Belts datation

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Hello,

Now that we are very familiarizated with the helmets or swords datation, can anybody provide a datation for the most popular belt plates? :

-Wolf and twins embossed and related types (hunting scene, etc...)
-Nielloed engraved plates.
-Plain plates.
-Concentric cercles engraved.
-Concentric cercles embossed.
-Punctim decorated.

I'm confused and it's hard to find a good information about the datation of such items.

Any good information about the diferent kinds of apron terminals are welcome:

-Lunullae.
-Tear drops.
-Others. (?)


Thanks!

[Praefectusclassis]

Or you could wait a little longer. A German archaeologist is writing her thesis on them.

[mcbishop]

Hello,

Now that we are very familiarizated with the helmets or swords datation, can anybody provide a datation for the most popular belt plates? :

-Wolf and twins embossed and related types (hunting scene, etc...)
-Nielloed engraved plates.
-Plain plates.
-Concentric cercles engraved.
-Concentric cercles embossed.
-Punctim decorated.

I'm confused and it's hard to find a good information about the datation of such items.

Any good information about the diferent kinds of apron terminals are welcome:

-Lunullae.
-Tear drops.
-Others. (?)

Wow, not asking much are you?! There are two different questions hidden in here: 1) when did such objects first come into use and achieve maximum popularity and 2) when might they enter the archaeological record. For example, wolf-and-twins belt plates seem to be Tiberian in date, but could enter the archaeological record at any subsequent point later in the 1st century AD, depending upon how long they lasted. At any one point in time, an army unit might be expected to have a proportion of new, older, and much older equipment in use. We can only generally tell the latter from examples excavated stratigraphically and the former is generally guesswork.

However, since you ask, here goes:

-Wolf and twins embossed and related types (hunting scene, etc...) Tiberio-Claudian, but generally pre-Flavian
-Nielloed engraved plates.Tiberio-Claudian, but generally pre-Flavian
-Plain plates.take your pick - 1st century
-Concentric cercles engraved.pre-Flavian and Flavian
-Concentric cercles embossed.pre-Flavian and Flavian
-Punctim decorated.Almost exclusively pre-Flavian

and as for 'apron' fittings:

-Lunullae. pre-Flavian and Flavian
-Tear drops. pre-Flavian and Flavian
-Others. (?) pre-Flavian and Flavian :-)

A German archaeologist is writing her thesis on them

What, a few words on each? Would have thought paper would be easier... ;-)

Mike Bishop

[le Cavalier Invisible]

[quote="mcbishop":3lbvlcdo]What, a few words on each? Would have thought paper would be easier... ;-) :lol:

[Praefectusclassis]

Well, theses are so easy. You have to include some kind of challenge.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Thanks, Mike.

Yes, i have asked too much. But i think it's a good beginning to make a new interesting post, and usable to re-enact better impressions, more accurate.

As archeologist, i know that always there is a diference between the beginning of fabrication of a piece and the period of use. Important to me, is to not use a flavian belt in a julio-claudian impression, but i think it's no problem to use a claudian belt in a flavian impression.

As to wait for archeological works as thesis etc... I prefer to ask directly. I'm still waiting for any kind of publication of a well know manuballista founded some years ago...

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Another question is to know when beginns the use of the apron. I know is sure the use in julio-claudian times, but there are evidences of use in augustean contexts? I know the augustean belt set of Velsen lack any evidence of apron fittings, and the Kalkriese finds (square plates) could belong to equine equipment... Confusing.