Crispus Pugio Help

[Doc]

I am having the Alleriot pugio made for my centurio impression. I know that since the deposit date for this pugio is 69 AD, that I could probably use it from Claudius to 69 AD. However, since I would like to have two periods for my kit, I wonder if I could use it pre-Claudian; Tiberio-Claudian. I have the gladii from thess periods (Mainz and Pompeii), however, I am missing pugios.

I know that the Alleriot is a Type A pugio and I think (please correct me if I am wrong) that these types were used throughout the entire 1st C AD. Thus I figured that I could use it for an earlier or later 1st C impression.

What about the Velsen? Is this not a type B pugio? Didn't type B pugios come after the A or did they coexist. I know that the letters do not desginate time periods but styles. However, from what I recall the type B pugio came later than the A. If this is true, then the Velsen could be used throughout the entire 1st C AD-no?

I ask about the Velsen because if the Alleroit is too late for the Tiberius period, I would think that the Velsen could cover it?

What is the earliest Type A found and the latest Type A found? How about the type B earliest/latest?

Thanks in advance for the help

[Peroni]

The latest dating of the Velsen dagger IIRC is 29AD.

[Doc]

Thanks Peroni for the response.

So the Velsen could be used in my pre-Claudian impression. However, were Velsen type pugios still in use after Claudius.

[Peroni]

Oh yes, the type B was used well into the late first century.

[Doc]

Thanks Peroni,

Thus I could use the Velsen in a post Claudian kit i.e. during the reign of Titus

How about the Type A Alleriot, could this be used at the same time period as the Velsen (30AD) even though its last deposit is later (as stated in my first post)

[Doc]

Does anyone know where Cripus is? Is he still a member of RAT?

[PhilusEstilius]

I think that once in the past he did mention that he had gone down with a computer problem, if this is the situation again heaven only knows when he may be back again.

[Peroni]

Frater Crispvs has recently changed jobs so he may not have the access to RAT he had in his previous line of work. :roll:

[Doc]

Thanks for the info Peroni.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Where has he moved to? I haven't seen him (or anyone) since Corbridge!

[Crispvs]

Sorry for my absence everyone.

As Peronis says, I have indeed changed jobs and in fact am presently on my second job since my old one went up in smoke. After a stint working with soldiers who had been blown to bits in Afghanistan I have now returned to something like my normal line of work, for the time being anyway until something better comes along.

Anyway, enough about the day job, which no-one here needs to be interested in anyway. I still have no internet access at home and none at work and so I have been limited to grabbing an hour here and there in internet cafes, most of which time has to be spent reading e-mail which has been building up, hence my sparce and silent presence here on RAT recently (and for the time being).

As Peronis says, the Velson sheath can be dated to AD29, when the fort at Velson was demolished. The soldier who had been wearing the dagger was buried (deliberately and probably with grave goods) in one of the fort's wells during the demolishion process. This gives us a terminus ante quem for type 'B' sheaths of AD29. Type 'B' sheaths were in use at least until the AD70s when the group from Chester were deposited.

I see no reason why you could not use a copy of the Alleriot sheath for the AD30s. Type 'A' sheaths were certainly in use by the AD20s and all three types of sheaths seem to have been carried by troops in the early phase of the conquest of Britain. The decorative scheme on the Alleriot sheath is not typical for the early first century AD, but that said, it has an unusual decorative scheme in any case so I would be very hesitant to give it an exact dating based purely on stylistic grounds. In any case, it is unlikely to have been brand new when it was deposited.

Crispvs

[Doc]

Crispus,

Nice to have you back on RAT. Hope all works out with you job.

Thanks for your reply. That is what I was looking for.

[Crispvs]

Thanks. Returning for a moment to the Alleriot sheath, my last post was accidentally deleted and I had to quickly re-type it before my time at the internet cafe ran out and in doing so managed to leave out an important point which I had intended to make.

The decorative scheme on the Alleriot sheath, whilst unusual for a type 'A' sheath, does contain some elements which are to be seen on earlier type 'B' sheaths, such as the wreath design. That this design was used earlier than some other decorative schemes is ably demonstrated by a type 'B' sheath plate from Mainz which had originally been decorated with inlaid wreaths but at some later stage had been turned around and its other side decorated with a more up to date design. Therefore it seems likely (although by no means guaranteed) that the Alleriot sheath was two to three decades old already when deposited.

Crispvs

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Now that is interesting!
Welcome back Crispus!

[Doc]

Crispus,

Thanks again. This really helps alot more.