Baldric construction

[lyuv]

Need your help with info about the construction of baldric for a gladius.

Specifically, I"d like to know:
1. Does the baldric connect to one or two of the front rings on the scabbard? I"ve seen both on the internet.
2. How long is each of the two strips that split from the baldric, and connect to the two back rings?
3. I want adjustability to the length of the baldric. What would an appropriate buckle look like?
4. At what height should the sword be worn?

Any info will be appreciated.
Thanks,

[jvrjenivs]

1. There are different opinions on this, but I think the general opinion is to attach the baldric to 2 rings on the back and only one on the front.

2. I just tried it out. Just make the longer one a bit too ling and attach the smaller one. Now, holding the scabbard by the baldric, you can estimate how long the longer one should be. It all depends on how you would like to have your sword hanging and how far the rings of your scabbard are from each other.

3. As far as the sources suggest to us, I don't think there is an appropriate buckle. As far as I know nothing is identified as such. Some times one old interpretation of horse gear closures are seen on baldrics, but this isn't correct, following the more resent research. So, either buckle which looks like a period one would be okay, as it is totally speculation.

4. I would say as high as possible, such that you just can move your arm freely without interference with your sword.

[Matthew Amt]

Yup, what he said. Here are 2 options for the split:

http://www.larp.com/legioxx/bldrc1.jpg

Either just split the strap into 2 narrower parts, or stitch on a second piece. On my current baldric, I cut it in one piece so that both parts of the fork are full width. The scabbard should hang vertically, and quite high. Most of us wear it too low! Best thing to do is make the baldric the right length with your armor on, and stitch it to the rings. It will hang a little lower when worn over just the tunic, but that's no big deal. It doesn't have to be adjustable.

Good luck!

Matthew

[PhilusEstilius]

I think that we should ask just who decided that a baldric strap should go to two rings at the rear of the sword scabbard, that is by it becoming a fork shape of two straps to do so.
This is a matter that was decided by the longest formed re-enactment group which is the Ermine Street Guard, and the way that they used it was by passing their waist belts thro' the V in the rear of the strap to hold the sword neatly by the side.
However in doing so this puts the sword low on the hip like a gun slinger which is not the way that the gladius was worn, it should be high at the chest with the pommel almost at the armpit.

I think it was used this way by the ESG to help hold the scabbard while the sword was drawn, however one must ask just where is the evidence that a baldric ever functioned in this manner for there is none.
Then again even if one does not put the waist belt thro' the imagined fork like strap why are there four rings on a gladius scabbard where infact simply two rings would do just as well or was there another method and indeed a reason to have four rings.

It would appear that all other groups have simply followed the ESG without question on this subject.

[jvrjenivs]

yeah, Brian, you touch the subject quit good. To add some more. From some late Roman iconography we know that, at least in later period, the baldric seems to been worn OVER the normal belt. So, that would suggest against the method the ESG introduced, even is it for 300 years earlier.

About the question as why 4 rings, I'm with some recent works on that, which suggest that this probably is purely a stylistic feature, evolved from earlier times when the sword was worn onto a belt and 4 rings would make some sence. We always see 4 loops both on pugio and swords of the first century AD, while I would almost never use the lower ones.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Hello,

I have proved with only the upper ring at the front and only the lower ring at the back. It works fine, as the baldric helps the scabbard to get a good inclination, to be easy to draw the gladius.

If you have a good sword and the baldric very short, you don't need to pass the baldric under the belt. It works too, indeed.

[Tarbicus]

There's an alternative that I like, and uses all four scabbard rings.

http://armillum.com/tienda/index.php?ma ... cts_id=474

Some baldrics use buckles to fix and graduate the size. But archaeologist never had found little buckles around gladiuses in excavations. Some others use a kind of clasps, but today it seems clear that this clasps are horse fittings, not something to use in your gladius. So we offer a different approach to the problem, the use of this little "mushroomlike" pin, found very often in excavations, passing through two slits in the baldric. It's easy and safe. Also we have tried to solve another problem, the need for different baldrics, one for each Gladius, with the ends sewn to the rings in the scabbard. We propose the use of hooks, like the ones in the Newstead Segmentata, to can change the baldric from one Gladius to another...

[Crispvs]

"It would appear that all other groups have simply followed the ESG without question on this subject."

Ah Brian, you haven't read my article on the carriage of weapons yet have you? :wink:

For another theoretical idea on how a baldric might be done up if it was very short and could not easily be put on over armour, which I also deal with in my article, a buckle could be positioned on the back of the baldric close to the scabbard suspension ring, allowing the strap to be passed through the ring and done up with the buckle on the back of the baldric strap.



This is of course speculative, based on three examples of scabbards associated with small buckles, and the observation that some baldrics shown in sculpture seem to be shown as extremely short. Of course, as Jurjen says above, no buckles appear to be shown on sculptural representations of baldrics and the commonly used cavalry harness junctions are simply wrong, which is why I placed the buckle in my suggestion on the rear of the baldric.

As far as using only two rings goes, the baldric on my current scabbard is now very old and about three years ago the lower strap of the split strap broke, meaning that my scabbard is now held by only the top two suspension rings. I have noticed that the scabbard appears to swing about much more now and on my new scabbard I intend to have a strap passing through each of the four rings.

Crispvs

[arklore70]

Jim,
that is very good way to secure the gladius, but other than what is on the armillum website, do we have any archeological finds to support this? Even with out the hooks, running the baldric through the rings as shown might explain why there continued to be 4 suspension rings on gladii scabbards and perhaps on the pugio scabbard as well.
R/

[Crispvs]

Such a system was not used on pugio sheaths. The lower suspension rings are consistently shown as hanging free and on surviving examples, the lower rings show little or no wear, by comparison with the upper rings, which tend to be rather worn. In fact, on the Velsen sheath, the upper rings were made of iron and were very worn, whereas the lower rings were of silver (a much softer metal) and showed no sign of wear.

Crispvs

[Tarbicus]

Jim,
that is very good way to secure the gladius, but other than what is on the armillum website, do we have any archeological finds to support this?

Jorge does mention that these mushroom buttons have been found in context, so it's a possibility, I guess, that the baldric's length could be adjustable using that method. I think there's one case for adjustable baldrics, and that's more length is needed when wearing armour, but less when only wearing a tunic, to keep the same positioning at the waist due to the added thickness of subarmalis and armour over the torso. I think the hooks are conjectural, but what's to stop the baldric from being stitched at the bottom rings instead?

Even with out the hooks, running the baldric through the rings as shown might explain why there continued to be 4 suspension rings on gladii scabbards and perhaps on the pugio scabbard as well.
R/

Like Crispvs says about the pugio, IMO. Of course, the reason for four rings on the sword scabbard could simply be to give the owner the freedom to choose to secure the scabbard using a baldric or to use cross-straps around the belt, should he so choose for whatever reason (e.g., he just didn't want to wear a baldric at times).

[PhilusEstilius]

Crispvs.

I would have to disagree with you as far as the Velsen dagger for they are not rings but suspension loops which are hinged, the upper two being of iron and the lower ones of silver.
However it has been stated by Morel and Bosman that these suspension loops are in such good condition that a reconstruction of the entire construction may be offered.

[PhilusEstilius]

When we read Suetonius "History of Twelve Caesars" relating to Galba we find that he set off from Spain wearing his dagger hanging down from about his neck just before his breast ; therefore there are situations where a dagger could be worn on a baldric strap.
Then if we consider the dagger of Galba being a Pugio did he have two straps at the bottom rings which went around his chest to prevent it banging about possibly if he were riding a horse, infact might this be the reason why these scabbards have four rings.

Indeed just where would Senators carry their daggers when they decided to go kill a Dictator ?

[PhilusEstilius]

Where I mention earlier about the baldric strap with it's suggested fashion as depicted by the ESG this would bring me full circle to yet again mention not only the Silchester beltplate that has a ring on it, but many others found all over Europe that may indicate another strap going from a bottom ring on the sword scabbard to this ring at the rear of the belt.

There is the satisfaction of knowing that with this mathod the sword can be lifted out from the body to allow a man to sit on a log where as the ESG man would have great difficulty in doing so.

[Crispvs]

Brian,

Naturally I have read Morell and Bosman's article on the Velsen burial. The suspension rings on the Velsen sheath are exactly that - type 'B' suspension rings to be precise. Type 'B' suspension rings differ from type 'A' suspension rings (which are found on type 'A' sheaths and frame type sheaths) in that type 'A' rings are round whereas type 'B' rings are shaped more like small buckles. Suspension loops are an entirely different thing - they are the pieces which connect type 'A' suspension rings to sheaths (type 'B' rings were hinged to their sheaths).

For a list of the complete nomenclature for first century pugio sheaths please see the diagram here:
<!-- l <a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=13523&start=40">viewtopic.php?f=22&t=13523&start=40<!-- l

As to Galba, the best answer to the question is that we simply do no know and will probably never know.
Incidentally, I think the work you are referring to by Suetonius is 'Lives of Famous Men'. He never wrote a book called 'The Twelve Caesars'. Penguin did that by taking Suetonius' three biographical works and uniting them into a single volume and presenting them as if they were a single work.

As for the senators, there are a variety of ways to put on a toga (just have a look the Ara Pacis) and I am sure someone experienced in the wearing of one could think of suitable places for secreting a dagger on his person. We should also bear in mind that each senator would be likely to have a slave close at hand to carry all the bits and pieces he might need, such as a writing tablet and stylus and if these things were carried in a bag of some sort, a dagger could also be carried in this way. This is a little OT though as it does not really relate to methods of weapons carriage employed by soldiers.

The lower suspension rings were almost certainly there simply because the Iberian dagger sheaths they were descended from had had them. There is evidence of a variety of methods of carriage for the earlier Iberian daggers and it is clear that the rings were all intended for use. However, by the time the Romans were using them in first century AD the evidence is pretty unequivical that the lower suspension rings had become decorative and were retained for the sake of tradition.

Regarding sword suspension, like you I feel that the ESG method is wrong and does not accord with the evidence. However, the method you have consistently advocated for at least the last ten years (I seem to remember you mentioning it to me at Chesters fort about that long ago) is not necessary for the man to sit down comfortably. If the sword baldric is not strapped down by the military belt, it can simply be moved into a more convenient position as you sit down (I wear my baldric unbelted and sitting down is never a problem because of this. It was not nearly so easy before I started looking at the evidence and still used the 'ESG' method).

You have often mentioned the plate from Silchester, but when you first mentioned it to me you did not seem to be able to tell me what period this dated to. The method you propose is interesting but I don't think it matches well with the first century AD sculptural evidence. Can you post up a picture of the Silchester plate, as I suspect it might be of late second or third century date, by which time things were being done differently anyway?

Crispvs