Login

10-08-2002, 03:10 PM

Hi 
Greetings from a new boy !! 
 
I have been researching the origins of the Gladius and need some help with a question I have regarding there being only one lineage. My sources are few so please excuse me jumping to, over and through conclusions !! 
 
1) The early Roman army used a Latinised form of the Greek hoplite cut & thrust sword. This was a more delicate and refined shape than the Greek original. Could this not have been bolstered by thickening the blade near the hilt thus giving the graceful waisted shape and better balance of the Roman examples circa 225 - 50BC ? This then shorteing to the Mainz type ? 
 
2) The Celtic LaTene I sword as encountered at Telamon had a blade length of about 60cm and was a straight sided cut & thrust type. 
 
Could the Delos type be an adaptation of this with a more clipped point ? This would shorten to the Fulham type and finaly to the Pompeii ? 
 
3) The Spanish appear to have adapted the LaTene I and had added their unique hanging style and scabbard type. Could the Hispanic nomenclature relate soley to the scabbard & hanging style ? 
 
Am I being stupid ? Please feel free to pat me on the head and point me in the right direction. 
 
Thanks

Matthew Amt · 10-09-2002, 01:42 PM

Ave, and Welcome to the RAT board! 
 
Not a stupid question at all, but the subject has been undergoing some new scrutiny so it pays to have up-to-date sources. Volume 8 of the Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies has the best collection of information on the development of the gladius hispaniensis, but there are still some gray areas. There have heen posts about this before, including one with photos of my own gladius hispaniensis. 
 
In short and very generally, yes, it seems safe to say that the earliest Roman swords were Italian versions of the Greek hoplite sword. The size and shape varied and evolved a bit through the Etruscan period and early Republic, but seems to have kept the leaf shape. 
 
Then, by the 2nd century BC, comes the gladius hispaniensis, which the Romans adopted from the Spaniards (no surprise), and which the Spaniards had adopted from the Gallic La Tene sword. The Gauls used a metal scabbard with a loop for the belt, but the Spanish preferred 2 rings on the back edge, and a wood and/or leather scabbard. The Romans went with the 2 rings, and at some point added a metal frame to the scabbard. The blade itself is fairly long and slim, 25 to 27 inches by a maximum of 2" wide, with a long point. And it looks like the Romans liked to add a subtle waisting to some blades, whereas the Gauls and Spanish went with parallel edges. By the first century AD some blades are getting a little wider, sometimes unwaisted, still with a fairly long point. This includes the Delos and Osuna swords, and others. At some point the scabbard starts being made with 4 rings instead of 2, so it hangs vertically rather than at an angle. 
 
Also in the first century BC the Mainz type shows up, and I really wish we had a more solid starting date for that. It looks like a shorter and wider hispaniensis. (Older books refer to the Mainz as gladius hispaniensis, but we know now that this is NOT the case.) The Fulham looks even more like a hispaniensis in width and point shape, it's just shorter. So I'm not sure we can say the Fulham is a transition from Mainz to Pompeii, it could simply be a parallel development with the Mainz. 
 
The Pompeii appears in the first century AD, maybe evolved from the Fulham but it's hard to be sure. 
 
Just a quick overview, but does that get you started? I try to stay away from trying to figure out WHY any of these changes occurred, because we don't know what the Romans were thinking, usually. Fascinating topic, though! 
 
Vale, 
Matthew/Quintus, Legio XX 
www.larp.com/legioxx/

10-11-2002, 03:36 PM

Thanks Matthew 
 
Useful stuff, 
 
Can you give me an oppinion on the possibilty of regional differences in production or were there Army regulated patterns ? 
 
I am also interested in a link in design changes due to the increased body armour being worn post Marius. Did the point become more important requiring a shorter sturdier sword ? 
 
I presume that the reduction in the size of the shield was due to this increase in armour or was it to facilitate a new fencing style ? 
 
Has anyone done published any work on a "Roman" fencing style, apart from Peter Connolly ? 
 
Questions , questions , questions !!! 
 
Regards 
 
 
Conal

Matthew Amt · 10-13-2002, 12:43 AM

Very welcome! There do not seem to have been any army or imperial "regulations" or standards for equipment, but it seems safe to say that there were some very strong fashions. We can even see some regional variations in certain items, such as belt plate designs, though we have to keep in mind that these might be due to a skew in the archeological record, or just in what gets published as opposed to what gets found. 
 
I don't think swords changed due to what the legionaries were wearing. Even if they were wearing more armor (and that is usually assumed but hardly proven), Rome's enemies were not! You equip yourself to fight your enemies, not your friends. Civil wars did happen, but they were the exception, not the rule. Besides, there's no need to make a sword more "armor-piercing", because you generally don't attack a man's armor, you go for the soft spots. Swords might have become shorter simply because they were less hassle on the march, or simply because the style changed. 
 
Similarly, with the shields we don't really know when they got shorter, and there is evidence that longer ones continued in use at least occasionally. I think the shorter ones are easier to march with when slung on the back--they don't bump the legs or interfere with the pack pole. 
 
I don't think that much has been published about swordsmanship, but we've certainly hashed out the question a couple times on this board! Check around for other threads. 
 
Vale, 
Matthew/Quintus

10-15-2002, 12:36 PM

This is good ... i'm interviewing a Roman .... who said time travel was years away !!! 
 
Can you give me an opionion on hilts ... You have given your Hispaniesis a rounded/oval guard ... the monument looks square in section ... are there any indications of shapes in archeological sources. I have the JRMES which has a hilt plate which appears as an elongated hexagon ? 
 
What are the sources for a double lobed pommel like the one worn by your collegue on your website ? 
 
Regards 
 
 
Conal

Matthew Amt · 10-15-2002, 05:00 PM

Yeah, I felt 2000 years old this morning, creak, groan! 
 
Unfortunately, there just ain't much solid evidence for the hilts. The Ahenobarbus relief looked like it could be showing an oval-plan guard rather than a rectangular block, so that's what I went with. The hexagonal plate comes from a later blade than what I wanted, but it may indicate a guard similar to some Mainz types, perhaps angular rather than rounded. 
 
The lobed brass pommel on Tom Kolb's sword? That's just the old Spanish sword that Museum Replicas used to carry. He bought it back when we thought that the Mainz evolved directly from that much older Spanish weapon. The lobes are the last vestige of the "antenna" hilt or the anthropomorphic types. Like the rest of the sword, I really feel that this kind of pommel would be way out of date by the time the Romans adopted the hispaniensis. It is at least pretty clear that most hilt pieces were not metal, since we have a number of bare tangs that survive, some even with the little washer at the tip of the tang still in place (so nothing has fallen off, it's simply decayed away). 
 
JRMES volume 8 mentions that a third sword found at Smihel had remains of its hilt still in place, but of course that sword is now missing! Apparently there are drawings in a couple publications from about 1902, which I have not yet tried to track down. As I recall, it mentions a "button shaped" pommel and "crescent shaped" guard, something like that. A curved guard would account for the sloped or rounded shoulders of the blade. All else is speculation, arrrgh!! 
 
Vale, 
Matthew/Quintus

10-16-2002, 11:59 AM

Dont suppose you have any details ref the 1902 publications ? 
 
Regards 
 
Conal

10-17-2002, 01:07 AM

They're bloody well Spanish, and I split the first Greek who says otherwise! 
_____________________________________________ 
The Way of a Warrior is based on humanity, love, and sincerity.
The heart of martial valor is bravery, wisdom, love, and friendship.
-- Ueshiba Morihei
 
_____________________________________________

10-17-2002, 07:26 AM

I'm not Greek, but I am Celtic ... can we agree on Celt- Iberian ?? ( I was hoping that I would find proof that the sword originated in Co.Mayo , west Ireland by a smith who went to Spain & sold the design to a wandering Roman !!!! .... one day ? ) 
 
The curved guard sounds Celtic but does not equate with any Spanish swords I have seen where the hilt survives. 
 
I am intrigued by the button pommel .... would this be like the ones on the daggers found at Pompeii ?

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me