Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > The Met Falcata Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Michael Granovsky




Location: Indiana
Joined: 09 Mar 2014

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sun 19 Nov, 2017 5:00 am    Post subject: The Met Falcata         Reply with quote

Hello!

I wanted to talk about this sword. The link is to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NY.
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/32256

The pics of both sides (click 'additional images') are good because you can roll your mouse in and really see whats going on.

So Im having a great smith make a reproduction. But I have to say, I think the smith that made it was of the highest caliber, with a firm grasp of designing elegant, functional, athletic and effective arms.

I have a question about the dimensions, especially the handle.

3 and 15/16th inches? Is there... room for fingers in there? Was it mis-measured? Were their hands smaller back then? Designed for a woman or teen? Or am I missing something.

Also, 1 pound... did this ancient metal weigh less? Is there a lot of material loss? Id expect a repro to be be a swell under 2, right?

Now I think the handle scales are postmodern, with brass pins. The pins have some sort of filing, grinding or machining on the heads. But Im sure the scales follow the tang. Wish I could see the tang...

Anyway, wow, those fullers.... challenging, and sexy. The deep line around the middle one looks like mascara around a woman's eye, somehow...

Thanks to anyone who would know this.

If you let it out NOW there'll be none left for battle!
View user's profile Send private message
Johannes Zenker





Joined: 15 Sep 2014

Posts: 71

PostPosted: Sun 19 Nov, 2017 5:40 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Almost 4 inches of hilt length (I guess at most 3 to 3 and a half grippable) seems okay for a knife/very short sword. A (slender) size 9 hand can surely fit, but it's definitely not spacious or made for large hands. Also extremely tight hilts weren't all that uncommon in the eastern world. Matt Easton has posted several videos on hilt and grip lengths of Tulwars and other Indian and Persian weapons, including one that is too tight for him, but fine for his wife. So yeah, it probably was made for a smaller person or at least smaller hands. No shame in having that detail slightly altered in a modern adaptation.

The weight seems okay, it is a short blade, the grip is quite light and you can be pretty sure that it's not a thick blade. Probably has a lot of distal taper (comparable to things like the Cluny falchion I'd assume).
View user's profile Send private message
Iagoba Ferreira





Joined: 15 Sep 2008

Posts: 151

PostPosted: Sun 19 Nov, 2017 7:59 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I'm sure that Fernando Quesada's articles will have more data on falcatas sizes and weight Wink
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Moore




Location: East backwoods-assed Texas
Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Likes: 6 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 2,223

PostPosted: Sun 19 Nov, 2017 8:17 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I can feel the edge on my thumb. Intoxicating. Wink .....McM
''Life is like a box of chocolates...'' --- F. Gump
View user's profile Send private message
JG Elmslie
Industry Professional



Location: Scotland
Joined: 18 Jun 2009
Reading list: 28 books

Posts: 250

PostPosted: Sun 19 Nov, 2017 10:13 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

well, firstly I'd second a close look at the work of Fernando Quesada for the subject matter.

My observations, however:
one of the most common reproduction errors is creating oversized grips - be it on these, on single-handed swords, etc. Unless you are actually endowed with Mike Tyson's hand size, a 10cm grip is more than adequate for normal people. Their hands were no smaller than ours. These hilts are designed to tightly "lock" into the hand, fore and aft, so there is minimal risk of displacement in use.

Weight, likewise, probably the most common errors is overbuilding the things. Cross-sectional profiles on those falcata I've looked at, are, like falchions, exceptional distal profiles from the forward guard, rapidly tapering to thin cross-sections in the 1.5-2mm range, with deep cut fullers forming a delicate web section to them. They are not, in any shape or form thick heavy choppers. Falcata, even more so, in that they are generally small. at about 50cm overall, its smaller than a conventional modern machete. I would expect that it is not fullered in the tang, but instead had proximal taper, going from maximum width at the forward guard down to about 1.5mm thick at the very back of the blade.

in other words, if it were drawn from the edge, it wouldnt be a:
=> shape, but
<> like that - tapering towards each end.

that's a fairly common error too.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Sun 19 Nov, 2017 12:44 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I agree with everything that JG Elmslie has said and will add that I was able to briefly have a look at the sword in question here and was shocked.. shocked.. and how thin the blade is. At the time, I really didn't understand what these types of swords were, how they were used, or why they were made the way they were. They're really quite a bit different than the swords that are my main area of interest. It was an eye opener, for sure.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Timo Nieminen




Location: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 08 May 2009
Likes: 1 page
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 1,492

PostPosted: Mon 20 Nov, 2017 12:14 am    Post subject: Re: The Met Falcata         Reply with quote

Michael Granovsky wrote:
Also, 1 pound... did this ancient metal weigh less? Is there a lot of material loss? Id expect a repro to be be a swell under 2, right?


While it's common to see repros of 2 to 3 pounds, originals are about half that weight. Most are from about 13oz/380g to 1.5lb/660g.

Lots of stuff about falcatas here: http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=2729

"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Michael Granovsky




Location: Indiana
Joined: 09 Mar 2014

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Mon 20 Nov, 2017 3:53 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks everyone for the replies.

Timo, I read that entire thread, thanks. As well, I read some other things by Mr. Quesada and will perhaps order his latest book.

Nathan, may I ask, was there any discussion at the time about the 'too good to be true' condition of the handle? Did they perhaps mean to date it 2 C. to 4 C. BCE and there was a typo?

I like the little aura of mystery surrounding this wonderful sword.

If you let it out NOW there'll be none left for battle!
View user's profile Send private message
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Mon 20 Nov, 2017 4:48 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Granovsky wrote:
Nathan, may I ask, was there any discussion at the time about the 'too good to be true' condition of the handle? Did they perhaps mean to date it 2 C. to 4 C. BCE and there was a typo?


I don't know. I saw it a long, long time ago. I was under the impression the grip was a replacement.

.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Joe A




Location: Philadelphia, USA
Joined: 17 Oct 2013

Posts: 57

PostPosted: Mon 20 Nov, 2017 9:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Granovsky wrote:
Thanks everyone for the replies.

Timo, I read that entire thread, thanks. As well, I read some other things by Mr. Quesada and will perhaps order his latest book.

Nathan, may I ask, was there any discussion at the time about the 'too good to be true' condition of the handle? Did they perhaps mean to date it 2 C. to 4 C. BCE and there was a typo?

I like the little aura of mystery surrounding this wonderful sword.


I'm a bit of a skeptic of anything this nice looking at the Met that's so vaguely labeled and "not on view." The Met did not dig this up themselves and there seems to be no provenance at all. It appears to have been accepted into the collection in 1932 when the museum was also displaying its fake Etruscan Warriors https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/etruscan-forgeries-met-museum-art . Even the Getty Villa and Penn Museum have been fooled.

I wonder if anyone has seriously taken a look at this very handsome sword with modern technology?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Michael Granovsky




Location: Indiana
Joined: 09 Mar 2014

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sat 25 Nov, 2017 4:56 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I'd like that too. How would one go about starting a movement to make that happen?
If you let it out NOW there'll be none left for battle!
View user's profile Send private message
Joe A




Location: Philadelphia, USA
Joined: 17 Oct 2013

Posts: 57

PostPosted: Sat 25 Nov, 2017 7:05 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Granovsky wrote:
I'd like that too. How would one go about starting a movement to make that happen?


If you mean having the Met confirm the age of this piece, as it's not on display I doubt they have any desire to do anything with it. The Met is a huge art museum and although it has an unbelievably large collection of Classical antiquities, that section is just a small part of it's overall collection.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,158

PostPosted: Sat 25 Nov, 2017 12:51 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Granovsky wrote:
I'd like that too. How would one go about starting a movement to make that happen?


The only way that this is likely to happen would be for a post graduate student to take an interest in the item and get permission from the MET to study it for their thesis.

Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > The Met Falcata
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum