Type B pugio

[Crispvs]

Peronis,

Thanks for posting that up. You saved me the trouble.

Jef,

I was actually looking at that sheath myself the other day. The majority of the surviving inlay is copper-alloy, including some of the chevrons and the vertical and horizontal petals of the floriate inlay. Stupidly I forgot to look closely enough to try to see what colour any visible remaining enamel was (it was very close to closing time) and the photo I took has not proved much help as the reflection of the flash against the glass has altered the colouration in the photograph to much for it to be much use. I will check Scott and see if he mentions it when I have time over the next day or two.

Doc,

The Oberamergau sheath could prove quite a challenge. If you are getting someone with a lot of experience at inlaying silver to do it it would probably not be a problem but if you are doing it yourself some of the detail, especially large items such as the ivy leaves, might be very hard to inlay successfully (unless of course you already have the necessary skill). If you don't, Matt Lukes posted up a useful tutorial on a simple inlaying technique on RAT about a year ago, but you would probably still have problems with large motifs or wide lines due to the problem of getting a tight enough fit. Something like the Allerot sheath might be easier to do, as it features long thin wavy lines, rather than anything complicated and you would still be the envy of all your friends once you had completed it and showed it off to them.

Crispvs

[Marcus Mummius]

Thanks Crispvs!

[Robert]

I seem to remember two Flavian type B's with plain cupric alloy plates, one from Nijmegen and the other one from Spain. The only decorations are chiselled paralel lines in both examples. They are amazingly alike for objects founs so far apart. This is a type which I will try to get reconstructed in the near future, as the Spanish one's pics have great detail. The plates are both front and back on the Nijmegen pugio for sure, as I examined it up close and took some pictures which I sent to Crispus some time ago.

[Doc]

Crispus,

I too was thinking of the Alleroit. However, the Alleroit is also quite difficult since it has small leaves in a laurel shape on the sheath.

I am going to have Matt Lukes make the pugio for me once I finalize my choice. I have the skill to do things since I am an Organic Chemist and manual skills are a must. However, I do not have the time to experiment and attempt anything like that.

Robert,

Do you have pictures of the brass type B pugios you are referring to.

[Doc]

Peroni,

Thanks for the picture. I thought it would have had something on it.

I know that it would be easy to make but I thought that for a centurio impression it might be too simple. But then again, who knows what centurios wore. There were many in a legion and many through out the duration of the empire. So who knows if every centurion wore decorative gear. Sometimes it is our modern conception that leads sown the wrong path: since the centurio was an officer his stuff was 100% decorative 100% of the time.

[jkaler48]

I known that it is on shaky ground to use modern comparisons but
having been in the US Army 24 years I and many many others would if able
have two sets of gear one for use in the field and one for inspection/parade use. It might not be unreasonable to postulate that some Roman soldiers
especially higher ranking ones such as Centurions who had the means
may have had some items in duplicate with nicer ones reserved for parades and other formal occasions and more utilitarian items used for field exercises and combat. I wonder if there are any written records tHAt say things like "I put on my best ????? for the parade" or "I wore my old ??????
on the march"

[Magnus]

Maybe....maybe not. I can see that with clothing items, but not weaponry or armour...that would be costly. Unless they were very high ranking officers and could afford 2 sets of each.

[jvrjenivs]

Even 2 sets of these, isn't handy. Now you only have on suitcase with your extra set of stuff back in the car/plane, but (mainly on earlier periods) how would you take all this extra equipment with you? Okay, a second tunic etc you need, and could be packed on your furca, but arms and armour couldn't be there, as there is enough on there already.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

I seem to remember two Flavian type B's with plain cupric alloy plates, one from Nijmegen and the other one from Spain. The only decorations are chiselled paralel lines in both examples. They are amazingly alike for objects founs so far apart. This is a type which I will try to get reconstructed in the near future, as the Spanish one's pics have great detail. The plates are both front and back on the Nijmegen pugio for sure, as I examined it up close and took some pictures which I sent to Crispus some time ago.

In Spain there is a lot of this kind of pugiones, but seems to be earlier than Flavian. Probably are good for a tardorepublican impression, but not for Flavian times.

I agree, there are very similar all of them, seems a mass- production.
:lol:
It’s the Type IV from Villanueva de Teba Necropolis, where there are a huge amount of them, associated with burials. As Crispus have cited, there are an associated form to wear Iberian daggers, more frequently hanging in front of the breast, or with a baldric reinforced with metallic plates.

You can see there here:

http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/index.p ... view/24/25

The chronology of the Necropolis begins at the end of III century, but the tombs with the Type IV are probably from II century and probably I century AD.

I don’t know why this one at Nijmegen is, but it's possible that it comes from a Museum’s adquisition and not from a local excavation.

[Robert]

Well, Flavian is what the curator said and that's first century. It was probably brought to Nijmegen by the Hispanis legion and lost by one of it's members, because it is definitly a find and not an aquisition. Almost the entire 98 % Valkhof museum's Roman collection is local!

[jvrjenivs]

In Spain there is a lot of this kind of pugiones, but seems to be earlier than Flavian. Probably are good for a tardorepublican impression, but not for Flavian times.

I don’t know why this one at Nijmegen is, but it's possible that it comes from a Museum’s adquisition and not from a local excavation.

Indeed, most probably it was taken to Nijmegen by one of the soldiers of the 10th legion, which was based in spain and moved to Nijmegen after the Batavian revolt in 69 AD. Also probably a reason why they disappear in the flavian era in Spain.

[Tarbicus]

I known that it is on shaky ground to use modern comparisons but
having been in the US Army 24 years I and many many others would if able
have two sets of gear one for use in the field and one for inspection/parade use. It might not be unreasonable to postulate that some Roman soldiers
especially higher ranking ones such as Centurions who had the means
may have had some items in duplicate with nicer ones reserved for parades and other formal occasions and more utilitarian items used for field exercises and combat. I wonder if there are any written records tHAt say things like "I put on my best ????? for the parade" or "I wore my old ??????
on the march"

Surely one of the effects of the bling was to intimidate and impress the enemy, and then you can't get around Caesar's account of the centurio who was targeted in battle for his impressive medals, and the son who unwittingly killed his father at Cremona after pursuing him for his expensive looking gear.

Also, why leave it back at base - if you're gonna die then why not look your very best in the afterlife, rather than look cheap? Another way to judge the issue is to see how much gear found at known battle sites is decorative compared to plain, and compare that ratio with gear found at forts. The Herculaneum soldier appears to have had some very impressive gear, but also a bag of tools. It's unlikely he was on parade unless he was a re-enactor trying to show the public how soldiers did carpentry and at the same time get the most out of what he paid Ericus Konigus :wink:

[jvrjenivs]

Not to mention that the roman hadn't some kind of Wall street so your investment is in your gear. And (just like right now) you want to have your valuable investment as close to you as possible, which is on your body.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Also, Caesar encouraged his men to spend their booty on their equipment, as this would disuade them from abandoning their kit on the field and running.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Legio X was transferred to Pannonia in 63 bC from his Spanish camp of Petavonium (near Zamora) to the camp of Carnuntum (Petronell, Austria). There was until the 68, when was moved again to Spain, probably to south, for fight against Clodius Macer.

In 70 was moved to fight against the Batavian to Arenacum ((Ridern, Germany). A few yars after, was moved to Nijmegen. (Informations extracted from Wikipedia and Jona Lendering’s page)

So, the hypothetical legionary that lost his pugio at that camp were an authentical survivor.

Problem is that the chronology of that kind of iberian daggers is 200-100 AD, so when that soldier arrives to Nijmegen, the pugio have had 170-270 years of antiquity. For me it’s very strange so long life of service of a weapon.

Nijmegen was founded at first century BC, so even the soldier don’t belong to the Legio X, the weapon have more than 100 years.

Another possibility is to think in a longer perduration of the type. Difficult, because in Spain there are dated and located in a close limits. The characteristics of the sheath are very marked and make it a very different type, in comparation with habitual roman types, so it’s impossible that the similarity of Iberian and Nijmegen exemplars are casual…

What a mystery!