Chichester belt plates

[Tim Edwards]

A set of belt plates from Chichester were mentioned by Brian Stobbs in this thread:

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... 26&start=0

I have attached some (admittedly very bad!) photos I took myself some years ago for the benefit of anyone not familiar with these already.

The ring which Brian argues would be used for Gladius suspension is clearly visible.

Its worth noting that these are quite dinky plates, less than 30mm long!
I'm not sure when they date to, but I'd place them 2nd century AD at a guess.

Personally I disagree that such a system was in widespread use in the first century AD.

Does anyone have any paralells?

[mcbishop]

Its worth noting that these are quite dinky plates, less than 30mm long!
I'm not sure when they date to, but I'd place them 2nd century AD at a guess.

Personally I disagree that such a system was in widespread use in the first century AD.

Yes these are 2nd century at the earliest and there is no evidence of which I'm aware for such a suspension system being used in the 1st century AD.

Mike Bishop

[Peroni]

Interesting that there is still a frog for the attachment of a dagger on second century enamelled plates!! :wink: If the belt plates were found in this exact series, why is there a suspension ring for a sword on the same side (it would appear) as the dagger?

Perhaps somewhere to hang your keys :wink: ??

Mike, am I correct in saying that enamelled plates are first seen in the second century? I'm thinking of the Caerleon and Vindolanda examples.

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

If the belt plates were found in this exact series, why is there a suspension ring for a sword on the same side (it would appear) as the dagger?

Perhaps, for this type of suspension?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Actually, Brian suggested it was to assist in the suspension of the sword, not to actually suspend the sword from it!

Sorry missed that post! I think he was talking about something similar to that, but around the back I recall! But that looks a little like what he was talking about, Alexander.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Nice picture, Alexander.

It's clear that the rear strap is located in the lower suspension band, but the front strap in the upper one.

What about probe it? Seems to help the swords to get an angled position.

[PhilusEstilius]

Infact Adrian when it comes to the Chichester belt plates there are two frogs as well as the plate with the ring on it, this would suggest that this belt may have been for the dagger. The plate that has the ring on it is where I made the suggestion that a separate strap came from a bottom ring of the sword scabbard, with a hook on it that goes onto this ring to not only hold the sword scabbard while the sword is drawn but also to allow the sword to be worn high on the side. The way in which re-enactors have a baldric that has a strap which separates and goes to top and bottom rings of the sword scabbard, then the waist belt holding the sword thro this strap is utter nonsence. The fool who designed that method has just about everyone else following him like stupid sheep.

[mcbishop]

Mike, am I correct in saying that enamelled plates are first seen in the second century? I'm thinking of the Caerleon and Vindolanda examples.

Enamelling is obviously around before the 2nd century AD but it only begins to make an appearance on military equipment in the first half of the 2nd century AD (although the dating evidence is thin on the ground, most of the pieces only being dated by association, rather than stratigraphically). The belt plate in the Corbridge Hoard ought to be Hadrianic and other dated pieces seem to be comparable. One thing Carlisle Millennium showed me was that a lot of stuff I had thought was Antonine was creeping in during the Hadrianic period (but I can't remember if any of the stratified finds from there included enamelled military equipment of the same date as, say, the armguards). Mike McCarthy showed me shedloads of stuff from those excavations and it was all a bit much to take in (and, having spotted the Newstead breastplate and clocked the significance of that, enamelled gubbins were pretty low down my list of priorities). This in turn reminded me of something that somebody had once said to me about a Hadrianic phase of destruction at Carnuntum (which of course made me think Waffenmagazin! - which I had always assumed to be Antonine).

Also intriguing are those enamelled buckle plates that closely resemble earlier niello-inlaid plates (but they are always buckle plates and only ever found in Britain, to the best of my knowledge). These too seem to belong in the first half of the 2nd century: one from Roman Gates at Caerleon (I dug on that whilst a student!) came from barrack block B phase III, dated to c.100 (Evans, D. R. and Metcalf, V.M. 1992: Roman Gates Caerleon, Oxbow Monograph 15, Oxford, 123 No.88).

Mike Bishop

[Tarbicus]

enamelled gubbins were pretty low down my list of priorities

And there you have it ladies and gents; It may all be gubbins, but at least it's not bobbins.

:wink:

[Peroni]

Brian wrote...

The plate that has the ring on it is where I made the suggestion that a separate strap came from a bottom ring of the sword scabbard, with a hook on it that goes onto this ring to not only hold the sword scabbard while the sword is drawn but also to allow the sword to be worn high on the side.

Ah! I see what you mean now Brian. Yes, that makes sense now. I couldn't form a mental picture from your original post. That combined with Alex's picture - now I'm with you.

Mike wrote...

Also intriguing are those enamelled buckle plates that closely resemble earlier niello-inlaid plates (but they are always buckle plates and only ever found in Britain, to the best of my knowledge). These too seem to belong in the first half of the 2nd century: one from Roman Gates at Caerleon (I dug on that whilst a student!) came from barrack block B phase III, dated to c.100 (Evans, D. R. and Metcalf, V.M. 1992: Roman Gates Caerleon, Oxbow Monograph 15, Oxford, 123 No.88).

One of these Mike? These are the plates from Caerleon I was referring to in my previous post!

Only buckle plates eh? that is interesting. Looking at the Chichester find above, it would appear that ordinary belt stiffener plates were also fashioned the same way.

[mcbishop]

One of these Mike? These are the plates from Caerleon I was referring to in my previous post!

Only buckle plates eh? that is interesting. Looking at the Chichester find above, it would appear that ordinary belt stiffener plates were also fashioned the same way.

Specifically the lowest of the three. Identical plates occur from a number of sites throughout the UK.

Mike Bishop

[PhilusEstilius]

As a matter of fact I have the bottom plate myself, mine is minus the buckle however I made a buckle and low and behold it works out to be identicle to that shown so I was not too far wrong.

[PhilusEstilius]

Arian are all these plates from Caerleon, for as Mick says the lower one does come from various places in Britain. There was one found at Staxton in north yorks'. then of course the one I have and maybe more.

[Doc]

Dr. Bishop wrote: "Enamelling is obviously around before the 2nd century AD but it only begins to make an appearance on military equipment in the first half of the 2nd century AD".

I agree that enameling was done before the 2nd century AD. However, (unless I am missing the point) enamel inlays appeared before the 2nd century AD on military equipmnet on items such as the Velson dagger and the "Gallic D" helmet. These items were in the first half of the first century.

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

The way in which re-enactors have a baldric that has a strap which separates and goes to top and bottom rings of the sword scabbard, then the waist belt holding the sword thro this strap is utter nonsence. The fool who designed that method has just about everyone else following him like stupid sheep.

Splitting the baldric strap was not unknown in the first century C.E., as two reliefs from Palmyra demonstrate, although the method of suspension here is different from the one you refer to in your post.