+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: 2nd Punic War - which sword? (/showthread.php?tid=11996)
Pages:
1
2
2nd Punic War - which sword? - Tarbicus - 03-07-2008
I'm really confused now. Am I right in suspecting that a Roman legionary of the 2nd Punic War would have most likely carried either a Xiphos type, or even an antennae sword, or even an antennae sword with the blade shaped a bit like a Mainz? I vaguely recall someone mentioning the latter after they read the new Miks book... or something. :?
What's the latest theory? IIRC, the gladius hispaniensis didn't go into Roman manufacture until near the end of the 2nd Punic War, or even later?
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - jho - 03-07-2008
I neither have Miks nor Polybios at hand at the moment but apparently Polybios fr. 179 says that the "Spanish Sword" was introduced during the Punic wars.
Miks now argues that all late republican swords currently styled as gladii hispanienses (Delos, Smihel etc.) are in fact normal Latene style swords and that the Romans would have used something similar to the Spanish antennae swords during this period.
The argument is based solely on the typological similarities between the Spanish antennae swords and later Mainz type swords.
I personally have difficulties in subscribing to this view (in spite of the striking similarities between Mainz blades and earlier Spanish blades) because this means that we do not have a single Roman blade for something like 200 years and that the not insubstantial number of blades found at Roman sites all belong to foreign auxiliaries. I am not sure how likely this is.
Again, I do not have access to my sources right now so apologize if I should misrepresent Miks' arguments.
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Tarbicus - 03-07-2008
Thanks Jens, that's really helpful. I wonder if, even though they may not be gladii hispaniensis, the Romans could have used LaTene type swords as well as antennae swords? Given the amazing variety of blade shapes and styles in Miks' new book, I personally suspect (as do others that I know) there was a greater variety of arms and armour than we currently think of in the legions.
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Conal - 03-07-2008
Aren't the arguements for the Hispaniensis being a variation of the LaTene I sword too strong for Miks theory to have credence? Lets have heated debate.:twisted:
(a) The Iberian short antenna sword had verymuch disappeared by the date of supposed adoption.
(b) The average length was a mere 30 cms, a big dagger in reality.
© The supension system was wholey Spanish and there is no evidence that the Celts changed their preferences.
(d) by the 2nd Punic the Celts had gone onto La Tene II types so any auxilliary use would reflect this?
(e) There is an actual bloodline via Iberian adoption of the La Tene I, coupled with Spanish suspension which fits too well.
Asd Miks wrote his book in foreign I am going to be spending a lot of time on babelfish :?
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - caiusbeerquitius - 03-08-2008
Quote:Asd Miks wrote his book in foreign
Non, no, not in Foreign, in German, Foreign is spoken somewhere else...
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Duncan Head - 03-11-2008
Quote:I neither have Miks nor Polybios at hand at the moment but apparently Polybios fr. 179 says that the "Spanish Sword" was introduced during the Punic wars.After, surely? Or at least, after the second war:
"The Celtiberians excel the rest of the world in the construction of their swords; for their point is strong and serviceable, and they can deliver a cut with both edges. Wherefore the Romans abandoned their ancestral swords after the Hannibalian war and adopted those of the Iberians. They adopted, I say, the construction of the swords, but they can by no means imitate the excellence of the steel or the other points in which they are so elaborately finished."
(from Perseus, italics mine)
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Tarbicus - 03-11-2008
Thanks Duncan, that clarifies a lot of things. IIRC, it was after Scipio Africanus had taken Carthage that the swordsmiths were captured and forced to teach the Romans how to make the Spanish sword. So we're talking about 209 BC when the true gladius hispaniensis saw full use within the Roman army. No doubt ones taken as spolia were in the army to a certain degree by then, but that should be the exception, not the norm.
So I come back to the use of the xiphos or longer LaTene sword.... :?
Anyone for Kopis? - zugislander - 03-11-2008
Hello all,
I think that prior to the adoption of the Hispaniensis another candidate should be some variation on the Kopis. The Greeks had moved largely in that direction. Many Spaniards used the Falcata instead of the straight sword. And it is not so far removed from that "vine pruner" looking sword shown commonly in the earlier Etruscan era. The Kopis was commonly available through the region, that would tend to lower the price, and this was the era where a Roman had to provide his own equipment. For some, cost would be a determinant.
Lacking any evidence in any direction. I always tend toward the direction of least change, but it is a fun puzzle to muddle.
Cordially,
Michael
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Duncan Head - 03-12-2008
Quote:So I come back to the use of the xiphos or longer LaTene sword.... :?Difficult. There are those currency bars with the xiphos-style sword on them - Sekunda illustrates one in the Early Roman Armies Osprey - but AFAIK those are still dated to the early C3rd, before the First Punic War. The "least change" thesis would suggest that the same style was still in use rather than proposing a third type intermediate between xiphos and hispaniensis.
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Tarbicus - 03-12-2008
I think I'll go with the 'least change' thesis, especially given the currency bars you mention. Thanks Duncan, you've helped make my mind up.
Michael, I already have a falcata, and I think it's a viable option for the First Punic War. But somehow it just doesn't sit right, for now, for Second Punic War.
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Thersites - 03-15-2008
May I insist you all have a look at the very detailed argument in JRMES 8, 1997, pp. 251 ff., an also at other papers there (Connolly's, Iriarte's, Horvat's...) The idea that Romans used any variety of Spanish athrophied antennae swords (probably my type III, contemporary and the longest of them) is just a much worse fit to available evidence that the much better supported theory that the model they copied around 209 BC or a bit later -it was probably during a somewhat long period- was my type VIIC (i.e., late Iberian swords of a type similar to La Tène I iwth a completely different suspension system using a baldric and a frame scabbard with syuspension rings. Falcatas have nothing to do in this story IMHO
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Tarbicus - 03-15-2008
Quote:May I insist you all have a look at the very detailed argument in JRMES 8, 1997, pp. 251 ff.,Impossible to find a copy of it (mine was ruined in a flooding accident), and by now it would probably cost over £100.
Is this yours? http://celtiberia.net/imagftp/espadas.jpg
Do you mean the swords found in La Osera and Gormaz?
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - John M McDermott - 03-15-2008
There is another theory that all of the swords found that we associate with the Republic are not infantry swords at all, but spathas. The supporting logic is that such swords survive because they are votive and only the "better" spathas would have been used for the votive purpose.
I currently reject this logic as all these swords have infantry style points. Also, it strikes me that these would be excellent swords for cutting off the tips of pikes. During the Republican period, the Romans were encountering pikemen on a regular basis.
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Thersites - 03-15-2008
Yes, it is mine.
There is also something in Spanish here (basically same argument, less detailed and referenced: http://www.celtiberia.net/articulo.asp? ... spaniensis
As for that JRMES thing... send me a pm with a postal address and I'll send you a copy by snailmail if you feel like reading it.
Re: 2nd Punic War - which sword? - Araujo - 03-24-2008
It is true that Scipio Africanus used many types of swords, since the roman native gladius to a foreign Gaul sword. But he didn't use those barbarian swords and weapons to fight against the Carthaginians, for these were too smart and too experienced to fall on an ambush with Greek, Spanish or even Gaulish swords.
So Scipio separated those weapons for its own men; as for example, the native roman legionaries would use a gladius as a second weapon, the first as being the pilum, and the mercenaries and all those "barbarians" their original type of weapon. A roman didn't want his roman troops stop being Romans! No, and so all the generals on the Second, Third or even in the Macedonian Wars, made separated units: one unit was a native roman unit, another a mercenary or "barbarian" unit, etc.