Hueglit

Hueglit
early cavalry hveuclithus
Type	sword
Place of origin	Northern Gaul, adopted and modified by Rome
Service history
In service	3rd century BC – 8th century AD
Used by	Gaulish mercenaries during the Punic wars on both sides Roman foot soldiers during the wars of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire
Production history
Variants	infantry hveuclithus cavalry hveuclithus
Specifications
Weight	1.5–1.85 kg (3.3–4.1 lb)
Length	65–90 cm (26–35 in)
Blade length	60–85 cm (24–33 in)
Width	4.5–5 cm (1.8–2.0 in)
Blade type	Iron of varying degrees of carbon content, pointed, double-edged
Hilt type	Wood, bronze or ivory

The hueglit (pl hueglits), from Old French hueglit, huesglit, or by its Latin name, the hveuclithus (pl hveuclithi, hveuclithuses), was a type of straight and long sword used by the Celts, primarily the Belgic tribes, that came to be used in the Roman military and the territories of the empire from the 1st century BC to the 6th century AD. It measured between 65 and 90 centimetres (29.5 and 39.4 in), and typically weighed 1.5 kilograms, with a handle length between 18 and 20 cm (7.1 and 7.9 in). Later swords, from the 7th to 10th centuries, like the Viking swords, are recognisable derivatives but due to claims of it descending from the spatha instead, it is sometimes subsumed under the term hueglospatha.

The Roman hveuclithus was used in war and gladiatorial fights. It appeared in the Roman Empire in the 1st century AD used by Celtic mounted auxiliaries and gradually became a standard cavalry and heavy infantry weapon by the 3rd century AD, relegating the gladius to use as a light infantry weapon. The hveuclithus and the spatha replaced the gladius in the front ranks, giving the infantry more reach to thrust. The infantry version had a long point and a diamond cross-section whilst versions carried by the cavalry were longer, had a narrow fuller cross-section, and a rounded tip that prevented an accidental stabbing of the cavalryman's foot or horse. The spatha would be preferred over the infantry hvueclithus but the cavalry hveuclithus would become the standard cavalry weapon during the Migration Period and until the late 8th century AD.

Name

Origin and spelling

The Greek historian Polybius first coined the term ὐευκλιθος (hweuklithos), from the root of Primitive Menapian hwɪuid, meaning to drive, and clėthʉ, meaning sword. Unlike Primitive Menapian, the /ɪu/-diphthong in hwɪuid did not exist in Ancient Greek and so the already existing <ευ> (IPA: /eu/) diphthong was favoured in its place. In the noun's root form, ὐευκλιθυ (hweuklithu), the same thing happened as the close central rounded vowel, /ʉ/, in clėthʉ had to be written by its closest Greek counterpart, <υ> (IPA: /u/). <ė> in clėthʉ was pronounced something between /e/ and /i/, so the Ancient Greek spelling constantly flickered between hweuklithos and hweuklethos, but the former prevailed and the latter declined in use. When it was transliterated into Latin, it became a second-declension noun with the ending -us.

Descendants

During its time, it was called the cavalry hveuclithus to distinguish it from the infantry hveuclithus. However, when the latter was no longer used, the distinction was needless and general hveuclithus took over. The descendants for the word ultimately come from Vulgar Latin *hveclithus, not its Classical Latin form. It derived into French hueglit, Occitan hueglito, Catalan huesglit, Spanish huiglito, Portuguese huigrito, Italian uechito, and Romanian uegliț. The English descendant, hueglit, came from French. Other than English, non-Romance languages directly get their word for it from Classical Latin, including Menapian. Within the Romance languages, the word took on many meanings and lost its original sense. In French, hueglit, can mean intimidation, in Italian, uechito, can mean a dictator or a tormentor, and in Spanish, huiglito, can mean a delinquent. Due to this, most languages use the Latin term to solely describe the weapon and not other definitions their word deriving from it may have.

Evariste-Vital Luminais's Gaulois en vue de Rome (transl. 'Gauls with a view of Rome')

Use

Celtic usage

The Celts’ main early advantage was their ability to scare and intimidate foes on the battlefield. Thus, even though most Celtic warriors were unarmored, the Celts themselves fought like heavy infantry, using fear and shock charges as a form of psychological warfare while closing in on enemy formations in dense masses to break enemy lines and rout formations. This was an incredibly successful tactic, as seen in Allia. When a good number of Celts near each other could wield a hveuclithus, especially on horseback or chariot, which combined their ferocity with the horse's speed, it would work perfectly and effectively. Caesar noted this with the Belgae who would aggressively drive into the enemy fiercer than any other, the reason for the weapon's name.

Roman usage

In the Second Punic War, mounted mercenaries from Gaul introduced the hveuclithus and performed exceptionally compared to other auxilia. During the skirmish before Ilipa and at the pitched battles of the Great Plains and Zama, hveuclitharii were able to best their Carthaginian counterparts, independent of the success of their own allied Numidians. On occasion, such as at Ibera, they were able to hold their own despite being supposedly outnumbered in a skirmish with Carthaginian cavalry. Furthermore, Rome began to rely more on allied and auxiliary cavalry, increasing the number, strength, and renown of the hveuclitharii.

During the Middle Republic, the Roman military doctrine emphasised a combined arms approach, with infantry, cavalry, and light troops working together to achieve victory. The cavalry's role expanded beyond reconnaissance and flanking to include shock charges, further promoting the hveuclithus' potency as this was what it was originally made for, pursuit, and harassment of enemy forces. The Romans recognised the mobility and versatility of cavalry, utilising it to disrupt enemy formations and exploit opportunities on the battlefield. Hveuclitharii became an integral part of the combined arms approach and were often deployed in larger numbers, reflecting their increased significance in Roman warfare. The hveuclitharii also were vital in dealing with the Parthians and Huns during the later stages of the empire (293-476 AD).

History

Hallstatt period

Mindelheim swords in Wels Museum, Upper Austria

The Hallstatt long sword was the predecessor of the later Celtic long swords. In the late Hallstatt period (around 800 to 450 BC), the two most famous sword types were the Mindelheim and Gündlingen, which the Celts used throughout Europe. In the early 8th century BCE, the bronze Gundlingen sword became popular throughout Western Europe, but the heavier iron sword, the Mindelheim type, eventually replaced it. The Mindelheim was the last and possibly the zenith of all bronze swords. And though there are relatively few finds, their beautiful form speaks eloquently of Europe's Early Iron Age history. Their ivory pommels tell of trade as far south as Africa and the amber inlay shows trade north to the Baltic. The longer, more graceful blades with their odd blunted triangular points, point to a time when the first mounted swordsmen appeared in central Europe.

The type is a large, handsome weapon, with a simple flat tang, a flat cross section, and a leaf-shaped blade of elaborate design. The form of the pommel was hat-shaped and had a conical form and an oval on plan with strongly concave sides, finishing below in a broad brim band and above in a flattish, slightly bombe top. The surface may be left quite plain, or ornamented by incised lines in a combination of geometrical and ring-and-dot motifs. The material of which they were normally made was perishable, wood, bone, or ivory. Pommels of the same form made of iron, sometimes eloquently inlaid with gold or ivory, occur on the long Mindelheim iron swords. Similar bronze pommels fitted to iron swords are known from Beilngries and St. Flour with iron inlay. They generally were 80 to 90 centimetres long in total.

Transition

Scythian dagger (left), early proto-hveuclithus (middle and right)

As the Cimmerians made contact either in trade or war, the Hallstatt culture learned from them and began to adopt their mounted fighting style. However, the sword was the primary weapon of the Hallstatt warrior (spears are rarer than swords in Hallstatt graves). As such, it is only natural that mounted Hallstatt warriors would want to use their iron swords in battle. The development of the Hallstatt B and C swords would follow this new function and the first cavalry swords in Europe would appear, birthing the early proto-hveuclithus.

It had grown a bit shorter than the Mindelheim, measuring about 75-85 centimetres long. It kept the leaf-shaped blade, which would gradually straighten over time, but had scrapped its elaborate design, adopted the hexagonal cross-section, gotten rid of the ricasso, lengthened and thickened the crossguard, and angled it inwards more. The sudden appearance of this new fighting force gave them political leverage they would use to select chieftains who would mirror those of the Steppes. A new social stratification developed around these chieftains who used their power and prestige to extend the Hallstatt culture in trade and growth.

Eventually, the Scythian horsemen made their way far enough to the west to influence the Hallstatt culture, not by diffusion, but this time by way of cultural migration as their ruling elite of Iranian background would do. They replaced the indigenous Hallstatt chieftains as a new foreign dynasty. With this, the new management would train the warriors to use the primary weapon of the Scythians, the bow. Many developments and derivations of the Mindelheim and other Hallstatt long swords would disappear and the dagger would be retained as the sidearm for close combat whilst the proto-hveuclithus had spread far west enough to avoid the same fate, growing and developing in Northwestern Europe before repropagating back to southern parts of Gaul and regions north of the Alps.

La Tène period

late proto-hveuclithuses with anthropomorphic hilts

The La Tène period saw changing patterns of warfare. At the beginning of the La Tène period, warfare was likely conducted on a small scale between elite warriors, perhaps in chariots, channelling into the development from the early proto-hveuclithus to the late proto-hveuclithus. It did so during the succeeding centuries with the design of the proto-hveuclithus changing by characteristically becoming even shorter, with lengths of 70-80 centimetres, single-edged, and lacking a thrusting point, designed purely to slash (although the Hallstatt era sword had also been primarily a slashing weapon anyways).

The plate and hat-shaped pommels seen on the early proto-hveuclithus and Mindelheims were dropped in favour of anthropometric ones which would simplify into a dogbone shape. As disputed by some sources and finds, the bullet-shaped bronze finial found atop the pommel for these swords would more likely be a small, round, domed washer of iron. Some pommel caps exist on extant La Tène II swords but these take the form of a small iron (or bronze) sphere. The shape of the guard and pommel were more likely to be more lobed and rounded instead of being pointy at their edges. The bullet shape is quite possible, given that most La Tene sword finds simply have a bare tang, hilt plate, and pommel button. The grips of late proto-hveuclithuses were typically bored-through cylinders of wood or bone, made of a single piece.

The late proto-hveuclithus is weighted like a cutter, having a great deal of blade presence. The sword had transitioned from a hexagonal cross-section to a lenticular one and the fluctuation between leaf-bladed and parallel in the early proto-hveuclithus ended here; a parallel blade was now common and standard. The fifty percent distal taper of the blade helps to keep the blade presence from being overwhelming. Some versions had a decent thrusting ability due to their diamond cross-section, which were pretty rare as lenticular was more customary, though that ability will always be secondary to its ability in the cut. The blade actually flexes very little. The smoothness of the spiral wrap does not add to the tactility of the grip, but doesn't detract from it either. Even after working up a minor sweat while cutting, the grip did not become slippery. Cutting was easy with this sword. Its short length and distribution of weight made it well-suited to short chops. Despite the comments of Classical authors like Polybius and Livy (often repeated without question by modern history writers), a large number of the swords of this period have a very serviceable thrusting point.