09-10-2014, 03:02 PM
Gladius
Quesada has a very detailed treatment on Iberian swords and their connection to the Gladius. He argues (complete with good tables and illustrations) that there is a clear evolution from La Tene I swords, to locally produced Celtiberian swords (which were produced after the Gauls had moved on to blunter La Tene II types), to the Republican roman types (such as the Delos sword) , and finally to the recognizable imperial types. He also mentions that the pugio is clearly based off of Iberian dagger. This argued in detail, but I think that the connection is non-controversial. The article is available here:
http://www.uam.es/proyectosinv/equus/war...C%20rd.pdf
EDIT: I'd also like to note that you can make a good argument that the spatha is at least celtic influenced. After all, it was a cavalry sword, and it was long. Celts used long swords, and served in Roman cavalry at the time it was introduced. While it's not really a "Celtic" sword, I'd be surprised if it was not introduced because cavalry auxilia (many of whom were from Gaul) wanted a gladius but longer, like their ancestral weapons. Though maybe thats not it, and it just made sense to make a longer gladius!
Horned Saddle
Once piece of equipment that I am personally quite curious about is Celtic saddle. It is generally regarded as Celtic based on two pieces of evidence. First is that the Glanum relief (1st cent BCE) shows a riderless horse bearing a horned saddle. As the battle appears to be between Celts and Romans, it is assumed that riderless horse is meant to be Celtic. It is therefore assumed that the horned saddle at this time was a recognizably Celtic feature.
The second piece of evidence is the Gunderstrup Cauldron. This piece is harder to interpret because it is very abstract. The maker is also uncertain as it may be Celtic or Thracian (or even some other group). Finally, the date is fairly uncertain, but possibly as early as the second cent BCE. It depicts several horsemen, who horses appear to wearing typical Celtic tack. There are slight bumps in front of and behind the rider,that may be a Celtic saddle.
I personally think that this is enough evidence to suppose a Celtic origin, but not really enough to fully rule out the possibility of the horned saddle as a Roman invention. The cauldron is just too uncertain to be fully credible and that leaves Glanum as the first clear attestation on the type. However, the well attested Celtic tradition of horsemanship (as well as the lack of Roman horse tradition) still somewhat favors a Celtic origin. Mr. Radpour, who sometimes posts here, posits an eastern origin to the type. But as far as I know, all eastern evidence of the horned saddle post dates Glanum and also post dates Roman contact with east, indicating that origin is more likely Celtic (if not Roman). If anyone has more info on this, please share it!
Quesada has a very detailed treatment on Iberian swords and their connection to the Gladius. He argues (complete with good tables and illustrations) that there is a clear evolution from La Tene I swords, to locally produced Celtiberian swords (which were produced after the Gauls had moved on to blunter La Tene II types), to the Republican roman types (such as the Delos sword) , and finally to the recognizable imperial types. He also mentions that the pugio is clearly based off of Iberian dagger. This argued in detail, but I think that the connection is non-controversial. The article is available here:
http://www.uam.es/proyectosinv/equus/war...C%20rd.pdf
EDIT: I'd also like to note that you can make a good argument that the spatha is at least celtic influenced. After all, it was a cavalry sword, and it was long. Celts used long swords, and served in Roman cavalry at the time it was introduced. While it's not really a "Celtic" sword, I'd be surprised if it was not introduced because cavalry auxilia (many of whom were from Gaul) wanted a gladius but longer, like their ancestral weapons. Though maybe thats not it, and it just made sense to make a longer gladius!
Horned Saddle
Once piece of equipment that I am personally quite curious about is Celtic saddle. It is generally regarded as Celtic based on two pieces of evidence. First is that the Glanum relief (1st cent BCE) shows a riderless horse bearing a horned saddle. As the battle appears to be between Celts and Romans, it is assumed that riderless horse is meant to be Celtic. It is therefore assumed that the horned saddle at this time was a recognizably Celtic feature.
The second piece of evidence is the Gunderstrup Cauldron. This piece is harder to interpret because it is very abstract. The maker is also uncertain as it may be Celtic or Thracian (or even some other group). Finally, the date is fairly uncertain, but possibly as early as the second cent BCE. It depicts several horsemen, who horses appear to wearing typical Celtic tack. There are slight bumps in front of and behind the rider,that may be a Celtic saddle.
I personally think that this is enough evidence to suppose a Celtic origin, but not really enough to fully rule out the possibility of the horned saddle as a Roman invention. The cauldron is just too uncertain to be fully credible and that leaves Glanum as the first clear attestation on the type. However, the well attested Celtic tradition of horsemanship (as well as the lack of Roman horse tradition) still somewhat favors a Celtic origin. Mr. Radpour, who sometimes posts here, posits an eastern origin to the type. But as far as I know, all eastern evidence of the horned saddle post dates Glanum and also post dates Roman contact with east, indicating that origin is more likely Celtic (if not Roman). If anyone has more info on this, please share it!
