+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Reenactment (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Roman Re-Enactment & Reconstruction (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Thread: Crossed Belts (/showthread.php?tid=11409)
Pages:
1
2
Crossed Belts - Doc - 01-03-2008
Would one belt with emperor and cornucopia and another belt with the wolf and romulus/remus be an accurate double belt arrangement since both belt plates are of the wider type?
The way I have seen it is that the two belt arrangement was used in the early Augustan period when the belt plates were narrow.
However, since my impression will be more Claudian, would such larger or wider belt plates (as the ones mentioned above) be as accurate to wear together in the same fashion as the narrower Augustan belts.
I know that tombstones show square and wide looking belt plates being worn as a two belt arrangemnet, however, non of those motifs have ever been found (at least to my knowledge) possibly making the tombstones questionable.
Can anyone share their opinion or possibly have evidence where the belt plates mentioned in the begining would be accurate as the "cowboy" arrangement.
Also would a narrow belt and a wide belt be accurate in a two belt arrangement?
Thanks
Paolo
Re: Crossed Belts - Gaius Julius Caesar - 01-03-2008
A wider plate type was found at kalkriese I believe!
So they were in use at the time...
Re: Crossed Belts - Marcus Mummius - 01-03-2008
This has been discussed before here:
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... light=belt
This is a very good article to better understand the different types of beltplates and their dating: Grew, F. and Griffiths, N. 1991: 'The pre-Flavian military belt: the evidence from Britain', Archaeologia 109, 47-84
Narrow beltplates were in use long after the Augustean period. Wide beltplates were also in use starting from the Augustean period. The appearance of the shoulder baldric might be related to the use of the lorica segmentata. Wearing two belts on this type of armour is difficult. Others say that the shoulder balteus was more of a stylish thing, based on the hellenistic shoulder baldrics.
The following configurations would be acceptable IMO for use by a legionary or auxilia soldier until about 75AD:
-two narrow waist belts
-two wide waist belts
-one narrow and one wide waist belt
-one narrow waist belt and a shoulder baldric
-one wide waist belt and a shoulder baldric
I was under the impression that you were building a centurion impression. If this is the case all different rules apply, as the centurio did not wore an aproned balteus.
Vale,
Two wide belts may be ok up to 79AD - Neuraleanus - 01-03-2008
Quote:The following configurations would be acceptable IMO for use by a legionary or auxilia soldier until about 75AD:The miles (nauta?) found at Herculaneum had two wide (1 3/4 inches) belts. He was wearing one and the other was wrapped around either a dagger or gladius. Ther was no baldric.
-two narrow waist belts
-one narrow and one wide waist belt
-one narrow waist belt and a shoulder baldric
-one wide waist belt and a shoulder baldric
Re: Two wide belts may be ok up to 79AD - Marcus Mummius - 01-03-2008
Quote:Quote:The following configurations would be acceptable IMO for use by a legionary or auxilia soldier until about 75AD:The miles (nauta?) found at Herculaneum had two wide (1 3/4 inches) belts. He was wearing one and the other was wrapped around either a dagger or gladius. Ther was no baldric.
-two narrow waist belts
-one narrow and one wide waist belt
-one narrow waist belt and a shoulder baldric
-one wide waist belt and a shoulder baldric
Wooops, I forgot to write that one!!! It is in the discussion I posted the link too. Edited my post
Re: Crossed Belts - Doc - 01-03-2008
Thanks all for the reply and thanks for the article reference Jef .
Say Jef, would you happen to have the article? I am not able to get it readily.
Yes Jef, I am assembling a centurion kit. However, I am not sure what you mean about the centurion being under different rules. I know that at least from sculpture centurios did not wear aprons. Therefore, are you suggesting that the combinations you gave for legionaries or auxilia do not apply to a centurion because theoretcially centurions wore no aprons?
If so, what would you or anyone suggest for a centurion in the Claudian era with respect to the current belt discussion. I really would not want to use a baldric this is why I am asking about the belt arrangements and belt plate widths.
I am having the plumata made by Erik Schmid and I am trying to figure out what belt plates would go well. I was thinking of a crossed belt system where one belt is the emperor/cornucopia and the other belt wolf/twins motif. If this is not "accurate" please suggest something better I am very open to ideas. If it "has" to be a baldric then be it.
Paolo
Re: Crossed Belts - Matthew Amt - 01-03-2008
For a centurion, I'd probably just go with one belt holding both pugio and sword. (Frogs for the pugio, but not for the gladius!) There *might* be evidence for a centurion wearing 2 belts, I just don't recall clearly. The Padua centurion, perhaps? If he isn't too early for what you're doing.
I don't see any problem with 2 belts having different plates. But another option is to have alternating plates on the same belt. Choices!
Matthew
Re: Crossed Belts - Doc - 01-03-2008
Yes, Matt you are correct. CHOICES
As I mentioned I am going for the Claudian era and I am not sure of the Pauda centurions era.
YEs, the two different motif belts would be fine. However, I was wondering if it could be accurate to wear as those belts as a crossed system for a Claudian era centurion.
The one belt approach you mentioned is interesting however. I think that this appeared towards the middle of the first century and if so perfect for me.
I do not know of any other centruions with a crossed belt system outside of the one you mentioned. Facilis has one wide belt and a baldric.
Firmus who is not a centurion has a two belt system but they appear to be narrow plates and wide.
My whole question is wearing crossed belts of the "wide" type for a mid first century impression.
Paolo
Re: Crossed Belts - Doc - 01-03-2008
Just a typo correction for Firmus
I do not know of any other centruions with a crossed belt system outside of the one you mentioned. Facilis has one wide belt and a baldric.
Firmus who is not a centurion has a two belt system but they appear to be narrow plates not wide.
Re: Crossed Belts - Peroni - 01-03-2008
I beg to differ on the Facilis stele. He does indeed have two belts. One wide, and the other very narrow to which his pugio is attached. (plus a baldric)
http://www.romanarmy.com/cms/component/ ... Itemid,94/
Re: Crossed Belts - Doc - 01-03-2008
Thanks Peroni.
I always thought that thin strap was just a long strap that connects the pugio to the wide belt. I did not see or think of it as two belts.
The wide belt appears to be responsible for the weight distribution of the hamata and naturally the baldric holds the sword.
Another point is that if you look at Petersons book of the Roman Legions in color, you will notice that he has the Facilis belt plates and that in fact he uses a long strap attached to the main belt to hold the pugio. At least to me that is what the reconstruction appears to show.
Thus if Petersons reconstruction of that belt system is correct, then it is not two belts. I know that Peterson in his book claims to base his impression on Sertorius however being that the stela of Sertorius has no belts, I guess the best next thing had to be used.
Peroni, if in fact those are two belts then the purpose of the wide belt, outside of looking nice is for weight distribution IMHO.
Furthermore, if they are two belts, then I have my aqnswer as to what I should do which is have one narrow plated belt for the pugio and a wider plated belt for the sword.
Paolo
Re: Crossed Belts - Doc - 01-04-2008
What part of the first century AD is Marcus Favonius Facilis?
Peroni, I do not think that that small strap is a belt I think it is attached to the main belt system.
Paolo
Re: Crossed Belts - Tarbicus - 01-04-2008
That thin belt holding the pugio looks like it has frogs. Isn't that characteristic of it being a separate belt?
Re: Crossed Belts - Peroni - 01-04-2008
Quote:Peroni, if in fact those are two belts then the purpose of the wide belt, outside of looking nice is for weight distribution IMHO.
I totally agree. The Facilis stele is in my local Museum, and unfortunately there is no way of telling whether the pugio belt is attached to the left side of the wider belt due to the manner in which it has been sculpted.
I think of it as a separate belt, because there is no reason why his dagger could not be suspended from the wider belt on the right side. As Jim said, there are frogs on the dagger belt, but there appears to be no belt passing behind the dagger sheath, so it could actually be a simple strap with a frog at each end (no buckle) held in place simply by the tightening of the larger belt, not actually attached to it.
Chris Haines of the ESG has his dagger suspended in this fashion.. .
http://erminestreetguard.co.uk/Archive% ... 01_JPG.htm
As does this centurion from the Netherlands who was auxiliary centurion at one of the ESG events, clearly basing the belts on the Facilis stele...
http://erminestreetguard.co.uk/Officer% ... pg_jpg.htm
AFAIK the stele dates to the second half of the first century AD.
Re: Crossed Belts - Crispvs - 01-04-2008
I was under the impression that it predated the Iceni revolt, when it was thought to have been knocked down, and thus dated to some time beween AD47 and AD60.
Crispvs