Identifying a Gladius bought years and years ago..

[M. Caecilius]

Dear all,

Some years ago - around the turn of the millennium, near as I can remember - I bought this gladius at a shop in Nürnberg, Germany, not too far from the Castle.

It's robust enough, but I have been unable to locate said shop or a matching sword on the internet, but have several questions about this gladius.

1. Does anyone recognise the manufacturer and/or know the shop?

2. Does it represent a Pompeii style gladius?

3. How historically accurate is it?

On the latter question: there appears to be a small, triangular ricasso, not very noticeable, but, as far as I am aware, not supposed to be there at all. It does also feature a small bit of leather on the top of the guard, where it touches the scabbard: not sure about the historicity of that, either. The experts here will probably find some other such features.

Though I'm not part of any group, I still care about historical authenticity.

The sword is some 77 cm (30,3 inches) in the sheath, has a blade of 49 cm (30,3 inches) long and 5 cm (2 inches) at the guard, and handle some 20 cm (7,9 inches). The weight, near as I can tell, is just above 1 kg (something in excess of 2 lbs). No idea as to what kind of steel, wood and leather was used.

Many thanks,
Max

[Crispvs]

Max,

Your sword is indeed supposed to be a Pompeii type but you are right that the ricasso should not be there. The handle is also not very good. You may be able to remove the handle and make a more accurate one yourself and with a bit of work you could also remove the ricasso (I get the impression, looking at your photographs, that someone may have had a go at doing this already). The sheath is more of a problem. I don't know who manufactures them but I have seen them before and tend to refer to them as 'trooper' scabbards (in reference to the inaccurate 'trooper' helmets which are so often seen for sale by uninformed or unscrupulous vendors). The scabbard body and leatherwork are probably alright but unfortunately brasswork is not good with the chape being badly wrong and the locket also wrong and difficult to correct. The suspension rings are also rather too large.

I don't know what you are like at reconstructing these things yourself but there are a number of excellent tutorials here on RAT which can show you how these pieces can be made accurately, meaning that with a bit of work you may be able to correct you sword and scabbard to a fairly accurate level.

I hope I haven't spoiled things for you or complicated them too much, but as you wished to be historically accurate I though you might as well know the score.

Crispvs

[M. Caecilius]

Thank you for your answer, Crispus.

No, you have not spoiled anything: I was strongly suspecting that the sword was not quite up to standard where historical accuracy is concerned. As you say, I asked, and thank you for a truthful answer.

I do have got another sword - a Deepeeka AH2005 for which I found reviews and discussions (including here on the forum) which indicate that it's acceptably accurate for the price, albeit on the large side, but am ready to set that aside too should the inaccuracy be too damning. I'm also considering investing in a Republican sword.

But I'm digressing here.

I would be very interested in hearing what is wrong with the handle and the sheath. I admit to being very un-gifted when if comes to 'artistic' and similar visual elements, such as styles and types. I'm happy I figured out that the ricasso is not supposed to be there! I'm aware that asking for a complete and exhaustive guide to assess the historical exactitude of sword replicas is, to put it mildly, excessive, and that these matters often require lengthy experience, but a gentle push in the right direction would be really appreciated.

Many thanks,

Max