Sword moving from right to left

[Paul Elliott]

I agree, thats a really interesting observation (hasta/sword) Robert. The adoption of the spear was a reaction to fighting cavalry then? Getting a longer reach in the 3rdC against Gothic cavalry and Persians? I had read the spear was back in vogue during that century (IP Stephenson), but not as much as people think (Ross Cowan/Simon James).

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Was there not a discussion of this very subject some time back?

[Paul Elliott]

Was there? I'll check the archives.

EDIT: No luck though, on the switch of the sword to the left side

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/17-roma...tml#242194

Ah-haaa, knew I wasn't imagining it!!

EDIT: Damn!! The link to the older conversation is kaput.... ad:

[Paul Elliott]

bum!

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I can see it.

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/17-roma...tml#242194

But I think the 2 older threads within it were lost on the old site transfer due to URL changes. If you google searched it it might come up.

[Antonius Insulae]

Potentially for display, that might be it.

[Paul Elliott]

Perhaps this one ('why wear the sword on the right?') :

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/17-roma...mitstart=0

And 'Moving the sword from right to left':

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/17-roma...-left.html

Reading these two threads, I wonder if its something to do with the curved shield. If some standard bearers and auxiliaries are already wearing their swords on the left in the first century, then perhaps its that tight, constraining curve of the legionary's shield that hugs the body when in a tight formation, that prevents you drawing a sword easily. Tightly packed, it really does hug the body. I can see drawing a spathes difficult from inside that shield as well as wielding it past those pointed corners. Maybe the gladius was better placed on the right because it was outside of the limiting curve of the cylindrical scutum, reverse draw and ready to fight along the straight edge of the scutum.

Auxiliaries and standard bearers might have found wearing the sword on the left no problem with a small or flat oval shield and not being constrained by any regulation, some did so....

[Virilis]

Yes Paul, might have something to do with the scutum too! The rectangular scutum, short gladius and the pilum might have fallen from use at the same time some time in the 3th c. AD? They were replaced by the longer Lauriacum-Hromowka etc. type swords, dished oval / round shields and hastae. Am I right?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Yes Paul, might have something to do with the scutum too! The rectangular scutum, short gladius and the pilum might have fallen from use at the same time some time in the 3th c. AD? They were replaced by the longer Lauriacum-Hromowka etc. type swords, dished oval / round shields and hastae. Am I right?

For some reason your post just made me feel dumb.

It makes sense, that and what was mentioned above about the Hasta/Spiculum. I'd imagine it would be faster/easier to draw a spatha from the left too.

[Paul Elliott]

The next painful question is, like the 'chicken or the egg', which change came first? The spatha or the oval shield? Date-line late 2ndC...

I tend to think that the need was for a longer weapon to reach more mounted foes, just as the hasta was being introduced into frontline service. The cylindical scutum may have proved difficult to use in combination with this longer weapon, used also for slashing as stabbing. An oval shield began to be introduced, and soldiers found they could shift the sword to the left, it made drawing the longer weapon slightly easier. The new shield also made slashing attacks over the top of the oval shield easier than over the top of the rectangular scutum.

This is conjecture, trying to put some of the ideas in this thread together.

[Virilis]

Interesting! An oval / round shield definitely makes slashing action more easy. Could it be that the shields were also lighter in construction? I know brass edgings of the rectancular earlier shields don't add to the overall weight much but still...

[Frank]

The next painful question is, like the 'chicken or the egg', which change came first? The spatha or the oval shield? Date-line late 2ndC...

I tend to think that the need was for a longer weapon to reach more mounted foes, just as the hasta was being introduced into frontline service. The cylindical scutum may have proved difficult to use in combination with this longer weapon, used also for slashing as stabbing.

I guess more important is the hasta or heavy lancea. Some historians argue, that the lancea became the main weapon these times. And with a spear you should use an oval or round shield in a shieldwall.

The lancea made a comeback as main weapon due to the changed tactics. Its the better weapon against cavalry armies and it also supports a more defensive role of the infantry.

I don't see a chicken and egg problem. The old traditional legion changed to the more flexible and versatile tactics, organisation and equipment of the auxilia cohorts. I doubt this was a step by step approach. If a unit changed equipment, it makes a lot of sense to change all the equipment at once.

[Paul Elliott]

Frank, I was thinking that change was by unit, not individuals switching from one to another, but a unit wide change might occur. But I doubt anything like a '167 AD' directive went out to all legions to begin oval shield and spatha operations.

Do you think then that the hasta and spatha may have been adopted as a new longer-reach fighting combination, and of course the oval auxilia shield (slightly enlarged) naturally came along with the spear. Use of the oval shield then allowed the sword to be switched to the left with ease, making drawing easier.

Thats a less convoluted argument than my 'theory' above.

All we need now is historical accounts of soldiers suffering from lack of reach with their gladii in the mid-2nd century against cavalry foes! Or accounts of repeated clashes with aggressive mounted troops.

I don't see a chicken and egg problem. The old traditional legion changed to the more flexible and versatile tactics, organisation and equipment of the auxilia cohorts. I doubt this was a step by step approach. If a unit changed equipment, it makes a lot of sense to change all the equipment at once.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Except, they used curved oval scuta wit hlonger swords during part of the republican period, with pila, which makes me wonder exactly what the difference in sword use was beteen thse longer infatry swords.