The Roman Spear

[petetherocker]

"Brad Meltzer's Decoded" did a "Spear of Destiny" episode back in 2011

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2073204/

 

[Dave Rishar]

Since the legitimacy of this relic is still being discussed, I'd like to add a few things:

- That spear is not what Roman soldiers were issued or normally used. That doesn't mean that a centurion couldn't have ended up with one somehow, but it makes it unlikely. Early on, the Romans used the hasta; later, the pilum. Neither of them look like or were constructed like this spearhead was.

For a quick visual primer on what sort of pointy things the Romans threw or launched or otherwise shot at other people over the centuries, this link is as good as any: Roman Military Equipment: Weapons - Gladius, Spatha, Pugio, Pilum Pay particular attention to the shapes of those tips, and what sort of labor would be involved in forging them. We'll touch on that again in a moment.

- That spear has been examined fairly extensively. The experts have stated that it's ~ 8th-9th century or so. I'm not going to argue for or against that, but it sounds reasonable to me. If anyone thinks that it's older than that, I'd invite them to prove it. A comparison has been made with Carolingian spears. I disagree, but I have to admit that this would fit that time frame, and the Carolingians did favor winged spears.

- There are multiple Spears of Destiny in circulation. The Vatican has one (with a better provenance than the Vienna one, I'd argue), and there are some other ones as well. We don't know for sure if any of them are the real deal. We do know for sure that no more than one of them can be the real deal. Is this one it? I don't think so, but you'll need to discredit the others (or prove that this one is without a doubt real) to make a convincing argument. Relics were big business back in the day. A desirable relic could make or break a community a thousand years ago. I won't say that they're all faked, but I'd argue that at least some of them were...and in the days before commercial airlines and the internet, no one would ever know.

- It's an art weapon. I invite anyone here to find me a spear made to be used by a soldier (not a king, not an emperor, but a soldier) that ornate. We don't issue M4's with engraved woodland scenes and Turkish walnut stocks to our troops for a reason - several reasons, actually. Decorations on military weapons drive up the cost without increasing their effectiveness, and may - as in this case - make the weapons more fragile. It is not the sort of weapon that a centurion in an unfriendly province would have been carrying with him. He'd want something like...well, you know, like a hasta or a pilum, something easier and cheaper to make, and without so many ways or it to go wrong when he stabbed somebody with it.

I understand that while Roman gear was fairly standardized, stuff happened out on the periphery of the empire. Given the choice between an artsy-fartsy fantasy spear and no spear at all, I'd go with the art piece. That was the beauty of those simpler Roman spear designs though - any knucklehead with a forge could bang one out fairly quickly, and if the Romans for some reason didn't have their own smiths with them, they could grab the nearest village smith, show him a pilum, point at the smith's forge, and jingle a bag of coins and he'd not only know what to do, but would probably already have the skills to do it. There would be absolutely no need for a spearhead this complicated, nor any realistic scenario for one. And if there was no smith to replace my broken hasta? Well, shucks, I'm a centurion that has a bunch of legionaries working for me. I'd borrow one of theirs, or better yet, order one of them to do it. That's the way the chain of command works, then and now.

Of course, if the Spear of Destiny had been a 1st century rusted-out pilum head, that would have made the historians and history nerds very happy, but the faithful would be sorely disappointed. The story sucks when the hero is killed by a normal guy with a normal guy's weapon but in reality, that's how the hero usually dies. I hope that nobody believes that the Romans commissioned an heirloom grade commemorative to stick a crazy Jewish guy that was scheduled to suffocate on a cross. They didn't operate like that. If an observer felt it necessary to poke someone being crucified, it would have been with the issued weapon - a pilum, or perhaps a hasta, or maybe a nearby stick, but not an art piece that seems to have been made 8 centuries later.

And Franklin? Using Hitler as an appeal to authority is a bit effed on several levels. I didn't say that earlier when I should have, so I'll do it now. It's neither logical nor persuasive. On a related note, Hitler was sometimes wrong. It's possible that he was wrong about this spear as well. I don't consider his endorsement to be a strong argument for the authenticity of a religious relic. His track record with good judgement is remembered today as being spotty, to put it charitably. He did make some mistakes.

 

[franklin]

I will have to disagree with you. Have you researched the Roman Soldier named Longinus or something like that? He was not a soldier he was the commander of a Legion. So?

 

[Al D]

I will have to disagree with you. Have you researched the Roman Soldier named Longinus or something like that? He was not a soldier he was the commander of a Legion. So?

Where did you get that information, from a comic book?

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

One of the five "Spears of Longinus" (the one from Austria) tested out to have been made in the 8th or 9th century AD. The story of "Saint Longinus" (the Roman Soldier at the Crusifiction) first appears in about the 4th century AD. Mark only mentions "a centurion" and the spear and piercing was a later addition to the Crucifixion story.

https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=11

One version claimed Longinus was "nearly blind" - which is I'm sure just what the Roman Army looked for in their guards - and the fluid from Christ's side cured his blindness.

The spear is also said to be inside one of the four pillars in the Basilica of St. Peter's. And another is in the Church of St. Peter in Antioch. And another is in a monastery in Armenia. And there is another on in Krakow, Poland. So he was a blind guard who carried at least four spears.

 

[franklin]

One of the five "Spears of Longinus" (the one from Austria) tested out to have been made in the 8th or 9th century AD. The story of "Saint Longinus" (the Roman Soldier at the Crusifiction) first appears in about the 4th century AD. Mark only mentions "a centurion" and the spear and piercing was a later addition to the Crucifixion story.

https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=11

One version claimed Longinus was "nearly blind" - which is I'm sure just what the Roman Army looked for in their guards - and the fluid from Christ's side cured his blindness.

The spear is also said to be inside one of the four pillars in the Basilica of St. Peter's. And another is in the Church of St. Peter in Antioch. And another is in a monastery in Armenia. And there is another on in Krakow, Poland. So he was a blind guard who carried at least four spears.

Long before the 4th Century. The Book of Nicodemus mentioned the name of Longinus and the name of the two thieves. Nicodemus was at the crucifixion and caught the Blood of Jesus in one of the two Silver Holy Grails that were carried to Glastonbury, England.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

If you find that in the Book of Mark let me know where. That was written maybe only 60 years after the Crucifixion. The others Gospels were written later and just added more and more embellishments . . . IMHO of course.

"Stuff" (aka relics) were needed to convince the illiterate weak of faith that something tangible remained and for a few pennies in the plate you could see or kiss it and huge structures were built to store the 67 fingers of St. Peter and such and to trap God where the clergy could control access. That's just marketing.

 

[Dave Rishar]

I will have to disagree with you.

Then disagree productively. Explain where and how I am wrong. And don't just drop a link or tell me to research something. In your own words, explain where and how I'm wrong. Be specific. I'm going to insist on this.

Long before the 4th Century. The Book of Nicodemus mentioned the name of Longinus and the name of the two thieves.

I'm not a Biblical scholar and I don't pretend to be one, but there are some issues with the Gospel of Nicodemus. I assume that you believe that it's both contemporary and authentic. In that case, I have a few questions for you about it.

- In how many languages was it written, and which was the original? (And can you prove that?)

- Did Eusebius of Caesarea ever mention it? If not, why not?

- Did Roman governors normally (or ever) write about non-citizens being executed?

My position is that the Gospel of Nicodemus was the ancient version of today's fanfic. Change my mind, but bring facts and logic. I don't respond well to emotional appeals.

 

[Dave Rishar]

That's just marketing.

Phrasing it like that makes me wince, but that's probably the most accurate way to describe it in today's terms. Before Facebook, before the internet, before TV, before radio, before the printing press...there was word of mouth, and something tangible to see, and a story behind it that no one had any way of verifying.

 

[lokiblossom]

If you find that in the Book of Mark let me know where. That was written maybe only 60 years after the Crucifixion. The others Gospels were written later and just added more and more embellishments . . . IMHO of course.

We actually don't have anything other than fragments that were written before the 3rd century.

Cheers, Loki

 

[DaveVanP]

Sounds like the Casca character from Barry Sadler's novels...
Did you know "Longinus" translates from Latin as "Lance"? Who'd have thought - a man named after his weapon...

 

[BeepersPuppy]

Has anyone anywhere found Templar treasure?

I have . FACT .