The importance of Roman Reconstruction Archaeology

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

Hmmmmm. I think the best re-enactment is a form of reconstructive archaeology. But the evidence for some reconstructions is weaker than for others. And therefore little information can be gleaned from them.

Is that fair?

As I pointed out, regarding certain parts of the equipment, reenactment simply cannot be reconstruction, because there is nothing to reconstruct due to the absence of archaeological findings. To summarize,

1. there are items of equipment where complete reconstruction is possible and should be pursued (e.g., gladii, certain helmets, pila)

2. there are items where archaeological data is available only for parts, and not for the whole. Those pieces are in part reconstruction, and in part conjecture (e.g., early imperial scuta, Melun pugio)

3. there are items where none archaeological data exists. Those cannot be reconstructed, and are conjecture (e.g., subarmalis).