Semi Spatha/short sword

[Conal]

its not so much the manufacturing method but the styling of the blade mentioned which may have a notch inserted into the blade which might indicated use in a fencing style.

[ambrosius]

A flat or mildly dished shield can be wielded as a weapon in ways other than a deeply curved shield. A fighter with a deeply curved shield is highly protected as long as he fights with his body inside the curve of his shield. The shield doesn't protect any other person. A large flat or mildly dished shield was often held at arms length from the bearer, and the edges could be used to attack an enemy, or catch his weapon or shield. Flattish shields tend to extend sideways, and could be used for shield walls or in a phalanx to guard the fighter standing next to you. A flattish shield is also much better at protecting the sword arm of the user than most deeply curved shields.

While it's easier to overlap flat shields - to form testudos or fulcums -
than curved scuta, I was always under the impression that both could
be equally well used to to form testudos. I thought that the earlier,
curved scutum was even more associated with close formations of
shields than the later flat shield, which has been thought to be more
adapted for open-order or even single combat. Though I agree that,
if I was isolated on the field, I would actually prefer the earlier curved
scutum, as it gives better protection at the sides.

On one point, though, I think both shields are equally effective - for use
as a weapon. Holding either out horizontally in front of you, they can be
used to punch with the bottom edge of the rim. The earlier, curved scutum is probably even better at this than the later flat scutum, as
the earlier shileds tended to have brass edging, rather than rawhide.

Ambrosius / Mike

[Robert Vermaat]

By 'curved', do you actually mean 'dished'? I'll continue to use the word 'curved'...

There is good evidence that the fighting style involved in using a deeply curved shield is different from using a flat or mildly dished shield. A flat or mildly dished shield can be wielded as a weapon in ways other than a deeply curved shield. A fighter with a deeply curved shield is highly protected as long as he fights with his body inside the curve of his shield. The shield doesn't protect any other person.

I agree to that. I also think that deeply curved shields are usually not as large as flat of mildly curved shields.

A large flat or mildly dished shield was often held at arms length from the bearer, and the edges could be used to attack an enemy, or catch his weapon or shield. Flattish shields tend to extend sideways, and could be used for shield walls or in a phalanx to guard the fighter standing next to you. A flattish shield is also much better at protecting the sword arm of the user than most deeply curved shields.

To hold it at arm's length depends on the size and weight of the shield, too. Inside a tight formation, it would be better to hold the shield close to you, for better protection, you get less tired and you can still surprise your enemy with a whack of the shield up his nose.

While it's easier to overlap flat shields - to form testudos or fulcums - than curved scuta, I was always under the impression that both could be equally well used to to form testudos. I thought that the earlier, curved scutum was even more associated with close formations of shields than the later flat shield, which has been thought to be more adapted for open-order or even single combat.

Actually, it's much easier to make an overlapping formation with flat shield that curved or dished shields. But the evidence of shield bosses sugests that later Roman shields were dished, no longer curved, and no (longer?) flat, so they must have managed somehow. I prefer a mildly dished shield to a curved one.
We think (it's an opinion) that curved shields were abandoned for dished shields because of a more flexible combat style, ranging from close to open order, indeed.

On one point, though, I think both shields are equally effective - for use as a weapon. Holding either out horizontally in front of you, they can be used to punch with the bottom edge of the rim. The earlier, curved scutum is probably even better at this than the later flat scutum, as the earlier shileds tended to have brass edging, rather than rawhide.

Use as a weapon - agreed!
I'm not so sure about brass edges being superior to rawhide, which is a lot stronger.

[Felix]

Holding a shield at arm's length is definitely tiring, I agree. It is shown that way, however, but was probably only held in that position for a short time. With a deeply curved shield, you get the best protection by stepping into the curve, so the shield surrounds you. With a flat or flattish shield, you actually cover the most of your body with it held at a distance - more of your body is in the shadow or umbra of the shield, so to speak.

[markusaurelius]

If you want to look at one example of a Semi-Spatha have a look at this one.

Semispatha

The leaf shaped tip and blade width is consistent with this type of sword.


Cheers
Markus