Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Two Swords for the Legionary?
#46
Quote:Allow me to split hairs and ask if the "left" is as you're facing the legionary or facing with the legionary? :wink:
AVETE OMNES
MARIVS TARQVINIVS VRSVS
PATER FAMILIAS DOMVS VRSVM
-Tom
Reply
#47
And from a theatrical "perspective"(perhaps being the operative word here)"stage left"---"stage right" Not meant for the audience but to tell the actors how to enter/exit.
I can't read Greek but I can enough to discern what he says. Now,what he meant is another thing. :?
Andy Booker

Gaivs Antonivs Satvrninvs

Andronikos of Athens
Reply
#48
What is wrong with taking Josephus' statement at face value? He accompanied Titus during the latter part of the war and must have become very familiar with the equipment worn by soldiers under both campaign conditions and formal ceremonial occasions. Thus if he says the sword was worn on the left, I believe him. He was there after all.

In addition to this, if any of you care to take a look at the Adamklissi metopes, you will find fairly quickly that swords are shown being worn by soldiers both on the left and right. Bear in mind here that we normally assume that the sculptors were soldiers. I don't have the capacity to post a suitable link from where I am now, but will do when I get the chance.

Crispvs
Who is called \'\'Paul\'\' by no-one other than his wife, parents and brothers.  :!: <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_exclaim.gif" alt=":!:" title="Exclamation" />:!:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.romanarmy.net">www.romanarmy.net
Reply
#49
Nothing at all as far as I am concerned. It just strikes me as strange that the Footmen have their swords on the left and the Horsemen have their swords on the right; a quite unusual arrangement and an interesting one. I was under the impression that it was more usual for Horsemen to wear their swords on the left and footmen to wear theirs on the right.

It's a difficult thing to interpret. Trajan's Column shows all Horseman and Footmen (even apparent Auxillaries) wearing Swords on their right hand sides. The Swords are rather short, which might accord with Josephus' description, but then where are the longer swords he describes? Alternatively, it could all just be artistic convention and interpretation. The Dacians appear to be wearing theirs on the left, which might suggest a Roman / Barbarian seperation.

On the other hand the Signifier (?) in the centre of this picture appears to have his baldric slung over his right shoulder, which would suggest he is wearing his sword on the left:

http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster.ca/t ... 1.74.h.jpg

Matthew James Stanham
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one\'s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)
Reply
#50
Quote:On the other hand the Signifier (?) in the centre of this picture appears to have his baldric slung over his right shoulder, which would suggest he is wearing his sword on the left:

http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster.ca/t ... 1.74.h.jpg

I don't see anyone wearing a baldric there, not even the ordinary troops behind. Sure it's not the front legs of the animal skin?
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#51
Sorry, middle guy, very faint line running from the top right shoulder across the chest; I think it could be interpreted as a baldric, if it's not just an illusion or, as you say, the front legs of the animal skin. seems to run all the way down to the left hip, though.

Here's a Barbarian pic from Trajan's column with a straight sword on the left; I'm not sure if he is a Dacian; I think not:

http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~ ... 2.20.h.jpg

Here is what I think is an image of a Dacian with his Falx worn on the left:

http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster.ca/t ... 2.90.h.jpg

Pretty much all the other images I have seen depict the Romans wearing their swords on the right (but I haven't seen the whole thing).
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one\'s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)
Reply
#52
hi.

ok here is my suggestion:

look at the pics in this thread http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=11419

on both pics it looks like the soldiers are wearing their sword on the left. when you take a look at the Adamklissi monument, for example metope XIV
http://museums.ncl.ac.uk/archive/arma/c ... tope14.htm

or XXVIII
http://museums.ncl.ac.uk/archive/arma/c ... tope28.htm

you see soldiers with their gladius clearly on the left while on XVII for example

http://museums.ncl.ac.uk/archive/arma/c ... tope17.htm

he is wearing it on the right.

So we know most gravestones and so on show the sword on the right. The column of Traian shows all swords on the right. Seems like this was the standard,maybe the standard order. At the same time we know all these depictions are ideals. The soldiers on Traian's column are artistically standardized. Not all soldiers wore the segmentata. actually most didn't, at least that's what I think and same might apply to the sword.

I mean think back, before you knew that most pics depict Romans with the gladius on the right, didn't you think the usual and most practical way to wear a sword is on the left because that's easier to draw it? I know there are lots of explanations about how it's as easy to use it when wearing it on the right. Well that's true, you just have to get used to it but the "natural" way to wear a sword would be opposit your swordarm. at least that's what most people would think. Well the Romans must have had their reasons to make it the standard to wear the sword on the right. Probably it was better, less dangerous to yourself or whatever and probably they all wore their swords the same way on parades or the praetorians in Rome did so and probably people on gravestones were depicted in the standardized way. I guess most gravestones were not made "in the field" or before the person's death.

What I'm trying to say:
Our modern armies are more standardized and more uniform thant the Romans were and still, look at modern soldiers, look at the troops in the field! I just remember my own time in the army:

We were all wearing our uniform and guns and knifes in perfect order when on parade or on guard at the base. When we went out into the field we wore it in a completely different way. everyone how he liked it best. we changed the lenght of the belt (is that the right word, or how do you call the belt thing on the gun whith which you hang it around your neck?sorry) of our guns so it hung much lower but it was nicer to wear it like that. not in the way all the time although it took slightly longer to bring it up. We took the knife off the right side of our waistbelt and mounted it on the left side of our chest and fixed it with a rubberband because it was easier to draw like that.we sometimes wore our caps with the front side pointing backwards underneath our helmets because it was warmer or the helmet fit better like that. we fixed our helmets behind the neck insted of under the chin because it was more comfortable while marching...and so on and no one said anything against that.

you know what I mean?
There is a standard in every army and you have to obey it in certain occasions. as I said, on parade or on guard we had to wear proper uniform and on all official pics of soldiers you will find in army mags or flyers or whatever you will ALWAYS see them wearing it standard. When you take a look at the troops when they actually have to do their job it's a completely different issue even in modern armies. The Romans were not different.
I sometimes have the feeling there is a strong tendency to see ancient cultures and people as so different, there is a certain picture of a Roman or a Greek, there is Caesar and Augustus, there are certain cultural issues but imho they were not too different from us when it comes to many things in everyday life...just take the time to read Roman grafitti or private letters or whatever. Those guys don't behave too different when it comes to things like love, hate, life. It's not all Livius, Cicero or Caesar (no offense to anyone here I'm more talking about the general opinion people often have, it's so much prejudice, hollywood, hiSTORY you come across everyday). Don't you think it possible that for example the guys in I Adiutrix or whatever thought it was maybe "cool" to wear the sword on the left or write "mama" or "meat is murder" or "F**k you" or whatever on their helmets in the 70ies or something like that?
RESTITVTOR LIBERTATIS ET ROMANAE RELIGIONIS

DEDITICIVS MINERVAE ET MVSARVM

[Micha F.]
Reply
#53
How about this for an interpretation?

Since at least the time of Polybius the Romans bore their swords on the right rather than the left. It is the 'roman' thing to do and signifies the difference between Roman and Barbarian. On Trajan's Column this is what is depicted regardless of the reality.

When Josephus says that the Roman Footmen bore swords on both sides he doesn't mean at the same time, but rather that those with shorter blades bore them on the right and those with longer blades bore them on the left.

This would accord well with the Horsemen who are only described as having one sword, which is worn on the right. Presumably because they are on horseback it is no great inconvenience to draw from the right?

I don't read Ancient Greek very well at all, but it seems to me that 'bearing a sword on both sides' might be ambiguous enough to render "the Footmen (collectively) bear swords on both sides (i.e. some on the right, some on the left)." It would be odd for him to mention that the Foot bear both 'Swords' and 'Daggers,' but that the Cavalry bear only 'Swords.'

Just a thought...

Matthew James Stanham
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one\'s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)
Reply
#54
Quote:When Josephus says that the Roman Footmen bore swords on both sides he doesn't mean at the same time, but rather that those with shorter blades bore them on the right and those with longer blades bore them on the left.
Best explanation so far IMHO.
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#55
Saying that, there is a problem with the second sword being only a 'span' [9 Inches] in length... that much more reasonably suggests a Pugio. Oh well...
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one\'s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)
Reply
#56
Quote:How about this for an interpretation?

Since at least the time of Polybius the Romans bore their swords on the right rather than the left. It is the 'roman' thing to do and signifies the difference between Roman and Barbarian. On Trajan's Column this is what is depicted regardless of the reality.

When Josephus says that the Roman Footmen bore swords on both sides he doesn't mean at the same time, but rather that those with shorter blades bore them on the right and those with longer blades bore them on the left.

This would accord well with the Horsemen who are only described as having one sword, which is worn on the right. Presumably because they are on horseback it is no great inconvenience to draw from the right?

I don't read Ancient Greek very well at all, but it seems to me that 'bearing a sword on both sides' might be ambiguous enough to render "the Footmen (collectively) bear swords on both sides (i.e. some on the right, some on the left)." It would be odd for him to mention that the Foot bear both 'Swords' and 'Daggers,' but that the Cavalry bear only 'Swords.'

Just a thought...

Matthew James Stanham

An excellent thought. In semantic terms, could it be read as 'bearing a sword of either side', i.e. one side or the other, rather than both? The long-sworded footmen might be the auxilia.
Felix Wang
Reply


Forum Jump: