Help with old Spanish? rapier

[Justin]

I picked this one up a while back from ebay Ive showed it to a few people and have ghotten mixed comments some people think its original others think its a 20th century repro.My opinion is that it is either an authentic and very old rapier or its an actual fake {as in it was made and damaged to make it seem old}but I think the 19th/20th cent copy designatuion doesnt fit mainly due to the amount of work put into it,I doubt they would have spent so much time on a wall hanger.

The once elaborate swept guard has been badly crushed{run over by a car?}.Guard was ,without a doubt, investment cast from brass or bronze and very very detailed there are rounded knobs visible in the pics{seven or eight total and many that are missing},all of these are small faces about 1/4in in diameter complete with tiny noses,mouths ect.There is a depiction of a baby{jesus?} in the middle of the knuckle bow on both sides again complete with fingers,toes,eyes,and hair {he is covering his face with his hands.There are also a lot of floral and geometric patterns and some horsemen {dragoons?} whose faces are about 1/16in in diameter also complete with eyes noses ect.Bottom line is that someone spent a lot of time carving this out of wax.

Blade is very very springy has been bent and restraightened several times atleast,edged shows nicks,scrapes scratches and is missing its tip which is rounded over around the break{I have read that this was common on old rapiers.Unless someone purposely damaged this blade it WAS used for fighting.Ricasso is oval in cross section the rest of the blade is diamond tapering in width and thickness from hilt to point,tang is peened through a pommel button,entire grip assembly is loose and wobbly.Any thoughts or comments are appreciated if you guys want more pics Ill be happy to oblige.

Sheath looks like it was from one of those old eagle pommeled 'militia swords' I have seen attributed to the 1700s-e1800s.

Overall it measures 40.25in,blade is 33.5in

[tom hyle]

I think I tend to agree with you; nice looking piece. Such nice casting like that now in brass is not cheap, either. The squared off point reminds me of swords used for practice or for limitted duelling, such as mensur; perhaps this sword was modified for such a use. Not that it might not have snapped off from use.....

[Tim Simmons]

To me this looks like some sort of court sword.It does look like you could thurst with it, but it just looks not quite right or rigded enougth for a full combat rapier.

[Justin]

Tim,I wondered about that as well,but my only problem with the court sword designation is the wear to the blade,nearly the entire length of both edgeds are covered with nicks and dings that look very much like they were inflicted by another blade.

The odd blade has been the biggest problem with identifying it.I have found a few rapiers in books and online that have similar enough guards but they all have wider and thicker blades.This tempts me to think that this may have been a blade ground from billet,I have read that Europe exported a lot of that type of blade during the 1600s,maybe someone has an old firangi or something with one of they blades Im thinking of,and could post a pic for comparison.

[tom hyle]

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? My impression in regards to most of the straight sword blades exported to India that became firangis and kattars is that they were obsolete (and/or banned) used European swords' blades. The hilt looks native (European) to me? The spiral wire-wrapped grip would sure be a gratuitous, uneccessary, and difficult detail for a foreigner or faker, who would have to learn how to do it tightly from experiments. Also the grinding with the sharp plunges looks European to me. Does the ricassoe have a kind of humped surface to the flats?
A narrow thin blade does not seem unusual to me for a late rapier on the way to smallsword. IMO a modern tendency to see such as nonweaponish is as suspect as the same when applied to central African swords, or even to k(e)ris. In continuing European folk tradition, some trained fighters prefer a thin flexible blade for thrusting, saying that it "slides around the ribs" instead of sticking in one. Lightness of blade could of course be a very important consideration. I've seen such blades in old plain iron dress; not court swords those. The thrusting tip of many smallswords (the expanded base kind, the backsword kind, and others) is long, thin and flexy. These were the swords used for duelling in the period of most of the famous "Western" duelling history and literature (though I'll take a moment to say that the idea that this indicates an absense of duelling in other times and places is far from accurate. An otherwise decent book on modern Western duelling that sticks to this error is called "By the Sword"....random book review.). The swords whose weilders claimed them the deadliest ever (not that that's a singular attitude).
Is there any sign of lamination/folding? Are you going to repair the hilt? When you remove it the tang may tell you things. They get loney and talkative in there

[Chris Evans]

Justin,

I am inclined to cautiously opine that it is a late 19th century replica, maybe even later, probably made for theatrical usage. That would account for the nicks on the blade and the square tip.

The blade is inconsistently short (at 33") for the general style of the hilt, which affects the style of the late 1500s when blades went well above 40" and the oval cross section of the blade where it joins the hilt is very suspicious. Also, the quillon, if it can be called that, wasn't designed for "fingering", an almost universal feature of genuine rapiers dating from the 1500s.

Further clues could be obtained from the blade itself; Look for such features as evidence of rolling, absence of forging defects, regularity of grind etc. Also look for evidence of machining on the hilt, especially the pommel nut.

Cheers
Chris

[tom hyle]

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....).