The Falchion or Malchus, the rarest medieval sword

cornelistromp · 3rd April 2012, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.G.Elmslie

An additional note before I head off for the night:

your figure 9b, the excavated falchion which was on auction with Hermann-Historica, but did not sell.

.

Hi JG,
welcome to the forum.
The Hermann Historica Falchion sale63 lot 2308 is sold after the auction

Best,

fernando · 3rd April 2012, 12:31 PM

Welcome to the forum GJ.
We hope you enjoy being around

Swordfish · 3rd April 2012, 05:48 PM

Welcome J.G.

You are right, Falchion #1 is in the Reichsstadtmuseum Rothenburg. It is some years ago that I saw it there. It was behind glass, and I was not able to examine it closely. Therefore I can not be sure that it is genuine.

Falchion #2 was at an auction in Italy. I was present at that auction and have examined it closely. It is surely a genuine medieval Falchion, but the copper inlays looked not good to me, therefore I refused to bid for it.

The photos of Falchion #3 were taken in the collection of one of the renownest experts in medieval arms and armour with over 40 years experience in that subject. There can be no doubt that this Falchion is genuine in all parts.

I have never been at Durham Cathedral, I know the Conyers Falchion only from photos.

I would be lucky if you have photos and measurements from the Falchion at Castello Sforzesco.

#1 and #2 of my typology are identical with the typology of Seitz, with the addition of Type #3. But all three types depend on real existing examples shown in sufficient numbers in art or real items in Museums. Therefore I see no need to overhaul it completely. There are surely examples shown in art, which do not fit exactly the three types, these may form sub-types of one of the three. Depending on the depictions of the Falchions that I have found, type II is depicted in earlier manuscripts than type I (see the Miniature from Paris dated before 1247). Pleas note that my Typology is only valid for Falchions with knightly sword hilts dating c.1240-1480.

I have not seen the Falchion at the Hermann sale in reality, therefore I assumed that the cutting edge is on the short side. If it is on the opposite side, it does not fit neither type III in my typology nor type I or II. This Falchion is again for sale at the next auction.

Best

cornelistromp · 3rd April 2012, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swordfish

I have not seen the Falchion at the Hermann sale in reality, therefore I assumed that the cutting edge is on the short side. If it is on the opposite side, it does not fit neither type III in my typology nor type I or II. This Falchion is again for sale at the next auction.
Best

The Hermann-Historica Falchion is listed as sold on their website sale 63 and is also not included in the new auction cat 64, now online??

Lot Nr. 2308
A Central European falchion
circa 1300
A forged iron single-edged blade, which widens to a double-edged point, and has encrustations stuck to both sides. The base of the blad ... >>more
Condition: III

Limit: 2000 EURO

sold

Swordfish · 3rd April 2012, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cornelistromp

The Hermann-Historica Falchion is listed as sold on their website sale 63 and is also not included in the new auction cat 64, now online??

Lot Nr. 2308
A Central European falchion
circa 1300
A forged iron single-edged blade, which widens to a double-edged point, and has encrustations stuck to both sides. The base of the blad ... >>more
Condition: III

Limit: 2000 EURO

sold

It is in the print catalogue Lot 2286, but is cancelled in the online catalogue.

cornelistromp · 3rd April 2012, 08:20 PM

oh yes now I see, it is withdrawn, it is probably sold in between the auctions and it could not be removed from the paper catalog anymore because the catalog was already under printing.

J.G.Elmslie · 3rd April 2012, 10:17 PM

Edit: Since I'm still on probation in case I'm secretly a med-ads-spamming bot, I cant edit the post I had made yet, so I'll have to add to it...

I'd just like to emphasise that I'm certainly not doubting the work and effort that's gone into your study, and I can only hope my own conclusions whenever I finally finish studying all the examples even begins to come close... I suspect it'll be a waffling, longwinded mess.

I really do worry that I've wandered in here, and might cause upset by having expressed an opinion on the three photographed examples. If that is the case, I sincerely apologise, and hope that the scepticism is read with the sincere respect I hold that you've produced such a study.

I just wish it were easier to get carbon-dating, metalurgical analysis, isotope flouresence, and all those other wonderful technologies that cost far, far too much, or worse involve destructive tests, and with them get absolutely certain answers over so many items which have doubts.

And I would'nt expect any less of a critical eye of anything I wrote - I hope when that day comes, the work is picked at under a magnifying glass!

JGE.

broadaxe · 4th April 2012, 08:51 AM

Additional pic, from Felix Fabri journal to the Levant, 1480 (2000 print, though...). The image shows pilgrims pay a token to the guardians of the Holy Sepulcher. Those, by tradition are muslems - to this very day; they appear to have European style flachions, probably to stand as 'ethnic' scimitars. The chief guardian holds a large wooden club, a bow and the set of keys. The pilgrim in the red cape holds a pilgrim's staff, recognized by its length and two balls along its grip.

stephen wood · 17th October 2012, 06:39 PM

...wasn't Malchus the servant of the High Priest whose ear was cut off by St Peter and restored by Christ?

J.G.Elmslie · 3rd April 2012, 09:30 PM

ahh. I'm not certain what the status of the Hermann-Historica example was, I was told by Carl Koppeschaar that it failed to sell after the previous auction, but I'm uncertain of any developments since.

---

Regarding examples #1, and particularly # 2 and #3 of the photographic samples, I cant help but feel sceptical for one reason: Similarity of proportion.

(Just to quickly explain, I used to work as a 3d artist, creating digital 3d modelling work, and its given me a particular focus in terms of observing proportion and dimension, and I spot details like that quite easily.)

Those three falchions are far too close in proportional simiarity for comfort to me. Something about #2 and #3 in particular jar my eye, because they are too similar. Comparing the invalides and delft falchions, they're clearly very similar, but only a few seconds viewing will let you see the significant proportional differences between them, the tang shape, the false edge, the curvature to the tip, and the pommels are very different.
that's a difference I'm not feeling when viewing #2 and #3. and my gut instinct is telling me there's something very wrong with them. There are too many co-incidences there for comfort. on its own, I would say one or the other was authentic. Together, no. something's not quite right there with one, or both.
If they were simply proportionally similar in one aspect, I would'nt feel there's a problem with them. but the proportions match, to within pretty close tolerances, in each area, the grip length, the pommel diameters, the false edge bevel, the blade at the tang transition, the cross shape, the cross arms length, the cross arms width... again and again, there's repeated matches there, and that making my mind flag up warnings, something's just not right there.

I'm hope I'm wrong. I hope that a fantastic and fully-documented provenance exists for each one of these, since they have clearly been stored in well-conserved conditions. these have not been dredged from rivers like the cluny, thorpe, or hamburg falchions. I'd love to trace their origins.

if I take the photographs and overlay them, you can probably see the similarities quite clearly - so I've done exactly that. I'm not sure it'll make sense, but then I dont know if I am making any sense with these.

Any further information on that pair you're able to give would be of a great deal of interest.

---

Regarding the Milan example, I'll ensure I can distribute a reference image and some data, and will get back to you on that - I think I'm still unable to send PMs so far.

cornelistromp · 4th April 2012, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.G.Elmslie

ahh. I'm not certain what the status of the Hermann-Historica example was, I was told by Carl Koppeschaar that it failed to sell after the previous auction, but I'm uncertain of any developments since.

---

Regarding examples #1, and particularly # 2 and #3 of the photographic samples, I cant help but feel sceptical for one reason: Similarity of proportion.

(Just to quickly explain, I used to work as a 3d artist, creating digital 3d modelling work, and its given me a particular focus in terms of observing proportion and dimension, and I spot details like that quite easily.)

Those three falchions are far too close in proportional simiarity for comfort to me. Something about #2 and #3 in particular jar my eye, because they are too similar. Comparing the invalides and delft falchions, they're clearly very similar, but only a few seconds viewing will let you see the significant proportional differences between them, the tang shape, the false edge, the curvature to the tip, and the pommels are very different.
that's a difference I'm not feeling when viewing #2 and #3. and my gut instinct is telling me there's something very wrong with them. There are too many co-incidences there for comfort. on its own, I would say one or the other was authentic. Together, no. something's not quite right there with one, or both.
If they were simply proportionally similar in one aspect, I would'nt feel there's a problem with them. but the proportions match, to within pretty close tolerances, in each area, the grip length, the pommel diameters, the false edge bevel, the blade at the tang transition, the cross shape, the cross arms length, the cross arms width... again and again, there's repeated matches there, and that making my mind flag up warnings, something's just not right there.

I'm hope I'm wrong. I hope that a fantastic and fully-documented provenance exists for each one of these, since they have clearly been stored in well-conserved conditions. these have not been dredged from rivers like the cluny, thorpe, or hamburg falchions. I'd love to trace their origins.

if I take the photographs and overlay them, you can probably see the similarities quite clearly - so I've done exactly that. I'm not sure it'll make sense, but then I dont know if I am making any sense with these.

Any further information on that pair you're able to give would be of a great deal of interest.

---

Regarding the Milan example, I'll ensure I can distribute a reference image and some data, and will get back to you on that - I think I'm still unable to send PMs so far.

Good point!
the similarities in proportion of #2 and # 3 are at mildly noteworthy, this is an understatement.
The proportions are quite similar, would the actual dimensions also be that consistent?
I am curious about the provenance of both of them.
certainly more than a few last years, from the existence of 600 years of these swords, must be found

best,

4th April 2012, 08:51 AM	#8
broadaxe Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 334	Additional pic, from Felix Fabri journal to the Levant, 1480 (2000 print, though...). The image shows pilgrims pay a token to the guardians of the Holy Sepulcher. Those, by tradition are muslems - to this very day; they appear to have European style flachions, probably to stand as 'ethnic' scimitars. The chief guardian holds a large wooden club, a bow and the set of keys. The pilgrim in the red cape holds a pilgrim's staff, recognized by its length and two balls along its grip. Attached Images

3rd April 2012, 09:30 PM	#10
J.G.Elmslie Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Inverness & Edinburgh, Scotland Posts: 17	ahh. I'm not certain what the status of the Hermann-Historica example was, I was told by Carl Koppeschaar that it failed to sell after the previous auction, but I'm uncertain of any developments since. --- Regarding examples #1, and particularly # 2 and #3 of the photographic samples, I cant help but feel sceptical for one reason: Similarity of proportion. (Just to quickly explain, I used to work as a 3d artist, creating digital 3d modelling work, and its given me a particular focus in terms of observing proportion and dimension, and I spot details like that quite easily.) Those three falchions are far too close in proportional simiarity for comfort to me. Something about #2 and #3 in particular jar my eye, because they are too similar. Comparing the invalides and delft falchions, they're clearly very similar, but only a few seconds viewing will let you see the significant proportional differences between them, the tang shape, the false edge, the curvature to the tip, and the pommels are very different. that's a difference I'm not feeling when viewing #2 and #3. and my gut instinct is telling me there's something very wrong with them. There are too many co-incidences there for comfort. on its own, I would say one or the other was authentic. Together, no. something's not quite right there with one, or both. If they were simply proportionally similar in one aspect, I would'nt feel there's a problem with them. but the proportions match, to within pretty close tolerances, in each area, the grip length, the pommel diameters, the false edge bevel, the blade at the tang transition, the cross shape, the cross arms length, the cross arms width... again and again, there's repeated matches there, and that making my mind flag up warnings, something's just not right there. I'm hope I'm wrong. I hope that a fantastic and fully-documented provenance exists for each one of these, since they have clearly been stored in well-conserved conditions. these have not been dredged from rivers like the cluny, thorpe, or hamburg falchions. I'd love to trace their origins. if I take the photographs and overlay them, you can probably see the similarities quite clearly - so I've done exactly that. I'm not sure it'll make sense, but then I dont know if I am making any sense with these. Any further information on that pair you're able to give would be of a great deal of interest. --- Regarding the Milan example, I'll ensure I can distribute a reference image and some data, and will get back to you on that - I think I'm still unable to send PMs so far. Attached Images

3rd April 2012, 12:31 PM	#2
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Welcome to the forum GJ. We hope you enjoy being around

3rd April 2012, 05:48 PM	#3
Swordfish Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 129	Welcome J.G. You are right, Falchion #1 is in the Reichsstadtmuseum Rothenburg. It is some years ago that I saw it there. It was behind glass, and I was not able to examine it closely. Therefore I can not be sure that it is genuine. Falchion #2 was at an auction in Italy. I was present at that auction and have examined it closely. It is surely a genuine medieval Falchion, but the copper inlays looked not good to me, therefore I refused to bid for it. The photos of Falchion #3 were taken in the collection of one of the renownest experts in medieval arms and armour with over 40 years experience in that subject. There can be no doubt that this Falchion is genuine in all parts. I have never been at Durham Cathedral, I know the Conyers Falchion only from photos. I would be lucky if you have photos and measurements from the Falchion at Castello Sforzesco. #1 and #2 of my typology are identical with the typology of Seitz, with the addition of Type #3. But all three types depend on real existing examples shown in sufficient numbers in art or real items in Museums. Therefore I see no need to overhaul it completely. There are surely examples shown in art, which do not fit exactly the three types, these may form sub-types of one of the three. Depending on the depictions of the Falchions that I have found, type II is depicted in earlier manuscripts than type I (see the Miniature from Paris dated before 1247). Pleas note that my Typology is only valid for Falchions with knightly sword hilts dating c.1240-1480. I have not seen the Falchion at the Hermann sale in reality, therefore I assumed that the cutting edge is on the short side. If it is on the opposite side, it does not fit neither type III in my typology nor type I or II. This Falchion is again for sale at the next auction. Best

3rd April 2012, 08:20 PM	#6
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	oh yes now I see, it is withdrawn, it is probably sold in between the auctions and it could not be removed from the paper catalog anymore because the catalog was already under printing.

3rd April 2012, 10:17 PM	#7
J.G.Elmslie Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Inverness & Edinburgh, Scotland Posts: 17	Edit: Since I'm still on probation in case I'm secretly a med-ads-spamming bot, I cant edit the post I had made yet, so I'll have to add to it... I'd just like to emphasise that I'm certainly not doubting the work and effort that's gone into your study, and I can only hope my own conclusions whenever I finally finish studying all the examples even begins to come close... I suspect it'll be a waffling, longwinded mess. I really do worry that I've wandered in here, and might cause upset by having expressed an opinion on the three photographed examples. If that is the case, I sincerely apologise, and hope that the scepticism is read with the sincere respect I hold that you've produced such a study. I just wish it were easier to get carbon-dating, metalurgical analysis, isotope flouresence, and all those other wonderful technologies that cost far, far too much, or worse involve destructive tests, and with them get absolutely certain answers over so many items which have doubts. And I would'nt expect any less of a critical eye of anything I wrote - I hope when that day comes, the work is picked at under a magnifying glass! JGE.

17th October 2012, 06:39 PM	#9
stephen wood Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 227	...wasn't Malchus the servant of the High Priest whose ear was cut off by St Peter and restored by Christ?