Secondary bevel
Mar 24, 2010 16:21:12 GMT
Post by randomnobody on Mar 24, 2010 16:21:12 GMT
Well I certainly do concede that European swords are not my personal forte, that should be pretty common knowledge...but from what I have seen of particularly aged examples, it seems only particularly famous swords, or swords of particularly famous people (Lunaman himself cited the sword of Saint Maurice) which surely have been in one or another royal or at least noble collection since the passing of their original owner. Most of these were surely cared for as they were looked upon as great things held by great people.
However, I tend to see more of the common man's sword...'s remnants. They often look more like sword-shaped lumps of charcoal than anything else.
Compare that to, say, the Japanese. Everybody's (okay not everybody, but the typical example of personal possession) got their grandpa's grandpa's sword, and it's not strikingly different than when it was originally made, despite possibly being used a great deal over its life. The only part that indicates any sort of age is the nakago, which...looks sort of like a nakago-shaped lump of charcoal at the end of the sword, sometimes. The blade may as well be brand-new. There are also many "historically important," "national treasure" swords locked away in one or another museum, too, and these are all kept in immaculate condition. But these are by no means swords of the common man.
It's not difficult to find "some guy's" sword from hundreds of years ago in like-new condition when dealing with antique Japanese swords. I have one, myself, that belonged to god-knows-how-many-people through god-knows-how-many-years and while it's not in "perfect" or even "like new" condition...it's still very much serviceable. I could still take it out and cut with it, and I would.
There are few European antiques that one would take out and cut with, and even fewer who would take them out and cut with them.
What I meant by "not taking care" was simply that; once they were done with them...that was it. They became waste. Unless, of course, they were of particular importance. I can't think of the last time I saw a 16th century European sword up on any antique site looking fresh and new bearing a passage about who's grandpa's grandpa's grandpa passed it down to them. Just some king or noble's sword hanging up in a museum, heavily patinated and showing typical wear of age.
What I mainly intended to get at was the issue of secondary bevels on current production swords and that it is not necessarily a BAD thing, nor should it automatically disqualify a sword as inferior product. Likewise, I also pointed out that there are budget manufacturers that DO incorporate the proper, convex profile that it seems many here find nonexistent in new, cheap swords.
However, I tend to see more of the common man's sword...'s remnants. They often look more like sword-shaped lumps of charcoal than anything else.
Compare that to, say, the Japanese. Everybody's (okay not everybody, but the typical example of personal possession) got their grandpa's grandpa's sword, and it's not strikingly different than when it was originally made, despite possibly being used a great deal over its life. The only part that indicates any sort of age is the nakago, which...looks sort of like a nakago-shaped lump of charcoal at the end of the sword, sometimes. The blade may as well be brand-new. There are also many "historically important," "national treasure" swords locked away in one or another museum, too, and these are all kept in immaculate condition. But these are by no means swords of the common man.
It's not difficult to find "some guy's" sword from hundreds of years ago in like-new condition when dealing with antique Japanese swords. I have one, myself, that belonged to god-knows-how-many-people through god-knows-how-many-years and while it's not in "perfect" or even "like new" condition...it's still very much serviceable. I could still take it out and cut with it, and I would.
There are few European antiques that one would take out and cut with, and even fewer who would take them out and cut with them.
What I meant by "not taking care" was simply that; once they were done with them...that was it. They became waste. Unless, of course, they were of particular importance. I can't think of the last time I saw a 16th century European sword up on any antique site looking fresh and new bearing a passage about who's grandpa's grandpa's grandpa passed it down to them. Just some king or noble's sword hanging up in a museum, heavily patinated and showing typical wear of age.
What I mainly intended to get at was the issue of secondary bevels on current production swords and that it is not necessarily a BAD thing, nor should it automatically disqualify a sword as inferior product. Likewise, I also pointed out that there are budget manufacturers that DO incorporate the proper, convex profile that it seems many here find nonexistent in new, cheap swords.