This is another wicked one and made me a fan when I held it the first time.

[ Linked Image ]

Specifications
Overall length: 26.5" (67.3 cm)
Blade length: 19.25" (48.9 cm)
Blade width:1.875" (4.76 cm)
CoP: n/a
CoB: 4.25" (10.8 cm)
Weight: 1 lb 7.4 oz (665 grams)

see more photos here:

http://www.albion-swords.com/swords/albion/ne...ompeii.htm

Best,

Howy

I'm just very glad to see things coming to market again!! :-)

I'm really surprised with how light the new gladii are. Now I know that the gladius was primarily a thrusting weapon, but I can imagine it is also a lightening fast cutter. However, I wonder at what point the lightness of a blade has a negative affect on it's cutting ability (regarding penatration).

Very nice. Again, there is something about the proportions on the hilt components. . . it is amazing what some very slight changes can do :cool: .

Okay, Peter, in reference to your comment in the previous gladius thread, what surprised you about this one?

and am I seeing things (camera angles and such) or is the shape of the pommel on this one not a sphere (or flattened sphere)? It looks to me like there is a noticable taper from bottom to top - more egg shaped, but even that is a poor choice of words. . . don't know how to describe it exactly.

Jay, I would imagine that this one is a lot quicker than its FG cousin, as from what I remember and in my opinion, the FG seemed a bit point heavy and more of a chopping sword rather than a slasher/cutter. Even more specifically, it seemed like a sword that really made a strong compromise in the direction of the thrust. In regards to penetration, I think it would depend on two things. One, would be your target medium. Correct me if I'm wrong, but these swords were designed in an era of lightly armoured/unarmored opponents where one could get away with a lighter sword, not having to cleave through heavy armour. Second, F=ma. If you don't have the mass, it just means you have to throw what you've got around that much faster. . . ;)

So. . . [looks around for the Fulham]. . .

The pommel seems onion or bulb shaped?

Very nice :!:

Question for Albion - the Pedite description notes, "...Some surviving examples of the Pompeii style sword have reinforced points with raised ridges, possibly designed to punch through leather and thin metal armour." (emphasis added on the "raised ridges"). I can't really see details of the Pedite point configuration from the photos. What sort of reinforcement, if any, is present?

The Pompeii type is a sword of humble looks that is proof of the ingenious design by the ancient craftsmen.
It must have been more economical to make and also need less material in the making of the blade: important factors when making swords in the thousands for legions...
Even though it might look less formidable than its predecessors it retains much of their function.
I was surpriced at the business like performance and powerful character of this blade when I tried out the mounting.

The pommel has a domed onion shape (as does the Mainz pomel). The grip is the same for all the three Gladii as is the authentically shaped rivet nut.

The "Pedite" does not have the reinforced spine or point that you find on some specimen. The desicion was made to keep a low cost on these gladii. If there seems to be enough an interest in roman blades, it might be possible that we could develop more advanced blade types. That is yet undecided.

The relative light weight of these swords is actually one of the important aspects I wanted to meet when I got the opportunity to make roman designs for the Next generation line. The Gladii (and the spathae as well for that matter) works differently than single handed sword of later periods. Weight and mass distribution of the bare blades is a very important factor in performance and dynamic balance.
Most of the weight, mass distribution and balance is established with the bare blade. The hilt mostly adds an ergonomic quality to the heft of the sword (and this is very important!). By the hape of the hilt components you get an effective management of the heft of the blade. It is difficult to describe in words: a bit like a short gripped viking or anglo saxon sword: the hilt components are shaped so by gripping more firmly you get a positive response and tighter controll of the heft. This is the case with roman style hilts as well: the guard, grip and pommel act together so that you get different control by changing the mode of gripping ever so slightly.

As the balance is established almost excusively by the blade itself, it is a good thing that they are light. A forward placed point of balance increases the cutting power and guides the point very intuitively. These are not overly weighty and point heavy blades: they have just enough forward pull to deliver effective cuts without making them sluggish in handling.

The pivot points are placed to the centre of the blade and the nodes gravitate towards the grip when the small mass of the hilt is mounted. The relative long tang of these short blades also help in node placing and dynamic balance. (almost like the effect on late medieval longswords).

In all, these roman swords are fascinating examples of sword design in the ancient world.
Simple lines and short blades belie very effective weapons that combine high performance in both cutting and precise handling.

Peter, interesting that you mention that the character of these swords is really built in the bare blade while the hilt is used almost exclusively for fine management/manipulation of that character in hand. Is this kind of what you were talking about when we were discussing the dynamics of very light celtic swords? Does the same foundation of philosophy hold true through the migration period or is that where one first starts seeing the hilt developed in greater measure as a vehicle to create the balance/heft of a sword as opposed to solely managing it in hand?


. . . kind of explains why the Al Massey bare leaf blade Ive got feels darn near spot-on in handling even without a hilt. I also suppose that one could very much adjust the feel of one of these swords in hand by moving the position of the grip up or down the tang using the shapes of the guard and pommel - a little more cut, bigger guard, smaller pommel; a little more thrust, smaller guard, bigger pommel?

Fascinating. :)