Pointer's Swords: First Century Mainz Gladius
Dec 12, 2017 20:22:46 GMT
Post by masterofossus on Dec 12, 2017 20:22:46 GMT
Introduction
The Mainz gladius is my personal favorite form of gladius. Although the Pompeii served for longer, among more legionnaires, was more widely represented in surviving examples, and is today more frequently depicted, I love the Mainz as a really fascinating style of weapon that bridged the gap between ancient leaf-shaped swords and modern straight-sided ones. Moreover, it has some fascinating features and I wanted a historically accurate one to understand how they all fit together in order to understand the handling of the gladius: the sword that defined the borders and represented the culture of the Roman Empire. Enter Patrick Pointer (forum name: rhema1313). Having seen some of his work, I was sufficiently enticed to go for the opportunity to get my hands on a piece of history.
Pointer's Swords offered me several things that I really wanted in a gladius: first, he’s obviously a great craftsman who does his own blades and his own fittings. I knew I’d be getting something that was well-built and functional. Second, he’s committed to historical accuracy. I really wanted both of those features in my first gladius because I don’t really see myself getting a whole collection of gladii since it’s not my personal area of interest as a practitioner (mostly Renaissance and some Japanese swords, more recently), so I wanted to make sure that the ones I do pick up are both high-quality and representative of the type, and I didn’t want to have to “guess” at how the sword was supposed to be.
But does the finished piece live up to my expectations? Of course it does: it lives up to history. I found this particular sword to be a good example of why historical accuracy can be really important in modern replicas: a major part of the hobby is learning about how weapons were made and used as a way to understanding the culture and material considerations that led them to make those choices. This Pointer blade taught me that many of my ideas about the Roman gladius were wrong, and I’m hoping it can also help me learn a bit more about what it was really like to carry a gladius for Rome.
Historical overview
The Mainz Gladius is my personal favorite of the four main types of Roman gladii. I see it as the key step in evolving from ancient swords – which were often leaf-shaped – and the more modern, straight-edged swords that would persist through the Viking/Migration Period, through past the crusades. The leaf-shape is actually quite an ingenius design: it allows for a slight curvature of the weapon, and increases the mass (and therefore cutting potential) at the point of percussion. From a theory perspective, I’m not actually sure why it fell out of favor, but it’s undoubtedly much harder to make, sharpen, and maintain and later smiths (and swordsmen) may have simply wanted to use the extra material and mass that went into the leaf-shape in order to increase the length of the blade.
The Mainz-type retains the narrowing of the blade immediately after the base of the blade, then widening again towards the point of percussion. Unlike the leaf-shape, though, the tip of the weapon is triangular in profile rather than curvilinear. The tip is diamond-shaped in cross-section, with a thick central ridge. The central spine allows for great stiffness in the point. You can compare this to the Type XV Oakeshott weapons from the late-Medieval period. That weapon developed in an effort to defeat and bypass mail armor via the thrust and to bypass plate by attacking joints and other weakpoints. The Mainz’s tip, though, is much wider and its cross section is thicker. But in the thrust it’s just as devastating – maybe more. In battle, the gladius would have been paired with a scutum shield and used in disciplined, close-order formations. These formations afforded soldiers mutual protection, but at the cost of space to maneuver as individuals. This made a thrust-centric weapon extremely desirable for the Romans and helps explain the design choice.
While the design of the tip, the great width, and thick cross-section of the sword make it a thrust-centric (and capable) weapon, the wasp-waisted form actually retains most of the advantages of the leaf-shape for cutting.
I love the Mainz because it’s a really interesting transitional form and has a very unique appearance. The Fulham form will reduce the wasp-waist form, and finally the straight-sided Pompeii type will eliminate it altogether. The Pompeii itself will eventually be lengthened and merge with the longer spatha to become the Viking/Migration Era swords that persisted well into the crusading era.
Full Disclosure
I bought this sword from a forum member who had been recommended by other members. I’ve had nothing but good experiences with the forumites, here (still have a backlog of people to thank, actually), and I wasn’t disappointed this time around, either.
I recently got this one from Patrick Pointer, or as you may know him, rhema1313 of our own SBG forums.
You can see some of his other work on his facebook page. In particular, notice the scabbards. I didn't commission one, but I am definitely thinking about it.
Initial Impressions
The sword was packaged really, really nicely. It came well-protected in some fairly high-density foam that made it very secure and safe in transit but also avoided the “mummification” syndrome that makes it hard to get at the contents of the box.
Very unfortunately for Patrick, I don’t have any experience at all with gladii and so I literally have nothing to compare it against in order to tell you how well it handles. In fact, you’ll see from the photo I took that I don’t even have any swords that I felt were a fair comparison for it. That led to some interesting first-impressions for me.
This shows a comparison between the First Century Mainz I got from Patrick and my most historically accurate leaf-shaped sword: a New Line Cinemas replica of Sting . It’s actually my only remotely leaf-shaped blade, so kinda interesting from that perspective. But my main point in this comparison is to show how wrong I was about the gladius and why historical accuracy matters. In my mind, somehow I’ve always had the idea that the gladius was a very small sword - closer to a dagger and meant to be handy and easy to wear and wield. In retrospect, I think I was (mis)informed partly by the prevalence of the Pompeii form (which was slightly smaller) in both history and culture, but mainly by my own inability to conceive of the weapon properly by looking at specs on a page. In person, I was struck by how big the thing is. It is a serious sword.
I know it’s not big compared to longswords or even an arming swords, but it’s much closer to them than to a knife or a dagger in length. And in width? Look at the width of that blade! It’s as wide across as a Coke can! That is the widest blade in my collection. And this is why it’s important to get historical accuracy if you’re interested in the history and you’re only collecting a few swords to represent an era: had I gone with a manufacturer that hadn’t built to historical dimensions, then I never would have known whether to trust the sword in my hand or my mental idea of it. Because I know I’ve got a piece of history in my hand, though, I can tell that my idea of how this sword was used must have been wrong, too, and I can try to learn more about it from practice and consideration of the actual weapon.
One other thing to note: the sword I got is dimensionally accurate. I’ve seen conflicting reports on how tall Romans were in relation to modern people, but I’m certainly no shorter than the typical Roman (I’m 5’9”). The gladius was famously worn on the right side for use in the right hand, to avoid interfering with the scutum shield (used in the left) while drawing. This prevented the gladius from being drawn across the body. But if hung at my waist, the gladius would hang down well past my knee and it seems like it would feel quite awkward to draw. I'd have to contort my arm to get the tip of the sword clear of the scabbard and sort of shimmy it past my shoulder. If the gladius were hung a few inches lower using a harness to facilitate drawing it more easily (maybe at pocket height), then the tip of the sword would come pretty close to the ground and I'd worry that this placement would make it more vulnerable to bumping on environmental hazards while working or moving about. I’m not sure how this was resolved – I’ll have to do some more research and if I can (eventually) get a scabbard and setup for wearing this maybe I need to do some experimentation. But if I hadn’t gotten this one, then I never would have realized that this could be a concern based on my impressions of the gladius – only by actually getting to see one have I even started considering it.
Statistics
Blade Length: 20.5” (52.1cm) (note that the guard is quite wide, so your hand will be about 1.5” back from the blade instead of roughly ½”
on arming and longswords).
Blade Profile: The blade tapers from 2.75”-wide at the shoulders through the first 8” (about 1.75” at its narrowest) and then widens for the next 6” (14” from the guard) to about 2” before tapering sharply to the triangular point.
Handle Length: 6.75” (the grip itself is just under 3.5”, with the pommel and guard taking up the remaining ~3.25”)
Overall Length: 27” (68.6cm)
Guard Width: 3.25”
POB (Point of Balance): Just shy of 5” from the guard (this is another ~1.5” from your hand because of the large guard)
COP (Center of Percussion): 13.75”
Weight: 923g (2.03 pounds)
The historical dimensions for this type (listed in this book):
Blade length ~50–55 cm (20–22 in). Sword length ~65–70 cm (26–28 in). Blade width ~7 cm (2.8 in). Sword weight ~800 g
So this particular gladius is right in the middle of the historical length and blade widths but may be slightly "heavy" (unless Burton was just measuring the mass of the surviving material? I'm actually not sure). Also remember that this model is currently unsharpened and I could easily trim 25g just putting an edge on it, let alone if I went for a grind all the way from the spine.
Components
This is outstanding. The entire sword is extremely well-assembled, tight, and obviously sturdy. The blade itself is great, thecopper bronze plate on the hilt of the sword is clean and tight with the blade and also the wooden parts of the hilt – it fits inside of the wood within a very small tolerance, with hardly any hint of a gap between the two pieces.
In any case, full marks for the sword’s grip, guard, and pommel. The construction seems to be peened, with perhaps some glue (?) or something on the little peening decoration to keep it on? (Mr. Pointer might be willing to share a bit more of his knowledge of the manufacture of this sword?)
The Blade
The wasp-waist shape looks a bit subtle, to my first impression, but that’s historically accurate. It's definitely enough to instantly tell that it's kind of hour-glass shaped and not simply straight-sided. The wasp-waist is also a good reason to get this one, instead of the Fulham, if you’re on the fence. (I won’t try to talk anyone out of a Pompeii as their first gladius, since I think those are two totally different swords, but the Fulham’s more subtle shape wouldn’t really “show off” the form, IMO). The blade is quite well-polished.
Pointer's Swords doesn't ship sharp (he had disclosed this to me and I guess some people would want that service, but for me it was a non-issue and in any case he told me about it well before the purchase). It would probably take me somewhere between 2 and 4 hours to get this thing just screamingly sharp on my Apex, if I wanted to, but I’m not planning to get into any sword fights.
The Handle
My favorite part of the sword is actually the grip. If you look closely at the grip, it’s octagonal (an ergonomic shape in and of itself), but it’s not regularly octagonal. Rather, the portions of the octagonal grip that are parallel to the cutting edge are longer than the other sections, to better fit the hand. The finger grooves index really well and “lock” the hand into the grip. I have hands that are just slightly narrow, and it fits well but would fit perfectly if I had normal hands. I’ve heard somewhat conflicting reports on how tall Roman soldiers were, but the Mainz seems to fit my hand very well (I’m about 5’9” – so about average for a modern man).
One other note on the craftsmanship, here: the pommel and the guard are made of different wood than the grip itself, but they fit together without any gap, despite the very complex shape of the grip (designed to fit the hand), and the rounded forms of the pommel (the guard is "smoothed" to facilitate fitting of the grip, but of course it fits well). Again, this must be a very painstaking process to get all of these pieces properly fitted together and the whole thing peened up, but it’s very well executed.
I'm not sure what kind of wood it is (maple? Maybe? Boxwood?), but it's obviously a hard wood that's been finished very smooth.
From a practical perspective, the whole thing feels excellent in the hand and gives complete confidence in both the cut and the thrust.
The Guard
The guard has an interesting design: there’s basically acopper bronze face plate that covers the “front” of the wooden “guard.” The bronze copper on this one is polished and imprinted with Patrick's paw print maker’s mark, matching the blade. (I actually really like the maker’s mark or I wouldn’t mention it). The wooden guard is kind of a half-ball shape, which is elongated to fully surround the blade’s width at the base. The guard plate is “inlet” into the guard – surrounded by a small wooden lip that runs around the face plate and extends just a fraction of an inch above it. There’s not really any appreciable gap between the faceplate and either the blade or the wooden lip/guard – I imagine that that must take a lot of time to get right because the guard is not a symmetrical circle/sphere.
The only plausible nitpick anyone could offer of this sword was that mine came with some slight discoloration on the faceplate right where the blade meets the guard. I'm guessing that this is actually the natural and inevitable result fromcopper bronze-on-steel contact, but I'm not entirely sure. In any case, it's very minor and only a careful examination turned it up. I'll keep an eye on it and clean it up if it gets significantly worse, but not really any issue with the sword and clearly not structural or even really an aesthetic flaw.
The Pommel
Like the grip and the guard, the pommel is made of wood. Again, the wood is polished smooth to a nice feeling finish.
I wasn’t totally sure what to expect of a gladius pommel (again, having never handled one before), but this one feels extremely sturdy. The pommel wood is big enough to help enforce the hammer grip, and restricts/supports the wrist in certain cuts if you try and open out with your wrist in the hammer grip. It’s not uncomfortable when this happens – it’s smooth and round so it can’t possibly dig in – but it does prevent you from using the broken wrist position for anything. Also, coupled with the (somewhat) short grip and the large guard, the gladius prohibits any type of handshake grips.
Scabbard – N/A
Unfortunately, I did not commission a scabbard for this sword. Patrick makes really, really nice scabbards which you can see on his facebook page – I hope to get one someday – especially since the canonical Mainz gladius (the Sword of Tiberias – which is held in the British Museum) is known for its exceptional and well-preserved scabbard. blog.britishmuseum.org/the-sword-of-tiberius/
Handling Characteristics
This is quite different from what I was expecting.
It’s interesting that a thrust-centric blade like a gladius would prevent the wrist from opening up at all in the thrust. Since it was obviously effective, opening the wrist must not be required for thrusting. Who am I to argue with the sword that conquered the Roman Empire?
For me, it's still a bit strange to have a thrusting sword that could only be used in a hammer grip, and to be honest I’m still not entirely comfortable with that aspect of it (not in the sense that it hurts or anything - it just... seems different). It feels like it’s got a noticeable amount of mass behind when I start a thrust - not as much as an arming sword but more than a kitchen knife... which I probably should have expected. There might be some technique to using this more effectively, but I think it’s just a matter of practice and experience to get used to it. Very cool.
In the cut, it feels very machete-like: effortless and responsive, but with enough authority to provide confidence in each cut.
Obviously, this is what I should have been expecting, but it’s not what I expected.
I thought it would be even easier in the thrust and feel a bit awkward in cuts, given its usage, but if anything it's almost the opposite because I can't "finger the guard" to align the blade with my forearm more. Definitely something I'll have to get used to.
Also, see the Initial Impressions section for my thoughts on the size of it in relation to me. It’s interesting how long and wide it is, and how that would impact its ease-of-carry and how it would affect drawing the weapon, given that it was carried on the sword-hand side.
Test Cutting - N/A
Sorry – not cutting with this one, anytime soon. Patrick has a policy whereby he does not ship swords sharp, so if that’s an important consideration for others you should be aware. Again, this was all disclosed before the purchase – I knew about it and for me it wasn’t important. If it’s important to you, then I’m sure Patrick could find a way to help you, but it was a non-issue for me.
Conclusions
This sword is a great piece of history. Patrick Pointer/rhema1313 very obviously did a great job of recreating an ancient weapon.
Pros
- Very sturdy construction – probably better than originals, given the superior modern steel
- Excellent craftsmanship: gladius is solidly constructed with narrow tolerances
- Sword is built to historically accurate dimensions and weight – handling should also be accurate
- The grip in particular is outstanding: it is shaped with extreme attention to detail and is very ergonomic while also keeping with historical originals
Cons
? ? ? ? ?
The Bottom Line
Pointer's Swords did a great job with this. I highly recommend his work for anyone looking to buy a historically accurate gladius. Indeed, this sword is also a perfect example for why modern practitioners and makers should strive for historical accuracy when possible: the sword looks, feels, and handles completely differently from my impressions of the gladius: the Mainz form is longer and vastly wider than I was expecting from its depictions in the media and even from my knowledge of Roman history. Holding the sword in-hand, therefore, is an educational experience that lets me recalibrate my understanding of Roman military tactics and the historical experience.
I only regret not getting a scabbard done – hopefully I can revisit that decision sometime soon, since the scabbard work he’s done looks amazing, as well.
Edit: Replaced copper with bronze because I'm an idiot who doesn't know what I'm looking at.
The Mainz gladius is my personal favorite form of gladius. Although the Pompeii served for longer, among more legionnaires, was more widely represented in surviving examples, and is today more frequently depicted, I love the Mainz as a really fascinating style of weapon that bridged the gap between ancient leaf-shaped swords and modern straight-sided ones. Moreover, it has some fascinating features and I wanted a historically accurate one to understand how they all fit together in order to understand the handling of the gladius: the sword that defined the borders and represented the culture of the Roman Empire. Enter Patrick Pointer (forum name: rhema1313). Having seen some of his work, I was sufficiently enticed to go for the opportunity to get my hands on a piece of history.
Pointer's Swords offered me several things that I really wanted in a gladius: first, he’s obviously a great craftsman who does his own blades and his own fittings. I knew I’d be getting something that was well-built and functional. Second, he’s committed to historical accuracy. I really wanted both of those features in my first gladius because I don’t really see myself getting a whole collection of gladii since it’s not my personal area of interest as a practitioner (mostly Renaissance and some Japanese swords, more recently), so I wanted to make sure that the ones I do pick up are both high-quality and representative of the type, and I didn’t want to have to “guess” at how the sword was supposed to be.
But does the finished piece live up to my expectations? Of course it does: it lives up to history. I found this particular sword to be a good example of why historical accuracy can be really important in modern replicas: a major part of the hobby is learning about how weapons were made and used as a way to understanding the culture and material considerations that led them to make those choices. This Pointer blade taught me that many of my ideas about the Roman gladius were wrong, and I’m hoping it can also help me learn a bit more about what it was really like to carry a gladius for Rome.
Historical overview
The Mainz Gladius is my personal favorite of the four main types of Roman gladii. I see it as the key step in evolving from ancient swords – which were often leaf-shaped – and the more modern, straight-edged swords that would persist through the Viking/Migration Period, through past the crusades. The leaf-shape is actually quite an ingenius design: it allows for a slight curvature of the weapon, and increases the mass (and therefore cutting potential) at the point of percussion. From a theory perspective, I’m not actually sure why it fell out of favor, but it’s undoubtedly much harder to make, sharpen, and maintain and later smiths (and swordsmen) may have simply wanted to use the extra material and mass that went into the leaf-shape in order to increase the length of the blade.
The Mainz-type retains the narrowing of the blade immediately after the base of the blade, then widening again towards the point of percussion. Unlike the leaf-shape, though, the tip of the weapon is triangular in profile rather than curvilinear. The tip is diamond-shaped in cross-section, with a thick central ridge. The central spine allows for great stiffness in the point. You can compare this to the Type XV Oakeshott weapons from the late-Medieval period. That weapon developed in an effort to defeat and bypass mail armor via the thrust and to bypass plate by attacking joints and other weakpoints. The Mainz’s tip, though, is much wider and its cross section is thicker. But in the thrust it’s just as devastating – maybe more. In battle, the gladius would have been paired with a scutum shield and used in disciplined, close-order formations. These formations afforded soldiers mutual protection, but at the cost of space to maneuver as individuals. This made a thrust-centric weapon extremely desirable for the Romans and helps explain the design choice.
While the design of the tip, the great width, and thick cross-section of the sword make it a thrust-centric (and capable) weapon, the wasp-waisted form actually retains most of the advantages of the leaf-shape for cutting.
I love the Mainz because it’s a really interesting transitional form and has a very unique appearance. The Fulham form will reduce the wasp-waist form, and finally the straight-sided Pompeii type will eliminate it altogether. The Pompeii itself will eventually be lengthened and merge with the longer spatha to become the Viking/Migration Era swords that persisted well into the crusading era.
Full Disclosure
I bought this sword from a forum member who had been recommended by other members. I’ve had nothing but good experiences with the forumites, here (still have a backlog of people to thank, actually), and I wasn’t disappointed this time around, either.
I recently got this one from Patrick Pointer, or as you may know him, rhema1313 of our own SBG forums.
You can see some of his other work on his facebook page. In particular, notice the scabbards. I didn't commission one, but I am definitely thinking about it.
Initial Impressions
The sword was packaged really, really nicely. It came well-protected in some fairly high-density foam that made it very secure and safe in transit but also avoided the “mummification” syndrome that makes it hard to get at the contents of the box.
Very unfortunately for Patrick, I don’t have any experience at all with gladii and so I literally have nothing to compare it against in order to tell you how well it handles. In fact, you’ll see from the photo I took that I don’t even have any swords that I felt were a fair comparison for it. That led to some interesting first-impressions for me.
This shows a comparison between the First Century Mainz I got from Patrick and my most historically accurate leaf-shaped sword: a New Line Cinemas replica of Sting . It’s actually my only remotely leaf-shaped blade, so kinda interesting from that perspective. But my main point in this comparison is to show how wrong I was about the gladius and why historical accuracy matters. In my mind, somehow I’ve always had the idea that the gladius was a very small sword - closer to a dagger and meant to be handy and easy to wear and wield. In retrospect, I think I was (mis)informed partly by the prevalence of the Pompeii form (which was slightly smaller) in both history and culture, but mainly by my own inability to conceive of the weapon properly by looking at specs on a page. In person, I was struck by how big the thing is. It is a serious sword.
I know it’s not big compared to longswords or even an arming swords, but it’s much closer to them than to a knife or a dagger in length. And in width? Look at the width of that blade! It’s as wide across as a Coke can! That is the widest blade in my collection. And this is why it’s important to get historical accuracy if you’re interested in the history and you’re only collecting a few swords to represent an era: had I gone with a manufacturer that hadn’t built to historical dimensions, then I never would have known whether to trust the sword in my hand or my mental idea of it. Because I know I’ve got a piece of history in my hand, though, I can tell that my idea of how this sword was used must have been wrong, too, and I can try to learn more about it from practice and consideration of the actual weapon.
One other thing to note: the sword I got is dimensionally accurate. I’ve seen conflicting reports on how tall Romans were in relation to modern people, but I’m certainly no shorter than the typical Roman (I’m 5’9”). The gladius was famously worn on the right side for use in the right hand, to avoid interfering with the scutum shield (used in the left) while drawing. This prevented the gladius from being drawn across the body. But if hung at my waist, the gladius would hang down well past my knee and it seems like it would feel quite awkward to draw. I'd have to contort my arm to get the tip of the sword clear of the scabbard and sort of shimmy it past my shoulder. If the gladius were hung a few inches lower using a harness to facilitate drawing it more easily (maybe at pocket height), then the tip of the sword would come pretty close to the ground and I'd worry that this placement would make it more vulnerable to bumping on environmental hazards while working or moving about. I’m not sure how this was resolved – I’ll have to do some more research and if I can (eventually) get a scabbard and setup for wearing this maybe I need to do some experimentation. But if I hadn’t gotten this one, then I never would have realized that this could be a concern based on my impressions of the gladius – only by actually getting to see one have I even started considering it.
Statistics
Blade Length: 20.5” (52.1cm) (note that the guard is quite wide, so your hand will be about 1.5” back from the blade instead of roughly ½”
on arming and longswords).
Blade Profile: The blade tapers from 2.75”-wide at the shoulders through the first 8” (about 1.75” at its narrowest) and then widens for the next 6” (14” from the guard) to about 2” before tapering sharply to the triangular point.
Handle Length: 6.75” (the grip itself is just under 3.5”, with the pommel and guard taking up the remaining ~3.25”)
Overall Length: 27” (68.6cm)
Guard Width: 3.25”
POB (Point of Balance): Just shy of 5” from the guard (this is another ~1.5” from your hand because of the large guard)
COP (Center of Percussion): 13.75”
Weight: 923g (2.03 pounds)
The historical dimensions for this type (listed in this book):
Blade length ~50–55 cm (20–22 in). Sword length ~65–70 cm (26–28 in). Blade width ~7 cm (2.8 in). Sword weight ~800 g
So this particular gladius is right in the middle of the historical length and blade widths but may be slightly "heavy" (unless Burton was just measuring the mass of the surviving material? I'm actually not sure). Also remember that this model is currently unsharpened and I could easily trim 25g just putting an edge on it, let alone if I went for a grind all the way from the spine.
Components
This is outstanding. The entire sword is extremely well-assembled, tight, and obviously sturdy. The blade itself is great, the
In any case, full marks for the sword’s grip, guard, and pommel. The construction seems to be peened, with perhaps some glue (?) or something on the little peening decoration to keep it on? (Mr. Pointer might be willing to share a bit more of his knowledge of the manufacture of this sword?)
The Blade
The wasp-waist shape looks a bit subtle, to my first impression, but that’s historically accurate. It's definitely enough to instantly tell that it's kind of hour-glass shaped and not simply straight-sided. The wasp-waist is also a good reason to get this one, instead of the Fulham, if you’re on the fence. (I won’t try to talk anyone out of a Pompeii as their first gladius, since I think those are two totally different swords, but the Fulham’s more subtle shape wouldn’t really “show off” the form, IMO). The blade is quite well-polished.
Pointer's Swords doesn't ship sharp (he had disclosed this to me and I guess some people would want that service, but for me it was a non-issue and in any case he told me about it well before the purchase). It would probably take me somewhere between 2 and 4 hours to get this thing just screamingly sharp on my Apex, if I wanted to, but I’m not planning to get into any sword fights.
The Handle
My favorite part of the sword is actually the grip. If you look closely at the grip, it’s octagonal (an ergonomic shape in and of itself), but it’s not regularly octagonal. Rather, the portions of the octagonal grip that are parallel to the cutting edge are longer than the other sections, to better fit the hand. The finger grooves index really well and “lock” the hand into the grip. I have hands that are just slightly narrow, and it fits well but would fit perfectly if I had normal hands. I’ve heard somewhat conflicting reports on how tall Roman soldiers were, but the Mainz seems to fit my hand very well (I’m about 5’9” – so about average for a modern man).
One other note on the craftsmanship, here: the pommel and the guard are made of different wood than the grip itself, but they fit together without any gap, despite the very complex shape of the grip (designed to fit the hand), and the rounded forms of the pommel (the guard is "smoothed" to facilitate fitting of the grip, but of course it fits well). Again, this must be a very painstaking process to get all of these pieces properly fitted together and the whole thing peened up, but it’s very well executed.
I'm not sure what kind of wood it is (maple? Maybe? Boxwood?), but it's obviously a hard wood that's been finished very smooth.
From a practical perspective, the whole thing feels excellent in the hand and gives complete confidence in both the cut and the thrust.
The Guard
The guard has an interesting design: there’s basically a
The only plausible nitpick anyone could offer of this sword was that mine came with some slight discoloration on the faceplate right where the blade meets the guard. I'm guessing that this is actually the natural and inevitable result from
The Pommel
Like the grip and the guard, the pommel is made of wood. Again, the wood is polished smooth to a nice feeling finish.
I wasn’t totally sure what to expect of a gladius pommel (again, having never handled one before), but this one feels extremely sturdy. The pommel wood is big enough to help enforce the hammer grip, and restricts/supports the wrist in certain cuts if you try and open out with your wrist in the hammer grip. It’s not uncomfortable when this happens – it’s smooth and round so it can’t possibly dig in – but it does prevent you from using the broken wrist position for anything. Also, coupled with the (somewhat) short grip and the large guard, the gladius prohibits any type of handshake grips.
Scabbard – N/A
Unfortunately, I did not commission a scabbard for this sword. Patrick makes really, really nice scabbards which you can see on his facebook page – I hope to get one someday – especially since the canonical Mainz gladius (the Sword of Tiberias – which is held in the British Museum) is known for its exceptional and well-preserved scabbard. blog.britishmuseum.org/the-sword-of-tiberius/
Handling Characteristics
This is quite different from what I was expecting.
It’s interesting that a thrust-centric blade like a gladius would prevent the wrist from opening up at all in the thrust. Since it was obviously effective, opening the wrist must not be required for thrusting. Who am I to argue with the sword that conquered the Roman Empire?
For me, it's still a bit strange to have a thrusting sword that could only be used in a hammer grip, and to be honest I’m still not entirely comfortable with that aspect of it (not in the sense that it hurts or anything - it just... seems different). It feels like it’s got a noticeable amount of mass behind when I start a thrust - not as much as an arming sword but more than a kitchen knife... which I probably should have expected. There might be some technique to using this more effectively, but I think it’s just a matter of practice and experience to get used to it. Very cool.
In the cut, it feels very machete-like: effortless and responsive, but with enough authority to provide confidence in each cut.
Obviously, this is what I should have been expecting, but it’s not what I expected.
I thought it would be even easier in the thrust and feel a bit awkward in cuts, given its usage, but if anything it's almost the opposite because I can't "finger the guard" to align the blade with my forearm more. Definitely something I'll have to get used to.
Also, see the Initial Impressions section for my thoughts on the size of it in relation to me. It’s interesting how long and wide it is, and how that would impact its ease-of-carry and how it would affect drawing the weapon, given that it was carried on the sword-hand side.
Test Cutting - N/A
Sorry – not cutting with this one, anytime soon. Patrick has a policy whereby he does not ship swords sharp, so if that’s an important consideration for others you should be aware. Again, this was all disclosed before the purchase – I knew about it and for me it wasn’t important. If it’s important to you, then I’m sure Patrick could find a way to help you, but it was a non-issue for me.
Conclusions
This sword is a great piece of history. Patrick Pointer/rhema1313 very obviously did a great job of recreating an ancient weapon.
Pros
- Very sturdy construction – probably better than originals, given the superior modern steel
- Excellent craftsmanship: gladius is solidly constructed with narrow tolerances
- Sword is built to historically accurate dimensions and weight – handling should also be accurate
- The grip in particular is outstanding: it is shaped with extreme attention to detail and is very ergonomic while also keeping with historical originals
Cons
? ? ? ? ?
The Bottom Line
Pointer's Swords did a great job with this. I highly recommend his work for anyone looking to buy a historically accurate gladius. Indeed, this sword is also a perfect example for why modern practitioners and makers should strive for historical accuracy when possible: the sword looks, feels, and handles completely differently from my impressions of the gladius: the Mainz form is longer and vastly wider than I was expecting from its depictions in the media and even from my knowledge of Roman history. Holding the sword in-hand, therefore, is an educational experience that lets me recalibrate my understanding of Roman military tactics and the historical experience.
I only regret not getting a scabbard done – hopefully I can revisit that decision sometime soon, since the scabbard work he’s done looks amazing, as well.
Edit: Replaced copper with bronze because I'm an idiot who doesn't know what I'm looking at.