The sword of Tiberius is the most famous gladius. Armament of the army of Ancient Rome (21 photos). State monopoly and arms ban in Rome

The ancient Roman army is one of the most powerful military formations of the pre-Christian era. Cardinally reorganized after the disastrous Punic Wars, which Rome managed to win only thanks to the outstanding talent of individual military leaders and the disunity of the Carthaginian oligarchy, it turned into an impeccable weapon of defense and offensive. Its advantages were mobility, cohesion, excellent training and iron discipline, and the legionnaire foot soldier was the main fighting force. Unlike many other armies of that time, the main offensive weapons of the Roman legionnaires were not spears, axes and clubs, but a short double-edged sword. Despite its apparent simplicity, it was an ideal close combat weapon and a key element of the tactical superiority of the Roman army, which allowed it to defeat even the most formidable and well-organized enemies.

wiki

The Roman gladius is one of the most widely known swords. It entered service with the Roman army between about the 4th and 3rd centuries BC and immediately became the main type of offensive weapon for cavalry and foot soldiers. On the origin of the name "Gladius" historians still do not have a final version. Some believe that it comes from the Latin "clades" ("mutilation", "wound"). Others believe that the origin from the Celtic “kladyos” (“sword”) is more plausible.

The Roman state of that time was rightfully considered the leading one. It owed such success to the wise tactics of its rulers, who, unlike many of their other "colleagues", did not destroy the cultural and technical heritage of the conquered peoples, but skillfully applied and developed them. This is what happened with the gladius. Having experienced in their own skin all the lethality of short heavy swords in combat during battles with the Spaniards, the Romans did not hesitate to adopt this successful concept and made them their main weapon. For this reason, the gladius was even called the "Spanish sword" for a long time. However, by the beginning of the II century BC. e. the word gladius became the accepted term for this sword in Roman texts.

The evolution of the gladius

"Spanish Gladius" . The earliest example of a gladius, which dates back to the 3rd century BC. e. Its weight was approximately 900–1000 g, its total length was 75–85 cm (from the handle to the blade approximately 65 cm) and its width was 5 cm at its widest point. Its feature is a characteristic leaf-shaped form due to a pronounced "waist".

"Mainz". Over time, the “waist” of the Spanish gladius became less and less noticeable, and the blade, on the contrary, shortened and expanded. Therefore, historians have identified it as a separate subspecies at the place of the first find. Mainz's classic proportions are 7 cm wide with a total length of 65–70 cm and a blade length of 50–55 cm. The weight of the sword was no more than 800 g.

Fulham. He replaced Mainz by the beginning of a new era and differed from it in the width of the blade (maximum 6 cm), the shape of the tip (in this case it was strictly triangular, and not tapering smoothly) and in weight, which decreased to 700g.

"Pompeii". The last type of gladius. It spread in the 1st century and received a name consonant with one famous city that died from the eruption of Vesuvius. It is distinguished by the shortest blade (45–50 cm with a total length of 60–65 cm). The width returned to the original 5 cm, and the “waist” of this type of gladius is completely absent.

Manufacturing features

The Romans mastered the processing of iron quite early, so the armament of the army consisted mainly of iron swords. Of course, bronze ones were also in use, but they made up a small percentage and for the most part were trophy ones.

Initially, gladiuses were not of very high quality, since the production of short blades was cheap and did not require special skill from blacksmiths. However, after the reorganization of the army that followed the Punic Wars, much more attention was paid to the quality of weapons, and the technology for their manufacture became standardized.

Gladius in the hands of a Roman soldier | depositphotos - Narval

Gladius began to be forged from high-quality high-carbon steel and no longer from one piece of metal, as, for example, the first "Spanish swords", but by layer-by-layer molding. According to classical technology, five pieces of iron were used. The softer low-carbon steel made up the outer layers, while the harder steel made up the inner layers. Thus, the sword turned out to be very durable and lends itself well to sharpening, but at the same time it did not suffer from excessive fragility and very rarely broke in battle.

What made the gladius a key element of Roman combat tactics?

The Roman gladius played an extremely important role in battles. But he did not owe this to any special outstanding qualities. The main reason for its success was that the Roman army mastered a unique type of battle order at that time - the “turtle”, in which military units moved in a very dense formation, covered on all sides by shields. And in such conditions, the sword, which allowed to deliver quick deadly attacks with almost no scope, was indispensable.

Lined up in "Turtle", the soldiers completely protected themselves from all types of projectiles, except for massive arrows and stone balls fired by heavy projectile machines. This impenetrable wall of shields slowly advanced, crushing the battle formations of the enemy, after which the gladiuses went into battle. Legionnaires opened small gaps in the wall and deftly made quick attacks, inflicting terrible stabbing blows that easily penetrated through the joints of armor. One blow to the stomach was enough to kill an enemy warrior, while the legionnaires themselves practically did not open up for a retaliatory attack.

The short sword, which allowed quick, deadly attacks, gave Roman legionnaires in tight formations a huge advantage over the enemy.

The absolute advantage of the “turtle” was due to the fact that most of the armies of that time used such weapons as spears, axes, battle clubs and long swords similar to scimitars, designed for sweeping chopping blows (kopis, romfeya, khopesh, etc.). The enemy warriors blocked by shields could not swing properly, which made their weapons almost useless.

However, the gladius was also suitable for fencing. Chopping, cutting and cutting blows were practiced, usually aimed at the legs. For an ordinary legionnaire, it was important to be able to skillfully wield a shield and thoroughly know a set of simple piercing techniques, but the situation was completely different with gladiators - warriors who entertained the audience in the arenas. To please the audience, they deliberately used a large arsenal of beautiful and spectacular strikes, demonstrating the wonders of swordsmanship. It was easier for them to do this, because in the arena they fought either alone or in small groups.

Sunset of the gladius era

Recommended

Starting from the 1st century AD, the role of gladius has noticeably decreased. And this was due to the degradation of the army, which followed the sharp expansion of the borders of the state. The need for troops grew, therefore, auxiliary forces were massively recruited into the legion, consisting mainly of mercenaries, whose training and discipline left much to be desired. They were not accustomed to fighting in close formation and had little understanding of the intricacies of the interaction of battle formations, so they used more crude tactics. Accordingly, their preferences in weapons were completely different.

Gradually, the gladius undergoes metamorphoses, and later it is completely replaced by a spata - a long sword, the fashion for which was brought by the German auxiliary detachments. At first it was adopted by the cavalry, and later spread among the infantry, completely replacing the gladius by the end of the 2nd century AD.

Illustration: depositphotos | neural

If you find an error, please highlight a piece of text and click Ctrl+Enter.

During the winter, people experience hypersomnia, depressed mood, and a general sense of hopelessness. Even the risk of premature death in winter is much higher. Our biological clock is out of sync with our wake and work clocks. Shouldn't we adjust our office hours to help improve our mood?

As a rule, people tend to see the world in gloomy colors, when the daylight hours become shorter and the cold sets in. But changing work hours to suit the seasons can help lift our spirits.

For many of us, winter, with its cold days and long nights, creates a general feeling of malaise. It becomes increasingly difficult to leave the bed in semi-darkness, and hunched over our desks at work, we feel our productivity dwindle along with the remnants of the midday sun.

For the small subset of the population who experience severe seasonal affective disorder (SAD), it's even worse - winter melancholy mutates into something far more debilitating. Patients experience hypersomnia, depressed mood, and a general feeling of hopelessness during the darkest months. Regardless of SAD, depression is more commonly reported in winter, suicide rates increase, and work productivity drops in January and February.

While it's easy to explain all this with some vague idea of ​​winter gloom, there may be a scientific basis for this depression. If our biological clock is out of sync with our wake and work hours, shouldn't we adjust our office hours to help improve our mood?

“If our biological clock says it wants us to wake up at 9:00 because it’s a dark winter morning outside the window, but we get up at 7:00, we miss an entire phase of sleep,” says Greg Murray, professor of psychology at Swinburne University , Australia. Research in chronobiology - the science of how our body regulates sleep and wakefulness - supports the idea that sleep needs and preferences change during the winter, and the constraints of modern life can be particularly inappropriate during these months.

What do we mean when we talk about biological time? Circadian rhythms are a concept that scientists use to measure our internal sense of time. It's a 24-hour timer that determines how we want to place the various events of the day - and most importantly, when we want to get up and when we want to sleep. “The body likes to do this in sync with the biological clock, which is the master regulator of how our body and behavior relate to the sun,” Murray explains.

There are a huge number of hormones and other chemicals involved in regulating our biological clock, as well as many external factors. Especially important is the sun and its location in the sky. Photoreceptors located in the retina, known as ipRGC, are particularly sensitive to blue light and are therefore ideal for adjusting the circadian rhythm. There is evidence that these cells play an important role in regulating sleep.

The evolutionary value of this biological mechanism has been to contribute to changes in our physiology, biochemistry and behavior depending on the time of day. “This is precisely the predictive function of the circadian clock,” says Anna Wirtz-Justice, professor of chronobiology at the University of Basel in Switzerland. "And all living beings have it." Given the change in daylight throughout the year, it also prepares organisms for seasonal behavioral changes such as breeding or hibernation.

While there hasn't been enough research on whether we would respond well to more sleep and different wake times in the winter, there is evidence that this may be the case. “From a theoretical standpoint, reducing daylight in the winter morning should contribute to what we call phase lag,” says Murray. “And from a biological standpoint, there is good reason to believe that this probably does happen to some extent. Delayed sleep phase means our circadian clock wakes us up later in the winter, which explains why it's getting harder to fight the urge to reset the alarm."

At first glance, it may seem that the phase delay of sleep suggests that we will want to go to bed later in winter, but Murray suggests that this tendency is likely to be neutralized by the general growing desire to sleep. Research shows that people need (or at least want) more sleep in the winter. A study in three pre-industrial societies - where there are no alarm clocks, smartphones, and a 09:00 to 17:00 workday - in South America and Africa found that these communities collectively napped an hour longer during the winter. Given that these communities are located in equatorial regions, this effect may be even more pronounced in the northern hemisphere, where winters are colder and darker.

This sleepy winter regime is mediated at least in part by one of the major players in our chronobiology, melatonin. This endogenous hormone is controlled by the circadian cycles and also influences them in turn. It's a sleeping pill, which means it's going to keep ramping up until we fall into bed. “In humans, the melatonin profile is much broader in winter than in summer,” says chronobiologist Til Rönneberg. "These are biochemical reasons why circadian cycles can respond to two different seasons."

But what does it mean if our internal clocks don't match the times our schools and work schedules require? “The discrepancy between what your biological clock wants and what your social clock wants is what we call social jet lag,” Rönneberg says. "Social jet lag is stronger in winter than in summer." Social jet lag is similar to the one we are already familiar with, but instead of flying around the world, we are unsettled by the time of our social demands - getting up to work or school.

Social jet lag is a well-documented phenomenon, and it can have serious implications for health, well-being, and how well we can function in our daily lives. If it is true that winter produces a form of social jet lag, in order to understand what its consequences may be, we can turn our attention to the people who are most affected by this phenomenon.

The first group of people for potential analysis includes people living on the western edges of time zones. Since time zones can cover vast areas, people living on the eastern fringes of the time zones experience sunrise about an hour and a half earlier than those living on the western fringes. Despite this, the entire population must adhere to the same working hours, which means that many will be forced to get up before sunrise. Essentially, this means that one part of the time zone is constantly out of sync with circadian rhythms. And although this may not seem like such a big deal, it is associated with a number of devastating consequences. People living in the western fringes are more prone to breast cancer, obesity, diabetes and heart disease - as the researchers determined, the cause of these diseases was primarily a chronic disruption of circadian rhythms, which arises from the need to wake up in the dark.

Another striking example of social jetlag is in Spain, which lives on Central European Time, despite being geographically aligned with the UK. This means that the country's time is set one hour ahead, and that the population must follow a social timetable that does not match their biological clock. As a result, the entire country suffers from a lack of sleep - getting on average an hour less than the rest of Europe. This degree of sleep loss has been associated with an increase in absenteeism, work-related injuries, and an increase in stress and school failure in the country.

Another group that may show symptoms similar to those of people suffering during the winter is the group that has a natural tendency to stay awake at night throughout the year. The average teenager's circadian rhythm is naturally shifted four hours ahead of that of adults, which means that adolescent biology causes them to go to bed and wake up later. Despite this, for many years they struggled to get up at 7 am and get to school on time.

And while these are exaggerated examples, could the winter-wearing consequences of an inappropriate work schedule contribute to a similar but less significant impact? This idea is partly supported by the theory of what causes SAD. Although there are still a number of hypotheses about the exact biochemical basis of this condition, a significant number of researchers believe that it may be caused by a particularly severe response to the body clock being out of sync with natural daylight and the sleep-wake cycle - known as delayed sleep phase syndrome.

Scientists now tend to think of SAD as a spectrum of characteristics rather than a condition that you either have or you don't, and in Sweden and other northern hemisphere countries, up to 20 percent of the population is estimated to suffer from milder winter melancholy. Theoretically, mild SAD can be experienced by the entire population to some extent, and only for some it will be debilitating. “Some people don't get too emotional about being out of sync,” Murray notes.

At present, the idea of ​​reducing working hours or postponing the start of the working day to a later time in winter has not been tested. Even countries located in the darkest parts of the northern hemisphere - Sweden, Finland and Iceland - work all winter in almost night conditions. But there is a chance that if the working hours correspond more closely to our chronobiology, we will work and feel better.

After all, US schools that moved the start of the day later to match the circadian rhythms of teenagers have successfully shown an increase in the amount of sleep students get and a corresponding increase in energy. A school in England that moved the start of the school day from 8:50 am to 10:00 am found that there was a sharp decrease in sick leave and improved student performance.

There is evidence that winter is associated with more lateness to work and school, with an increase in absenteeism. Interestingly, a study published in the Journal of Biological Rhythms found that absenteeism was more closely related to photoperiods - the number of hours of daylight - than other factors like the weather. Simply allowing people to come in later can help counter this influence.

A better understanding of how our circadian cycles affect our seasonal cycles is something we could all benefit from. "Bosses should say, 'I don't care when you come to work, come when your biological clock decides you've had enough sleep, because in this situation we both win,'" Rönneberg says. “Your results will be better. You will be more productive at work because you will feel how efficient you are. And the number of sick days will decrease.” Since January and February are already our least productive months of the year, do we really have anything to lose?

Gladius is the Latin word for "". Early ancient Roman swords were similar to the swords used by the Greeks. Starting from the 3rd century BC. the Romans adopted swords similar to those used by the Celtiberians and other peoples in the initial period of the conquest of Spain. This type of sword was known as the "Gladius Hispaniensis" or "Spanish sword". It was once believed that they were similar to the later swords of the " " type, but the evidence now available shows that this is most likely not the case. Most likely, these early ones followed somewhat different patterns, being longer and narrower, and were probably what Polybius described as "well suited for both cutting and stabbing." Later existing gladiuses are now known as the "Mainz", "Fulham" and "Pompeii" types. In the late Roman period, Vegetius Flavius ​​Renat refers to swords called "semispathae" (or "semispathia") and "", for both of which he seems to consider "gladius" to be a suitable term.

A fully equipped Roman soldier would be armed with , several ("pila"), a sword ("gladius"), probably ("pugio") and possibly . Usually, they were thrown before close contact was made with the enemy, in which the gladius was already used. The soldier covered himself with a shield and struck with a sword. Although the gladius was designed for stabbing from behind a shield, all types of gladius were probably suitable for slashing and slashing as well.

Name etymology

The name "gladius" comes from the Latin noun "stem", the plural of which is "gladii". The mention of the gladius has been found in literature since the plays of Plautus (Casina, Rudens).

Words deriving from "gladius" include gladiator ("swordsman") and "gladiolus" ("gladiolus", "small sword", from a diminutive form of gladius). Gladiolus is also the name of a flowering plant with sword-shaped leaves.

Celtic gladius

It was a Roman short sword. According to Julius Pokorny, the term was of Celtic origin, from "Gaulish *kladyos", cognate to Welsh "cleddyf" and "Bretion kleze" (Old Irish "claideb" from Brythonic, compare with ), all of which mean "sword", in ultimately from the stem *kelad- (expanded from the root *kel-) akin to the Latin "clades" ("wound, injury, defeat"). Gladius could also be a term used to describe a dagger, "Pugio".

Use of the term by the Romans

The Spanish sword was probably not acquired from either Spain or the Carthaginians. Livy relates the story of Titus Manlius Torquatus accepting a Gallic challenge to duel with a large soldier on a bridge over the river Anio, where the camps of the Gauls and Romans were located on opposite banks of the river. Manlius was equipped with a Spanish sword (gladius hispanus). During the fight, he twice stabbed the Gaul under the shield with his sword, inflicting fatal blows to the stomach. He then removed a tork from the galla (an ornament around the neck in the form of a hoop, a neck hryvnia), and put it on his neck, thus receiving his name - Torquatus (from "torc").

This fight took place during the consulship of Gaius Sulpicius Peticus and Gaius Licinius Calva Stolon in about 361 BC, long before the Punic Wars, but during the border wars with the Gauls (366-341 BC). One theory therefore suggests a borrowing of the word gladius from "*kladi-" during this period, relying on the principle that "k" becomes "g" in Latin only in written documents. Ennius confirms this. Gladius may have replaced "ensis", which was used mainly by poets.

The debate over the origin of the Spanish gladius continues. That the gladius originated from the Celtic periods of the La Tène and Hallstatt cultures is beyond doubt. Whether it came directly from the Celtic troops of the period of the Punic Wars, or from the Gallic troops of the period of the Gallic Wars, is still a mystery of the Spanish sword.

Gladius and gladiators

The gladiator in general was a slave (very rarely a free volunteer), one who fought to the death using a gladius, in a show called ludus, "play" - originally as part of a funeral celebration in honor of a famous warrior. The time at which this custom appeared is lost in prehistory.

The Etruscans held funeral games of unknown origin. They passed this custom on to the Romans. In Roman gladiatorial theory, the sacrifice of prisoners of war was seen as a duty towards the deceased warrior; hence the games were called munera, "services". Over the centuries, "favors" have been rendered in the form of many forms of combat. Those who were sacrificed had many different names.

Even among the Romans, there were many forms of combat and weapons. The choice of the word "gladius" needs some explanation. The Games were first announced by speakers in Capua, the renamed Etruscan city. Livy explains that in 308 B.C. the Samnites were defeated by the Campanians, who captured a large number of new and beautiful weapons, only acquired by the Samnites in 310 BC, and the Campanians gave these weapons to the gladiators, creating a new class of gladiator - the Samnite. They fought gladiuses.

When the Romans staged the games in Rome in 264 BC, they displayed 3 pairs of matched gladiators. They were probably already called gladiators then, although the only evidence of this is Livy's words about it. He may have spoken anachronistically; however, his description of the Gallic combat above is consistent with the use of the gladius.

Gladius production

During the Roman Republic, which flourished during the Iron Age, the classical world was very familiar with steel and the steelmaking process. Pure iron is relatively soft, but pure iron is never found in nature. Natural iron ore contains various impurities in solid form, which complicate the recovery of the metal, leading to the appearance of irregularly shaped metal crystals.

The Khalibs of the Caucasus region were metallurgists in Iron Age Europe, and they discovered that increasing the carbon content of steel produced harder steel. In Roman times, ore was reduced in a bloomery furnace, since the blast furnace had not yet been invented, at least not in Western society. The temperature in this case was not high enough to melt the metal. As a result, pieces of slag, or bloom, were obtained, which were then forged into the desired shape. Forging continued until the metal cooled (cold forging).

Recent metallurgical study of two swords of Etruria, one in the form of the 7th century BC. from Vetulonia, another in the form of a Spanish gladius from the 4th century BC. from Chiusa, gives some idea of ​​the manufacture of Roman swords. The Chiusa sword comes from Romanized Etruria; thus, regardless of the names of the molds (which the authors do not identify), the authors believe that the manufacturing process was passed down from the Etruscans to the Romans.

The Vetolunian sword was made by stack forging from five blanks, restored at a temperature of 1163 °C. Five bands of variable carbon content were created. The central core of the sword has the highest carbon content: 0.15-0.25%. On its edges were placed four strips of mild steel, 0.05-0.07%, and all of this was welded together with hammer blows (forge welding). The blows increased the temperature of the workpiece at the point of impact enough to effect friction welding at the point of impact. Forging continued until the steel cooled, providing some central annealing. The sword was 58 cm long.

The Chiusa sword was forged from a single billet at 1237°C. The carbon content increased from 0.05-0.08% in the tang area of ​​the sword to 0.35-0.4% in the blade, from which the authors conclude that some form of carburization of the steel may have been used in the forging. The sword was 40 cm long and was characterized by a thinning of the blade closer to the hilt.

Roman swords continued to be forged both from batch steel and from separate blanks. Sand and rust inclusions weakened these two swords under study, and no doubt limited the strength of Roman period swords.

Description of gladius

The word "gladius" took on a general meaning as a term meaning any type of sword. In this sense, the term was used already in the 1st century AD. in the biography of Alexander the Great Quintus Curtius Rufus. Republican authors, however, imply a specific type of sword, which archeology now knows had variants.

Gladius were double-edged for slashing, and had a wedge-shaped point for stabbing. Durable consisted of a convex, possibly with indentations for the fingers. The strength of the blade was achieved by welding together strips of metal, in which case the sword had a recess down the center, or, made from a single piece of high-carbon steel, a diamond-shaped cross-section. The owner's name was often engraved or stamped on the blade.

Sharp sword thrusts were a very effective technique, as stab wounds, especially in the abdominal area, were almost always fatal. However, the gladius was used in some circumstances for slashing and slashing, as shown in Livy's accounts of the Macedonian Wars, which say that the Macedonian soldiers were frightened by the sight of dismembered bodies.

Although the main attack of the infantry was thrusts to the abdomen, they were trained to gain any advantage, such as cutting blows to the kneecaps below the enemy's shield wall.

The gladius was worn sheathed, fastened to a belt or strap over the shoulder, both on the left and on the right. Some argue that the soldier took out the gladius on the other side of the body from the working hand, others claim that the position of the shield made this method of wearing impossible. The centurion wore a gladius on the opposite side as a badge of rank.
By the end of the second century AD, the spata takes the place of the gladius in the Roman legions.

types of gladius

Several different designs were used; among collectors and historical reenactors, the three main types are known as the Mainz gladius, the Fulham gladius, and the Pompeii gladius (these names refer to the places where the canonical specimens of these swords were found). More recent archaeological finds have found an earlier version, the Spanish Gladius.

The differences between these options are quite subtle. The original Spanish sword had a slight curvature of the wasp-waist or leaf-shaped blade. Such a sword was used in the Republic. The Mainz type came into use on the frontiers of the early empire. This type retained the curvature of the blade, but the shorter and wider blade made the point triangular. In the republic itself, a less effective version of Pompeii came into use. It had no curvature, it had an elongated blade and a reduced point. The Fulham Gladius was a compromise, with straight blades and a long point.

Spanish gladius

Used no later than 200 BC. before 20 BC The length of the blade is approximately 60-68 cm. The length of the sword is approximately 75-85 cm. The width of the sword is approximately 5 cm. It was the largest and heaviest of the gladiuses. The earliest and longest of the gladius, it had a pronounced leaf-like shape. The maximum weight was about 1 kg for the largest versions, the more standard weighed about 900 g with a wooden handle.

Gladius "Mainz"

Mainz was founded as a Roman permanent camp at Moguntiacum around 13 BC. This large camp provided a population base for the growing city around it. Sword-making probably began in the camp and continued in the city; for example, Gaius Gentlius Victor, a Legio XXII veteran, used his demobilization bonus to start a business as a gladiarius, arms maker and dealer. Swords made in Mainz were sold mainly to the north. The variation of the gladius "Mainz" was characterized by a small waist of the blade and a long tip. Blade length 50-55 cm. Sword length 65-70 cm. Blade width about 7 cm. Sword weight about 800 gr. (with wooden handle).

Gladius Fulham

The sword that gave this type its name was excavated from the Thames near the town of Fulham and must therefore date from after the Roman occupation of Britain. This was after the invasion of Auliya Platia in 43 AD. It was used until the end of the same century. It is considered an intermediate link between the Mainz type and the Pompeii type. Some consider it a development of the Mainz type, or simply that type. The blade is slightly narrower than the Mainz type, the main difference being the triangular point. Blade length 50-55 cm. Sword length 65-70 cm. The width of the blade is approximately 6 cm. The weight of the sword is about 700g. (with wooden handle).

Gladius "Pompeii"

Named in modern times for Pompeii, a Roman city that lost many of its inhabitants - despite the efforts of the Roman fleet to evacuate people - which was destroyed by a volcanic eruption in 79 AD. Four examples of swords were found there. The sword has parallel blades and a triangular point. It is the shortest of the gladiuses. It is worth noting that it is often confused with the spatha, which was a longer slashing sword used by auxiliaries fighting on horseback. Over the years the Pompeii type has become longer and the later versions are referred to as semi-spaths. Blade length 45-50cm. The length of the sword is 60-65cm. The width of the blade is about 5 cm. The weight of the sword is about 700g. (with wooden handle).

Hilt

The hilt of the gladius of the Roman sword was often decoratively decorated, especially the hilts of officers and dignitaries.

The Roman Empire achieved its greatness and power largely thanks to its legions. The victories of Ancient Rome on the battlefield were brought by the Roman infantry, who were fluent in close combat techniques. A short, double-edged gladius sword in the hands of a Roman legionnaire became the pivot on which the entire military machine of a mighty ancient state rested.

Excursion into history

Even the Roman chronicler Titus Livius (1st century BC - early 1st century AD) described in his writings the actions of Roman soldiers on the battlefield. The main tactics of combat clashes were based on collective actions. The line of legionnaires was a series of closed shields, followed by a line of soldiers. The first and main blow to the enemy was delivered with the help of darts. Short spears rushed into the ranks of the enemy, inflicting their first serious losses. After that, hand-to-hand combat began, where the main emphasis was on the technique of close combat.

The main weapon of close combat among the Romans was the sword. With its help, a soldier could decide the outcome of a single combat in his favor, injuring or killing the enemy. The Roman gladius in this regard was an indispensable weapon. The combat characteristics of edged weapons in those days were determined by the following aspects:

• weapon weight;
• weapon size;
• the strength of the warhead;
• the presence of piercing and cutting edges.

Before the Romans, fighting was mainly fought with a spear, the sword had defensive functions and was used in extreme cases. The military reforms of Marius (157 BC - 86 BC) made the soldier the perfect universal combat mechanism of the Roman army. Legionnaires were equally proficient with spear, sword and shield. Before the Romans, only the Greeks actively used swords on the battlefield, but the effectiveness of the combat use of this type of cold weapon was limited. The bronze swords of the Greeks were too short and did not have high strength characteristics.

The Romans were the first to equip their swords not only with a cutting edge, but also added a point to the weapon. The first mention of the combat capabilities of Roman swords falls on the III-II century BC. In this form, the short sword became a dangerous and versatile combat weapon capable of inflicting stab and cutting wounds on the enemy. Great importance was attached to the art of wielding a sword during close combat. In this aspect, the Roman legionaries were unmatched on the battlefield.

The appearance of the gladius

The Roman army, not having numerous cavalry and recruited in most cases from poor strata of Roman citizens, relied on the combat capabilities of the infantry. The main task that faced the Roman legions was to maintain the battle order and formation, to deliver a stunning first blow to the enemy. Further, swords were used, which inflicted huge damage on the enemy upon direct contact. Gladius allowed Roman soldiers to simultaneously strike and cut at close range, in a dense and close fighting mass.

Initially, weapons were made of low-grade metal, since there was neither technical nor financial possibility to equip a large army with first-class combat blades, therefore Roman swords are often called the most democratic weapon, which became the main weapon of the ancient Roman infantry. Despite the poor quality of workmanship, Roman swords were delivered to the troops in large quantities. Due to the ease of manufacture and low cost, it was easy to make up for the loss of military equipment and equip new military formations with such weapons.

Legionnaires were massively armed with gladiuses, which were equally effective for fighting in close formation and in single combats. The size of the weapon ensured its successful use both in land combat, during an assault, and during boarding battles at sea.

The gladius firmly established itself as the main military weapon of the Roman warrior after the conquest of Spain. The first successful combat clashes between the Roman army and the Spanish tribes, as well as the battles of the First Punic War, proved the right choice in favor of short swords.

The sword got its name because of its shape. It is a straight, short blade with a smooth edge. The weapon has a shifted center of gravity due to the presence of an oversized spherical pommel. This design of the sword makes it fairly easy to use. Unlike other types of edged weapons, Roman swords allowed soldiers to save their own strength and have been in service for a long time.

The warhead has a point that provides the weapon with greater penetrating power. The sword could inflict fatal stab wounds, but the presence of cutting edges on the blade made it possible for the legionnaires to inflict chopping, distracting blows. For a closed formation, the main combat technique was stabbing with lunges, so it was this blade shape and blade length that was convenient.

In comparison with the swords of other tribes and peoples, the Roman sword was significantly inferior in length and striking effect. However, the skillful possession of the principles of close combat by the Roman legionnaires compensated for the insufficient tactical and technical characteristics of the gladius.

Later a compromise was found. Spatha appeared in service with the Roman infantry - a weapon that combines the properties and qualities of Roman swords with the blades of barbarian tribes.

Combat characteristics of the gladius

Roman swords that have survived to this day are made by forging. There are mentions of bronze items, but the bulk of the weapons were made of iron. The main historical period, which accounted for the intensive use of the gladius, falls on the era of the Roman Republic and the formation of the empire. In different historical periods, the use of short swords of one or another modification by Roman soldiers in battle was noticed.

Those samples of swords that have survived to this day are steel blades 65-85 cm long and 4-8 cm wide. The weight of the sword usually varied within 1.5 kg.

Each era left its mark on the combat equipment of the Roman army. Roman legionnaires adopted the best from their opponents, making adjustments to the tactics of warfare and modernizing their combat equipment. The main Roman sword, the gladius, did not stand aside. At different times, the Romans were armed with four main types of swords:

• bilbo;
• mainz;
• fulham;
• pompeian gladius.

All four types are distinguished by the length of the blade, its shape, time and geographical conditions of use.

The most common type of Roman sword, which was used by legionnaires for almost three centuries, is the Spanish gladius. The blade has a length of 75-85 cm, which is the largest size for a weapon of this type. The blade has a straight shape with a pronounced point. Such weapons weighed up to 1 kg.

The mainz became the next type of Roman sword, which was in service with the legionnaires during the conquest of Europe. The sword is named after the German city of Mainz, in which samples of this weapon were found. This type already bears the features of German edged weapons, which armed the barbarian tribes on the Upper Rhine. Weapons were used in the late period, at the turn of the millennium, until the 3rd century AD.

The sword was shorter than the Spanish one by 10-15 cm. The samples that were found during the excavations were 65-70 cm long. There are samples of swords with a short blade, only 50-55 cm. The width of the warhead is only 7 cm. Mainz" is even smaller, up to 800 gr.

The third type of Roman swords - fulhem, is intermediate. The name of the weapon was given in view of the fact that the samples were found in southern England, near the city of Fulham. The weapon has strict geometric shapes and lines. The blade is distinguished by straight cutting edges, a geometrically sustained point angle of 25 degrees.

Fulham-type gladius swords are 65-70 cm long. The blade is about 6-7 cm wide, so this type can be considered the narrowest of all four types. A combat sword in this design weighs 700 gr. The combat use of weapons of this type falls on the first century AD, when the Romans began to conquer the British Isles.

The most recent type, the Pompeian gladius, is a weapon that became widespread in the last years of the Roman Empire. The blade got its name because the first samples were found during excavations at the site of the ancient Roman city of Pompeii. In appearance, this type is the most perfect product, which indicates its late appearance in service with the Roman army. Unlike previous types of Roman swords, the Pompeian gladius is light and thin. The tip has a low angle, adding maximum piercing capabilities to the weapon. The samples found allow us to say that the swords were short, 60-65 cm with a blade width of 5 cm. Such a blade weighed a little more than 700 grams. This type of swords was used in the Roman army until the 5th century AD, when the Roman Empire was in decline. .

Conclusion

Gladius became synonymous with any sword in service with the Roman legions. New technologies in metallurgy have led to the fact that metals of better quality began to appear. Traditional swords with a simple and unpretentious form were replaced by more advanced weapons. Powerful and long blades became the main weapons of medieval knights. The sword became the weapon of rich, prosperous warriors. The transition from a regular mass army to the formation of a military militia was the reason for the transition to other, cheap types and types of edged weapons.

If you have any questions - leave them in the comments below the article. We or our visitors will be happy to answer them.

The passion for weapons is indestructible in men's hearts. How much has been invented, invented, improved! And something has already become history.

The most important type of hand-to-hand melee weapon in antiquity and the Middle Ages is the sword.

Before the Romans, the main weapon of foot soldiers was a spear. The sword was used only as a last resort - to finish off a defeated enemy, or in case the spear breaks.

“Gladius or gladius (lat. gladius) is a Roman short sword (up to 60 centimeters).
Used for combat in the ranks. Although it was possible to cut with a gladius, it was believed that it was possible to kill an opponent only with a stabbing blow, and the gladius was intended for such blows. Gladius were made most often of iron. But you can also meet the mention of bronze swords.

This sword has been in use since the 4th century BC. to 2nd century AD Gladius was made in two modifications: early - Mainz Gladius, it was produced until 50 AD. and Pompeii Gladius after 50 AD. Of course, this division is arbitrary, in parallel with the new swords, the old ones were also used.
The dimensions of the gladius varied 64-81 cm - full length, 4-8 cm - width, weight up to 1.6 kg.

Mainz Gladius.

The sword is, as it were, fitted, has a smoothly tapering point, the balance of the sword is good for stabbing, which was preferable for fighting in close formation.

Full length: 74cm
Blade length: 53cm
Handle and pommel length: 21 cm
Location of the center of gravity: 6.35 cm from the guard
Weight: 1.134 kg

Pompeii Gladius.

This sword is more than its predecessor adapted for cutting, its end is not so pointed, and the center of gravity is shifted towards the point.

Full length: 75cm
Blade length: 56cm
Handle length with pommel: 19 cm
Center of gravity locations: 11 cm from the guard
Weight: up to 900 gr.

As you know, in Sparta, all men owned weapons: citizens were forbidden to engage in any craft and even study it. Best of all, the statements of the Spartans themselves testify to the ideals of this warlike state:

"The borders of Sparta are as far as this spear can reach" (Agesilaus, the Spartan king).

"We use short swords in war because we fight by coming close to the enemy" (Antalactis, Spartan naval commander and politician).

"My sword is sharper than slander" (Fearid, Spartan).

"Even if there is no other benefit, the sword will become dull on me" (an unknown blind Spartan who asked to be taken to war).

The peculiarity of the short swords of the Greek warriors, convenient in close formation, was that they did not have a pointed end and the blows were only chopping. The blows inflicted were parried with a shield and only in rare cases with a sword: the weapon was too short, poorly tempered, and the hands, as a rule, were not protected.

In ancient Rome, unlike Sparta, military-physical training was not a matter of state, but of a family. Until the age of 15, children were brought up by their parents in private schools where they received this training. And from the age of 16, young men entered military camps, where they improved their combat skills, for this they used all kinds of shells - stuffed animals dug into the ground, wooden swords and sticks. There were instructors in the Roman army, they were called "doctors of weapons", and they were very respected people.

So, the short swords of the Roman legionnaires were intended to deliver a stabbing blow during the battle in tightly closed rows and at a very close distance from the enemy. These swords were made of very low-grade iron. A short Roman sword - a gladius, a democratic weapon of foot mass battles, aroused contempt both among the barbarian tribes (where long expensive swords made of excellent steel were highly valued, which were not inferior to Damascus steel in their properties), and among the Hellenic environment, which used high-quality bronze armor. However, the Roman tactics of warfare brought such a sword to the fore, making it the main weapon for building the Roman Empire.

The infantry Roman sword was an ideal melee weapon, they could stab, cut, chop. They could fight both in formation and out of formation. They could fight both on land and at sea in boarding battles. We walk and on horseback.

The entire Roman military organization, battle tactics were adjusted to legions on foot, armed with straight swords. And so, the Etruscans were first conquered. In this war, the Romans perfected the tactics and features of combat formations. The First Punic War gave military training to a huge number of legionnaires.

The battle usually took place according to the following scenario.

When camping, the Romans fortified it and surrounded it with a palisade, a moat and a parapet. Offensive or throwing weapons at that time were still too imperfect to destroy the obstacle that such structures represented. As a result, the army, thus fortified, considered itself completely safe from attack and could, at will, give battle now or wait for a more favorable time.

Before the battle, the Roman army left its camp through several gates and formed up in battle formation either in front of the camp fortifications or at an insignificant distance from them. There were many reasons for this: firstly, the army was under the cover of towers and other camp structures and vehicles, secondly, it was very difficult to force it to turn the rear, and, finally, even in the event of a defeat, the camp was a safe haven for him, due to which the victor could not pursue him and take advantage of his victory.

The legionnaires of the first row of the first line, hiding behind shields, approached the enemy with a quick step and, approaching at a distance of a dart throw (about 25-30 meters), fired a general volley, and the soldiers of the 2nd row threw their spears into the gaps between the soldiers of the first row. The Roman dart was almost 2 meters long, and almost half the length was occupied by an iron tip. At the end of the tip, a thickening was made and sharpened so that, stuck into the shield, it stuck to us tightly! It was almost impossible to get him out. Therefore, the enemy had to simply throw away these shields! Darts were also very effective weapons against light cavalry.

Then both lines of the enemy entered into hand-to-hand combat with swords in their hands, and the legionnaires of the back ranks pressed on the front ranks, supported them and, if necessary, replaced them. Further, the battle was a chaotic skirmish, breaking up into the struggle of individual warriors with each other. This is where a short, but at the same time convenient sword came in handy. It did not require a large swing, but the length of the blade made it possible to get the enemy even from the back row.

The second line of both troops served as support for the first; the third was a reserve. The number of wounded and killed during the battle itself was usually very small, since the armor and shield served as a fairly good protection for the blows of the enemy's sword. And if the enemy took to flight ... Then detachments of lightly armed warriors and the victorious cavalry rushed to pursue the infantry of the defeated army, which was forced to turn its rear. Deprived of cover, left to themselves, the fugitives used to throw away their shields and helmets; then they were overtaken by the enemy cavalry with its long swords. Thus, the defeated army suffered huge losses. That is why in those days the first battle was usually decisive and sometimes ended the war. This also explains the fact that the losses of the winners have always been very small. So, for example, Caesar under Pharsalus lost only 200 legionnaires and 30 centurions, under Taps only 50 people, under Munda his losses reached only up to 1000 people, counting both legionnaires and horsemen; 500 people were wounded in this battle.

Continuous training and excellent organization have done their job. It was with this tactic that the hitherto invincible Macedonian phalanxes of King Pyrrhus were defeated. This is how the famous Hannibal was defeated, who was not helped by either war elephants, or archers, or numerous cavalry. Even the brilliant Archimedes could not save Syracuse from the powerful and well-oiled Roman military machine. And the Mediterranean Sea at that time was not called otherwise than Mare Romanul - the Roman Sea. The North African Carthage held out the longest, but alas ... it suffered the same fate. Queen Cleopatra surrendered Egypt without a fight. Great Britain, Spain and half of Europe were then under Roman rule.

And all this was done by the Roman infantry, armed with a straight short sword - a gladius.

Today, a Roman sword can be bought at any souvenir shop. Of course, it is not as popular as the Japanese katana or knightly swords. It is too simple, devoid of the halo of legend and design frills. However... When you see such a sword in a store or with your friends, remember what is written above. After all, this sword conquered half of the ancient world and led entire nations in awe.