01-02-2014, 03:33 PM
Mark wrote:
For when I espouse the idea of stab/thrust and cut (for which I see the shorter classic gladius with it's heavier waisted point and double-edges perfectly designed for) I am thinking of the placed 'cut' (literally as one cuts meat - by placing the blade and drawing backwards); as opposed to the downward cutting motion that I could perhaps better describe as 'slashing'.
[img width=400]http://www.museodelarmablanca.com/gladius_files/gla18.jpg[/img]
The sword on the bottom is the Gladius Hispanensis, the Spanish Sword, that is described by Polybius and was carried by Romans in the mid to Late Republic/Early Principate. Based on recent archaeological discoveries, the blade length ranges from 25"-27", the blades were mostly straight, with some minor wasting, long points, thin blades. Its blade heavy, with a point of balance at generally 5-7" from the guard. It was the sword the Romans carried, at least during their rise to the empire period that you frequently mention, and as you can see, it wasn't short.
[img width=350]http://www.myarmoury.com/images/collect/nateb_swor_var_gladh_a_s.jpg[/img]
[img width=350]http://www.armae.com/Photos/Epees_sabres_glaives_poignards/114PDSW131F.jpg[/img]
A couple of modern recreations of the Gladius Hispaniensis.
It's in thinking this that I would happily dismiss any thoughts of 'virtus' and heroism, for I would ask all to forget any warrior ethic, knightly behaviour or individualism when it comes to soldiers fighting. For they are there to perform only one task - to kill, preferably with minimal losses - and nothing else. It is this aspect that made the Roman military machine what it was. There is a time and place for a bit of heroism, but that's not what you teach soldiers - you teach them to kill in the most efficient method possible.
The modern soldier vs. warrior debate didn't exist in ancient Rome. The Romans were a war like people, who glorified war at every level of their society. I highly recommend you read Ross Cowan's For the Glory of Rome: A History of Warriors and Warfare. Cowan (who is a RAT member) specifically recounts of situations where it is undeniable that the Roman soldier was also a warrior, believing in concepts like virtus and heroism. Please read this book.
Additionally, I would also recommend J.E. Lendon's Soldiers and Ghosts and Simon James Rome and the Sword.
Your assumptions may be flawed.
For when I espouse the idea of stab/thrust and cut (for which I see the shorter classic gladius with it's heavier waisted point and double-edges perfectly designed for) I am thinking of the placed 'cut' (literally as one cuts meat - by placing the blade and drawing backwards); as opposed to the downward cutting motion that I could perhaps better describe as 'slashing'.
[img width=400]http://www.museodelarmablanca.com/gladius_files/gla18.jpg[/img]
The sword on the bottom is the Gladius Hispanensis, the Spanish Sword, that is described by Polybius and was carried by Romans in the mid to Late Republic/Early Principate. Based on recent archaeological discoveries, the blade length ranges from 25"-27", the blades were mostly straight, with some minor wasting, long points, thin blades. Its blade heavy, with a point of balance at generally 5-7" from the guard. It was the sword the Romans carried, at least during their rise to the empire period that you frequently mention, and as you can see, it wasn't short.
[img width=350]http://www.myarmoury.com/images/collect/nateb_swor_var_gladh_a_s.jpg[/img]
[img width=350]http://www.armae.com/Photos/Epees_sabres_glaives_poignards/114PDSW131F.jpg[/img]
A couple of modern recreations of the Gladius Hispaniensis.
It's in thinking this that I would happily dismiss any thoughts of 'virtus' and heroism, for I would ask all to forget any warrior ethic, knightly behaviour or individualism when it comes to soldiers fighting. For they are there to perform only one task - to kill, preferably with minimal losses - and nothing else. It is this aspect that made the Roman military machine what it was. There is a time and place for a bit of heroism, but that's not what you teach soldiers - you teach them to kill in the most efficient method possible.
The modern soldier vs. warrior debate didn't exist in ancient Rome. The Romans were a war like people, who glorified war at every level of their society. I highly recommend you read Ross Cowan's For the Glory of Rome: A History of Warriors and Warfare. Cowan (who is a RAT member) specifically recounts of situations where it is undeniable that the Roman soldier was also a warrior, believing in concepts like virtus and heroism. Please read this book.
Additionally, I would also recommend J.E. Lendon's Soldiers and Ghosts and Simon James Rome and the Sword.
Your assumptions may be flawed.
