Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Two swords?
#1
This out of the blue.

The discussion on the Late Roman Army had me pouring over my class notes when I found a reference to Frankish King, Childeric I (d. 482) and his grave goods. He was found with some absolutely spectacular late Roman gear, including two swords and an axe. The context of the find, as I understand it, was that he was actually fitted out in full kit, and that the weapons were not just placed in the tomb.

I wrote down that my professor, Lawrence Nees, thought that this was likely just pomp and grave goods and that wearing two swords into battle was absurd, which seemed reasonable.

Since then I've come across numerous Byzantine military saints shown with two swords. Specifically St. Makarios is usually shown with two swords, one on his saddle, another on the waist or in hand.

Hmmm. Suddenly I'm not so sure.

So what says RAT. Is wearing/using two swords ridiculous? Could there even have been a two-handed fighting style?

Not sure if there is an answer, just curious.

Travis
Theodoros of Smyrna (Byzantine name)
aka Travis Lee Clark (21st C. American name)

Moderator, RAT

Rules for RAT:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?Rules">http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?Rules for posting

Oh! and the Toledo helmet .... oh hell, forget it. :? <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_confused.gif" alt=":?" title="Confused" />:?
Reply
#2
Large amounts steady quality metal was an issue at that time.
What do you do if your blade brakes upon that damned enemy catafract?
A second blede might be handy.
On the other hand Klibanioforoi catafracts had a 2-handed one edged sword if we trust KEKAYMENOS. It was carried by the saddle and was used against infantry sometimes with 2-handed grip (possible case Kleidi 1014). That might be a second explanation if the artist had seen that.
Kind regards
Reply
#3
I agree with Stefanos the most likely explanation is backup. Having a second of anything is a good thing, and with swords (unlike spears, shields, or helmets) it is more practical.

We do, however, have a number of Germanic graves in which swords and large (upwards of 30cm blades) seax knives were given to the same person. I beliee these, too, were backup weapons, but it is an outside possibility that they were supposed to go together.

Does anyone have a handle on the very large 3rd century pugiones and the 'semispatha'?
Der Kessel ist voll Bärks!

Volker Bach
Reply
#4
A back up weapon is always good.

I would place my money that the second sword was a back up. Would be pretty easy to caryy two around if one were mounted on horseback. Less partical I think if dismounted or in a Infantry type role, where a dagger or Pugio would or might be better suited.

I am doubtful at the praticalness of using two swords at once. I have tried in my back yard for giggles and grins and ......there was much bemusement. Takes a lot of skill, which I dont have.

Cheers!!
Mike
Mike Daniels
a.k.a

Titus Minicius Parthicus

Legio VI FFC.


If not me...who?

If not now...when?
:wink: <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=":wink:" title="Wink" />:wink:
Reply
#5
in death, if you've got it, flont it
Tiberius Claudius Lupus

Chuck Russell
Keyser,WV, USA
[url:em57ti3w]http://home.armourarchive.org/members/flonzy/Roman/index.htm[/url]
Reply
#6
A couple of our members have two swords or sword and large dagger/semispatha.

Any definite evidence - not that I am aware of, but some of those Kunzing blades seem mighty short to be a main weapon. The Quinta view is that they are a back-up weapon, used in extremis

[Image: QUINTA3.jpg]

Andrew
Reply
#7
Thanks all,

I think the consensus is that going into battle with two swords would not be atypical, but using both at the same time probably would be. The childeric I finds have one spatha and a slightly short spatha, but I don't think it would qualify as a semispatha. The makarios icon I am looking at right now are two of equal length, but one is clearly on the saddle.

It seems that they were back-up weapons then.

Next question: Anybody got a two sword kit?

Travis
Theodoros of Smyrna (Byzantine name)
aka Travis Lee Clark (21st C. American name)

Moderator, RAT

Rules for RAT:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?Rules">http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?Rules for posting

Oh! and the Toledo helmet .... oh hell, forget it. :? <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_confused.gif" alt=":?" title="Confused" />:?
Reply
#8
I'm no swords expert, however, it does seem likely that the second blade was purely for backup. Many cavalry units would carry two swords, one on their hip and another on their horse in the event that the first one was lost, or broken in battle. This can be seen with your comment about St. Makarios. Perhaps the man in question did some service in a cavalry unit?

I would agree that using two swords in battle, together, is highly unlikely, especially if a shield was also found in the tomb (I'm not sure if it was).

Just some thought!

-Trey
Gaius Tertius Severus "Terti" / Trey Starnes

"ESSE QUAM VIDERE"
Reply
#9
I belive in the backuptheory more than in the dubblehanded fighting style theory.

To fight with two blades is quite hard! One of the blades becomes naturally more defensive and a shield or other weapon more like it wouldbe prefereble. On the other hand there is in other times and cultures fightings styles with two blades. For examle there is rapiertechniques depicted where two rapiers are in use.

I can test it and see what I come up with!

Martin
Reply
#10
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=5435

Scroll down to book cover.

I believe these were Childerics swords ?

One looks more like a long dagger rather than a sword like his maid whopper !!
Conal Moran

Do or do not, there is no try!
Yoda
Reply


Forum Jump: