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