Late Roman Tactics

[Paullus]

In addition the increased cavalry threat would have encouraged the use of long swords. We know that the spatha became a legion weapon c. early 3 century AD when a substantial part of the army would still have used pila. Not all of them would have a lancea to fend off a horseman. If a cavalryman is charging you down I'd much rather cut him in half with a spatha instead of trying to stab with a gladius. Safer and more practical.<br>
<br>
Plus during the civil wars of the 3rd century, Roman fighting technique with the gladius and scutum could have been so down pact that when combined with their armor legionnaires were practically invincible against like foes. Hard to stab for the enemy's face when he knows how to use his scutum. Now to be able to chop through the edge of that shield would be very useful.<br>
<br>
Plus the continued cruciform reinforcement of helmets couldn't solely have been caused by the falx. After all the Dacians were conquered fairly soon after this feature emerged. If it was a simple adaptation this would have petered out soon after, yet it continued i.e. Imperial Italic Type H. This would support the possible adoption of spatha in small numbers sometime in the mid 2nd century AD. Or could it be the increased use of swords by the Germanics in addition to having to face the falx? Obviously there was no systematic reinforcement of helmets (if any) during Caesar's Gallic campaign, so who knows? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p200.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=paullus@romanarmytalk>Paullus</A> at: 11/13/04 1:14 am<br></i>