New sword find in Jerusalem, image?

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Well, since you were obviously there at the time, please let us know what really happened.

I base what I say on Josephus, read his books and you will find out what happened, from his perspective. I also base myself on several excavation reports by the Israeli Antiquities authority in which weapons of several eras are shown. A very important report is the one on the sword found on Masada which was put in Masada VIII : "The Military Equipment from Masada", in: Masada VIII: The Yigael Yadin Excavations1963-65 (2007)

An interesting critical read on the making of history by Josephus is the book :

Making history: Josephus and historical method by Zuleika Rodgers.
ISBN: 90-04-15008-0

But since you claimed that the sword could only be lost in the tunnel by a Roman ("inconsistent with any Roman legionary losing his sword") I think that the the possibilities of Jewish defenders using Roman swords captured in the years before the siege represent more than a likely possibility, as you have confirmed yourself in your last post. So why am I 'gravely mistaken' again? :wink:

I do not say the sword could only have been lost by a Roman. I say the only person losing the sword could have been a Jewish combattant since the Romans did not fight in the tunnels according to the sources who highly likely would have told us so if they did since it is peculiar enough to mention. Josephus only mentions rebels hiding out in the sewers, not rebels fighting Romans in the sewers. Furthermore the type of sword found in the tunnels is not Roman military issue. One set of rings in stead of two sets, not the shape of any Roman military sword found in other parts of the Empire, and it does not have a spatha shape as you say it does. Of course the sword may have come out of an armoury but since we do not know what kind of weapons were stored in armouries we cannot therefore say the sword is Roman, which the archeologists do say it is. It is not at all certain that since the Romans were in Judaea with a large military presence (which they were not untill the Jewish war started) all weapons found in Judaea therefore are Roman.
The Judaean people used all kinds of weapons, and the chances are likely that they were a combination of hellenistic weaponry. In the Bible the greek word Xiphos is used in the new testament on several occasions. Does that mean the people used Hoplite weapons ? Not at all, but it also does not mean the weapons used were Roman.

Please let us know why exactly, because the Israeli archaeologists seem to know nothing about swords whatsoever. :mrgreen:

There will be some scholars in Israel specialised in Roman military equipment but they are not as widespread as the ones in Europe specialising in this field of expertise. Furthermore, looking at a lot of claims coming out of Israel like for instance the golden bell found near the temple which was immediately made out to be a bell of a garment worn by a priest confirms my idea that this is wishful thinking. A metallurgical analysis could help in this case. But still, if you compare sword shapes and want to keep saying this sword is Roman, it does not look first century Roman at all. It looks more Republican in shape and style. We dont have a clearly defined hilt or pommel anymore nor do we have the scabbard tip end of the sword so we cannot tell with absolute certainty where this sword originated from.

All I say that it is not Roman in my eyes, and I base that not only on Josephus but also on other finds of swords from Israel which are clearly Roman military issue swords.

M.VIB.M.

And for those interested in Iudaean weapons : one of the most widely used weapons in the region was the Sicca :