Roman cavalry in Josephus

[DBS]

Having been re-reading Josephus' Jewish War, I was taken by his description of the Ronman cavalry at Bk3.5.5.  They are described as having kontos, thureos, and three large darts or javelins in a quiver.  I have gone back to the Greek and definitely kontos and thureos, despite the imprecision of both the Loeb and Penguin translations.  They are again described as having kontoi at Bk3.7.24 when dismounted for a siege assault.  It is perhaps noteworthy that Josephus describes the thureos as hanging at the side of the saddle - simply how observed when they were on the march, or too much to manage with the kontos when mounted?

Made me stop and pause given we usually think of Roman cavalry with very big pointy sticks as a tad later, and even then in limited numbers.  Also, because Josephus, rightly or wrongly, seems to be talking about this as a uniform set of kit in Vespasian's force, not the odd specialist ala or two.  I suppose there is the possibility that there is regional influence from allied xystophoroi, or even that these cavalry are the former Herodian alae transferred when Archelaus forfeited his kingdom?  Or Josephus is just not reliable on detail...?

[Duncan Head]

It is generally considered, I think, that Josephus is using "kontos" loosely for the standard Roman cavalry spear. After all, anyone who can use "xyston" to mean the pilum...

[DBS]

That was my initial thought but two things made me pause: he talks about them having darts/javelins in a quiver, so seemingly a different weapon optimised as a missile; and at III.7.24 there seems to be an implication that the dismounted cavalry are placed opposite the breach as their "kontoi" have a longer reach.

Hey ho, just has planted a seed of doubt in my received wisdom...

[Duncan Head]

Of course the dismounted cavalry in the breach are in full armour, which has led to the suggestion that they are allied cataphracts, not Roman cavalry.

I don't see the javelins in a quiver as an issue; we always thought that the auxiliary cavalry had a spear plus a bunch of javelins (which is why Arrian's training manual has them throwing lots of missiles); it doesn't to my mind have any bearing on how long the spear is.

[nikgaukroger]

Lighter spears in the quiver for chucking at the enemy, and a more substantial one for stabbing them - doesn't mean the latter has to be a similar size to, say, a Parthian kontos.

[DBS]

Absolutely, get all that.  Does make me wonder what would be the first attested use of kontos for a weapon before Josephus?  If we assume that he is being a bit loose with his terminology, still means that it is a technical term upon which he is seizing to use or misuse.  Of course, I recognise that the vagaries of ancient literary survival may render the question a tad moot.

[stevenneate]

I'm in agreement with Duncan and Nik. Standard cavalry spear, as opposed to throwing javelins, is my interpretation.

However, I won't have a bad word spoken about Josephus - he's one of the best primary sources we have and a dastardly good story teller. I have built Hasmonean and Herodian Jewish armies around him.

[Jim Webster]

I'm in agreement with Duncan and Nik. Standard cavalry spear, as opposed to throwing javelins, is my interpretation.

However, I won't have a bad word spoken about Josephus - he's one of the best primary sources we have and a dastardly good story teller. I have built Hasmonean and Herodian Jewish armies around him.

Given he owed his life to his ability to improvise stories, had he not been as good he'd probably have been just another crucified rebel 

[DBS]

I would simply observe that on three occasions in just Book III, he describes the thrusting spears of the Roman cavalry, and on all three occasions chooses to use kontoi, so it would seem to be a deliberate choice, not simply selecting approximate synonyms for spear out of literary good taste.  For spear in general, he uses doru, xyston - as noted by Duncan - for pilum, and longche for javelin.  So he does seem to have a fixed vocabulary which he uses consistently for different types of pointy stick.  The question is therefore whether his technical vocabulary matches our technical vocabulary...? 

Not trying to die in a ditch on this, just one of those occasions when I wonder if we risk being hasty in assuming a genuine primary source is muddled.  There should not be too many anachronisms in Josephus, unlike, say, Livy or Dio.  And as I say, also makes me wonder when kontos first came to be applied to cavalry spears, regardless of whether Josephus is using the term "correctly".

[Erpingham]

Doesn't Arrian in Array against the Alans call the pilum a kontos?  Suggests technical precision of translation may have been less of an issue with Greek writers than we might like.  I'm used to medieval inventories where an clerk may consistently describe things but not in the same terms as someone else, so I have some sympathy 

[DBS]

Absolutely, I am simply making the point that every single time Josephus refers to a Roman cavalry thrusting spear, he calls it a bargepole.  Which suggests that he has a specific distinction in mind from "ordinary" dorata.  Whether that distinction of kontos is the same to him as the distinction of kontos is to us, namely a long, usually two-handed, lance, one cannot say.  But he is consistent.  A medieval clerk has the excuse of not being a soldier, which does not apply really to Josephus, though one might question whether he was quite as competent as he portrays himself.

[stevenneate]

/quote]

Josephus was extremely competent because he told us so and 100% of the surviving sources agree. Oh... I see what you mean!

Kontos isn't compatible with the thuros one would think, nor with known Roman auxiliary cavalry equipment of the time. So maybe the "large pole" translation is correct and they were all carrying banners with "Vespasian is here!" flags?

[dwkay57]

In their book "The Roman Cavalry" Dixon and Southern express the view that due to the saddlery of the time nobody had sussed out a way of staying on the horse, controlling it, hold a large shield and wield a very long spear all at the same time.

I suppose two questions arise:
1) What is the earliest known reference to a Roman Ala with "Kont." or similar in its title?
2) How "primary" is our source in the sense of the number of copies (and potential clerking errors) it has been through before it reached us?

[Andreas Johansson]

Absolutely, I am simply making the point that every single time Josephus refers to a Roman cavalry thrusting spear, he calls it a bargepole.  Which suggests that he has a specific distinction in mind from "ordinary" dorata.  Whether that distinction of kontos is the same to him as the distinction of kontos is to us, namely a long, usually two-handed, lance, one cannot say.  But he is consistent.  A medieval clerk has the excuse of not being a soldier, which does not apply really to Josephus, though one might question whether he was quite as competent as he portrays himself.

Does he use doru of non-Roman cavalry thrusting spears?

[DBS]

Does he use doru of non-Roman cavalry thrusting spears?

That thought had occurred to me, so I spent yesterday afternoon combing the Jewish War, and unfortunately the only times he talks about cavalry armament are with regards to the Romans; he mentions their thrusting spears three times, and every time uses kontoi, and several times mentions the darts which he says they also use (his statement of three in a quiver) but which he says are large and no smaller than dorata, but on these occasions he is clearly talking about thrown weapons where the cavalry are pelting hapless Jewish troops with missiles.  Which nobody contests was a known tactic.

With regards to the shield being incompatible with the kontos, I did point out that he specifically describes it as hanging at the side/rear of the saddle.  Which may just mean a sensible place to hang it on the march, but might also mean a sensible place to put it out of the way if needing both hands free.

I do not think that one can blame medieval copyists, since there are three occasions that I can find when he mentions a Roman cavalry spear, and each time it is a kontos.  That is consistency, so I think rules out copyist error or literary affectation.  To my mind it suggests that by the Flavian period, the cavalry spear was being called a kontos in at least some circles.  The question is whether it just means a hefty hasta of notable length for a single handed weapon (in contrast, say, to Xenophon or Polybius' much earlier descriptions of Greek, Roman and Persian cavalry spears) or means something more akin to our modern conception of a kontos?

As I say, I cannot work out if any surviving author before Josephus is attested as using kontos for a weapon.

I am not a Josephus fanboy, and he is clearly a hugely self-serving, nasty little quisling and apologist.  But none of these faults are served by inaccuracies regarding Roman weapons, and he is a primary source and genuine eye witness.  Which simply makes me pause for thought.