Pugio hilt question

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

LS,

have any pugiones been found where the hilt, instead of metal was made entirely from hardwood, or hardwood with bone and metal sheet ?

I ask this because i was once ripped off by someone who asked me to exchange my iron hilt parts for his bronze hilt parts, and would want to finish it properly, so without the bronze parts.

M.VIB.M.

[PhilusEstilius]

There are many Pugio that have been found with only the blade and tang, in fact the well known Velsen when found had the front plate of the scabbard along with several beltplates but no metal hand grip parts.

It may well be that many were just covered in wood, but one would need more reseach to state just what type of wood might have been used.

[Matthew Amt]

There is at least one surviving bone grip, including the pommel but not the guard. It has a hole through the middle for the tang, and one side is beveled and shaped just like most hilt plates. The other side, however, is flattened, with a recess, forming a lip or raised edge all the way around, like the face of a gladius guard into which the brass plate is set. However, there are no traces of metal, and I don't remember if there are rivet holes to secure a plate set into that recess or not. Interesting that the 2 sides are different! But it really does seem too thick to be just half of a grip (as if a flat tang went into the recess).

Matthew

[Doc]

Henk,

Michel Feugere mentions on pg 128 of his book "Weapons of the Romans" that a dagger grip in ivory is present in the Museum of London. He goes on to mention that mostly all hilts are of iron and only a few are of bone or ivory.

Of course I know that there are hilts in copper alloy but I do not think that I have ever heard of just wood as the outer layer. I could be wrong.

[Matthew Amt]

Of course I know that there are hilts in copper alloy

There are? I haven't seen any originals, so if you can point me towards one, I'd love to see it. The one exception may be the Leeuwen pugio, which I seem to recall being (oddly) something like brass-plated iron. I'm sure Crispus will straighten me out if I've gotten that wrong!

Mind you, there are LOTS of reproductions with cast brass or bronze hilts! I think they're all wrong. And they always get the shape of the center swell wrong, too...

Vale,

Matthew

[Doc]

Matt,

The Leeuwen pugio was the one I was thinking about. I could swear there is another one but I could be wrong. Crispus would be best to confirm.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

The Leeuwen Pugio only has a small brass plate attachjed to the front of the crossguard, not the upper part of the hilt...

That is why i dont want to use these bronze things since they are not correct.. Ivory is a great idea though...

any photos of that particular Pugio hilt ?

M.VIB.M.

[Crispvs]

The grip plate from Heddernheim is indeed made from ivory. It is recessed to fit a type 'A' tang of full length, and features two roughly parallel holes in the pommel expansion (drilled badly off centre). The grip itself is rather thick and this results from the fact that the plate is designed to enclose the tang rather than only cover its outer face. Curiously the only holes are the two small holes in the pommel expansion and as these do not seem sufficient to hold the grip securely to the tang I do not know how it was really attached. Obviously, the recessed nature of the plate would help but there are no holes at all in the guard, which would really have made it secure. The handle may originally have featured a thin outer layer of iron, which would be fairly normal but there is no guarantee of this. In any case that would still not explain how a more secure grip could have been achieved. Of course the recession might have been an exact fit on the original tang, in which case, with the other side still present, the central expansion would have prevented it being pulled off and the pins or rivets which ran through the pommel expansion may have been enough to hold it together, especially if the ivory plates could have been glued edge to edge, which is a possibility.
Obmann shows both front an back views of the plate (taf47,figs 2&3).

I am not aware of an ivory grip plate in the museum of London, although I have heard tell of a jet handle, although I do not have a picture of this.
I don't have a copy of Fugere but when he talks of ivory handles he may be including the Melun pugio. As far as I know this has not been verified. The article in which the Melun pugio was published is poor and the analysis of the dagger was equally poor. The author seems to make assumptions based on what the remains looked like, but it seems vague and it would appear that no proper analysis was done. Thus I do not accept the identification of ivory rather than bone (which seems much more likely) and will not until I see a proper analysis of the remains of the dagger's handle which proves it one way or the other.

With regard to the possibility of copper-alloy grip plates, I do recall photographs of a pugio with a plain copper-alloy type 'A' sheath, which may have had copper-alloy grip plates, which were posted up on RAT by someone about four years ago. Unfortunately the copies I made of these pictures became corrupted an I have not been able to find them again on RAT, meaning I cannot check.

In the case of the Leeuven pugio, the sheath is copper-alloy, decorated with cast strips of pearled brass which were soldered on. The grip plates of the handle were iron but had a thin copper-alloy coating, which is why many people see photos of this dagger and think it has brass grips. The guard is further decorated with a line of pearled strip of the same type as on the sheath running around its outline. This does not continue up onto the grip itself.

Regarding the possibility of wooden grip plates, this is certainly a possibility but if it was the case no such grip plate have so far been found, as far as I know. This does not prevent the possibility (quite a likely possibility) of wooden grip plates but at this stage the evidence to prove their existence is lacking.

Crispvs

[Dithrambus]

I hope the OP does'nt mind if I ask a question here concerning my pugio, I puchased this several years ago without doing any research and since I have seen many pugios, especially here at RAT, but none that match in appearance to the one I purchased. Could someone take a look and tell me if it matches any known historic designs.

BTW it has a one-piece wooden grip.

Thanks

http://www.museumreplicas.com/p-281-roman-pugio.aspx

[Doc]

Save for the body of the blade in the originals having some waist, none that I know of look anything like that. This is one of those items to avoid if possible. As a matter of fact, just about everything from Museum Replicas should be avoided when it comes to Roman gear.

[Dithrambus]

Save for the body of the blade in the originals having some waist, none that I know of look anything like that. This is one of those items to avoid if possible. As a matter of fact, just about everything from Museum Replicas should be avoided when it comes to Roman gear.

Thanks Doc, I could have used your advice five years ago. :wink: Actually, I have their Gladius as well... :oops: along with several other pieces that I had bought over the years before I had any idea what I was buying. I simply love swords and was willing (unwisely) to take catalog descriptions at face value, since then I have learned to do plenty of research before making a purchase.

Thanks again

Mark H.

[Crispvs]

I would have to agree with Paolo. The blade looks like some sort of Ancient Greek xiphos type sword, while the handle is based on a first century AD gladius handle. Unfortunately it is one of those things you will have to put down to inexperience. You never know, it might end up looking good on the mantelpiece, but it certainly would not do any good for the credibility of your Roman soldier impression.
Unfortunately the world is full of charletons and con-artists like those at 'Museum Replicas', who will tell you lies and take your money. As you have found out already, the only protection from them is knowledge, and none of us starts off with the full quota of that.

It does not have to be a case of 'better luck next time'. If you are still after a pugio, build up your knowledge from the resources you find here and then, armed with a greater amount of knowledge, get one from a reputable supplier. Then you can be happy with what you have acquired and will not have to be worried about anything being less than right about it.
Have fun learning about pugiones! My own deep interest in them was started after I bought a reproduction pugio blade about fifteen years ago which did not seem to look like the ones I had seen pictures of when I received it and I then started looking at more and more pictures and articles in order to try to work out how to correct the faults. After a while I discovered I had read all of the readily available sources and looked at pictures of scores of actual examples and had developed a knowledge and love of the subject that I had never intentionally set out to gain.

Crispvs

[Doc]

Crispus,

I sent you a PM

[Dithrambus]

Anyone interested in purchasing a pugio? :lol: :lol: :wink:

I would'nt do that to my fellow brothers in arms, besides it might get used against me....literally! (you guys would know better than to buy it anyway)

I guess I could re-construct the one that I have, it was a waste of money anyway. Is there anything I could do such as changing the grip? Or is the blade to far from being historically accurate to be worth the effort?


My apologies and thanks to M.VIB.M. for the use of your thread. :wink:

[Doc]

It would entirely depend on the nature of the tang if there is one at all. You may be able to do something with the blade provided that the waist is not narrower than any of the real examples. If the waist is wide enough, then possibly you could attempt at making a correct pugio blade in width and shape. I do not recall however how long the dagger you posted is. It may require for you to reduce its length. However, I will yield to those who are more expert than I am for thier opinions.


Anyway, back to the topic.