is it a roman sword or a celtic one?

[Matthew Amt]

Whoa! Fascinating. If the length you give is correct, it looks REALLY narrow. The proportions look more like a spatha. I'm assuming there are no details of this find, i.e. it's a typical looted artifact. (Which makes me wonder if the mods are going to stomp this thread, hmmm...) So there's no way to tell if the scabbard or the other loose bits actually go with this blade or not. The way the top of the scabbard is still stuck to the blade, with no indication that it's broken off from the rest of the scabbard frame, makes me think these pieces are not related. So while it COULD all be one fascinating find, it could also be a collection of unrelated artifacts, or partly or wholly faked.

Yeah, the more I look at it, I really don't think that main scabbard frame section was made to go with this blade. It has a lot more room at either edge than any original blade found in its scabbard--compare to the narrower part stuck to the top of the blade. And it looks complete, with nothing missing at the top, which would mean it's too short for this blade.

Overall, I'd agree that the blade shape looks more Roman than what I've seen of Celtic, and assuming "Roman" I'd go for a date of first or second century AD. But Eastern Europe turns up some unfamiliar things, sometimes! It could be some kind of hybrid, or an export piece, or something that was modified (or a new scabbard made for an older blade) during its own lifetime.

More data needed!

Matthew