04-02-2006, 12:28 PM
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you'd do everything in camp with a pugio when there are surely more useful tools around; but it has wider potential applications than the gladius, as Gabinius says. But I do feel that in pitched battle the pugio was unlikely to have been used as anything but a last resort after loss of gladius, that it would not have been chosen over the gladius.
In the engagement with the Insubrian Gauls in 223 BC, when the Romans deliberately fight at much closer quarters than usual for them, they're using gladii (though the tactics are employed because the Gauls needed more space to operate successfully than the Romans).
Some of the recent literature on battle - for the period I'm studying - suggests that it was fairly fluid; it might be unwise to dump gladius in favour of pugio in a momentary melee when that might swiftly loosen up.
In the engagement with the Insubrian Gauls in 223 BC, when the Romans deliberately fight at much closer quarters than usual for them, they're using gladii (though the tactics are employed because the Gauls needed more space to operate successfully than the Romans).
Some of the recent literature on battle - for the period I'm studying - suggests that it was fairly fluid; it might be unwise to dump gladius in favour of pugio in a momentary melee when that might swiftly loosen up.
