Flanged Mace for comment
 

Got that interesting piece recently.

What it is exactly?

Lenght 65 cm.
Hollow construction, but quite heavy.
It has a drilled hole on the heft, perhaps a later addition.

I would like to know the origin of the piece. Is it european? Seems so, but I saw very similiar indopersian or turkish pieces.

Any opinions? :shrug:

looks very heavy - have you weighed it? the perspective may be making it look heavier thanit is. like the re-enforced points.

i'd hate to have to swing that more than a few times, my enemy would just push me over and poke me with something sharp. my few maces are under a kilo (2.2 lbs)

These maces, even with a hollow haft, can be rather heavy. There is a variety of examples in the Wallace Collection, with seven flanges head sets and hafts with a length similar to the one posted, weighing between 1,260 and 1,540 grams.

It would be European or a copy in style of.

The hole would be correct but it seems the later examples have it too.

How are the flanges attached? They should each be inserted in to individual slots.

Does the haft have a seam that runs longways? Most (I dont know if all) hafts were rolled into a cylinder from a flat piece resulting in a lengthwise seam.

Best,
Casey

Salaams Valjhun....Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_weapons There is a mace in this form on that page. Ottoman.
There is another at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ace+Collection at post #50 also Ottoman.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

lots of gorgeous weapons in those links. way above my paygrade.

the 3 'ottoman flanged maces' in the wiki link remind me of my more mundain 'onion' headed steel mace: (top - or left)

i gather you mean the gold one (bottom - or right) which looks very similar to the slightly more distressed one originally posted. i not it does not appear to have the re-inforced points to the flanges - i would guess it was not expected the owner would ever need to actually use it. he must have had people to do that for him so he wouldn't have to. :)

Some examples-

http://www.hermann-historica-archiv....db=kat56_p.txt

http://www.hermann-historica-archiv....db=kat56_p.txt

The small holes on the flanges of yours are a little concerning. I can't recall seeing those in an original piece but I could be wrong.

Salaams CSinTX, Spot on Sir !

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Hello,

Thank you for your replies.

The mace weights a little less than 2kg.

The flanges are attached correctly, each inserted to its individual slot.
The reiforced points are also attached individually

No lenghtwise seam visible on the haft, there is some copper soldering visible at the pommel.

The mace is incredibly similar to the one from HH, postet above.

hello,

The weight of the mace is too heavy, which should have a maximum of around 1.2 kg and most are lighter than 1 kg.


the shaft of this type is hollow/tubular and formed by rolling or hammering a flat section of metal around a cylindrical former, so there must be a seam at the shaft along the length direction!

The flanges of the macehead of this type must be fitted in slots cutted in the shaft, from the top down through the metal, and are fixed with copper solder.

Iam sorry but regarding to the weight and the lack of a longitudinal seam.
I think it is a subsequent reproduction, 19th or 20thC.

best regards
Jasper

Hello Jasper,

I am very sorry to correct you, but the average weight of a european flanged mace is around 1.5 kg and more.
The mace must be so heavy, because the mace is originally intended for penetrate or at least pressing dents in a plate armour. The thickness of a tempered european plate armour is between 1.5 an 2 mm.

A battlefield mace with a weight of less than 1.2 kg would be too lightweight against plate armour.


Best regards Roland

Hi Roland,

you may correct me, but it must of course be supported in order to convince me. :)
1.5 kg average and more you have mentioned is not correct,
where did you find this digit?

Clive Thomas has written a wonderful article on maces in park lane arms and armor fair cataloque of 2014. I've also spoken to Clive about the weights of the different maces, because what he found was much lighter then we both expected.

Quote Clive page 21 "In General it could be said that the solid shafted examples are about 52.5 cm in avarage overall length and weigh around 1,050kg, whilst the tubular types are approximately 50cm and 560g, respectively" unquote

the type under discussion is oakeshott M2 and/or Clive Thomas B2
this type was usually larger around 60cm+ and heavier then the earlier ones
but will average not go over the maximum weight found of 1.2-1.3 KG
some examples from the article.


best,

I know nothing of these things but ...

Don't in any case, besides the number of flanges, the length of the shaft and or that of the entire mace have great influence in the weight variation ?

A few examples in the Wallace collection read:

A982 - seven flanges - total length 63.5 cms. - weight 1.470 Kg.
A983 - seven flanges - total length 60.4 cms. - weight 1.260 Kg.
A984 - seven flanges - total length 63.5 cms. - weight 1.540 Kg.
A985 - eigth flanges - haft length 45 cms. - weight 1.860 Kg.

.

yes like i mentioned in post #12 this type M2 was usually larger around 60cm+ and heavier then the earlier ones.

Wallace A985 is 0.86kg, not 1.86kg, the heaviest mace in Wallace is A979 with 1.67 KG.

best,

You mean A985. In my 1962 book version is 1.86Kg, (4:11/2).


Yes ... eight flanges.

hereby 4 maces from the William Burrell Collection, the middle two, the larger ones are of the same type as het mace in # 1, M2B. around 1550
the outer smaller ones are earlier around 1500 of type M1A.

the second mace, from left to right, is 63cm long, flanges are 9.9cm, weight is 1,274kg.


best,
Jasper

original or not?
 

It was offered to me, but i'm not sure if original or not...

Diego, how can anyone help if you don't post any pictures, as you were already reminded ?