New sword find in Jerusalem, image?

[richsc]

This from David Meadow's news digest. Any images of it around?


2,000 year old iron sword, still in its leather scabbard, was discovered in work the Israel Antiquities Authority is doing in the channel, which served as a hiding refuge for the residents of Jerusalem from the Romans at the time of the Second Temple's destruction. In addition, parts of the belt that carried the sword were found. According to the excavation directors Eli Shukron of the Israel Antiquities Authority and Professor Ronny Reich of the University of Haifa, "It seems that the sword belonged to an infantryman of the Roman garrison stationed in Israel at the outbreak of the Great Revolt against the Romans in 66 CE. The sword's fine state of preservation is surprising: not only its length (c. 60 cm), but also the preservation of the leather scabbard (a material that generally disintegrates quickly over time) and some of its decoration".

[jkaler48]

Info and downloadable images (2) here:

http://www.antiquities.org.il/about_eng.asp?Modul_id=14

[Tarbicus]

Another photo here, with someone's hand in frame.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/isr...l-1.377614

[Gaius Colletti]

Pretty cool, a shame the sword isn't in better condition

[Jona Lendering]

I am deeply disappointed. Swords from Jerusalem are to be hyped. This has to be presented as "the sword of the centurio who crucified Christ". The Israeli archaeologist made a mess of it. Pfff. Loosers.

[M. Demetrius]

:grin:

[arklore70]

OK,
now what is that we can tell about the sword by its current condition? Not sure if I follow all the tounge and cheek humor.

Looking at it, it seems to have a rather broad tang with a wooden grip, guard and lower bottom of the pommel perhaps?

[Luca]

an hi-res pic here:

http://www.romanhideout.com/News/2011/20110815.asp

[Virilis]

Thanks for the pic, Luca!

Quick observation: the grip / scabbard ratio would indicate that it is a spatha? Of course the grip could be broken but then again if originally longer it would be too thin...

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

I do not think it can be classified as Roman at all. Not only the find place, namely the tunnel in which the rebels took shelter is inconsistent with any Roman legionary loosing his sword, nor does Josephus mention any massacre inside the tunnel system of Jerusalem, also the pictures do not at all make this into a definite Roman sword. It could just as well be a Herodian sword or any other type of indigenous weapon used by the Jewish town guards/rebel factions of Jerusalem itself.

M.VIB.M.

[Robert Vermaat]

Not only the find place, namely the tunnel in which the rebels took shelter is inconsistent with any Roman legionary loosing his sword, nor does Josephus mention any massacre inside the tunnel system of Jerusalem

The Jews massacred enough Roman troops in the years before the siege to fully equip themselves with Roman weapons.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

The garrisons which were attacked throughout Iudaea numbered significantly less than 2 Legions. Its also not even known how many people were in the city when it was under siege, let alone how they were armed and with what. We do know the armouries were opened and (Roman) siege artillery was put on top of the Antonia, the walls as well as the Temple area itself.

What could be a possibility is that Roman arms were purchased by Herod Antipas. This sword in no way looks Roman to me. It does not look like a Spatha nor does it look like a Gladius hispaniensis. If it looks anything at all it looks republican.

This entire idea is again wishful thinking on the part of the Archaeologists. There is a sword which was found on Masada which was clearly Roman, and that find has nothing in common with this one.

M.VIB.M.

[Robert Vermaat]

I am afraid you are gravely mistaken and should read up on your Jewish history.

Well, since you were obviously there at the time, please let us know what really happened.

The garrisons which were attacked throughout Iudaea numbered significantly less than 2 Legions. Its also not even known how many people were in the city when it was under siege, let alone how they were armed and with what. We do know the armouries were opened and (Roman) siege artillery was put on top of the Antonia, the walls as well as the Temple area itself.

In which I take back the word 'fully'. But since you claimed that the sword could only be lost in the tunnel by a Roman ("inconsistent with any Roman legionary losing his sword") I think that the the possibilities of Jewish defenders using Roman swords captured in the years before the siege represent more than a likely possibility, as you have confirmed yourself in your last post. So why am I 'gravely mistaken' again? :wink:

This sword in no way looks Roman to me. It does not look like a Spatha nor does it look like a Gladius hispaniensis. If it looks anything at all it looks republican.

Please let us know why exactly, because the Israeli archaeologists seem to know nothing about swords whatsoever. :mrgreen:

My apologies for being a bit cynic here, but you are quite harsh in your condemnations, without offering us anything where you base that on.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Well, since you were obviously there at the time, please let us know what really happened.

I base what I say on Josephus, read his books and you will find out what happened, from his perspective. I also base myself on several excavation reports by the Israeli Antiquities authority in which weapons of several eras are shown. A very important report is the one on the sword found on Masada which was put in Masada VIII : "The Military Equipment from Masada", in: Masada VIII: The Yigael Yadin Excavations1963-65 (2007)

An interesting critical read on the making of history by Josephus is the book :

Making history: Josephus and historical method by Zuleika Rodgers.
ISBN: 90-04-15008-0

But since you claimed that the sword could only be lost in the tunnel by a Roman ("inconsistent with any Roman legionary losing his sword") I think that the the possibilities of Jewish defenders using Roman swords captured in the years before the siege represent more than a likely possibility, as you have confirmed yourself in your last post. So why am I 'gravely mistaken' again? :wink:

I do not say the sword could only have been lost by a Roman. I say the only person losing the sword could have been a Jewish combattant since the Romans did not fight in the tunnels according to the sources who highly likely would have told us so if they did since it is peculiar enough to mention. Josephus only mentions rebels hiding out in the sewers, not rebels fighting Romans in the sewers. Furthermore the type of sword found in the tunnels is not Roman military issue. One set of rings in stead of two sets, not the shape of any Roman military sword found in other parts of the Empire, and it does not have a spatha shape as you say it does. Of course the sword may have come out of an armoury but since we do not know what kind of weapons were stored in armouries we cannot therefore say the sword is Roman, which the archeologists do say it is. It is not at all certain that since the Romans were in Judaea with a large military presence (which they were not untill the Jewish war started) all weapons found in Judaea therefore are Roman.
The Judaean people used all kinds of weapons, and the chances are likely that they were a combination of hellenistic weaponry. In the Bible the greek word Xiphos is used in the new testament on several occasions. Does that mean the people used Hoplite weapons ? Not at all, but it also does not mean the weapons used were Roman.

Please let us know why exactly, because the Israeli archaeologists seem to know nothing about swords whatsoever. :mrgreen:

There will be some scholars in Israel specialised in Roman military equipment but they are not as widespread as the ones in Europe specialising in this field of expertise. Furthermore, looking at a lot of claims coming out of Israel like for instance the golden bell found near the temple which was immediately made out to be a bell of a garment worn by a priest confirms my idea that this is wishful thinking. A metallurgical analysis could help in this case. But still, if you compare sword shapes and want to keep saying this sword is Roman, it does not look first century Roman at all. It looks more Republican in shape and style. We dont have a clearly defined hilt or pommel anymore nor do we have the scabbard tip end of the sword so we cannot tell with absolute certainty where this sword originated from.

All I say that it is not Roman in my eyes, and I base that not only on Josephus but also on other finds of swords from Israel which are clearly Roman military issue swords.

M.VIB.M.

And for those interested in Iudaean weapons : one of the most widely used weapons in the region was the Sicca :

[Gaius Colletti]

I do not say the sword could only have been lost by a Roman. I say the only person losing the sword could have been a Jewish combattant since the Romans did not fight in the tunnels according to the sources who highly likely would have told us so if they did since it is peculiar enough to mention.

Perhaps Roman's "normally" did not fight in sewers, but what do you make of Dura Europos? Certainly several Romans fought (and died) in the counter-mine.