Spartan sword and not only

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

A collector sent me some photos of some of his collection. The most interesting among them was a sword he claims must have been the famous "Spartan sword".It was found in a Thracian grave with other three,almost identical swords, only one or two cm difference in length. The collector was free to do something no archaeologist would do,he cleaned the finds. The short sword had traces of the wooden scabard and of cource rust. The most magnificent is that the blade is serrated. This is the case also with another "spartan" sword that comes from a statue, and makes the sword lethal for one more reason. The shape and size coincides with sculptural evidence. Some of the photos are in the Phalanx forum,too.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unclenaed after it was found.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
with another of his swords,also cleaned and in its full weight

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

The hilt was made from three bronze pieces. Here the joint between the grip and pommel. Also, marks from fingers!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The serrates. They are made in a sophisticated way, with great skill and allowing fro the sharpenning of the sword

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

The spartan sword coming from an ovesized sculpture. It is also serrated.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Similar examples in grave stones(I don't know about the second one)

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

More of the collector's swords.Also cleaned
In the picture is a kopis on the top,three macedonian swords(actually this kind of kopis appears more frequently in vases) and a spear poin that he called "sarissa" point. There is a discusion about this in another thread.

casting hilt(?)

Khairete
Giannis

PS.This could be a place to post more photos of ancient swords,scabards. There seems to have been a vry big variety of swords,like there was for helmets.

[geala]

Hmmm, deserves a big laus.

[Matthew Amt]

Hmmmmmm, I think it's a fake. I remember reading about this piece on The Phalanx list (presumably it's the same one?), but these photos have lit me up. The 3-piece hilt is a big alarm bell--as far as I know, the ancients could only join bronze pieces like that by soldering with lead, but whatever is joining those pieces is brass-colored. That makes me think it's a modern braze or weld. In addition, why would such a solid bronze hilt not be cast in one piece? Or in two halves riveted together? Those were common methods all through antiquity.

Furthermore, why is the hilt so plain? I mean, sure, Spartan influence and all that, but there are no edges or lines or angles or anything else that regularly shows up on sword hilts. It just looks too much like something that someone *expects* to look Spartan.

I don't really like the blade shape, either. Can't put my finger on it, but it just seems off. Not to mention that it's remarkably well-preserved, without ANY little bits missing from the edge at all.

Finally, the serrations bother me. They aren't at all like those on the bronze model, but it seems like they're *inspired* by that. As if someone said, "Hey, that bronze one is serrated, so I'll put serrations on this for more realism!" Just makes me suspicious. Has any seen ANY other serrated ancient blades? Plus I'm wondering how serrations like that would survive sharpening.

I know, I'm raining on the parade, but everything about that piece makes me suspicious. Call me a skeptic.

Oh, and when you get hold of an ancient blade with bits of scabbard on it, DON'T CLEAN THEM OFF!! Do you have any idea how much information was just lost?? Mind you, I have no objection to people cleaning their own antiquities in general, but organic scabbard remains are so incredibly rare that ANYTHING we can learn from them is incredibly valuable.

So, what do we KNOW about the provenance of this sword?

Khairete,

Matthew

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Agreed in many things,Matt. This is what I told him about the scabard,too, but he said it was nothing so exciting.In fact, here is his reply:

The scabbard was nothing more than a thin layer of organic residue adhering to the iron. The scabbard on the Sarissa head is wood and leather and has bonded to the iron. I achieved only partial separation but a majority of it remains.
The thinner sword you like is an eagle headed, almost saber type weapon. We have 2 of these and based on writings we believe they are Macedonian infantry swords. I will get you some better pictures of the Spartan sword and the spear I have. The spear is authenticated by the British museum based upon a 600bc spear found at the Spartan colony of Syracuse as they are identical. The Thracian burial of the sprtan sword is feasible due to numerous sprtan incursions into the area. I'd have to he th relvany information to you.

Please share the pictures to anyone interested.

I don't know much about metallurgy in ancient Greece,and since no one made that point in the phalanx forum,I didn't dare it is fake,myself. Other things that make me skeptical,too, is that all the other swords have bronze hilts that appear to be made from the same workshop,and to me they look similar to the spartan sword,too. The same smoothe shape and lines.

This is his first message explaining about the cleaning

Bronze is easy to strip of corrosion as it sits on the surface. Iron can rust away to nothing unless protected or buried in the right conditions.

It all started with the Spartan sword. We could see what appeared to be the remains of the scabbard and also the faintest hint of serrations. We decided to do what no Archeologist would do. We gently, using only a toothbrush, cleaned that sword for months. In that time we removed almost all the corrosion leaving only bare iron and all the battle damage and serrations perfectly to see. We have since added all the additional weapons and have done the same to each. So what you see is these artifacts mostly as they appeared at burial. What we have learned about weaponsmithing and metallurgy as it relates to Greek weaponry could be a whole book itself!
The Greeks appear to have invented steel though not on the scale of the Romans, but they were first and skilled at making laminated or Damascus type blades before anyone else. Every sword or knife we have including the Kopises balance perfectly at the crossguards.
Not just hacking weapons or crudely made weapons. We have discovered that each and every one of them are finely balanced and precisely made.

Lamentable that I see so many magnificent weapons that could explain so much to us; sitting uncleaned, encrusted and forgotten in glass cases

But still, the shape is not that different from the sculpture. And what I would expect from a fake is to see something identical to the statue sword or the sculptures. and some of the other swords have indeed missing parts.
Khaire
Giannis

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

In the phalanx photo album he says,under the photo of the serrated blade:

Offest serrates allow for sharpening without dulling on edges on opposing serrates

Khaire
Giannis

[Matthew Amt]

This is actually getting more wierd, to me. If the bronze is so well preserved, why does it have that pebbly finish? (Most ancient bronze that I've seen is nice and smooth!) Why does it look like all of those horse-head hilts came out of the same workshop? How can he have come up with 5 or 6 solid bronze-hilted swords when most other originals don't have them? I'm NOT saying that he's lying to us, but I do think someone is selling him fakes. I'm also a little curious--what country allows excavated artifacts (particularly of this quality!) to be sold to foreigners?

The blade shape reminds me a lot of Indian-made pugiones and Mainz gladii. The point is too short and the waisted section is too long, moving the widest part of the blade too far towards the tip.

The little history lesson about Greek steel-making is largely irrelevant, but I'd like to see more early iron blades before concluding who "invented" steel. As I understand it, steel can be a natural result of the smelting process, depending on the ore, etc. In any case, iron swords were only made after about a thousand years of bronze swords, all of which were highly-developed weapons and very nicely balanced. It's only natural that iron swords would be good weapons as well.

Anyway, the more I hear about these swords, the more questions I have. In my experience, that's just not a good sign.

Khaire,

Matthew

[geala]

What you say about the possibility of a fake sounds very reasonable. The pieces look indeed very good, perhaps a bit too good.

But when I first saw it my thought was "Oh, the short swords looked like this, I had a very different imagination of them before". Because, to be honest, from the pictorial evidence of the ancient sources and the bronze modell from Crete I would have never thought of a Spartan or Greek sword, had I seen the shown pieces and was not told about the alleged background. And if you would make fakes, would you not make fakes with more "typical" appearance? :? wink:

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

I also think that the first photo I posted, with the uncleaned sword, does not show the same sword our collector has. The shape of the blade is more typical and the hilt longer and thinner.Perhaps one of the other "almost identical" swords from the same excavation(if they were excavated).
I don't believe he's lying to us. I don't know him very well,but if the swords are fake, then I think he's not responsible for that. On the other hand,you never know...
Khairete
Giannis

[Matthew Amt]

And if you would make fakes, would you not make fakes with more "typical" appearance? :? wink:

Not necessarily! Remember that "Roman Trooper" helmet that got posted here on RAT a while back? It had been "aged" rather severly, with holes corroded in the metal, etc., and bought as an antiquity by some known dealer, apparently for something like fifty thousand dollars! Yet anyone who knew anything took one look at it and said, "Oh, a Windlass Trooper helmet! Piece of junk!" Another dealer had a Deepeeka Attic helmet similarly aged and on sale as an original--you could just about make out the screw in the top holding on the crest knob, even in the photos. I've seen things on ebay that seemed to be old files or drill bits being sold as Roman spearheads. There was that whole run of "Roman" swords all showing up over a couple months, all with (surprise!) solid cast bronze hilts and very similar blades, all remarkably well preserved.

So no, there is no incentive for a fake-maker to make his fakes realistic or in line with general expectations. Practically any piece of rusty junk will sell, for BIG bucks.

I've also seen an original patera handle being sold as a mirror handle. Lots of dealers mislabel their stuff simply out of ignorance, though it can be surprising just how little they know, at times. For all we know, these "Spartan" swords could be World War I trench knives, or something.

When I hear about a legitimate archeological dig that has turned up something new and different, I'm all ears. I LOVE new finds that make us say, "We were all wrong!" But when I see something for SALE (or has already been sold) that just doesn't look like anything I've seen before, and the story of its origin is a little vague (or a lot vague), I'm immediately going to suspect a fake.

Bottom line, Caveat Emptor. Valete,

Matthew

[Hypaspist]

Hey Guys ,
These swords are bad fakes period . Amature stuff .It does not take much discussion .
Michael Pechacek Sr