Interesting Unusual Rapier for comments

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by fernando

Just so says i, Gene .
Look at the space left on the right side, if the inscription were Solingen.
Definitely Klingenthal, don't you agree?, matching with inspection mark and everything ... just like Valjhun's example.


.

Hi Nando,
I see what you mean. Perhaps Vajhun can help with a comparison shot from his rather nice example?

I've now finished the clean-up on mine and there is a stamped mark on the other side but it's not readable. Doesn't look like there is any script under it either, just some scratches.

[Atlantia]

Here's a quick capture of Valjhuns:

[Dmitry]

Both blades are clearly marked Klingenthal, with post-Napoleonic inspectors' marks. The swords themselves were either wall-hangers or assembled for theatrical/film combat. Just my $.02

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Dmitry

The swords themselves were either wall-hangers or assembled for theatrical/film combat. Just my $.02

Do you have any evidence at all to support that conclusion Dmitry?

[Dmitry]

Originally Posted by Atlantia

Do you have any evidence at all to support that conclusion Dmitry?

Just my $.02.
I see no other purpose to them, other than decorative or theatrical.
19th c. markings on the blades were not removed in attempt to deceive.

[fernando]

Hi Gene,
Me too, i wouldn't reject the idea that someone bought a bundle of blades at the Klingenthal surplus depot and made a few 'appealing' swords for the noveau riche to ostentate in their brand new mansions.
The theatrical/movie prop is also a good theory.

[Atlantia]

I can't understand your reasoning Dmitry. Was yours badly made or deliberately blunted? Did it strike you as a cheaply produced, lightweight, suitable for stage use?

I think I've already said why I feel that it differs from the usual pieces made in this period for pure decoration ('wall hangers') but I agree with that being a somewhat subjective view.
However, made for theatre film? No chance.
I collect film props

This sword is too well made, far too heavy and dangerous, too expensive and not suitable for the purpose.
I have seen 'real' swords modified (see below) for possible use in this context and it is understandable that they would be because they were plentiful and cheap 100 years+ ago.
But to use a new, so more expensive, relatively heavy sword with a fine dangerous point would be nigh-on suicidal.

Hell even dropping it could nail someones foot to the floor!

Actors are not professional swordsmen so you don't give them deadly weapons or they will likely kill each other.
Many early stage/film swords had sporting blades, often Epee (or even foil). Often these were remounted in fancy repro or real hilts. Sporting epee blades are of course edgeless and button ended.
Some prop/stage swords had aluminium blades, some have steel 'non blades' etc. Occasionally old swords are used, usually with replacement blades or at least some nod to safety modifications presumably ones used in the cheapest amateur productions (the point removed and blunted edge). depending on the context of use. You get the picture.
Nobody would order prop swords to be made like this.

Also there was no need for 'quality' as there were no high-def close-ups and the combat was simulated.
My sword is too 'well made' for a prop.
Such quality and care of construction is not needed for a prop.

Fencing with a real sword is extremely physically demanding. Hell, fencing with a sporting foil is extremely physically demanding and they weigh almost nothing.
My sword weighs in at 820g. Now despite its excellent balance thats a fair old weight to 'swashbuckle' with.
Try it with one of yours of similar weight.
It's far to heavy and dangerous for stage use.
Try it for a few minutes then imagine that the slightest mistake and you will impale someone on the fine sharp point of this rigid steel military blade.

Even if I was wrong about ALL of that (which I don't think I am), then as an expensive item bought for that purpose, it would have seen extensive use in stage combat, resulting in a frighteningly chewed edge.
It has a few very minor edge clicks only.

The 'wall hanger' theory is possible despite my ideas to the contrary.
But film/theatre? No chance.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Gene! I think we're still pretty much on the same page. I for some reason still feel there was a more sound purpose for these weapons, and I think my pursuit in this direction suggests my apparant 'Quixote syndrome'
I suppose that my often near delusional romanticism concerning arms causes my disdain for the categoric dismissal of these as simply wallhangers or 'theatrical' pieces, while that of course is the easy assessment. In what I have learned about our societies in these 18th and 19th century times there were far more romantic delusions in popular culture than typically perceived historically. It seems that the penchant for secret societies, magical allusions, unusual religious and political pursuits in almost cult like character and of course organizations with more regimented character such as the Masons, and many fraternal and military organizations was prevalent in those times.

Often in post war circumstances, while demand for weapons waned, there were notable increases in such societal groupings, and particularly veterans of the military were powerfully represented in these many variant organizations. Political situations also brought national groups into effect who sought to preserve their country's heritage and past glories. The extremely colorful pageantry of today's reeenactment groups have distinct antecedents almost ironically in the periods which they anachronistically represent, in an almost telescopic analogy.

In studying the arms and armour of colonial New Spain, of course with the Conquistadors in the beginning, the images typically issued in literary or art treatments are actually far from how these forces were equipped. There were no 'issue' materials and most individuals were privately supplied. They used all manner of inexpensive surplus and composite items as could be obtained in thier home country, or in arriving supplies brought in. I believe thier 'countenance' would have been almost 'Quixotesque'. In studies of the armour used it has been discovered that types long obsolete in Europe had survived in these colonial regions far beyond thier antiquity.

The point is that in most cases, cultures and societies seek to preserve and celebrate thier ancestral heritage, and often this involves unusual or even seemingly 'eccentric' use or anachronistic representation of materials and fashion. In mant instances traditional court and dress weaponry, while appearing ostentatious or ineffective combatively, in surprisingly numerous cases was actually quite serviceable.

As mentioned, sword makers in peacetime often sought related venues to augment diminished demand including of course various tools and implements. However, they were not far removed from the skills and tooling to fashion the swords previously produced nor variations of earlier forms as required. If there were stores of surplus blades still held as orders for certain sword types ceased at end of hostilities or in cases or supercession, then these could certainly have been used for custom requests in varying volume.

There would be no need for trying to 'duplicate' marks, nor to remove them and the makers of these composite classical creations would have been actual swordmakers, not artisans fabricating decorative pieces.

In my opinion the concept of 'theatrical' pieces is often a bit 'overplayed' and as many as it seems have been given such assessment would presume there were virtual hordes of theatrical troupes moving about with huge stockpiles of arms and props. Actually these groups were much more a novelty than even imagined, thus the accordingly notable reception they received when they appeared.
With the idea of wallhangers, it seems there was more attention given in earlier times in replicas to armour than to swords. Actually the availability of 'old swords' was considerably well supplied and it would seem curious that anyone who had the somewhat unusual need to display an old sword would have had ample opportunity to acquire authentic old pieces almost at random. Arms collecting is more a modern phenomenon, though it was practiced in earlier times among certain nobility and gentry in degree. It was not until the latter 19th century that souveniers were gathered and displayed more nominally and these were typically of 'exotic' weapons, while as mentioned the demand for vintage European armour of illustrious heritage was more high end.

BTW, I agree the script would most likely be as Fernando suggested originally and well worked out by he and Gene...Klingenthal.

I guess this typical tirade of mine would be a nickel or so worth but my thoughts.

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Gene! I think we're still pretty much on the same page. I for some reason still feel there was a more sound purpose for these weapons, and I think my pursuit in this direction suggests my apparant 'Quixote syndrome'
I suppose that my often near delusional romanticism concerning arms causes my disdain for the categoric dismissal of these as simply wallhangers or 'theatrical' pieces, while that of course is the easy assessment. In what I have learned about our societies in these 18th and 19th century times there were far more romantic delusions in popular culture than typically perceived historically. It seems that the penchant for secret societies, magical allusions, unusual religious and political pursuits in almost cult like character and of course organizations with more regimented character such as the Masons, and many fraternal and military organizations.

Often in post war circumstances, while demand for weapons waned, there were notable increases in such societal groupings, and particularly veterans of the military were powerfully represented in these many variant organizations. Political situations also brought national groups into effect who sought to preserve their country's heritage and past glories. The extremely colorful pageantry of today's reeenactment groups have distinct antecedents almost ironically in the periods which they anachronistically represent, in an almost telescopic analogy.

In studying the arms and armour of colonial New Spain, of course with the Conquistadors in the beginning, the images typically issued in literary or art treatments are actually far from how these forces were equipped. There were no 'issue' materials and most individuals were privately supplied. They used all manner of inexpensive surplus and composite items as could be obtained in thier home country, or in arriving supplies brought in. I believe thier 'countenance' would have been almost 'Quixotesque'. In studies of the armour used it has been discovered that types long obsolete in Europe had survived in these colonial regions far beyond thier antiquity.

The point is that in most cases, cultures and societies seek to preserve and celebrate thier ancestral heritage, and often this involves unusual or even seemingly 'eccentric' use or anachronistic representation of materials and fashion. In mant instances traditional court and dress weaponry, while appearing ostentatious or ineffective combatively, in surprisingly numerous cases was actually quite serviceable.

As mentioned, sword makers in peacetime often sought related venues to augment diminished demand including of course various tools and implements. However, they were not far removed from the skills and tooling to fashion the swords previously produced nor variations of earlier forms as required. If there were stores of surplus blades still held as orders for certain sword types ceased at end of hostilities or in cases or supercession, then these could certainly have been used for custom requests in varying volume.

There would be no need for trying to 'duplicate' marks, nor to remove them and the makers of these composite classical creations would have been actual swordmakers, not artisans fabricating decorative pieces.

In my opinion the concept of 'theatrical' pieces is often a bit 'overplayed' and as many as it seems have been given such assessment would presume there were virtual hordes of theatrical troupes moving about with huge stockpiles of arms and props. Actually these groups were much more a novelty than even imagined, thus the accordingly notable reception they received when they appeared.
With the idea of wallhangers, it seems there was more attention given in earlier times in replicas to armour than to swords. Actually the availability of 'old swords' was considerably well supplied and it would seem curious that anyone who had the somewhat unusual need to display an old sword would have had ample opportunity to acquire authentic old pieces almost at random. Arms collecting is more a modern phenomenon, though it was practiced in earlier times among certain nobility and gentry in degree. It was not until the latter 19th century that souveniers were gathered and displayed more nominally and these were typically of 'exotic' weapons, while as mentioned the demand for armour of illustrious heritage was more high end.

BTW, I agree the script would most likely be as Fernando suggested originally and well worked out by he and Gene...Klingenthal.

I guess this typical tirade of mine would be a nickel or so worth but my thoughts.

I'd say completely on the same page Jim.
Can't disagree with anything there mate.