is it a roman sword or a celtic one?

[marcos]

This sword is presently on the market, and the seller shows it as a celtic sword, III-II cent. b.C., but , although a very interesting sword, I would be not so sure it is really a celtic one.



The total lenght is 66 cm (blade around 57 cm ,I guess), weigth 385 grs, and , as you can see, it has a short tringular point. All those features of the blade are in average for an imperial roman gladius of the I century a.C. On the contrary , the scabbard looks in celtic style, but I have never seen celtic blades so short and with a similar traingular point.
I think it could be a roman sword, made from an auxiliary craftman or for an auxiliary soldier; I'm not sure, of course, and this is why I want to talk about it with you .

[Matthew Amt]

Whoa! Fascinating. If the length you give is correct, it looks REALLY narrow. The proportions look more like a spatha. I'm assuming there are no details of this find, i.e. it's a typical looted artifact. (Which makes me wonder if the mods are going to stomp this thread, hmmm...) So there's no way to tell if the scabbard or the other loose bits actually go with this blade or not. The way the top of the scabbard is still stuck to the blade, with no indication that it's broken off from the rest of the scabbard frame, makes me think these pieces are not related. So while it COULD all be one fascinating find, it could also be a collection of unrelated artifacts, or partly or wholly faked.

Yeah, the more I look at it, I really don't think that main scabbard frame section was made to go with this blade. It has a lot more room at either edge than any original blade found in its scabbard--compare to the narrower part stuck to the top of the blade. And it looks complete, with nothing missing at the top, which would mean it's too short for this blade.

Overall, I'd agree that the blade shape looks more Roman than what I've seen of Celtic, and assuming "Roman" I'd go for a date of first or second century AD. But Eastern Europe turns up some unfamiliar things, sometimes! It could be some kind of hybrid, or an export piece, or something that was modified (or a new scabbard made for an older blade) during its own lifetime.

More data needed!

Matthew

[Ordovices]

What a shame the context to this facinating find is lost .

[marcos]

So while it COULD all be one fascinating find, it could also be a collection of unrelated artifacts, or partly or wholly faked.
Matthew

good idea, indeed it could be so. The top of the scabbard looks narrow than lower, thus not coming from the some scabbard, anyhow I don't think is a fake.
Unfortunately I have not more informations , just that it was in a old german collection, but the proportions and the general shape look to me more closer to a gladius from the first cent. than to a spatha. By the way, they are not close to a celtic sword of III b.C. .
But perhaps we are mistaking.

The seller is mentioning two issues about this kind of celtic swords (Celtic Art by Ruth and Vincent Megaw page 134. British Museum Guide to Early Iron Age Antiquities 1925 page 58, figure. 56) , but I don't know them. I have some good issues about celtic artifact , included a catalogue of the British Museum , and I can't find a celtic sword like that.

[john m roberts]

I may be way off here, but is it possible that that top "scabbard" section is actually a decoration permanently fixed to the blade? It seems to fit awfully close.

[marcos]

note an odd feature: near the point the blade is quite wider than near the tang. It narrows steadily from the point to the tang, that' indeed strange.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Those were both my first impressions of the sword. Thought perhaps it was just me!

[Conal]

The scabbard indicates a migration era sword to me. If it were Celtic it would have a full plate finish...this looks like a wooden scabbard with a trough fitting.

Those fittings look like some Bog Find belt or baldric fittings I have seen.

[Chuck Russell]

that strap attachment, its more vendal/viking is it not?

[marcos]

that strap attachment, its more vendal/viking is it not?

I don't know , but surely the blade is not viking, absolutely not similar. Indeed it is very close to roman style.

[mcbishop]

This sword is presently on the market, and the seller shows it as a celtic sword, III-II cent. b.C., but , although a very interesting sword, I would be not so sure it is really a celtic one.

The decoration on the scabbard is alarmingly similar to that on a series of fakes that were doing the rounds in the UK a few years back. Started out with a supposed 2nd/3rd century copper-alloy dagger scabbard and progressed to a full gladius sheath in the same technique - the only thing it lacked was the word 'dodgy' embossed on it! The reason it looks 'like' so many things is that it is the usual eclectic mix (with a hint of originality) that you find in such confections.

Mike Bishop

[brennivs - tony drake]

I have to agree with Mike there is too much wrong with the whole thing to be right. The decoration is no way near anything that the Celts were capable off let alone anything found to compare with it, even the most basic of swords found. The sword itself looks like it has heavy scoring on the lower half which makes it look like wrought iron and the blade that tapers from shoulder to point, no point for it to being made like this, as for the locket again the clearence would make it imposible to make a scabbard that would work and take the blade shape. The ring item looks to be a chest horse harness fitting which may be the only thing origonal as it looks to be made with bronze as the guttering is made from brass as the the locket is, I hope someone does not pay too much for this as other I have seen go for silly money and become a white elephant. Marcos thanks for posting this a very interesting item
Regards Brennivs

[marcos]

uhm... fakes, you say .
I have to be honest and to say that I did not thought to that eventuality :oops: . Could be , indeed could be, but , if it is so, is a high quality fack (and very dangerous).
Some points of the surface of the blade looks rather original (take a look to the two portions precisely under the horizontal bars of the scabbard, you can see a different type of damages impossible to falsify, up to my opinion ) , but , on the other side, the remaining of the blade is not convincing, I don't see none hole or damage made from rust.
And more, what would be the reason for a forger to do a so odd blade , counter tapering ? To make a fraud would be better do a "normal" shape gladius, I think.
Nevertheless in this case is very hard to say if is a fake or an original , just looking to a photo .

[Medicus matt]

Gods, what an odd looking hybrid of stuff.

The chape elements look English/North Germanic/Southern Scandinavian Migration period, both in the form of the long u-shaped channel and the punch work decoration on the lateral plates.

The strap distributor has a distinctly 9th C scandinavian look to it, possibly recycled from horse harness?

As for the blade, in size and form the closest parallel I can think of is some of the early medieval, pre-Viking Irish swords, which would tie in date-wise with the fittings (except the strap distributor) and possibly even the decoration.

Odd and intriguing.

[marcos]

As for the blade, in size and form the closest parallel I can think of is some of the early medieval, pre-Viking Irish swords, which would tie in date-wise with the fittings (except the strap distributor) and possibly even the decoration.

I don't know very well early medieval/ irish swords, but were them so short (66 cm) and with a so triangular point ? All those I know are quite longer and with a different point.