I'm looking for more information about a particular messer/falchion in the Philadelphia Museum of Art. Date, measurements, pictures of the blade unsheathed, close-ups, place of origin, and so forth.

Thanks!

---

 Attachment: 38.7 KB

Which one, the one with what looks like false edge (or is just a two-edged sword) in the center or the on the far left?

The center one reminds me of one that's in the Triumph of Maximillian being carried by the dudes with the hand pavises.
Early 16th century then?

Which one of the lot? The messer in question seems to be shorter than any of these,

[ Linked Image ]

I would assume it is the one smack in the centre, as it is the only one that could really be called a messer. Am I wrong?

Sotyy-the photo from the museum is too unfocused and badly lit. I can't even tell for sure if it's one or two-handed, it fades into the background too much

It's the one in the middle. I actually deliberately faded out all the rest of the image to make that clear. That'll teach me to doctor photographs. Here's the original, untouched (by me anyway). Granted, it's not a great photograph. Hence the desire for more or better information. It's clearly one-handed, though, unless the dagger and rapiers around it are also two-handed varieties.

My primary hope was that someone who was familiar with the piece or the museum might shed some light — the metaphoric variety — on that particular specimen. The photograph itself, at any brightness and contrast, is just not that helpful. I can't even tell if the blade is scabbarded, though that gold-ish rectangle might be a scabbard throat.

---

 Attachment: 45.8 KB

Sorry I still cant tell anything. I found a couple of my blade books, and still don't know what it is for sure. I need to see it unsheathed, because there is another type of one-hand falchion from c1500, and that's the Storta a north italian falchion distuinguished by a double backedge. The photo of one I have is one owned by Emperor Charles V, Emperor Maximillian's grandson.

It's easy. If it has a riveted tang - it's a Messer. If it has a full grip - Falchion/Malchus/Storta.
It looks like a Messer, dating around ~1500.
Nevertheless, it could also be a hunting sword. It's not easy to distinguish between straight bladed Messers and early hunting swords.

Peter

I have a photo copy of the hilt of this sword somewhere. Cannot find it right now, frustratingly.
It was once part of a German collection (beginning of last century) and I copied the century old catalogue that is kept in the Royal Armouries in Stockholm. I will get back with these details as soon as I find it.

At the base of the blade the is a nice swirl of etched and gilded floral decorations.
It has an all wood grip (walnut or ebony?) with a hidden tang. Still, even with these features it is so very much a Messer in shape and character, that I would give it the benefit of a doubt and call it a Messer, rather than a Malchus or Storta.
There are small notches on the finger side of the grip: dividers or risers to provide a more positive purchase. The section of the grip is a rounded hexagonal or octagonal.
On the front of the guard is a nice oval ring. The ends of the guard has a slight S curve at right angles to the plane of blade. The guard also as a short "throat" extending into the grip, just like is common on Katzbalgers. All features are defined with nicely file worked bevels and planes.
The blade is single edged and wide (I would guess there is a quarter length false edge at the point).
I would guess a width of some 55 - 60 mm at the base and some 4-5 mm thick. I do not think there is any fuller or grove in the blade, but rather that it is perfectly flat.
In style Iit seems reasonable to place it in the first quarter of the 16th C.

It was at least ten years since I saw the picture of this weapon the first time and has wondered ever since why it is not more commonly represented in books about the history of bladed weapons. It is absolutely magnificent. The picture I saw only showed the base of the blade and the hilt, so I have only been able to guess at the shape and size of the rest of the blade. That is the main reason I have not attempted to do a reconstruction or inspired piece.
This weapon would be a very interesting candidate to add to the NG line! (But without etchings, probably)

I will keep looking for the picture I have of the hilt, and will post it as soon as I find it.

Pete Grassman mucho thanks. I was concentrating so much on the messer-storta thing I forgot Germans were in love with big hunting swords. They still had Auroch in eastern Germany (European Bison), and in fact Auroch were protected by the noble hunters untill WWI when they were eaten by German and Russian soldiers during the German campaigns of Hindenburg and Ludendorff against Russian Poland.

Hi Peter.

Big thanks I have to say I have been confused for some time by the use of the name messer on weapons I would have called Falchion by the blade shape. You have explained it nicely thanks.

Dan-thanks, the two WWI references I have call them Aurochs, and say they were living in the forest preserve of Augustow untill they fell fighting bravely for the kaiser. :)

Michael

Here's a big pic for you

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rewakagirl/320498041/

Danny

Danny-That's a good photo, and is definitely either a storta /malchus or a hunting sword depending on detail blade shape, which can't be seen ( by me0 due to the sheath. The full hilt is perfectly clear though

Okay. What distinguishes a Malchus and Storta?

If the book I have on the storta is right"Swords and Hilt Weapons" a compilation by Multimedia Books,they are different names for the same thing. Storta is the commonest name.

Hey James,

Not to sound too disparaging, but I also have that book, "Swords and Hilt Weapons", and I have to say it is not the most accurate source material to refer to. I bought it mostly for the photography, but after reading through it and comparing to more scholarly material, I found many glaring errors in its text. The example that comes to mind most prevalently is the author stating emphatically that the term "Claymore" was originally used for the two-handed Scots sword, and that the baskethilt should not be called by that name, but rather by the term "broadsword". As you probably know, the proper term for the two-hander is Claideahm Da Laihm, while the baskethilt has been documented as being called a Claymore by Scots writers in 1715, a year the sword was in full use. No earlier writings call a two-handed sword anything other than a Twa-handit sweard.

As to Malchus and Storta, I can't say, but I know Fulvio Del Tin calls the saber-like sword a Storta. Since he's Italian, well... :)

Hi Christopher. I bought the book for the photography too. As for a twahandit sword, thats scots english not gaelic. However, I agree, for some reason the scots took to calling a schiavona (hat's what it really is ) a claymore as well, why not cliadhmor I don't know-I'll have to channel some of my border bandit (Armstrong ) ancestors :)

James,

Actually, a Schiavona and a Scots Claymore are two different swords - one Italian, one Anglo-Scot. It wan't until the 19th century that sword enthusiasts began confusing Italian Schiavona with Scots Claymores (they are both in the basket hilt sword family). As I pointd out, the gaelic word for the two-handed sword is now known to be Claideahm Da Laihm, and as you pointed out, Twa-handit Sweord is a Scots-English term (quite correct - not all Scots spoke gaelic, after all).

I would suggest trying to locate the book, "The Swords and the Sorrows" from the National Trust of Scotland exhibition of the Culloden artifacts from back in the late '90's. It has a lot of great photographs as well as interesting history, since we're fellow Scots. It was the book that really got me into history and serious sword collecting. :)