The new life of the sabre blade.

[TVV]

Originally Posted by werecow

A replica tries to reproduce something real. This is just a forgery.

I would not call it a forgery, because forgery implies an intent to deceive. Jacenty would not post the sword here if he really intended to potentially sell it as a Polish-Hungarian saber.

Anyone can do as they please with their own items - collecting is a hobby, aimed at deriving pleasure and if Jacenty likes the sword the way it looks now, then it is his absolute right to have it that way. Or he may want to use for reenactment - whatever his purpose, it does not matter, as it is his sword.

However, I disagree with a couple of notions:

1) Taking a European blade that has been hilted in North Africa and putting a European hilt on it does not restore it back to its original state. First, there is no evidence whatsoever that this blade was ever mounted on a Polish-Hungarian hilt before it found itself in Algeria - in fact, as Jim has pointed out, it is very probably that it may have been produced for the Maghreb market in the first place. Second, marrying it with a new hilt, or even with an old one does not restore it, but it destroys whatever actual history there was, and the end result is a compilation of parts, which may be esthetically pleasing, but historically never really existed - a sword Frankenstein of sorts. This is true even of regulation military patterns, where people still distinguish between original and parts weapons, for example when it comes to dress daggers, but even more so when it comes to ethnographic arms who by their very nature are all unique.

2) If katana and keris can be re-hilted over and over and it is culturally acceptable to do so, why not this blade? Katanas and keris have their own very specific cultural context, within which refreshing the blade's dress is considered normal and even encouraged. However, other swords do not exist within the same cultural context, especially in the Western world. Besides, a katana in a new saya, with a new tsuba and all the rest of the hilt parts is still a katana. In contrast, when you remove an Algerian hilt and put a Polish hilt on, the result is an attempt at a total cultural transformation of the object, from an Algerian sword to a Polish (or Hungarian, or Cossack) one. It takes an actual, historically correct identity and replaces it with a new, fake one.

This post came way longer than I intended, and it is probably somewhat pointless - anyone can do what he/she wants with their swords. But we just have to be aware that the end result here is something that may look like a Polish-Hungarian saber, but is not even close to being an authentic one.

[Radboud]

Thank you TVV, that is an excellent summation of how I feel about this fakery.

As you and Jim mention, it's all about context and much more nuanced than just "it's all about the blade".

It's not, it's about the complete sword, a historical object that is placed in its historical context.

There is a world of difference between an older blade mounted on 'newer' fittings to be carried and used by an officer in his time, and one where parts are put together in the now, because 'they look good'.

Jacentry clearly has metalworking skills, the hilt looks very good to my untrained eye, why not put a newly produced blade on it?

[David R]

For me, the tragedy was the removal of the original hilt, I would love to have an original Nimcha (at an affordable price) and now there is one less in the World.

[Jim McDougall]

In all my years of collecting (just a few decades) as much more historian than collector, the swords I acquired were dark, often slightly damaged, but intact and reflected the toll of time and whatever rough handling they experienced.

The most exciting were those with apparent battle damage (one yataghan had taken a ball at the fittings of the hilt), some were clearly battlefield pickups and relics. These I would NOT touch or 'clean up' obviously.
The only care I usually afford a weapon is to stop active rust or corrosion and apply wood and leather care as required to stabilize .

I was often chided for buying these 'dogs dinner' weapons(as they were called by scoffing others often), but these had stories to tell and THEY HAVE!
Years of research often revealed amazing details of where and what these weapons experienced.

This would NOT have been possible had they been ' given new life' by being dismantled and hopelessly altered.

In a trip to Athens many years ago, as I walked through the stately ruin of the Parthenon, I quipped, 'a little work here and there, maybe some fresh paint' .....the gasps around me were telling. Imagine! New life?

All of these swords I acquired were rough (lucky for me with my meager resources)......but honestly.......my EXACT thoughts were that I was rescuing them from the very fate of this old nimcha! They have remained in my charge ever since, safe from being dishonored with the removal of their well earned wear.

Im glad this thread came up, as it is a topic that perhaps need to be more addressed, and again I regret having to do so at Jacenty's expense, as I think he meant well, and not to deceive (but many do).
I rest my case.

[awdaniec666]

Grip wrong. Crossguard badly made. This blade would not have been used on a Central or Eastern European sabre of the 17th century. This Frankensword fits the ethical standards of its owner.

[serdar]

Ahhhhhh 😵*💫😵*💫😵*💫
Why, just why….
Nimcha was nice looking, now it is to throw away in a trash can…

[Jacenty]

I am sending detailed photos of the handle of this sabre.
The brass is broken, with hammer marks. The hole in the hilt is too big and someone tried to fit it with a hammer. The hilt must have been from another sabre.
The handle, made of rhino horn, is chipped and cracked. It crumbles easily.
If these parts were in better condition I would certainly not have reworked this sabre.

[Jacenty]

Originally Posted by awdaniec666

Grip wrong. Crossguard badly made. This blade would not have been used on a Central or Eastern European sabre of the 17th century. This Frankensword fits the ethical standards of its owner.

Original Cossack sabres can only be found on battlefields in Ukraine. They look as in the attached photos.








I believe that my adaptation does not deviate from the originals.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, there were hundreds if not thousands of craftsmen in Poland and Ukraine - blacksmiths and sabre makers who made battle sabres and each one was an individual, unique product.
I therefore disagree with your assessment.

[awdaniec666]

Originally Posted by Jacenty

Original Cossack sabres can only be found on battlefields in Ukraine.

No. And those swords are not called Cossack sabres.

You say the following:

Originally Posted by Jacenty

They look as in the attached photos.

And then that

Originally Posted by Jacenty

...each one was an individual, unique product.
I therefore disagree with your assessment.

So do they look all like the one from your photos? (No) Does yours look like the one on the photos? (No) Can one be sure from the photos that the sabre shown is original (No)

Nevermind, that Nimcha is already trashed - nothing left to argue about.