A Question on Collecting

[Panzerraptor]

Hello, everybody. I hope this is a proper place to post my question.

So I started collecting swords since last year and already I have a flyssa, a gold-encrusted shamshir, a takouba, and a (possibly) ceremonial kora. I enjoy having these weapons and hope to increase my collection further. Of course, you might notice that the shamshir on the list and, if you've seen the listing in the seller's forum, you're aware that this blade is of much more recent craft than its contemporaries. This leads to my main question: Are modern swords less worthy than antique arms?

Allow me to further pontificate my query. As a collector, or rather, sword enthusiast, I respect and appreciate the history of these items as reflections of the cultures and eras they hail from. Indeed, to have a sword and inspect it personally, and clean it within the confines of your home is a great way to understand how these weapons functioned and the significance they had in their place of origin. That said, as the first (and favorite type of) sword that I managed to obtain was a flyssa, I feel a sense of accomplishment as I have received such a prize that few people can attest to possessing: a rare weapon nearly three hundred years old with intricate designs and a unique build.

However, I understand that some swords or other periodic pieces are hard to come by either due to price or rarity or because, while exquisite in appearance, were made merely decades ago (again, the shamshir). From time to time, you will see items like these but made with relatively high quality and seemingly well-crafted replicas of historical versions (like how most katanas nowadays are - unless they're sold at the mall or HSN, of course - as there are very few examples beyond the usual gunto and fewer that can be obtained at an affordable price).

With this in mind, if one were to come across such replicants, like a ram dao based on an old model, are such items in this hobby seen as merely useless trinkets inexperienced collectors use to fill in space? Does having such an item, lacking any prior history other than "it's based on an existing sword" somehow cheapen the "true" experience and therefore the collection in general?

[A.alnakkas]

My biggest issue with new items is when its sold as a genuine old piece and sometimes "antiqued" to look old. That's dishonesty that proper research would most likely keep you safe from.

I collect swords and daggers mainly from the 20th century, with older blades. But I am also currently commissioning a sword that is completely new, from its blade to its dress. But its made completely traditionally as well... to me its part of the same heritage and to me its more valuable since its "my" sword. Thats a different discussion all together.

Collecting means a big investment, not just financially but also in time and mind. You need to study and learn from your mistakes, and to never shy from asking and acknowledging mistakes.

[kahnjar1]

I agree with Lofty in his comments. I was once told by an old collector, now sadly passed, that "If it looks wrong, it probably is". So reference and research of a particular item before you buy, will stand you in good stead, and likely save you in cost.
I relation to "modern made" as opposed to old/antique, you would need to consider how representative of the original your modern copy is. If an original is either almost impossible to own, or the cost of one is too high, then I personally do not see any problem in having a copy/replica in one's collection until an original comes along. That decision is of course up to the individual, and due care would need to be taken that one does not pay the antique price for something which is not antique. .

[silberschatzimsee]

I still don't own any weapon but for me collecting new 'replicas' is not an option. I prefer to stay without anything rather than haveing something contemporary.

Off course should I want to participate in reenactments or similiar festivities I would go for the modern stuff, but then I wouldn't consider them collectibles but tools which can be heavily used without takeing too much cautions about their wear down.

So I am still waiting for the right object to stumble upon but that's part of the game when collecting.

[ariel]

There are as many collections as there are collectors.
Each one collects what he (or she) wants and there are no rules or objective criteria to judge the validity of reasons for collecting any particular category of objects.
Come to think of it, there are some strange people who collect beer labels, old coins, watches, Faberge eggs, antique cars, mistresses, and ( horror, horror!) .... stamps! :-))))

[Bob A]

As I see it, there is a basic choice to be made, whether to focus on examples which were made, and used, within a period in which their use was the norm, or to support the continuance of a traditional art and craft, so that it might not be lost.

Either, or both, are worthy of effort and expenditure of personal treasure, in my opinion.

The making of objects which are visual and perhaps functional replicas of weapons from days gone by, for the purpose of studying techniques of their use in the period for which they were intended, is also worthwhile.

Making objects, however artfully, with the purpose to deceive, is less worthy a practice. However, I can even see a certain utility in forming a collection of deliberate fakes and forgeries, so long as it is represented as such.

Stuff made as souvenirs for tourists has the value of supporting the maker, and pleasing the tourist. I can't see collecting it, myself, but tastes differ. I knew someone who collected schlocky ashtrays from the places she visited; she derived much pleasure from this.

I don't see that I've added anything of value to this discussion, alas; nor have I closed any doors. With 8,000,000,000 people extant, more or less, there's plenty of room for variety.

As Aleister Crowley, described as "England's worst man", put it, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law".

(I think England produces the best eccentrics).

[Tim Simmons]

Very good topic. This link covers some of your questions. It is not about swords but the same argument applies. Many fine words about good new art as opposed to bad new art, and who is to say who can make art {no different to swords} These comments all seem to be from collector dealers or dealer collectors????

http://www.newguineaart.com/png-art.php

Something I would add from my own experience: try selling or exchanging a good new piece to a dealer, sadly their opinions I have found are somewhat different to the fine words.

If you have the money to collect fine new pieces as in this other link then fine. If you have not you probably get better pieces and value from old to antique. Not only do you get a nice thing at sometimes sensible prices but also history. I know where my interest is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2x5WzIu5iXU

A really good documentery understanding modern sword collecting.

[kronckew]

see also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX9IF4v3RdU&spfreload=5

today's 'new' sword is tomorrow's antique.

my first 'real' sword was a USCG officer's sword required for my dress uniform. modern frangible stainless, barely a sword, a sword in name only. but gold plated and pretty enough for a parade, pass-in-review or a wedding. not really a weapon, but a statement. i had no real love for it.

i bought my first samurai sword in the 1980's on a visit to japan on the way home from saudi arabia to the USA. it was made a year or so before by one of the then two japanese master swordsmiths designated as 'living treasures', using traditional materials and techniques and cost me a small fortune. had to wait an extra week to get a permit from the govt. there to export it. reproduction? sadly stolen from the relative i left it with while i worked overseas. ther arte some very good smiths out there turning out just as good a weapon as the old stuff.

some new swords are junk, some decent place-holders, some just as good if not better than those of the past. beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all, some here will not touch anything less than a few hundred years old. some are more flexible & eclectic. to each his own.

i cannot now afford the expensive fancy gold plated and bejewelled sharp pointies beloved by many, and make do with the old warhorses that slip thru the cracks, a few sharp modern swords and axes that just might do when the solar flares knock out our modern world.

i'll likely carry this hungarian one (attached), along with a longer sharp pointy or two. too modern for most here, it's got 40 layers of twisted C10+90MnCrV8 top + C10 serrated middle part + 90MnCrV8 serrated cutting edge. i think this will be one of tomorrow's antiques. new isn't necessarily bad, tho this forum is mostly for discussion of the older vintage and antique arms rather than ones that may be in use even as i type somewhere in the world...

[RobertGuy]

Not all new made swords are replicas. A newly commissioned katana from a Japanese smith is a katana, no more no less. British Army Officers still buy new made swords to carry on parade. Ceremonial items... yes. Made of stainless steel... sometines. Still real swords not replicas. I like to classify swords in this way:
1.Genuine. A functional sword made and used in the way it always has been. Does not have to be old.
2. Antique/vintage. An old genuine sword, originally issued and used as intended. May now be too delicate or valuable to be anything other than an object of study or admiration.
3.Replica. A sword made to look similar to a genuine sword. May be made of different materials or constructed differently to a genuine sword, Does not have to be functional, Many swords purchased by reenactors fall into this category.;
4. Recreation. A modern made functioning sword that reproduces the look and feel of ancient blades. Can vary a lot in quality but many modern smiths are producing custom work of the finest quality. These allow mere mortals to handle swords that are normally only seen in relic condition in museums.
6. Fantasy. Modern made funtional swords made to non traditional designs. Often based around blades appearing in films or novels. Quality can range from diabolial to superb.
5. Fake. A sword sold with the intention raising more money from the purchaser by deception. A good replica swords is nor a fake until someone tries to sell it as genuine or antique.
6. Genuine fake . I have added this one to my categories to cater for Japanese gimie blades. Genuine antique katans but with a fake signature often added by the original smith to increase value. Can be valuable in their own right.
Happy collecting

[Lee]

A most interesting thread indeed!

Modern bladesmiths do produce some fantastic work, very often surpassing antiques in terms of functional capability as well as fit and finish. I surely like Kronckew's short sword pictured above; such high quality work surely qualifies as art and should appreciate or hold its value (though these should be secondary concerns to a collector).

I have never had a huge 'war chest' of cash to pursue the collecting hobby, though I have probably been more fortunate than many. In order not to be overwhelmed, I would apply blinders and focus on something specific, though the collection shows evidence of too many diversions from when I found quality where I was not looking. One of the things that attracts me to this field of collecting is the incredible ingenuity that craftsmen 'before science' applied to overcome their often inferior materials and lack of scientific understanding of what was really going on. The antiques also, for me, carry a cachet of being from and part of a time when edged weapons were truly culturally relevant.

But, in the end, one should collect what personally thrills one's self and not what others tell them that they should like. If such items become a good investment, that should be 'icing on the cake' for the collector's estate.

[Rich]

Lee said:

"But, in the end, one should collect what personally thrills one's self and not what others tell them that they should like. If such items become a good investment, that should be 'icing on the cake' for the collector's estate."

Agree 100%; collect what you like, but like what you collect.

Rich

[drac2k]

All very valid points, however antique weapons are still plentiful at reasonable prices! It will require study, knowledge,and work.Auctions, estate sales, garage sales, gun and militaria shows, antique sales,epay, etc..If it looks like too good, it probably is a bad investment, but not always.This is where learned experience, study, and putting your hands on it first will pay dividends.
Part of the learning curb, will be getting burned ; don't get mad, just keep it, study it and learn from it .

[Battara]

Greetings Panzerraptor. Here are my thoughts:

1. First rule of thumb: collect what you like.

2. As far as market value is concerned, that is a different question. Example: a custom knife maker makes a dagger replicating a Persian kard vs one found at HSN, then the custom piece is more valuable as a rule due to the better quality, craftsmanship, rarity, etc.

However, an original Persian kard vs a custom made replica, usually the original one would be worth more.

Again these are generalities assuming that the condition of the original one is near perfect and the quality and craftsmanship is superb.

This does not take into account demand pressures on the antique weaponry and custom knife markets. Plus, some folks like custom stuff only for the artwork, some the antique stuff for that plus the history.

Although this is more to this, these are the bare bones basic tenets that I see.

Clear as mud?

[Jim McDougall]

EXCELLENT TOPIC!!!!!
And well posed question, very glad you are with us Panzerraptor !

Collectors are truly a breed unto themselves, and quite honestly, everyone collects for their own reasons and based on their own interests and passions...which easily become obsessions. You could not have come to a better place to ask this, as here there are legions of well seasoned and incredibly knowledgeable participants.

While I am personally a historian and researcher, I did collect for most of my life (I am now 70), so can truly say I have studied arms and their histories for over 50 years. That being the case, I can also say, I feel as though I have barely scratched the surface of the amazing stories these weapons have to tell.

As a young collector I could not afford the high quality and condition of many weapons, and usually ended up with well worn, rough quality items usually passed over by collectors. This served me perfectly, as I wanted to learn FROM the weapons, and discover who used them, where might they have been, why were there certain features as opposed to others?

If you use the search feature here on our forum, you will find amazing discussions where these kinds of details were shared and learned...I have always been proud of the things we all learned TOGETHER here. I have written here as many have for nearing 20 years....so imagine the archives we have compiled!

For example.......you mention the flyssa......an absolutely fascinating form, and classic example of the quintessant representation of a culture....the Kabyles tribes of Berbers in Algeria. What was discovered in our research on these years ago was that the form itself probably evolved from Ottoman yataghans of earlier form with straight, deep bellied blade . The earliest positive reference we have to a 'flyssa' was 1827, but the term was not coined until around that time (French term referring to the Iflisen tribe who was early aligned with these). The earliest example I found was provenance from c 1857 from capture in campaign in French Foreign Legion museum.

Therefore, while not necessarily 'old' chronologically, this sword is perfectly representative of a key ethnographic form, and 'of the type' used by the Kabyles in their conflicts with French colonial forces.

In many cases ethnographically, tribal peoples and many cultures still value the forms of weapons they have used traditionally for many years, often centuries. So will we see these often 'modern' weapons produced by these people as reproductions, or fasified? Not always, though many are indeed produced to satisfy the desire for souveniers.

For a sword enthusiast, who studies the actual use and methods of swordsmanship involved with these weapons, a collection might include both vintage and modern examples.

For purists who assemble only vintage examples to display the various forms in associated groupings and variations, they would abhor the idea of modern reproductions naturally.

For historians, myself included, we cannot gain any knowledge from that aspect from a modern weapon, as we look for answers in patination, markings of the times, damage or alterations which might have resulted during certain historic events, influences reflecting changes in the culture or context regionally by intertribal, colonial or other incursion etc.
Therefore, reproductions or modern copies null those purposes.

My advice to any new collector, and for me it is most exciting to welcome you and all who enter these ranks, is emphatically:
The most important weapon you will collect, is knowledge!
Study, learn, remember......then buy.

Follow your heart and your own passions and interests in deciding what will be part of your holdings, collect for yourself.....not others.

Never restrain from asking questions, or sharing thoughts or ideas, especially here . There is merit in every one of them, in one degree or another. We are all a team, and the goal is to learn.

Thank you for asking this one!!!

Well done!

Jim

[Battara]

Well elaborated Jim!

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Battara

Well elaborated Jim!

Thanks Jose!!!!
I felt like I wrote "Ben Hur" !!!

[Battara]

Or Ben Him (must respect all sexes) 😄