Full Version: Late Roman Scabbard attachment- alternative method
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2

Here is the archaeology of a method of Roman scabbard hanging that was certainly new to me, from the massive Studien zur romischen Schwertbewaffnung in der Kaiserzeit by Christian Miks (pp 286, 287). The "usual" way of a leather strip being either wound round the scabbard through the slide is also discussed, but what was interesting here is the use of small "studs" to hold the belt
Heres the archeology
[Image: LateRomanswordattachmentarchaeology.gif]

And here are two possible reconstructions.
[Image: LateRomanswordattachment.gif]

He also describes a later version where the studs are actually fixed to the scabbard and the leather goes over these and through the slide.

(And a great book, btw!)
That's very interesting stuff Paul. Thanks for sharing that.
I've been thinking about it for a long time, but I've got no time for real experimenting. Sad
Of course, I am not thinking on third century baltea like those depicted on Miks' book but on our later ones. 8)
My idea is that the scabbard's position must be fixed on the balteus and, therefore, the simplest solution involving two mushroom studs would be to attach a a short strap section to the balteus by means of those studs. Either in front of it and through the slider or to its back (in that case, it would be the balteus the one passing through the slider.

One balteus of one of the two third century impressions of Legio Prima Germanica have used that method.

I can't put pictures yet. The owner is Tibisius, when i talk with him, i suggest him to make some detailed pictures.
Exactly the same priciple as the third Century fungiform bottons seen on ring buckle belt fastenings.

Thanks for that Paul! Shame I just completed my late Roman baldric with a different fastening method! :?
These mirror late Germanic fittings. But interesting stuff.
Very interesting. Makes sense to me, and looks neat as well. Wonder if the studs would have make a "clinking" sound as the sword slid between them while you walked....
I imagine the leather would hold it tight enough to eliminate that!?
I am guessing the logic is to stop the sword floating about? also a secure mount for withdrawing the sword?
Dutch Finds.

From the book:
Van Romeinse soldaten en Cananefaten.
Gebruiksvoorwerpen van de Scheveningseweg.
J.A. Waasdorp 1999
The depth of the "slider" would indicate a fairly thick piece of leather for the belt, don't you think? Odds are, the one would be patterned after the other.
Slider dimension
Length 8,7cm
Maximum width 1cm
Maximum thickness 1,3cm
Depth for passing through the belt 0,8cm

Fitting dimension
Maximum diameter 2,2cm
Total height 1,5cm
So the belt could reasonably be .5 cm, which is pretty thick leather. It figures that a belt to hold a sword should have considerable thickness or the belt would bend under the weight of the sword, especially on such a narrow area.

Could that attachment point additionally have been reinforced in some way?
If the scabbard has an outer cover of 0,2cm thick leather, the maximun thickness of a belt could be 0,3cm.

If a fitting is not used for decoration, but for rivetting 2 belts together the gap between the 2 plates can be 0,5cm or more.
Garrelt, wouldn't the entire thickness of the scabbard be under the rivetted area that the "foot" of the belt loop rests on? In other words,
scabbard: wood, leather, brass trim if any, belt loop foot, rivet head (as seen in cross section).
Or am I missing something? That wouldn't be news, of course if I were.
I think that the second picture in this tread answers your question.

The build up of a scabberd could be as you stated.
Also don't forget the felt/woollen lining inside the scabbard.
Pages: 1 2