Talk:Falchion

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Look, I'm a video game nerd myself, but this is an encyclopedia, not a gaming web site. This article contains almost as much roleplaying trivia garbage as factual information. Why is it that nerds feel obligated to fill every article related to weapons or anything Japanese with a list of video games or anime in which they appear? You'll notice that the "Apple" article does not contain a list of every book and movie in which a character ever consumed an apple, nor does the "Pants" article have a list of famous pant-wearers; this is because it's not encyclopedic information. A falchion is a type of sword; of course half of the fantasy games out there have them. Someone needs to start a "Purge Wikipedia of Fanboyism" project.

Hey! That's just rude!

I cut out all the Popular Culture references except for the mention of Diskworld. That's the only case where the anecdote had something directly relating a falchion to the plot, rather than just 'in game/story X, there's a sword called a falchion that may or may not be anything like a historical falchion.' --Clay Collier 22:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only one of those gaming entries that I felt was notable as a comment is Fire Emblem, since Falchion isn't simply the type of sword wielded by the main character, but it's the sword's name. --Visual77 14:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Falchion is not a weapon in current millitary use anywhere. Its only significance is its appearance in historical accounts, myth, legend, literature and popular culture. Is it unlikely that many if not most of those seeking Wikipedia information on this Medieval weapon are actually interested to know why their MMPORPG character does so much damage or swings so slowly with his falchion or why in Bulfinch's 'Legends of Charlemagne' Bradamante sharpens specifically a falchion when preparing to battle Rogero in his invulnerable armor? More simply could we have a section for cultural references?

removed due to questionable grammar->questionalble content: "There is ample pictorial evidence of falchions used in combat by commoners and noblemen alike, and this type of sword was likely the most popular design. Also favord by alot of knights." jdb ❋ (talk) 00:20, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I removed the internal link from "Conyers" in "Conyers Falchion" as the link sent me to Conyers, Georgia, not having anything to do with Sir John Conyers or his Sword. Sort of a temporary fix until I get the gumption to write an article about the relevant Conyers. --Solacium Christiana 14:27, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image banner is obsolete, and really should have been placed in the article, not here. I'm making the correction. Canonblack 22:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge?

we need a central article to discuss single-edged weapons. There are just too many terms for one and the same thing. Sword#Single-edged_and_double-edged_swords has:

Europeans also frequently refer to their own single-edged weapons as swords — generically backswords, including sabres. Other terms include falchion, scimitar, cutlass, or mortuary sword. Many of these refer to essentially identical weapons, and the different names may relate to their use in different countries at different times.

in the spirit that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, we should merge these into a single article and discuss each term briefly there. "Falchion" seems to be essentially an old-fashioned or poetic term for "backsword", without being any more specific. dab (𒁳) 14:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The swords in the above comment are distinct in appearance, function, design as well as cultural and historical context. The cited text no longer appears (not my doing) in the Wikipedia article linked. 'Backsword' is apparently a generic term for a class of weapon unlike the Falchion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.230.141.70 (talk) 13:28, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questional Picture

The Falchion in the picture doesn't look like a functioning or historically accurate speciman. The handguards are too thick and looped a strange angle rarely seen in accurate replicas. The Celtic decorative scheme would also be inapropraite, it is a lot of excess mass and genunie articles don't have much decorations on them other than twisted wire. Would the editor(s) of the page please chage it?

I don't know when this comment was made, but I also agree that this is not an appropriate picture. I'm not a sword expert by any means, but I don't think this is a falchion. ^†Basilosauridae ❯❯❯Talk 18:49, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, the image shown at the bottom of this page (from the Morgan Bible) is very clearly a short-hafted glaive, an established type of polearm, and not some kind of "falchion with long, wooden haft" as the caption indicates. I suppose the similarly colored horse behind the blade may have confused someone as to its shape, but it is an image of a standard type of weapon, not some weird custom hybrid. Farewell, Randolph Carter, and beware - FOR I AM NYARLATHOTEP, THE CRAWLING CHAOS!! 21:15, 7 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyokoMocha (talk • contribs)

Replaced image as per this discussion. -Caranorn (talk) 16:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that still isn't a falchion. It looks like a messer to me; note the knife-like hilt construction. The key distinction between falchion and messer is that the falchion has a hilt in the style of an arming sword, while a messer has a hilt in the style of a knife. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Fat Wiki (talk • contribs) 05:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not so minor edit

I originally intended just to make a brief mention of the falchion-like hafted weapon. However, looking at article, I felt it needed re-organising a bit - lot of good stuff but not in a clear order - and the references strengthened (too many refered just to repro "sales puff"). Some citations would be useful in places. I think the assertion that the falchion is widely viewed as a peasant weapon may well be correct but it would nice to know who said it.

Finally, I removed the paragraph on swords of the English Civil War, which was hardly connected to the falchion and the one direct connection (that the tuck was related to the falchion) is wrong. The tuck derives from a thrusting sword (the estoc) and is straight, not curved. A stronger case might have been made for the hanger, also IIRC used by infantry in the ECW.Monstrelet (talk) 16:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A little more work on referencing has nailed the Medici Falchion and the peasant comment was found in a reference which pointed elsewhere on page. This latter reference is, however, weak as it is an unreferenced comment on an internet site. Sourcing this comment from a notable reference work on swords or Medieval warfare would be better.Monstrelet (talk) 08:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Origins

I'm not an expert, but I find the claim that the falchion developed independently of eastern sabre-type swords to be dubious. The claim that the shamshir is a late development is contradicted by the shamshir page itself, and almost certainly the Arab saif was curved as well much earlier than the 15th century. The fact that extant examples of falchions are Venetian or Italian certainly point to possible origins in conflict with the Turks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.194.70 (talk) 12:40, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that there is significant scholarly opinion that there has been a long tradition of single edged overhand cutting swords in European history going back to the Hellenistic Falcata. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.230.141.70 (talk) 12:25, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The falcata is really from a different tradition - the cutting edge is on the inside of the curve of the blade rather than the outside. There is, as the article suggests, some debate about the origins of the single edge sword with the cutting edge on the long side.Monstrelet (talk) 14:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surviving cultural reference

Is it worth mentioning that the weapon is referenced (". . . See ye not their falchions gleaming . . . ?") in the still popular Welsh song Men of Harlech (although many singers probably don't really know what a falchion actually is)? { The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.142.105 (talk) 05:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elmslie typology

Our current sourcing for the Elmslie typology is a video, which wouldn't pass as a reliable source under wiki guidelines. Does anyone have a link to a properly published article or book which gives details of this typology? Monstrelet (talk) 19:07, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]