Is Sword 21 the Earliest Fake Hercules Sword Yet?

1/15/2017

This blog post brought to you by insomnia.

A comment by Graham on yesterday's blog post about the newly-discovered Sword 21 raised the possibility that Sword 21, with it's fullered/ribbed "xiphos" blade was a member of the parent generation to the Type F swords (California [Sword 3] and Sonja [Sword 8]):

"Interesting. That design with the full length rib running down the center of the blade looks like the 'fullers' on the California and Sonja blades. Could one of these 'daggers' have been broken in two near the hilt and then used to cast those blades."

I think that's a reasonable working hypothesis.

One mystery that it would explain is the origin of the partially-fullered blade on the F swords . . . those swords have fullers that begin at the guard but end just a few centimeters down the blade.

The hypothesis that Sword 21 is a representative of a pre-F generation of swords raises several expectations. As I discussed in this post from last January, we can presume that successive generations of swords will be smaller and less detailed. Loss of both size and detail would have been the expected results of the process of making successive new molds from swords. If Sword 21 is earlier than Sword 3 (the Type F sword about which we have the most detailed information), we would expect the hilt to be larger and at least as detailed as Sword 3.

Unfortunately, we have only a single photograph of Sword 21. It isn't scaled, so we can't say anything about size. Comparison of the Sword 21 hilt with those of other generations of swords does seem to me to be consistent with the idea that it is early in the copy chain.

Even with the low resolution of the photo, several features are visible on Sword 21 that are absent from the later swords (e.g., the Type J's and the current Design Toscano version).

Log Bumps: The two pronounced bumps visible on the top of the log are important, as the California sword also has them but they are absent in later generations. The J and CS versions have a single pronounced bump; the Design Toscano version has a very muted bump.
Lion Paw Digits: The individual digits of the paws of Hercules' lion skin are visible on Sword 21. They're also visible in the California sword. They're less discernible on the J swords; by the time you get to the Design Toscano swords the lion's paws are just blobs.
Fullers: As Graham pointed out, if you chop off the blade of Sword 21 near the hilt, you've got a blade segment that appears from the photograph to be more-or-less identical with the fullered blades of the Type F swords. The fullers are lost completely in later generations as the blades become shorter and cruder.

I didn't fully appreciate the possible significance of Sword 21 when I first looked at the image -- I thought maybe it was a bizarre side-branch. But now I think it could be closer to the root. I wish we had some better pictures of the thing. I wonder if it would be worth following up with the auction site to see if they know anything else about the sword (perhaps even who purchased it).

I'm looking forward to seeing what my fellow Swordgate fans think of the idea that Sword 21 gets us closer to the elusive Mother of All Fake Hercules Swords. My plan today is to take the kids to the beach. Hopefully you guys can solve the mystery while I'm looking for shark teeth.

Pablo

1/15/2017 03:32:52 am

Based on the photo, the Hercules on 21 looks a bit skinnier than the other ones. I think that could be a sign of it being older.

Andy White

1/15/2017 03:33:36 am

I agree. Man I wish we could get some better photos of this one.

Killbuck

1/15/2017 07:43:04 am

We have justly focused a great deal on the hilt. Yet the thing that has consistently bothered me about the OI sword and the others to this point, is the blade shape. They are just not consistent with the dominant shapes and lengths of documented originals.

No. 21 has the leaf shaped blade of early Hispaniensis swords - 216 BC until 20 BC. These were iron swords with separate hilts of wood, bone, ivory etc. Not cast metal hilts.

Throughout the empire, and in it's far flung points of manufacture for Roman occupation, the Pompeii type Gladius sword became "the" standardized form from the early decades C.E. onward. These had an iron blade that became gradually longer, with an elongated angular tip. These swords were primarily light handled- blade heavy stabbing weapons rather than lighter bladed slashing weapons. These also had separate attached hilts on a cast tang, not cast metal hilts.

The Herc swords up to example No. 21, have crude, mostly blunt unfinished blades and cast metal hilts- most integral to the blade casting. The shapes of these blades have a symmetrical curve point more common to later Euro-Saxon swords designed for slashing.

Blades with fullers are usually associated with later Euro-Saxon long bladed swords where the weight of the long blade had to be reduced. The balance of the sword was brought close to the handle. The central ridge added strength while the fullers reduced weight. Fullers don't appear on Roman swords in the same way as the later Euro-Saxon types. There are some Roman swords with center-line groves- single or even several. Similar to the so called "blood grooves" used on more modern knives, supposed by knife and blade makers to allow the blade to pull out easier from the gut of the unfortunate recipient.

Lastly if the OI example is a "ceremonial" sword created on commission by the Emperor Commodus born 31 August 161 c.e., died 31 December 192 c.e., why would he commission special swords of brass or even bronze, full cast and finished with such haste and crudeness, with blades out of character with the shape traditional to the Empire for close to two centuries?

Sword 21 does have, at least, a type of blade shape consistent with known types- yet, types in use long before the rein of Commodus. But sadly, if it is an iron sword, the verdigris patina is certainly fake.

Peter Geuzen

1/15/2017 08:25:11 am

The longer and moderately more complicated blade, make it a more expensive and slightly more difficult thing to make, compared to others with short and rough blades. Hypothetically there would be a general trend to keeping it simpler and using less raw material (lower cost) in the blades over time. Conversely if Herc himself is deemed too wimpy in this possibly early model, then hypothetically he may have been made slightly beefier over time, pre DT, to emphasize the hilt as more of the key selling feature.

I assume one of the bumps on top is the end of the pour sprue. A couple shots of #1 Nova Scotia really seem to show it well, biased a bit to the back. It would be cut and filed down as part of the clean-up.

The outside edge of the partial fullers in Type F is chamfered inward while the length of the edge in 21 looks squared and raised, so the fuller area is actually not an exact match. The chamfering could have been a design move in Type F, post 21, to help blend and transition it to the flat blade face.

Regarding changes in the hilt, I think we need to think more about the form of casting. Bivalve mold yes, but was it a carved half hollowed stone mold, or clay molds made from models, or was it sand molds with models used for impressions. I would lean to sand casting. The models could have been master copies used over and over, or they could have just been using random swords from one batch as models for the next batch, and so on, over successive pours. There really is a whole range of possibilities, and these all introduce vagaries and questions.

Uncle Ron

1/15/2017 09:05:23 am

Slightly off-topic, but as a cutlery collector of several decades there is an issue that is of concern to me due to the negative reaction created by a popular term used in reference to blades. Fullers (and ridges) strengthen blades against flexing and reduce the weight of the blade. The claims that, as Killbuck notes, "so called 'blood grooves'" make it easier to extract a blade from a body and/or increase blood-loss have been disproven with scientific tests (unfortunately I can't provide the citation - it was ten+ years ago). While it is true that these weapons are designed to kill people, and there can be a proper forum for discussing the relative merits of various designs, I don't feel it is productive to romanticize violence with "macho" (and inaccurate) terminology. IMHO, as scholars and historians we should discourage the use of the term "blood-groove" whenever possible.

Killbuck

1/15/2017 04:50:21 pm

Indeed, hence my "so called" ref to blood grooves

Uncle Ron

1/15/2017 06:41:35 pm

Yes. I wanted to acknowledge your qualification of the phrase. R

Bob Jase

1/15/2017 04:29:47 pm

...

Ryuthrowsstuff

1/16/2017 12:16:47 am

We may be mistaken in thinking those are meant to be fullers. IIRC Andy's scans of the other blades revealed a cross section closer to an I beam than a typical sword. So rather than a beveled blade shape, with material dug out. You've got a flat plane with a raised bead at the center and another at each edge (or on 21 around the perimeter).

It's possible that's meant to create the visual illusion of the contours of a blade as seen in a real sword. Beveled from a centerline to the edge. And then another bevel create g the sharpened edge itself. The photo from yesterday certainly shows such an illusion would be effective from a distance taken together with the shading of the false patina.

Like wise the leaf shape to the blade seems a lot more exaggerated than on the Hispaniensis type swords killbuck mentions, though I'm hardly an expert. But that would presumably be what lead others in yesterday's post to us "xiphos" as a descriptive. At least in the popular imagination those seem to have a more extreme broadening near the tip.

Both the exagerated shape and the use of raised portions to create shading to imply shapes that aren't there are common sculpture techniques.

Jonathan Feinstein

1/16/2017 09:03:45 am

One thing that keeps bothering me with the evolution of these swords is that if I were manufacturing them, I'd be making my molds from a single master, so while molds might wear out (or might actually be one-use sand cast molds) the next mold would be made from the same master.

I cannot argue, however, against the fact that that we do, indeed, have the development that matches Andy's theory that the smaller and less detailed pieces must be younger. In fact I agree with it, but I still have to wonder how many different manufacturers of these swords exist(ed).

Some of the changes might have been in the name of economy. If our current hypothesis that Sword 21 might represent the earliest form so far of these swords and might even be the root model, then it is reasonable to guess that the partially fullered swords might have been designed either from a broken version of this one or else the manufacturer chose to simplify the model, by recasting it with a straight and somewhat smaller blade. That would be both cheaper and simpler and it would likely be sold at the same price (whatever that was)

A blade further redesigned without the tell-tale partial fullers might have been done for any reason (flat is easier to clean and apply a patina to than the fullers, but then no worse than on the Hercules figure so I doubt that explanation), but someone's aesthetics might have led them to make the whole blade flat, especially if they were making a knock-off copy of the earlier pieces.

Knock-offs might well have used earlier pieces as the masters and if various foundries chose to make copies then, over time they would be using later and later copies to make their own masters which leads us down the family tree to the Design Toscano swords (of which I proudly own a copy - bought one winter morning when DT was offering a 25% discount )

The DT version is the smallest and least detailed of the lot and no doubt shows the signs of having descended from copies of copies of copies. I suspect the DT people know where they got their copy but since they are maintaining it is a copy of a piece from the National Museum of Naples (whichever museum they are referring to) we may never know just where their copy came from. IOf we could find even one foundry that admits to having manufactured these swords we might be able to trace back the first foundry to produce them for sale (but maybe not), however, for now we can still only guess.

It would be interesting to learn if Sword 21 really was made of iron or if it was actually cast brass. The switch to brass would make the manufacture simpler although brass and bronze are generally more expensive than iron.

So much for my guesses. I sit awaiting further news.

Pablo

1/16/2017 09:37:06 am

As far as I'm concerned, we only know about one company fabricating one of these; which is clearly a modern one. Even the patina is fake. I'm talking about the one I found on facebook, the Spanish one made by Atenea Coleccion.
I believe that others have tried to contact Design Toscano for information, with no luck

Jonathan E. Feinstein

1/17/2017 12:44:47 pm

Pablo,

You have my thanks. I somehow missed the mention of the Atenea Coleccion. Otoh, I guess that means that even knowing one manufacturer doesn't give us a chain back to an "earliest manufacturer." I'm not surprised it's a modern one, but then I've always felt that all the swords were of modern manufacture (latter half of 20th Century or so) but that's a hunch only.

Graham

1/16/2017 05:26:58 pm

That does seem to be a reasonable hypothesis in this case, but it does depend on finding proof that Sword type 21 is the earliest version.

Jonathan E. Feinstein

1/17/2017 12:59:24 pm

Andy,

I just compared my DT sword with your picture of it and I think yours has more of a bump on the log than mine does. Mine just sort of has a gentle swelling in that general direction, but I noticed that there are a lot of file marks on the top of the log there. DT's original may have had a more distinct bump on the log but someone filed it off; perhaps it was not casting well?

Kill Bill

1/25/2017 11:01:38 pm

Andy are we still going to ignore the fact that all these replicas mention that they are models of an actual "roman dagger". Do you really believe all these swords you are finding just came into being all around the world with slight variations while all mentioning they were inspired by an actual ROMAN ARTIFACT, one that must surely has existed...

Only Me

1/25/2017 11:52:24 pm

First, being inspired by an actual artifact is not the same as declaring a replica sword IS the artifact that provided the inspiration. This is backed up by the fact the OI sword has been proven to be a replica.

Secondly, the existence of said artifact isn't evidence of Roman incursion into North America. You'd have to prove the artifact was discovered in North America for that to be true. Nobody has been able to do that.

Pablo

1/26/2017 02:01:08 am

It has not been ignored: We asked the shops we know that make replicas about that supposed original sword, asked the Naples museum about it, checked the Museum's catalog, no info. Someone said they had a photo of the supposed original in the museum, still waiting for it!!

Given the lack of evidence, I would say that the possibilities are getting tinier that this sword design was based in any roman original.

Jonathan Feinstein

1/26/2017 03:15:43 am

Saying they were inspired by or based on an actual Roman artifact does not constitute proof since in no case has the inspiration been documented.

As Pablo said, some of us have looked for shops that make replicas. I know I'm one of those who scoured the museum's catalog.

Inspired is a slippery word. It suggested that the inspiration was not exactly the same as the replicas. The fact we have them in such variety, in fact, might suggest just the opposite. The inspiration might be an entirely different weapon, perhaps a simple gladius that the maker of the first inspired piece embellished. The Hercules hilt, if not a fanciful work, might not actually have been part of a sword as well. It might have been part of a decorative chair leg or a figural column, such as those from the baths at Pompeii. It might have been a decorative motif on a pot or part of a mural.

Any of those possible origins (though there is no proof of them either) could be considered inspiration.

Pablo

1/26/2017 05:42:01 am

Fact: the stores that sell the replicas mention that they are based on a sword on "the Naples Museum"
Not a fact: The actual sword do exist in some Museum. No evidence of that.

Bob Jase

1/26/2017 08:52:55 am

http://www.ebay.com/itm/15-5-Full-Tang-Zomb-War-Hunting-Sword-With-Green-Nylon-Handle-Sheath-/222334394532?hash=item33c429a0a4:g:vSQAAOSw2xRYQv2z

Guess zombies are real or this sword couldn't exist.

Comments are closed.

Is Sword 21 the Earliest Fake Hercules Sword Yet?

Archives

Categories