict the damage this blade has I think it would have taken a lot of force.

24th May 2005, 05:15 AM	#4
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	When it comes to Victorian reproductions, I truly think that this is an oft maligned period in which some truly beautiful items were made (and also some horrific examples of just about everything) that manage to capture the flavor of old world skill and artistry as the age of industrialization went into full swing. A sword such as yours might well have been used in a true "stage" setting, where it would have gotten a much more strenuous workout in repeated nightly performances as opposed to an early movie prop, which also are famous for butchering true antiques in their own right, but for use over much shorter lengths of time. As I told you before, I suspect that it's from the early to mid 1800's, when Toledo, among other places was putting out some of its best and worst simultaneously. Mike

24th May 2005, 05:43 AM	#5
Chris Evans Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 685	Hi Conogre, I tend to agree with what you say. I have seen some rather attractive 19th century rapier and medieval repros. They were well made, but after handling them it was obvious that they were not meant for actual use; They had the usual flaws that plague repros: Over-heavy blades, poor edge geometry, and a general lack of strength in the furniture. Wall hangers. Cheers Chris

24th May 2005, 01:38 PM	#6
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	This hilt has lost either longer ends on the pas d'ans that would've come out (in?) to meet the blade right behind that little shoulder, or, which is what I had been thinking, there was a plate. Justin can probably tell us which. The sudden square plunge grinds with which the bevels end are not really unusual for late medieval European blades. Think of the daggers (eared, rondel, ballock, Basel, etc.) with a half-length false edge; it often, even usually ends in such a plunge, which is also usually seen at the base of the true edge. Think of how the grooves in cinquedeas often end in sharp square ends. These are examples of styles where it was usual. On rapiers it is more unusual, but certainly not nonexistant. What actually strikes me as odd and perhaps meaningful about the ricassoe is how long it is beyond the guard; usually they have no ricassoe outside the pas d'ans or a very short microricassoe under 1/2". This humped rebated edge area seems to be meant to somewhat make up for the slightness of the blade in making parries. What about this pommel shape? Any thoughts?