03-04-2015, 08:42 PM
Quote:The earliest evidence for segmentata (the Kalkriese type) is indeed from a site with a terminus ante quem of 9BC. However, we still do not fully understand the Kalkriese type and there are several possible interpretations of the evidence assembled so far. Therefore you are in safer ground with hamata or squamata.
For your scabbard, the shape looks fine but I would see if you can install side guttering along the length of both sides, this being a feature which if seen on surviving mid first century BC scabbards. I would also omit the decorative plate at the top altogether as the surviving scabbards do not have plates there, the mouth featuring nothing more than a metal band around it. I don't think there is any evidence for mouth plates on scabbards of the period either.
The surviving examples of mid first century BC scabbards give an impression of simple functionality. Decorative metal elements appear to be something which did not begin to work their way onto scabbards until the advent of an established professional army under Augustus. I would also avoid references to 'Divvs Iulivs' (Divus Julius) as the term was not used until after his death. Perhaps a legion number might be appropriate.
Although you haven't mentioned belts, if I were you I would get a plain belt with just a buckle, as belt plates are very rare finds for the period, suggesting that their use was not widespread. The apron straps seen on later belts also appear to have been an Augustan innovation.
I hope this helps.
Incidentally, this thread should have been posted in the 'Re-enactment and Reconstruction' forum. Can a moderator shift it to the correct location please?
Crispvs
You mean 9AD? If you mean the one found at the supposed site of Teutoberg battle...
