arms & armour, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2012, 63–75 An Undocumented Gladius from Baena (Spain) Eduardo Kavanagh de Prado Grupo de Investigación Polemos (UAM-F063) The hitherto undocumented sword from the collection of the Museo Histórico Municipal de Baena, Córdoba (Spain) is discussed. The sword is of unknown provenance but from its typology is judged to be Roman and could come from a site on the Iberian Peninsula. keywords Roman sword, gladius, Early Roman Empire, militaria, Baena, Córdoba, Hispania History of the sword and context The sword in the Museo Histórico Municipal de Baena1 (inv. no. 98/6/56, Figures 1 and 2) was donated to the museum in 1998 by the Instituto Luis Carrillo Sotomayor (Baena) which had itself received the item from a local parish priest, Father Virgilio Olmo Relaño.2 Unfortunately, when we began research into the Baena sword it was too late to interview Father Olmo, who had left no information about its provenance. Therefore, we do not know where nor in what circumstances the sword was found, and so we must concentrate on the typological analysis as our only source of information. We might, tentatively, suggest an origin for the sword close to the town of Baena, as that was the area known to Father Olmo. We believe that this sword is of Roman date (vid infra), but the town of Baena had little Roman presence, as it is likely to be a medieval foundation.3 Nevertheless, its territory is rich in Roman and Pre-Roman sites.4 Of the Roman period a few important sites draw our attention: Cerro del Minguillar5 (Baena, ancient Iponuba), El Laderón (Doña Mencía, ancient Favencia6), Cerro Plaza de Armas and El Higuerón7 (Nueva Carteya) and Torreparedones8 (between Baena and Castro del Río, ancient name unknown9). Tentatively, we might suggest El Higuerón (Nueva Carteya) as a possible origin for our sword, since it was used as a stronghold during the first centuries of our era10 and, in all probability had a military presence that is coherent with the dating of our sword. In any case, the relation between our sword and any of these sites is just speculative, so we can not further elaborate on this issue. © The Trustees of the Armouries 2012 DOI 10.1179/1741612411Z.0000000007 64 EDUARDO KAVANAGH DE PRADO figure 1 Drawing of the sword at the Museo Histórico Municipal of Baena (Córdoba). Side ‘A’. figure 2 Full length photograph of the sword (side ‘A’). AN UNDOCUMENTED GLADIUS FROM BAENA (SPAIN) 65 Description The sword has not been restored in any way and suffers from a great deal of corrosion (Figures 3 and 4). Nevertheless, it retains the complete structure of blade and tang, lacking only the organic elements that originally made up the hilt. It is a doubleedged straight blade, 635 mm long, 475 mm of which is the blade and 160 mm. is the figure 3 Detail of the tang (side ‘A’). 66 EDUARDO KAVANAGH DE PRADO figure 4 Detail of the sword tip (side ‘A’). tang (or interior of the hilt). Its maximum width, at the base of the blade, reaches 61 mm. (Table 1). We believe it belongs to the Roman weapon tradition of the first centuries as it displays a variety of elements characteristic of several main Roman sword families. This fact allows us to identify it as a Roman production, but makes its typological and chronological classification difficult. We can easily discard a Pre-Roman date, as none of the Pre-Roman swords in the Iberian Peninsula is anywhere close in shape or dimensions to our example11. For the same reason we may also discard any Late-Antiquity or Medieval date. Finally, we may easily discard any Roman-Republican dating as no model from that period12 -generally longer in blade and with a very acute tip- matches our sword. We believe that it must therefore belong to the Early Roman Empire or Principate period. We will separately analyze each of the main characteristics of our sword in an attempt to reach conclusions regarding its possible origin, typology and date. Blade length The sword from the Baena Museum has a blade length very similar or identical to many of the Roman first- and second-century examples, especially those identified as Mainz or Pompeii types. In the first case, the blade lengths normally range between 450 and 550 mm and in the second between 400 and 560 mm, dimensions both compatible with the Baena sword, which has a blade length of 475 mm. AN UNDOCUMENTED GLADIUS FROM BAENA (SPAIN) 67 TANG TABLE 1 DIMENSIONS OF THE BAENA SWORD AND COMPARISON WITH OTHER ROMAN CASES CHARACTERISTIC DIMENSIONS COMMON WITH TYPES MATCHES WITH EXAMPLES FROM. . . Total length 635 mm — — Tang length 160 mm Pompeii-Classic Oosterbeek (Braat, 1967: no. 5, Pl. III.3., see note 53 for full reference; Miks, 2007: A549, see note 12 for full reference) Newstead (Miks, 2007: A528,2) Sládkovičovo (Krekovič, 1994: fig. 6.10, see note 38 for full reference; and Miks 2007: A665) Mainz (Miks, 2007: A467) Tang section: shape and width Rectangle, 8–10 mm — — Tang button: shape and width Rectangle, 18 mm — — Blade length 475 mm Mainz-Classic, PompeiiClassic Mainz (Miks 2007: A467) Svannige (Miks 2007: A708) Sládkovičovo (Krekovič, 1994: fig. 6.10 and Miks 2007: A665) Newstead (Miks, 2007: A528,2) Maximum blade breadth 61 mm Mainz-Classic, PompeiiHamfelde, Lauriacum/ Hromowka Arnhem-Malburgen (Miks, 2007: A20) Unknown origin (Miks, 2007: A200) Amay (Miks, 2007: A11) Minimum blade breadth 49* mm Mainz-Classic, Mainz Fulham London (Miks, 2007: A194) Blade thickness 7.8–9.2 mm — — Pompeii-Classic, MainzCanterbury, MainzClassic, Lauriacum/ Hromowka Iža (Miks, 2007: A327) Mainz (Miks 2007: A467) Arnhem-Malburgen (Miks, 2007: A20) Bordesholm (Miks, 2007: A63) TIP BLADE Profile tapering 61 to 53 mm (slightly convergent from base of edges) blade to base of point Slight widening at the base of the blade (wide shoulders) +4 mm (from Pompeii-Classic, 57 mm close Pompeii-Hamfelde, to the base) Mainz-Classic Blade cross-section Diamond? - Mikulov (Miks, 2007: A 500) Unknown origin (Miks, 2007: A200) Kryspinów (Miks 2007: A396) Hamfelde (Miks, 2007: A282) - Widening of the blade before the tip +4 mm (from Pompeii, Mainz-Classic, 49 to 53 Mainz-Fulham mm) Mainz-Wiesbaden (Biborski, 1993: Abb. 9.2, see note 14 for full reference) Bližkovice (Biborski, 1993: Abb. 9.5). London (Miks, 2007: A194) Sládkovičovo (Krekovič, 1994: fig. 6.10) Short triangular blade tip 79 mm long, Pompeii-Classic, Mainz53 mm wide Wederath, Mainz Canterbury, Lauriacum/ Hromowka Newstead (Miks, 2007: A528,2) Sládkovičovo (Krekovič, 1994: fig. 6.10 and Miks 2007: A665) Godmanchester (Miks 2007: A824) Unknown origin (Miks, 2007: A200) Mikulov (Miks, 2007: A500) Dobřichov Pičhora (Miks, 2007: p. 93, A129) Mainz (Miks, 2007: A467) * Very possibly due to corrosion. The original dimensions would be slightly bigger. 68 EDUARDO KAVANAGH DE PRADO Blade cross-section The blade’s cross-section was probably diamond-shaped (Figure 5), but owing to the advanced degree of corrosion we are unable to be absolutely sure.13 On the other hand, we can confidently reject the presence of any fuller or rib on the blade, a characteristic of most Roman swords from the late second and early third centuries onwards.14 Distal tapering Another interesting feature of our sword is the fact that it shows no distal tapering, that is, the blade is equally thick at the tip as it is at the base (approximately 8.5 mm15). This is usually regarded as a defect in sword construction as it makes the sword too heavy at its point, but it is a general characteristic of all Roman swords as can be deduced from a great variety of examples.16 Blade width One of the most peculiar characteristics of our sword is its great width, which reaches 61 mm at the base of the blade. This is similar to some Mainz-Classic, PompeiiHamfelde and Lauriacum-Hromowka swords. From the first group we may cite those found at Arnhem-Malburgen17 (Netherlands), unknown origin in Germany18 and Amay19 (Belgium), and from the second group the cases of Podgorzyce20 (Poland) and Bordesholm21 (Germany). The first group is roughly dated to between the last quarter of the first century bc and the middle of the first century ad, whereas the second group is restricted to the first half of the second century ad. The membership of the Baena sword to the Pompeii-Hamfelde family can be easily rejected as this group shows ogival tips, completely different from the triangular tip or our example. A third group, that of the Lauriacum/Hromowka family, is also endowed with wide blades but in combination with extreme lengths, which are completely different from our example. figure 5 Detail of the blade with oblique light (side ‘B’). Notice the very slight ridge that can be seen in spite of corrosion. AN UNDOCUMENTED GLADIUS FROM BAENA (SPAIN) 69 Profile tapering The sword from Baena shows a gradual profile taper, that is, a gradual narrowing of the edges of the blade from base to tip (Figure 1). As a consequence, there is a difference in width between the base of the blade and the base of the tip (61 and 53 mm, respectively). This peculiar characteristic matches several cases classified as PompeiiClassic, Mainz-Classic, Mainz-Canterbury and Lauriacum-Hromowka styles. Such is the case of an example from Mainz22 (Germany) or another from Bordesholm23 (Denmark) dated in the first half of the second century, both belonging to the Pompeii-Classic sword type. A third example from Arnhem-Malburgen24 (Netherlands) has been identified as a Mainz-Classic. We might also trace profile tapering in some of the Canterbury — or Mainz-Canterbury or Lauriacum25 — type swords, dated from around the second and third centuries ad. Such is, for example, the case of a sword found at Iža26 (Slovakia). Nevertheless, our sword differs from this family of swords, since the blade dimensions are clearly shorter and wider, although they might be chronologically close, as both share this peculiar characteristic of profile tapering. Wide shoulders Our sword shows what could be called ‘widened shoulders’, this is, a slight widening towards the base of the blade (the inflection point is just 45 mm before the tang), where the blade widens from 57 to 61 mm. This is barely noticeable, but must not be attributed to corrosion, as it is common to both sides of the blade (Figure 3). This is a characteristic of many of the Pompeii family swords, as examples from Mikulov27 (Czech Republic) and Gué de la Casaque28 (France) clearly show. It is also a very common characteristic in the Pompeii-Hamfelde group, as examples from Kryspinów29 (Poland) and Hamfelde30 (Germany) show, and also in some of the Mainz-Wederath family, as in the case from Korytnika31 (Poland). A similar phenomenon can be seen in the Mainz family, but to a greater degree. Such is the case of a Mainz-Classic example of unknown origin found in Germany,32 a Mainz-Mülbach example from Třebušice33 (Czech Republic) and of a Mainz-Sisak example of unknown origin found in Germany.34 We may conclude, then, that the characteristic of the ‘widened shoulders’ is an extremely common feature of many Early Empire swords, independently of their typological classification. We should notice that from the end of the second century ad, widened shoulders become extremely rare,35 giving us a possible ante quem limit for our sword. Widening of blade before the tip A very interesting feature of the Baena sword that again relates it to Roman examples is a widening of the blade shortly before the tip. Many swords, specially in Antiquity, show a curving of the blade edge at the point where it reaches the base of the tip or, to put it in a different way, it forms an angle at the point where the blade ends and the tip starts (what is sometimes called in sword terminology the ‘dividing line’ because it divides blade and tip). But what we find of special interest in our case 70 EDUARDO KAVANAGH DE PRADO is that at this point the blade shows a very slight widening compared with the centre of the blade. This means that the blade actually widens slightly just before reaching the base of the tip (Figure 4). In our case the widening is so slight that it results in only a 4 mm gain in width36 (from 49 to 53 mm). This feature is seen in some Roman swords, such as the examples from Gué de la Casaque37 (France), Sládkovičovo38 (Slovakia) and Blížkovice39 (Czech Republic), all belonging to the Pompeii family; or as in the example from St Georgen (Austria) dated at the time of Augustus40 and classified as a member of the Mainz family. Short triangular tip Another very distinctive feature of the Baena sword is its extremely short and triangular shaped tip (79 mm long and 53 mm wide — Figure 4). The edges of the tip are straight, thus forming a triangular-shaped tip very different from the ogival-shaped tips of later models. This is an attribute of most of the first and second century swords. It is universal to all of the Pompeii family, but is also traceable in some of the Mainz-Classic, Mainz-Canterbury and Mainz-Wederath groups. Some of the closest parallels to our example of a triangular tip may be the swords from Mainz41 (Germany), Newstead42 (GB), Sládkovičovo43 (Slovakia), Godmanchester44 (GB) and Mikulov45 (Czech Republic). The short triangular point is also characteristic of some of the swords of the Lauriacum-Hromówka family,46 which are dated from the middle of the second to the end of the third century. Nevertheless, the Baena sword cannot be a Lauriacum-Hromówka47 type nor any of its variants48 because, although it shares a short triangular point and a very wide blade with the Lauriacum-Hromówka swords, the Baena sword has a blade length of 475 mm, which makes it very different from the blade length of around 565–710 mm49 of the Lauriacum-Hromówka group. Besides, the Lauriacum-Hromówka group is rather homogeneous, as can be seen in Figure 6, and quite different from the Baena sword. Conclusions Typology and dating The sword from Baena seems to have a normal first and second century blade length, a Mainz style blade width and a Pompeii style triangular tip (Figure 7). It has no distal tapering, which is a general Roman sword characteristic. It has also a very slight profile tapering, which is a Pompeii type characteristic. The widening of the blade just before the tip is common to both Mainz and Pompeii swords. But it does not fit into the Pompeii family of swords, as all Pompeii examples have a very homogeneous blade width, around 36–45 mm,50 as can be seen in the examples from Mainz,51 Sládkovičovo52 and Oosterbeek,53 among others (Figure 6). The Baena sword blade, instead, is 61 mm wide. On the other hand, the Baena sword resembles Mainz type swords in width and length and the proportion between both (Figure 6), the profile tapering, the widening of the blade before the tip and at the base of the blade, the lack of grooves and the triangular point. AN UNDOCUMENTED GLADIUS FROM BAENA (SPAIN) 71 figure 6 Dispersion graph of a selection of Roman swords. The x axis represents the width of the blade in mm. The y axis is the product of dividing blade length by maximum blade width. The numbers preceded by a letter ‘A’ refer to the catalogue of Roman Swords by Miks12. We would like to thank Professor Dr Fernando Quesada Sanz for advising us on the design of this graph. figure 7 Relatively close parallels to the Baena sword: 1. Unknown provenance in Great Britain; 2. Arnhem-Malburgen (Netherlands); 3. Amay (Belgium); 4. Baena (Spain); 5. Newstead (GB); 6. Mainz (Germany); 7. Godmanchester (GB); 8. Svannige (Denmark); 9. Kryspinów (Poland). 72 EDUARDO KAVANAGH DE PRADO For all of these reasons we therefore conclude that it must be a Mainz type sword, closest perhaps to the Mainz-Wederath subgroup, with some influence from the Pompeii family that becomes apparent in the extremely short, triangular tip, unlike the also triangular but much longer and pointed Mainz tips. The Mainz-Wederath subgroup is the only one that combines the very wide blade of the Mainz swords with the extremely short tips of the Pompeii group. If we are to consider our example as part from the Mainz-Wederath subgroup, which it resembles in length, very slight profile tapering, widening of the blade before the tip and short triangular point, then it may not be any later than the first quarter of the second century.54 But this attribution is not certain because Mainz-Wederath swords tend to show slimmer blades and slightly longer tips than our case and — as Figure 6 clearly shows — the example from Baena has a proportion between its width and length that fits more neatly into the group of the Mainz Classic swords. Nevertheless, even if we are not completely sure as to what precise group it belongs, its great similarities with these prove that it must be chronologically close. All of the parallels mentioned so far extend through a period between the early first and mid second centuries ad (or, in some particular cases, perhaps as far as the third quarter of the second century ad). Some of the Mainz parallels could be as early as the last quarter of the first century bc, but the short triangular tip of our sword suggests a Pompeii-Classic influence, which cannot be previous to approximately the middle of the first century ad. The widening of the blade before the tip is also an attribute of some Pompeii family swords. On the other hand, with all probability our sword cannot be dated to later than the end of the second century ad, as from that date swords tend to have longer blades, rather rounded ogival tips,55 instead of the triangular pointed tip of previous models, and, very rarely, the sort of widened shoulders56 characteristic of the Baena sword. Besides, the Baena sword shows no visible grooves down the centre of the blade, which is normally consistent with later than second-century Roman swords. We may conclude, then, that our sword could be a member of the Mainz group, perhaps closer to the Mainz-Wederath subgroup than to any other, with a strong influence from the Pompeii group. Very probably thus, our sword was forged sometime between the middle of the first century and the middle of the second century. The marginal position of the Iberian Peninsula (Hispania) with respect to military affairs at that time could have had the effect of permitting a certain originality to its local workshops in their scarce weaponry productions. If the sword from the Baena Museum was made in Hispania, this could explain the rather creative mixture of influences that we see in it. Mechanics As we have already stated, the sword from Baena has a very gradual profile taper, a narrowing upon the edges of the blade from base to tip so slight that it is hardly noticeable. From this we could infer that it was meant primarily to be a cutting instrument instead of a thrusting one. The great width of the blade in proportion to AN UNDOCUMENTED GLADIUS FROM BAENA (SPAIN) 73 its length, making the blade heavier, points in the same direction, as cutting capabilities improve as blades become heavier. Furthermore, a blow is much more easily absorbed by a solid broad blade. All these facts seem to indicate the use of the sword as a cutting rather than as a thrusting weapon. However, its short blade would appear to make it rather useless as a cutting weapon. Therefore, we believe that its gradual profile taper is the result of the sword maker wanting to produce a robust weapon rather than a cutting weapon, although the sword would probably have both thrusting and cutting capabilities. Unfortunately, we have not had the opportunity to test the chemical properties of the sword, but we know that most of the Imperial Roman swords were not properly carburized57 and, in general terms, metallurgy was somewhat rudimentary.58 Furthermore, we know that from about ad 50 quality decreased sharply in the manufacture of Roman swords.59 Therefore, we believe that the great width of the Baena sword in comparison to its length could result from the need to compensate its meagre physical properties with a robust shape. In other words, it is a sword very compact in shape but of very poor quality. In fact, we believe that this is not an exclusive characteristic of the Baena sword but a general trait of Roman sword manufacture, a circumstance that would in turn affect the fighting techniques throughout the Roman period. This theory is coherent with the already mentioned marginal position of Hispania in military affairs, which may have resulted in the production or distribution of lower quality weapons, bound for police rather than military use. Notes 1 2 3 4 We are especially grateful to D. Jose Antonio Morena López, director of the Museo Histórico Municipal de Baena, who so kindly put the sword at our disposition for analysis. I would also like to thank Professor Dr Fernando Quesada Sanz for his essential advice through the development of this paper. Last but not least, I would like to thank D. Jorge Chamón Fernández for his aid in the metallurgical aspects of this paper. Former parish priest of the church of Santa María la Mayor, Baena, Córdoba, Spain (1972–2005). If it had a Roman origin, it would have been very modest at that time. It has been proposed that its medieval name of ‘Bayyana’ may derive from a Roman villa belonging to a person named ‘Baius’ with the suffix –ana, which is normally connected with Roman villas (Martín Escudero, F. 2002. Baena en época islámica: fuentes, arqueología, documentos. . . . Arqueología y Territorio Medieval, 9: 37–52. Morena López, J. A. 1990. Prospección arqueológica superficial de urgencia en los terrenos afectados por el trazado de la variante de Baena (Córdoba). Anuario Arqueológico de Andalucía. Actividades de urgencia, 1990. Sevilla, 1992. Pp. 78–82. Valverde y Perales, F. 1903. Antigüedades romanas de Baena. 5 6 7 8 9 Boletín de la real Academia de la Historia, 43: 521– 525. Muñoz Amilibia, A. M. 1974, Excavaciones en el Cerro del Minguillar de Baena (Córdoba). Memoria 1974 del Instituto de Arqueología y Prehistoria, Universidad de Barcelona and Muñoz Amilibia, A. M. 1975. Excavaciones en el Cerro del Minguillar de Baena (Córdoba). Memoria 1975 del Instituto de Arqueología y Prehistoria, Universidad de Barcelona. Or instead, Agla Minor (after Arjona Castro, A. 2007. El Laderón de doña Mencía. Posible identificación de la población que hubo en el Laderón de Doña Mencía con el oppidum de Agla Minor. Boletín de la Real Academia de Córdoba de Ciencias, Bellas Letras y Nobles Artes, 153: 231–236, 231–236). Fortea, J.; Bernier, J. 1970. Recintos y fortificaciones ibéricos en la Bética. Cunliffe, B; Fernández Castro, M.C. 1999. The Guadajoz Project. Andalucía in the First Millenium BC. Volume I. Torreparedones and its Hinterland. Oxford University Cometee for Archaeology. Monograph no. 47. Oxford. Although sometimes tentatively identified with the Iberian city of Itucci (Hübner CIL II: 213 and 74 10 11 12 13 14 EDUARDO KAVANAGH DE PRADO Caballos Rufino, A. (unpublished): Contribución al estudio de la obra colonizadora de J. César en la Ulterior. Memoria de licenciatura, Sevilla, 1978, 62 y 55). Castro López, M. 2004. Una presencia sobre el límite: torres antiguas en el territorio de Atalayuelas (Fuerte del Rey, Jaén). Pierre Moret (coord.), María Teresa Chapa Brunet (coord.) Torres, atalayas y casas fortificadas: explotación y control del territorio en Hispania (s. III a. de C.- s. I d. de C.), 119–132. Quesada Sanz, F. 1997, El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a. C.) I–II. Monographies Instrumentum 3. Montaignac: passim. Cf. Rapín, A. 2001, Des épées romaines dans la collection d’Allise-Sainte Reine. Gladius, XXI: 31– 56, passim; Ulbert, G. 1979, Das Schwert und die eisernen Wurfgeschosspitzen aus dem Grab von Es Soumâa, H. Horn, C. Ruger, eds. Die Numider, 333–338. Ulbert, 1979; Bonnamour, L; Dumont, A. 1994. Les armes romaines de la Saône: état des découvertes et dones récentees de fouilles. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 5: 141–154, passim; Feugere, M. 1994. L’équipement militaire d’epoque republicaine en Gaule. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 5: 3–23; Quesada Sanz, F. and Núñez Pariente de León, E. 2000, Una sepultura con armas de Baja Época Ibérica (o época romana republicana) en la necrópolis del ‘Cerro de las Balas (Écija, Sevilla)’. Gladius, XX: 191–220, fig 4; Connolly, P. 1997. ‘Pilum, Gladius and Pugio in the Late Republic’ M. Feugere, ed. L’équipement militaire et l’armement de la République, Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 8: 41–57, fig 8, passim; Quesada Sanz, F. 1997. Gladius hispaniensis: an archaeological view from Iberia. M. Feugere, ed. L’équipement militaire et l’armement de la République, Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 8: 251–270; Quesada Sanz, F. 1997. ¿Qué hay en un nombre? La cuestión del gladius hispaniensis. Boletín de la Asociación Española de Amigos de la Arqueología, 37: 41–58; Horvat, J. 1997. Roman Republican weapons from Smihel in Slovenia, en M. Feugere, ed. L’équipement militaire et l’armement de la République, Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 8: 105–120, fig. 10; Miks, C. 2007. Studien zur Römischen Schwertbewaffnung in der Kaiserzeit. Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Provinzen, Band 8; Stiebel, 2004, A Hellenistic gladius from Jericho, en Netzer, E. Hasmonean and Herodian Palaces at Jericho, Final Reports of the 1973–1987 Excavations, II: 230 and ff. We propose a diamond cross-section as most probable, but it could instead be lenticular. Cf. Biborski, M. (1994): ‘Die Schwerter des 1. und 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. aus dem römischen 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Imperium und dem Barbaricum’ Specimina Nova 9 (1993, published 1994), 91–130, passim. More precisely between 7.8 and 9.2 mm, but the differences are due to corrosion, the original thickness being unknown. Miks 2007: A802, A102, A773, A774, A824, A104, A348 among others. Miks, 2007: A20. Miks, 2007: A200. Miks, 2007: A11, Taf. 12. Miks, 2007: A585. Miks, 2007: A63. Miks, 2007: A467, Taf. 30. Tomb 1534 (Miks, 2007: A63, Taf. 41). Miks, 2007: A20, Taf. 13. Miks, 2007: 92–94. This sword has been dated around 166/7 — 179 d. C. (Rajtár, J. 1994. Waffen und Ausrüstungsteile aus dem Holz-Erde-Lager von Iža. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 5: 83–95, Abb. 3.2. Miks, 2007: no. A327, p. 93, Taf. 90). Miks, 2007: A500. Bonnamour and Dumont, 1994: 141, fig. 2.2; Miks, 2007: A251, Taf. 31. Miks, 2007: A396 Miks, 2007: A282 Miks, 2007: A369. Miks, 2007: A200. Biborski, 1994: 96, Abb. 6.7; Miks 2007: A734. From the Axel Guttman Collection. Miks 2007: A198. One of the last known examples of ‘widened shoulders’ could be the case from Brzeski (Poland), dated at the end of the 2nd century (Biborski, 1994: 100, Abb 16.2). Or 2 mm. gain in width on each side of the blade. Bonnamour and Dumont, 1994: 141, fig. 2.2; Miks, 2007: A251, Taf. 31. Krekovič, E. 1994. Military equipment on the territory of Slovakia. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 5: 211–225, fig. 6.10. Biborski, 1994: 97, Abb. 9.5. Miks 2007: A694, p. 733, taf. 24. Miks, 2007: A467. Dated after ad 81 (Miks, 2007: A528, 2). Dated circa ad 75–125 (Miks 2007: p. 67, A665). Miks 2007: A824. Other examples of the same family are dated circa ad 14–150 (Miks 2007: p. 62). Dated circa ad 75–150 (Miks, 2007: 67, A500, Taf. 32). For example, the sword from Dobřichov Pičhora (Miks, 2007: p. 93, A129). Ulbert, G. 1974: «Straubing und Nydam. Zu römischen Langschwertern der späten Limeszeit» in Kossack, G. and Ulbert, G. (eds.) 1974: Studien AN UNDOCUMENTED GLADIUS FROM BAENA (SPAIN) 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 zur Vor- und Frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie. Festschrift für Joachim Werner zum 65. Geburtstag, 197–21. Miks, 2007: 92–98. Miks, 2007: 92–98. Futhermore, LauriacumHromówka swords tend to have very noticeable fullers or groves in their blades, which are absent in the Baena sword. Biborsky, 1993: 97. Exceptionally 5 cm blade width, as in the case from Newstead (Curle, J. 1911. A Roman Frontier Post and its People; Manning, W. H. 1985. Catalogue of the Romano-British Tools, Fittings and Weapons in the British Museum, 148 and ff. (sp. 152 and pl. 73). Schoppa, 1974: 102. Krekovič, 1994: fig. 6.10 and Miks, 2007: A665. Braat, W. C. 1967, Römische Schwerter und Dolche im Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, OMROL 48, 56–61. Miks, 2007: Vortafel ‘B’. The last swords with a triangular point belong to the second ‘variante’ of the ninth group (after Biborski, 1994: 98–99) and date between the middle of the first and the end of the second centuries ad (Biborski, 1994: 99). 56 57 58 59 75 Widened shoulders are popular in the first and second centuries ad, and very rare afterwards. As the Baena sword shows widened shoulders, it is probable that it was produced previous to ad 200. Lang, J. 1988, Study of the Metallography of Some Roman Swords, Britannia, 19: 199–216. Eherreich, R.H. 1999. Archaeometallurgy: Helping Archaeology Bridge the Gap Between Science and Anthropology. Young, Pollard, Budd and Ixer, eds. Metals in Antiquity, 218–222. Lang, J. (unpublished). A consideration of the methods of constructing iron swords blades in the pre-medieval period. 2nd International Conference- Archaeometallurgy in Europe 2007, 17–21 June, Aquileia, Italy. Schrüfer-Kolb, I. 1999. Roman Iron production in the East Midlands, England. Young, Pollard, Budd and Ixer, eds. Metals in Antiquity, 227–233. In the case of Roman Britain quenching seems to have been very rare and limited to the indigenous production (Ehrenreich, 1999: 219–221). Cf. Fulford, M.; Sim, D.; Doig, A.; Painter, J. 2005. In defence of Rome: a metallographic investigation of Roman ferrous armour from Northern Britain. Journal of Archaeological Science, 32(2), 248. Lang, 1988: 209–210. Notes on contributor Eduardo Kavanagh de Prado is completing his doctoral thesis at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid on Roman Military Standards under the direction of Dr Fernando Quesada Sanz. He has published several articles concerning Roman militaria and on pre-Roman archaeology in the Iberian Peninsula. He is also a member of the research teams of two excavation projects in the South of Spain. Velázquez 73, 28006, Madrid, Spain. Email: eduardokavanagh@gmail.com