Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Width of a spatha blade
#1
Hey.
My spatha is during construction and now it's a time to figure out what's the widht of the blade.
I know it has 57,5mm at the bottom (grip) but I have no idea what's the width in the middle and at the end.

Therefore I kindly ask you to shae with me with widths of your spathas so I can count % to see if there is some % relation for all spathas.

I know that one spatha has 4cm and the bottom, 3,2cm in the middle and 2,2cm at the end.
According to these numbers I know that the relation is 100%/80%/55%.

But know I need few more spathas.

Please, share with me the width of your spathas Smile

Unless you know the dimensions of this spatha. Like I said, it's has 57,5mm at the bottom but no idea what's te width in the middle of the blade and at the end.

[Image: 11148726_1146228018741229_36593758311090...e=57835597]
Damian
Reply
#2
Come on guys!

Please grab your spatha and measure the widht near the grip, in the middle and and the end!
Time is crucial here! Smile
Damian
Reply
#3
As requested:

I own 2 spathas - one based on the Nydam bog finds and 2/3rd century - hilt width, 4.5cm, mid-width, 4.25cm, and the width before it tapers into the point is 4.00cm.

The second spatha is a 4/5th century model - hilt width, 4.75cm, mid-width, 4.00cm, tapering to the point width is 3.25cm.

There are pics on the facebook page for the Barcarii:

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?s...4214928024
Francis Hagan

The Barcarii
Reply
#4
(03-26-2016, 11:59 AM)Longovicium Wrote: As requested:

I own 2 spathas - one based on the Nydam bog finds and 2/3rd century - hilt width, 4.5cm, mid-width, 4.25cm, and the width before it tapers into the point is 4.00cm.

The second spatha is a 4/5th century model - hilt width, 4.75cm, mid-width, 4.00cm, tapering to the point width is 3.25cm.

There are pics on the facebook page for the Barcarii:

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?s...4214928024

And that's what Im talking about! Great!

I see that the one from Nydam is quite equal at all parts. I guess this might be good lead for mine.
Damian
Reply
#5
I think both qualify under the Straubing/Nydam typology rather than the Lauriacum one with the former having a more parallel blade and the latter a more tapering one. Your own would fit that typology then? The Straubing/Nydam variant of the spatha?
Francis Hagan

The Barcarii
Reply
#6
Well, honestly this blade is very interesting becasue it's really, really wide (57,5mm) and it's flat (no grooves)

So far I figured out that it has 57,5mm at the beggining of the blade, 42mm where the blade is broken and 37mm at the end, where blade is switching to the tip.
Damian
Reply
#7
it would help a lot to help you ( Big Grin ) if you gave some more information about your blade. so: where is it from, is it publicated etc...

the relations of measures alone won`t help you much as long as you don`t know which type of blade it is.
 for example: it doesn`t help you to compare a long, narrow, heavily tapering blade from the beginnig of the 3rd. century AD with a broad parallel-edged one from the 5th... if you use measures in between these extremes you might get a "bastard" that must not necessarily resemble anything real

I suppose your blade is a find from Nydam or Vimose. do you have a find-number or something that would help to research any further?
Als Mensch zu dumm, als Schwein zu kleine Ohren...

Jürgen Graßler

www.schorsch-der-schmied.de
www.facebook.com/pages/AG-Historisches-Handwerk/203702642993872
Reply
#8
The photo was taken in Schleswig, Nydam Hall.
Here you have everything.

[Image: 12920237_1147905865240111_15695058057587...e=5775817F]


As for the width I finally figured out correct numbers in the most simple way Big Grin
I took photo from Miks' book with cross-section under the blade. Knowing that cross section is 57,5mm I zoomed it so it's 57,5mm on my screen.
Then I measured width near the tip and at the broken place. Respectivly 37mm and 42mm.
But how to find out is these numbers are correct? I know that broken part is 265mm so I measured this part in the same zoom and it was 26-27cm so seems like everything fits.

[Image: 12512428_1147908575239840_65110908072003...e=578021BD]
Damian
Reply
#9
that`s exactly what I`d have done with these infos Smile 

be aware that the blade lacks a piece of unknown length in the middle part. you can best figure out the persumed original length by drawing the point-part with the lines of the edges continuing till they are at a width of 58mm. I think there will occur some mm extra length to add to the 454mm + 265mm recorded blade length
Als Mensch zu dumm, als Schwein zu kleine Ohren...

Jürgen Graßler

www.schorsch-der-schmied.de
www.facebook.com/pages/AG-Historisches-Handwerk/203702642993872
Reply
#10
Im not sure... 719mm for the blade seems like a quite normal lenght. Blades over 800mm don't seem to be quite useful. Much heavier, much slower, they need more space etc.

Tho the grip will be much longer because with 113mm I would not be able to hold it.
Plus currently I will use wooden grip which will be changed for bronze in next 2 years and to do that I need a bit longer handle.
Therefore total lenght will be around 95-100cm which is around 10-15cm longer than original.
Damian
Reply
#11
just draw it in 1:1 and you`ll see what I mean.
by the way: handles of that length work wonderful if you use the correct hilt pieces / form. for changing the handle some day it is enough to  let the tang be 5mm longer now. that can becovered by a higher "washer" under the peening
Als Mensch zu dumm, als Schwein zu kleine Ohren...

Jürgen Graßler

www.schorsch-der-schmied.de
www.facebook.com/pages/AG-Historisches-Handwerk/203702642993872
Reply
#12
Hmmm seems kinda fine...
I also counted % gradation on each 15cm lenght. 0cm to 15cm; 15cm to 30cm; 30cm to 45cm; 45cm to 60cm and 60cm to 69cm.
Byt htis I mean that at 15cm lenght, width is 92% of 0cm.
At 30cm, it's 88% of 15cm.
At 45cm it is 89% of 30cm.
At 60cm it is 95% of 45cm.
At 69cm it is 92% ot 60cm.

Does not look like something is missing. I mean, if there would be like ~5-10cm missing, % drop between 45cm and 60cm would be quite low like 70-80% but it's increasing rather than drasticly going down.
I'd say opposite. If there was some extra part, this spatha would look insane with extra 5-10cm getting thiner and thiner and the suddely 42mm of broken part. It would look like it's getting narrower and narrower and then out of nowhere 42mm which would be wider or at least with the same width as the missing part.

[Image: 12924445_1148760221821342_55706062166733...e=577F7822]
Damian
Reply
#13
if you got 2 straight edges it should be okay Smile 

i did a calculation-way and that comes to the same result: the blade has a taper in width of approx. 2mm / 63mm of length, assuming that there is no part lost. this matches quite well with the ~ 42mm at the breaking point

blade length 454 + 265 = 719mm - ~40mm (point) = 680mm length of the straight part of the edges

total taper is 58 - 37 = 21mm

680mm / 21mm = 1mm taper in width / 32,5mm length
Als Mensch zu dumm, als Schwein zu kleine Ohren...

Jürgen Graßler

www.schorsch-der-schmied.de
www.facebook.com/pages/AG-Historisches-Handwerk/203702642993872
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Illerup-Adal spatha blade XorX 1 1,979 03-11-2016, 08:44 AM
Last Post: Damianus Albus
  Late Roman Spatha- Pattern welded blade markusaurelius 27 9,468 12-24-2014, 07:01 PM
Last Post: markusaurelius
  Balteus Width Gatorsailor 13 2,540 03-15-2013, 05:45 AM
Last Post: Gatorsailor

Forum Jump: