Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T07:33:10.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Pedite Gladius

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2011

P. J. Hazell
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In conjunction with a survey of Roman sword finds, an attempt is made to classify the varying types and dimensions of blades into categories indicative of their function within the Imperial Army. In particular, a category is defined as being that most likely to represent examples of the standard gladius as issued to the legionary infantryman.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Antiquaries Journal , Volume 61 , Issue 1 , March 1981 , pp. 73 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 Webster, G., The Imperial Roman Army (1969), p. 29, p. 130.Google ScholarB.M. Guide to Greek and Roman Life, (1908) fig. 91.Google Scholar Vindonissa Museum, acc. no. 1938. Ulbert, G., ‘Gladii Aus Pompeji’, Germania, xlvii (1969)Google Scholar.

2 B.M. Guide to Greek and Roman Life, fig. 91. Webster, op. cit., pls. VIIIb and IXa. Robinson, H. Russell, The Armour of Imperial Rome (1975), col. pl. facing p. 8.Google Scholar Unfortunately, the H. Russell Robinson harness arrangements do not work. The gladii not only cannot be drawn readily but they also have a tendency to slide under the armpit and out of reach when a pilum is discharged.

3 Museum der Stadt Worms, Inventarnummer R4682. Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Inventarnummer O.15391.

4 Nylen, Eric, ‘Early gladius swords found in Scandinavia’, Acta Archaeologica, xxxiv (1963), 212–28.Google ScholarUlbert, Günter, op. cit., 115–8Google Scholar.

5 Rossi, L., Trajan's Column and the Dacian Wars (1975), pp. 18, 59.Google Scholar

6 Hawkes, C. F. C. and Hull, M. R., Camulodunum (Soc. of Antiq. Research Report no. 14, 1947). p. 339, pl. CII, items 30, 31.Google Scholar

8 Nylen, , op. cit., fig. 9, 200, fig. 14.Google Scholar

9 Hawkes, and Hull, , op. cit., pl. CIII, items 2, 3.Google Scholar

10 Nylen's supposition that these swords may have been traded directly from within the empire seems a little unconvincing. A more likely solution is that they represent Germanic trading of the spoils of war.

11 Oswald, F., Index of Figure Types on Terra Sigillata (1936–37), pls. XLVIII, XLIX.Google Scholar

12 Britannia, vii (1976), 92–5.Google Scholar

13 A curious feature of the above review of ‘long’ swords is the large proportion (3 out of 5) of these items which were recovered from river beds. In fact Ulbert in his review of Mainz type gladii (op. cit., pp. 127–8) lists 13 river bed finds from a total of 23 examples. Ritual deposition of swords and other war trophies in water (lakes, rivers and bogs) was certainly a practice among Germanic tribes (see Mogens Orsnes ‘The weapon find in Ejsbol Mose at Haderslev’, Acta Archaeologica, xxxiv (1963)). This fact coupled with the preserving environment which such sites provide may go some way towards explaining the perhaps undue significance attached to the longer swords. These (officers' ?) weapons may well have been specially selected, from among other spoils of war, for ritual deposition as a result of their fine appearance and rich scabbard furnishings, thus distorting the blade length table with an unduly large proportion of well preserved ‘long’ finds.

14 Antiq. J. lviii (1978), 361–4.Google Scholar