Update on the Spatha and Gladius fighting techniques!

[Gregg]

I'm curious, when performing these tests, how "authentic" were the swords used? Remember, surviving sword furniture suggests a weapon with an extremely tight grip. The deep grooves of the bone grip, the shortness of the grip (around 80-85 mm seems to have been typical), and the large size of both the pommel and guard all suggest a weapon designed to permit very little in the way of sophisticated "fencing."

Gregg

[Martin Wallgren]

On the contary. The tight grip can be very versitile if used in the correct way. If one use a loose grip the sword can move in your hand as you want. From a "classic" all finger grip to the handshake grip, even griping only the pommel and ad a few centimeters of thrust-range.

Here is a topic on myarmoury.com about the ideas on griping a vikingsword where I got the inspiration for my testing of this.

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic ... light=grip

[Paulus Claudius Damianus]

Hello Mithras!
Here is an extract of the article that I have co-write on the occasion of the acts of the international colloquium of the western martial arts of Dijon 2006. (Supervised by Bourgogne Unniversity) I quotes some example of the organization chart of the base of the late Roman army and the names of the in order foot soldiers in front battle-line...

As Végèce, we still find at Jean Lydus Ordinarii as being the second of the tribunes in term of command. There is not more doubt, Ordinarii are the centurions superior to the head of Ordines. In first ones rows(ranks), in the first Acia of the order of battle. It is already what said to us Ammien in the battle of Strasbourg:

"Quos cum iam prope densantes semet in cuneos nostrorum conspexere ductores, steterunt uestigiis fixis, antepilanis hastatisque et ordinum primis uelut insolubili muro fundatis et pari cautela hostes stetere cuneati."
LIVRE 16, Chapitre 12, paragraphe 20.

Ordines primi (Ordinum primis) fights with the Antepilani which Antesignani synonymic to Ammianus. It is always the most experimented troops which fight in the first row (Ordo) It is there still mention in the siège of Amida when troops rebels against the superior centurions and we still find this name a little farther during an important battle of Gratien against Alamans Lentiens:

"Proinde quiete reficiendis corporibus data, signoque erecto, quod solet ad pugnam hortari, tubarum minacium accendente clangore, fidentissimo impetu acies motas prompte ante alios praeiere duo iuunes lecti in principiis adeundi discriminis, Saliuius et Lupicinus, Scutarius anus, alter e schola Gentilium, fragore terribili concitantes: hastasque crispando cum ad rupim obiecta uenissent, trudentibusque Alamannis euadere ad celsiora conarentur adwenit omne pondus armorum, isdemque antesignanis per hirta dumis et aspera magno uirium nisu in editas sublimitates erepsit."
Ammien Marcellin, Res Gestae, Livre XXVII, chapitre 10, paragraphe 12

Bit by bit the details of the puzzle can are set up, and in the Vegetius descriptions less dark now. We know for example that the term "Principales" for the early imperial times or "Principiores" (which live "Principia"; in Roman headquarters of camps and barracks) for the Late Empire also indicate all the small-officers of the legion. Vegetius call them Principiores legionis. J. Fountain (Histories, I, on 1968, Paris) points out that the term " Principia " at Ammianus Marcellinus succeeds in the late Latin Primores. Principia also means small-officer, distancing itself from superior officers; Tribuni.

EX:
"legionum principia" (XXII, 3,9; XXV,5,1.).
"numerorum principia" (XXVIII, 6, 17).
"cum tribunes principiisque militum" (XXV, 8, 16).

Ammianus, to indicate them, still speaks about the lawsuit of the "Princes" of Legions Ioviani et Herculiani to Chalcédoine under the presidency of the prefect of Gallic origin Salustius Secondus.

"(…) qui omnes transgressi Chalcedona praesentibus Iovianorum Herculianorumque principiis et tribunis, causas uehementibus aequo boboque spectauerunt praeter paucas, in quibus veritas nocentissimos offerebat."
LIVRE 22, Chapitre 3, paragraphe1.

The term "Princes" also indicate to Ammianus all the small-officers of the legion. The Latin term is "Principiis" or "Principles"… And there, if we resume the battle order of Végèce, the buckle is buckled. Vegetius never made a mistake in the description of his battle order, he has never wanted to describe the manipular legion like some Historian say again (see philip Richardot)

Bientôt la suite...

[Robert Vermaat]

Damien, thanks for the overview but could you add English translations for the Latin quotes? I'm sure some of the members are not so well-versed in Latin..

And there, if we resume the battle order of Végèce, the buckle is buckled.

?? Sometimes Babelfish does not work properly.... :?

[Paulus Claudius Damianus]

La suite...

It is simply that his description of its battle order is indeed that of a late legion. When Vegetius says to us that in the front line are the "Principes" then in the second "Hastati" while the Republican descriptions (see Titus Livius, Polybius) whom he did not have to ignore, indicate in the first one les Hastati then the Principles, it is not an error of its part; it is just a shift in meaning which he makes to stick better on his time, victim than he is as scholar of his taste for the étymological previous words. If the Princes are indicated in the front line it is simply because the officers and small-officers of legions are there: The Principes (small-officers; the first ones) primi ordines (the first ones of the row) as Ordinarii (the centurions of the first troop), Antepilani or Antesignani (those who are in the front.) then only comes second there line Hastati …

From then on, the attributions of the centurions at Végèce become understandable:

Ranks formerly current:

" We kept the ancient usage to bring up to the rank of " Primuspilus " the first prince of the legion (it is a prince " princeps ", he makes left the "Principes" and thus the primi ordines). Besides the command of the eagle He had under his orders four centuries of the first line (Antesignani or Antepilani of the first Acia) among four hundred soldiers; placed so to speak in the head of all the legion (idem), he enjoyed advantageous bonuses allocated to this employment. After him, the first one Hastaire (another member of Principiis) named Named today " ducenarius " (his late name), steered in second line two centuries or two hundred men (after Antépilaires comes well " Hastati "). The first one of the first troop (idem) commanded one and a half century, that is hundred and fifty men(people). The first one triaire commanded only hundred men Ten centuries of the first troop thus had for common officers five (Ordinarii; primi ordines). (…) There were still the centurions, today called" centenarius " but made guard polemical at the modern historian's: commander of called barracks centenaria? Commander of cavalry? Commander of a century ( Hypothesis of Zuckerman?) who commanded(ordered) each a century. There was "Decanus"; (leader of late manipulars) equivalent of 11 men which replaces ancient Contubernum), knew at present under the name of leader of squad, put in the head of 10 men (no Latin correspondence but Jean gives us maybe one). The second troop counted five centurions; it was the same of the third, the fourth, until the tenth up to and including. The number of centurions in a legion amounted to fifty five.
" Livre II, Chapter 8.

Let us note to strengthen the comment that Constantin Zuckerman and his team discovered the stele of an officer of the name of Dassianus which was among others named " Centurio primus " in its career(quarry) near 350 AD …

A suivre...

[Paulus Claudius Damianus]

There is another sort of supplementary hierarchical distinction which separates the Common: the said centurions "Augustales" and "Flaviales" whose meaning is not clear …

In the same way St Jèrome, the patriotic crying bishop all the tears of his body in the first bag of Rome in 410, gives us on the occasion of one of his papers " Against Jean of Jerusalem The list of the ranks of the cavalry of his time at the beginning of the end 4e century-5th century. This list with also the parculiarity to be ascending, that is in feel her gradual of the "tour" of promotions.

"(…) Volo quod dico manifestius fieri, finge aliquem tribunitiae potestatis suo uitio retrogradatum, per singula militiae equestris officia, ad tironis uocabulum deuolutum. Numquid ex tribuno statim fit tiro? Non, sed ante primicerius, deinde senator, ducenarius, centenarius, biarchus, circitor, eques, dein tiro; et quamquam tribunus quondam miles gregarius sit, tamen ex tribuno non tiro, sed primicerius factus est (…)"
HIER. C. Ioh. 19 (J. L. Feiertag, CC SL 79 A, 1999, p30-31.)

If we read it in growing orders; we obtain: tiro, eques, circitor, biarchus, centenarius, ducenarius, senator, primicerius, tribunus.

Mithras we have Aurelius Gaius triari optio under Dioclétian, optio ordinatus and optio princeps…Voir Wheeler; la légion en phalange, REMA N°1, édition Picard 2004 ou Th Drew-Bear, "Les voyagent d'Aurélius Gaius, soldat de Dioclétien" dans "La géographie administrative te politique d'Alexandre à Mahomet", Univ. Des Sciences humaines de Strasbourg. Travaux du centre de Recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Grèce antique, 1981 (Leyde) p93-141. …

no Triari after Diocletien but the Triari fonction is play by the rear "subsidia" in late roman battle order. See the seven Vegetius Battle orders ans the Ammianus and Pacatus (Panégyrics) terminology.

To well complete the Ammianus Marcellinus late battle orders information there are the excellente Oratio I and III by Julian Caesar.

The panegyrics of the unknown person of 313 and that of the 321 by Nazarius abounds in details tactics of the arrangement of the troops.

Among the immense work of libanios there is obviously Julian's Funeral oration which detail a part of the campaigns of the emperor. Less known but fascinating the ground fight and the naval action of Ekphraseis de Libanios. (Sort of descriptive picture of the progress of the battle)

Maurus at Ammianus is said (Chapter 20, paragrahe 4) Draconarius to Hastati. This passage is famous and very interesting! He simply signifi that he is standard barrer in a whole unit of Hastati (cohors?) it supposes a clear tactical positionement of these Hastati (doubtless the second Acia of the order of Battle)

[Paulus Claudius Damianus]

sorry robert, I tempt an English translation of extracts Latin and I the sendings in addition.

[Gregg]

I don't know how possible a loose grip would be with a gladius. The pommel generally seems to have been too large to permit a "handshake" grip (assuming I understand the meaning of that expression), and you certainly couldn't hook the index finger over the guard, like you could on a Viking sword, the way the Sassanians are known to have done.

The attached photo is a rare, detailed representation of how the Romans viewed the gladius in action, and goes a way to illustrate the limitations I am referring to:

[Mitra]

Damianus i think is best to move the discussion on Vegetius on a new post, is off-topic on this.

[Martin Wallgren]

I just came home from an albion round table meeting in Uppsala, Sweden where I had the oppertunitu to handle and get the feel of Albions Next Generation Mainz and Pompeii gladii. And they could be held in a various ways. In a other thread I will give a more precise rewiev of the swords.

[Tarbicus]

I don't know how possible a loose grip would be with a gladius. The pommel generally seems to have been too large to permit a "handshake" grip (assuming I understand the meaning of that expression), and you certainly couldn't hook the index finger over the guard, like you could on a Viking sword, the way the Sassanians are known to have done.

The attached photo is a rare, detailed representation of how the Romans viewed the gladius in action, and goes a way to illustrate the limitations I am referring to:

Well, I just had a thought.

The huge pommel - what better way to ensure that when you pull the gladius back, after stabbing someone, you don't lose your grip of it when pulling back if stuck in the victim's body or armour. Could this be a design feature demonstrating its primary function as a thrusting weapon?

Your hand's slippy with sweat and blood, and the blade gets stuck in someone's ribs. It also could possibly explain the other feature on most gladii - the large ridges on the handgrip serving the same function. Form follows function.

[Endre Fodstad]

The huge pommel - what better way to ensure that when you pull the gladius back, after stabbing someone, you don't lose your grip of it when pulling back if stuck in the victim's body or armour. Could this be a design feature demonstrating its primary function as a thrusting weapon?

It could be, of course, but there are plenty of later swords with large pommels, so it is not really a distinctive marker, now is it?

I've done quite a few test cutting and thrusting experiments and demonstrations on hanging pig's haunches and sharp weapons and to be quite honest, even when I pierce the legbone (thicker than any human bone except the cranium) with a considerably more unwieldy weapon (like a spear or a two-handed axe) than a gladius, pulling the weapon back has never been a problem - flesh and bone are so very, very soft and pliable - it is scary sometimes to put the point of a spear at pig's flesh and push the entire blade through the haunch with only a finger. It also gets a rise out of the crowd, every time.

To a large extent, I think archaeologists severely underestimate fashion and artisan's tradition when discussing pre-modern weapon design and overestimate the amount of "design" that go into them.

[Tarbicus]

It could be, of course, but there are plenty of later swords with large pommels, so it is not really a distinctive marker, now is it?

But are they almost spherical, or do they have an almost constant diameter all the way round? No matter the orientation of the sword you will always have the hand in a position to rest against it. How about the handgrip having deep grooves which very well suit a pulling action?

I'm not saying I'm right, but I think there's more to the design than just fashion. There are many changes in armour, and there are gladii examples that have smoother handgrips, but these features seem to be a mainstay for a very long period.

A more disc shaped pommel suggests the sword was meant to be manipulated to different orientations far more than a pommel that could tend to get in the way.

[Goffredo]

Yes I agree that we severely underestimate fashion and traditions, but I do think that features are most likely not to have been handicaps. "A feature, not a bug!"

As people were trying to stay alive I expect that a feature would persist (as a fashion or to the point of being a tradition) as long as it did not reduce the ability to survive and to kill the opponent. HOWEVER this was true as long as the enemy and the tactical aspects of the fight were known and predictable. If instead the enemy was new, had new weapons and ways of fighting and killing then a feature might then revealed itself to be a bug.

I think that as long as the battles were basically all alike (variations of the usual stuff) then I would expect that evolution was dominated by fashion and relatively soft cultural changes.

Just thinking

[Endre Fodstad]

It could be, of course, but there are plenty of later swords with large pommels, so it is not really a distinctive marker, now is it?

But are they almost spherical, or do they have an almost constant diameter all the way round? No matter the orientation of the sword you will always have the hand in a position to rest against it. How about the handgrip having deep grooves which very well suit a pulling action?

Plenty of norse swords, as well as many early and high medieval swords, have eye-shaped pommels, but few have circular ones. Then again, the gladii pommels I've seen are hardly entirely circular either. I sort of doubt it's that much of a problem anyway. I've fought in WMA training and gotten small but heavily bleeding rifts on my hands (typically knuckles), causing my gloves to fill up with blood without that impacting much on my handling of blades (or me noticing it before it started drippling down the arm ruining my shirt). It would truly take an impressively stuck weapon to demand extra grip like that...

You could be right, of course. I've usually fought with leathercovered wood grips - perhaps all-wooden grips more easily slips...