Most descriptors (in lack of a better word), whether these are prepositions or something else, are in Esperanto put in the front of the main word. Antaŭ is a preposition, so it comes before the main word, which in this case is la unua mondmilito, i.e. antaŭ la unua mondmilito fixes the time reference. If you want to express the idea, that during the centuries before that soldiers often used swords and scabbars, then you can say

Dum jarcentoj antaŭ la unua mondmilito soldatoj ofte uzis glavojn kaj glavingojn.

I wouldn't consider centuries to be a point of time, so that you could say Jarcentojn… or En jarcentoj….

PS. I prefer porti (cf. trägen in German) here, since scabbars aren't used per se but for protecting the bearer and the sword.

---

The _verbot_ against the double accusative concerns the case of chained direct objects.

Mi manĝigis la hundon la viandon.

Here the dog is the direct object of me making it to eat, and the meat is the direct object of eating itself ("I fed the dog the meat", if that is correct English either). The root cause of this kind of chaining is, that the accusative in Esperanto is kinda overloaded, it is used for too many things. With igi-verbs the accusative is commonly used to denote the receiver of the action (Mi manĝigis la hundon), even though the correct grammatical case would be dative, an indicator for the recipient or beneficiary of an action. Since Esperanto lacks real dative case, one uses the preposition al for that purpose, i.e.

Mi manĝigis al la hundo la viandon.

Most descriptors (in lack of a better word), whether these are prepositions or something else, are in Esperanto put in the front of the main word. Antaŭ is a preposition, so it comes before the main word, which in this case is la unua mondmilito, i.e. antaŭ la unua mondmilito fixes the time reference. If you want to express the idea, that during the centuries before that soldiers often used swords and scabbars, then you can say

Dum jarcentoj antaŭ la unua mondmilito soldatoj ofte uzis glavojn kaj glavingojn.

I wouldn't consider centuries to be a point in time, so that you could say Jarcentojn… or En jarcentoj….

PS. I prefer porti (cf. trägen in German) here, since scabbars aren't used per se but for protecting the bearer and the sword.

---

The _verbot_ against the double accusative concerns the case of chained direct objects.

Mi manĝigis la hundon la viandon.

Here the dog is the direct object of me making it to eat, and the meat is the direct object of eating itself ("I fed the dog the meat", if that is correct English either). The root cause of this kind of chaining is, that the accusative in Esperanto is kinda overloaded, it is used for too many things. With igi-verbs the accusative is commonly used to denote the receiver of the action (Mi manĝigis la hundon), even though the correct grammatical case would be dative, an indicator for the recipient or beneficiary of an action. Since Esperanto lacks real dative case, one uses the preposition al for that purpose, i.e.

Mi manĝigis al la hundo la viandon.

Most descriptors (in lack of a better word), whether these are prepositions or something else, are in Esperanto put in the front of the main word. Antaŭ is a preposition, so it comes before the main word, which in this case is la unua mondmilito, i.e. antaŭ la unua mondmilito fixes the time reference. If you want to express the idea, that during the centuries before that soldiers often used swords and scabbars, then you can say

Dum jarcentoj antaŭ la unua mondmilito soldatoj ofte uzis glavojn kaj glavingojn.

I wouldn't consider centuries to be a point of time, so that you could say Jarcentojn… or En jarcentoj….

---

The _verbot_ against the double accusative concerns the case of chained direct objects.

Mi manĝigis la hundon la viandon.

Here the dog is the direct object of me making it to eat, and the meat is the direct object of eating itself ("I fed the dog the meat", if that is correct English either). The root cause of this kind of chaining is, that the accusative in Esperanto is kinda overloaded, it is used for too many things. With igi-verbs the accusative is commonly used to denote the receiver of the action (Mi manĝigis la hundon), even though the correct grammatical case would be dative, an indicator for the recipient or beneficiary of an action. Since Esperanto lacks real dative case, one uses the preposition al for that purpose, i.e.

Mi manĝigis al la hundo la viandon.

Most descriptors (in lack of a better word), whether these are prepositions or something else, are in Esperanto put in the front of the main word. Antaŭ is a preposition, so it comes before the main word, which in this case is la unua mondmilito, i.e. antaŭ la unua mondmilito fixes the time reference. If you want to express the idea, that during the centuries before that soldiers often used swords and scabbars, then you can say

Dum jarcentoj antaŭ la unua mondmilito soldatoj ofte uzis glavojn kaj glavingojn.

I wouldn't consider centuries to be a point of time, so that you could say Jarcentojn… or En jarcentoj….

PS. I prefer porti (cf. trägen in German) here, since scabbars aren't used per se but for protecting the bearer and the sword.

---

The _verbot_ against the double accusative concerns the case of chained direct objects.

Mi manĝigis la hundon la viandon.

Here the dog is the direct object of me making it to eat, and the meat is the direct object of eating itself ("I fed the dog the meat", if that is correct English either). The root cause of this kind of chaining is, that the accusative in Esperanto is kinda overloaded, it is used for too many things. With igi-verbs the accusative is commonly used to denote the receiver of the action (Mi manĝigis la hundon), even though the correct grammatical case would be dative, an indicator for the recipient or beneficiary of an action. Since Esperanto lacks real dative case, one uses the preposition al for that purpose, i.e.

Mi manĝigis al la hundo la viandon.