Roman Sword ??

[Neuraleanus]

is more fantasy than anything else. A transitional weapon or dark age, I do not know. The fact is that the most likely possibility is that this sword is a fake. Besides looking wrong, the metal itself looks too good.

[Tarbicus]

Doubting Thomas :wink:

[stevesarak]

Here’s an observation.

When you first said “I would not pay $1 for itâ€

[Neuraleanus]

then it is clearly not a good copy. It looks like nothing that I can find in my library of roman military reference works. Now it might be something from a later period, I do not have the reference materials for that, but if it doesn't show up in any published roman references, then I have to doubt it being roman. There are ALLOT of fakes in the market. Buying antiquities is a risky business. You're buying on fantasy, not reality, but, it's your mioney to waste.

[Tarbicus]

Didn't I post reference to a publication that has finds like it except for the pommel?

[Neuraleanus]

but this sword does not look anything like the ring pommel swords that are illustarted in Bishop and Coulston I. It is definitely not a ring pommel sword.
The pommel is the most significant part.

[stevesarak]

then it is clearly not a good copy. It looks like nothing that I can find in my library of roman military reference works. Now it might be something from a later period, I do not have the reference materials for that, but if it doesn't show up in any published roman references, then I have to doubt it being roman. There are ALLOT of fakes in the market. Buying antiquities is a risky business. You're buying on fantasy, not reality, but, it's your mioney to waste.

Remember that most books show you the norm of what's used by a particular tribe, or nation. This is obviously not a standard Roman sword, that’s obvious, the pommel is all wrong. Now, near the end of Rome you can find more and more swords that are unique in design, but only one has been found. So who knows how many are were unique sword were never found and lost for all time.

As far as I know, there isn’t a book on old antique swords that can’t be grouped to any nation. Lets say there’s a roman solider who keeps using the back of his sword to pound away at things and the pommel keeps breaking, he might go to the local smith and have him make him something out of metal, but wait, it throws the balance off. He’s seen a celtic style with the hazel nut pommel. He thinks it’s still functional, it’s strong and being a small light pommel, it doesn’t throw off the balance, he might have it made. I’m not saying that’s how my sword came about.
Since scholars can’t conclusively identify this as your typical roman sword, it would be better to leave it out of books of roman swords they’re creating, rather then loose creditability because they can’t prove it. Just because you can’t find the classification of sword doesn’t mean its fake, it could have been someone’s personal creation back then.

This sword show the characteristics of two different swords, Roman and migration type. There wasn’t any group of people that used it, therefore I dough you would find it by looking in books that describe swords by nations.
If you look hard enough you might find an obscure reference in some sword book describing swords found but not by category, such as roman.

Like I said, if you look around you can find rare Roman swords that are unique in style, only one exists. This sword looks like it was a unique roman sword from below the pommel down or would you disagree with that? If you can agree that it is roman in style, from the pommel down, then since no other culture produced that kind of sword, then the simplest explanation would be that is Roman. But now we have the pommel, which as we all know doesn’t belong on any roman sword, so what gives? That’s what makes this sword unique, it shouldn’t exist, yet here it is.

And of course, good luck finding any reference to it. What we need is a book of personal sword creation though the ages.

Once again Titus Licinus Neuraleanus, you gave me the chance to think about old roman swords, so thanks again.

[stevesarak]

Any chance of a link to a picture?

Check the PM I just sent.

Just sent a PM to you.

[Cornelius Quintus]

Ave Steve,

that’s right. Not even the best replica can replace the feeling of having history in Your hands and feel directly connected to the past – unpayable.

And You’re right too: The decision to buy or not, to judge something as ‘genuine or copy’ depends on the special situation, many information, experience and the personal feeling about the object and the vendor.

In ancient times, thousands of items were manufactured and only a few survived. Imagine the huge equipment of only one Legion, manufactured at several locations by different skilled craftsmen, without the blueprints and the precision of our modern industry’s serial production. Even in World War One, some German Fokker-Biplanes were reported to have been partially built after chalk-drawings on the wall or ground, based on finished planes or parts.

So some items are unique, which simply might mean, that they are the only examples dug out today. But they might have been also very common in their times. Or vice versa.
For example the Gjermundbu helmet (with ‘spectacles’) is the only one known dating to that period. So lots of dark age reenactors are wearing that design and You can buy some very decent copies of it. On the other hand, someone who examined the original, reported it was very fragile and he doubted, that it was used in battle. So it might have been a unique helmet, quick made for a special purpose and overvalued today. If the Gjermundbu find never would have been dug out, and a modern reenactor would built exactly that helmet – would the experts applaud or say: ‘Get away with that fantasy junk’? ;-)

Steve, You did all You could do – so enjoy Your treasure! Perhaps it fell into the water in battle (on a bridge) or was simply lost by an accident on transportation? Some experts doubt, that they were willingly deposited as gifts to the gods, when found in fresh water. Some excellent preserved Viking swords were found in the mud of the former Viking harbour of Haithabu/Hedeby, not far away from here. They looked packed together, beeing still in their scabbards. Perhaps someone stumbled and let them fall – a merchant unloading his commodities or a warrior equipping the dragon-ship? The must have searched and searched, but never found them again, even knowing the certain location at the harbour. Perhaps Your own sword came up to the daylight again, after meltwaters washed away the covering mud bit by bit?

And @ Neuraleanus
Perhaps simply an angry 10th century Viking chief has thrown it overboard, shouting: “All right, ist’s april fools day. But who of you mad seals has fixed this ancient letter opener to my best replacement pommel and put it in my sunday-scabbard? :-D lol:

Greetings from Germany

Heiko (Cornelius Quintus)

[Tarbicus]

Don't forget the Fulham pattern is thought to be a transition between Mainz and Pompeii, although highly debatable. Perhaps Steve's sword is a transition from a spatha?

[url:1tbq8f77]http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1438&view=previous[/url]

In terms of profile the pommels on a couple of the spathae above have the same cross-section.

See in particular Peter Johnsson's first post in the thread posted above.

[Cornelius Quintus]

Ave,

and perhaps the proud owner is the only one, who can give a hint to the sword's point of balance?

The somewhat heavy hilt furniture (metal, not wood), I rather would have expected to a longer blade. But looking at a photograph is not the same as holding it in your very own hands.

Due to the overall fine condition of the sword, the balancing might still today indicate the style of using it?

Greetings from Germany

Heiko (Cornelius Quintus)

[Sassanid]

Hi Steve,

I, like Jim (Tarbicus) am unable to find any guard that is exactly the same as yours, but quite a few that are similar. I personally (minus that pommel) have no problem believing that this sword is genuine 2nd-4th C AD. A Roman shaped blade with ethnic Dacian/Sarmatian guard. Perhaps even the blade is Dacian/Sarmatian.

That pommel is your problem, or maybe your key. Know any Romanian archaeologists who can help you? That pommel looks 10th C, and I have never seen anything that suggests otherwise. Find an earlier Dacian/Sarmatian example and bingo! I believe Sarmatians were often buried with their worldly possessions so there should be some hope.

Michel Feugere's "Weapons of the Roman" has similar guards fitted to ring pommel swords on page 123.

Best wishes on your quest,

Andrew

[stevesarak]

I’ll check the center point over the weekend, but as you can see from the picture, the bottom half is pretty corroded. A lot of metal is missing, which of course throws off the balance.

[stevesarak]

The resolution on the picture is to small to see the detail. Here's another one of part of the lower blade.

[stevesarak]

Oops, for those like me that didn't realize you can zoom into the picture by clicking on it, you can.