Author |
Message |
D. Lazarus
|
Posted: Thu 29 Nov, 2007 11:47 am Post subject: Bud K Roman Gladius |
|
|
23 5/8th inch blade - isn't this too long compared to any known examples? My quick Google search shows them to have been more long daggers than swords in the usual connotation. Thanks. Pg 5 latest catalog or see website. #46 BK1397.
|
|
|
|
Lin Robinson
|
Posted: Thu 29 Nov, 2007 12:13 pm Post subject: Re: Bud K Roman Gladius |
|
|
D. Lazarus wrote: | 23 5/8th inch blade - isn't this too long compared to any known examples? My quick Google search shows them to have been more long daggers than swords in the usual connotation. Thanks. Pg 5 latest catalog or see website. #46 BK1397. |
BudK is not big on authenticity, although they do provide some interesting - and cheap - items from time to time.
The gladius was a short sword that was the ideal weapon for the "shield wall" tactics in use by the legions. They also carried daggers called, I think, pugios (sp?). However, the different divisions of the army, such as the cavalry, were equipped differently. The cavalry carried a longer version of the gladius because, if you think about it, when they were on horseback they needed a longer weapon to be able to reach an opponent on the ground. I don't know how long the cavalry swords were but 24" might be about right.
BudK uses a lot of stainless steel in their sword blades and many of them are very sharp. So, you need to exercise caution if you plan to actually use any of them. They make much better display items.
Lin Robinson
"The best thing in life is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women." Conan the Barbarian, 1982
|
|
|
|
D. Lazarus
|
Posted: Thu 29 Nov, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the words. I have a few pieces, stainless & carbon, sold thru Bud K (including the CSA Foot Officers sword that is the topic of a how-to-age article here.) They all have unsharpened edges as sold.
|
|
|
|
D. Lazarus
|
Posted: Thu 29 Nov, 2007 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What were the tactics of the Roman cavalry? Did they primarily fight mounted or on foot?
|
|
|
|
D. Lazarus
|
Posted: Thu 29 Nov, 2007 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Note: the same dealer offers a somewhat more authentic version of the gladius as well - #44 PCSB017.
|
|
|
|
Gary A. Chelette
|
Posted: Thu 29 Nov, 2007 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D. Lazarus wrote: | What were the tactics of the Roman cavalry? Did they primarily fight mounted or on foot? |
On foot they would be called "Foot Soldiers"
Are you scared, Connor?
No, Cousin Dugal. I'm not!
Don't talk nonsense, man. I peed my kilt the first time I went into battle.
Oh, aye. Angus pees his kilt all the time!
|
|
|
|
Lin Robinson
|
Posted: Thu 29 Nov, 2007 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D. Lazarus wrote: | Thanks for the words. I have a few pieces, stainless & carbon, sold thru Bud K (including the CSA Foot Officers sword that is the topic of a how-to-age article here.) They all have unsharpened edges as sold. |
Take a look at the article on this site the subject of which is the gladius. You can click on the highlighted word in our posts and it will take you right to it. Apparently 20" plus was about right for a gladius.
I am really the wrong guy to answer any questions about Roman cavalry tactics. The BudK thing caught my eye because I have extensive experience with their stuff. I am sure many, much more learned, members of the forum will respond.
Lin Robinson
"The best thing in life is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women." Conan the Barbarian, 1982
|
|
|
|
David Wilson
Location: In a van down by the river Joined: 23 Aug 2003
Posts: 803
|
|
|
|
Werner Stiegler
|
Posted: Fri 30 Nov, 2007 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
D. Lazarus wrote: | What were the tactics of the Roman cavalry? Did they primarily fight mounted or on foot? | Which roman cavalry? That handful of national roman equus were your usual "light" cavalry in the greek fashion of those day fighting with a spear, a set of javelins, sword and shield wearing armour. They did what cavalry does - flanking and covering the flanks of armies.
All the allies and merchenaries employed in the roman army retained their distinct style of warfare. Wich means that the celtic heavies would fight with infantry runners at their side, other formations with bows and yet others as contrarii wielding a long lance in two hands.
|
|
|
|
Matthew Amt
|
Posted: Fri 30 Nov, 2007 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Several of the Bud K "Roman" swords are better than many cheap repros I've seen over the years, and better than most anything seen in the movies. If you just want something Roman-esque without spending much, go for it, but they aren't really historically accurate. Mind you, the errors can be subtle!
#BK1397 is based on a gladius found in Denmark, which actually does have little studs on the pommel and guard. But grips were not generally made that way (though there is a British sword which has a similar construction), and the guard plate should be thinner or set into the face of the wooden guard. Yeah, the blade is a little long, something around 19 inches was typical. Useless scabbard!
#44 PCSB017 looks like a Mainz, though the blade shape is a little off. Not a great scabbard--shows up with any number of bad repros, these days. Pretty much the same with #44 PCSB016. It's possible that both have other little problems once you see them up close (bad balance, grips too long, etc.).
During the Republic, the Romans never had much cavalry themselves. The upper class was known as "equites", often translated as "knights", because they were wealthy enough to have horses and serve as cavalry. They typically made up for their own lack with "allied" cavalry or hired mercenaries. In the Empire, most cavalry were auxiliaries, enlisted from provincial areas that were big on horse-raising and riding. Fully half of all known auxiliary units were cavalry, and half of the infantry cohorts were "mixed" or part-mounted, being half infantry and half cavalry. So there was always plenty of cavalry in the Roman army! Each legion also had a small contingent, and while these are often written off as "scouts and messengers", they brigaded with the regular cavalry during battle.
If you want to know more about the capabilities of Roman cavalry, any book by Ann Hyland is what you want. In short, though, they were HIGHLY effective and very well regarded. And yes, cavalry swords (generally called spathae these days) were longer than the infantry gladius, around 30 inches in the blade or so.
That what you're looking for? Vale,
Matthew (Leg.XX)
|
|
|
|
D. Lazarus
|
Posted: Fri 30 Nov, 2007 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Definitive Roman gladius page - "page cannot be found." Thanks for all the info.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Lin Robinson
|
Posted: Fri 30 Nov, 2007 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D. Lazarus wrote: | Definitive Roman gladius page - "page cannot be found." Thanks for all the info.
Dave |
Iron of the Empire - The Roman Gladius. It is a feature on the homepage of this site.
Lin Robinson
"The best thing in life is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women." Conan the Barbarian, 1982
|
|
|
|
D. Lazarus
|
|
|
|
Anders Backlund
|
Posted: Sat 01 Dec, 2007 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gary A. Chelette wrote: | D. Lazarus wrote: | What were the tactics of the Roman cavalry? Did they primarily fight mounted or on foot? |
On foot they would be called "Foot Soldiers" |
Unless one is talking about that King Arthur movie from a while back.
You know, the one that had the knights of the round table be members of a supposedly "elite" roman cavalry who... jumped off their horses the moment they got into a battle and proceeded to fight on foot.
Jesus Chist, that was stupid.
|
|
|
|
Matthew Amt
|
Posted: Mon 03 Dec, 2007 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
D. Lazarus wrote: | Definitive Roman gladius page - "page cannot be found." |
Looks like a comma got stuck in the URL. Try this:
http://www.larp.com/legioxx/gladius.html
That's part of my own Legio XX site, so feel free to hit me with any more questions!
Vale,
Matthew
|
|
|
|
|