Number of dagger belt plates 1st half 1st c.

[Magnus]

I have 5 non hinged plates for my belt to play with...what do you guys think of this layout?



Depending on how much actual room I have, I may add #5 to the end of #4.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Brian,
yes that is sensible if we assume that the plates were evenly distributed. It might also be considered that the plates were in the front only, to show off :-)

Matt
if you make it like that you will find you pugio somewhere on your back. Most of the steles show them on the left front, so I´d move #1 next to #3 and move the frog plates right next to #2. If you have the plates sitting next to each other towards the end of your belt, they will prevent the sword scabbard from scratching the leather of the dagger belt.

[Magnus]

Sorry, that isn't drawn to scale or anything, it was only to show general placement. The buckle, frogs and thus pugio will all be placed in their proper places lol. I'm not that dumb :-D

What I'll do is once I get the buckle and frogs in the mail and complete them, I'll post the mock-up with the placement on the actual belt.

Oh and where the apron straps hang over the belt, I was going to keep that bare...or should I put some plain plates?

[caiusbeerquitius]

Matt, I wasn´t insinuating you were stupid, all I could go by was your drawing. Just tried to help, as on my belt the frogs are a bit too far on the left.

[Magnus]

I know, I was only jesting with you

[Crispvs]

I have had the feeling for a while now that most belts used by re-enactors have far too many plates.
Not only do the surviving apparently complete sets only have three to eight plates, but depictions of belts (not including those on 'standing soldier' type sculptures) often show only four or five mounts distributed along the belt.
The 'standing soldier' type stelae from the Rhineland generally show the belt apparently completely covered with plates. However, we cannot see the backs of the men and it is possible that unseen parts of the belts to the men's rear had no plates at all.
To my mind this is supported by the Velson plates. One of them had been shortened by carefully bending one end back on itself. This would make little sense if the plates were distributed evenly around the belt with spaces between them, but if they were grouped together in a defined space (between the buckle and the dagger frogs for instance) this might call for the shortening of a plate which turned out to be slightly too long for the space available.
The velson soldier is particularly valuable here, as he was wearing his belt when he was buried so we can be fairly sure that we have the complete set, allowing that is for the fact that we know from all of the finds of individual belt plates that it was probably not uncommon for belts to be missing a plate or two.

The belt wrapped around the sword from Vindonissa may or may not be complete. The five belt plates (three square, one round and one depicting winged thunderbolts) may well have been the total of the original plates. Similarly, although no belt buckle was found, leading Dreschler-Erb to suggest that the button and double loop fitting was being used as a makeshift buckle, it is possible that the segmentata buckle which was found with it was acting as a replacement belt buckle. This might seem strange, but in fact there is a another belt plate from Vindonissa which does have what appears to be a segmentata buckle fitted to one end, presumably to replace a lost or damaged buckle, so there would be precedent for the small buckle having been used to secure the belt. The button and double loop fitting can be shown from comparison with other sites like Idrea to be for use in sword suspension so it may be that the only item missing from the find is a second button/loop fitting. Then again, if this is missing it leaves open the possibility that other things might be as well.

For my next belt I plan only to cover the front with plates. It is at this point I also seem to recall an incident when thieves cut solders' belts in order to steal them. This would be far easier to achieve if the part of the belt to the soldier's rear was not plated than if it was (I am assuming here that the thief would not be stupid enough to try to cut the belt when standing in front of the soldier).

However, as a corollary to all this, I recall that the Herculaneum soldier had two belts, both plated and totalling something like twenty two plates.

Brian,
The plates from Chicester, which you have mentioned a number of times before, are of a type which would date to the mid to late second century AD. They are not invasion period, despite their findspot.

Crispvs

[Tarbicus]

In fact, my dagger belt will have many less on it.

Why less? The pugio belt would have been the most worn, surely? Legionaries seem to have been very proud of their pugiones (murderous if the pugio belt was messed with, as seen in Rome), so why waste an opportunity for more bling?

[Magnus]

We just finished a discussion about putting less plates on, and now you want me to put MORE? You rebel Jim!

[PhilusEstilius]

I think I must agree with Jim on the beltplates for the pugio the more the better, indeed the pugio belt would have been worn so much more in camp and also off duty times when a soldier went to shop at the Vicus.
Where Crispvs has said we can be fairly sure we have the complete set of Velsen plates is not of course a certainty but more of an assumption, there is the more important fact that these plates were used twice on two belts for a second belt was made for the up-grade of it.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Basically I agree, but the finds from Auerberg and Velsen are complete sets, and they have these few plates.

[Magnus]

I think I'm going to remove the plates from my other belt and re-do it. I'm not happy with how they came out crooked, and maybe I'll add some extra ones to my pugio belt instead.

[PhilusEstilius]

Christian.

I am not so familiar with the plates from Auerberg however it has to be clearly assumption that the 8 Velsen plates are a complete set, for it is just as well to ask if all the plates were recovered from the well at Velsen there is no way anyone can be so sure about that.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Brian, it would be just enough to look at the excavation report, I think. Hint:

J.-M.A.W. Morel & A.V.A.J. Bosman, "An early Roman burial in Velsen I", in C. van Driel-Murray (ed.), Roman Military Equipment: the Sources of Evidence (Oxford, 1989), 167-191.

I guess Duncan knows something here as well.

Auerberg: The belts were wrapped around the daggers, which were then deposited in a wooden cistern, before to was closed. No reason to assume they are incomplete.

[PhilusEstilius]

Christian.

I do have and have read the report you refer to however where we hear of various things that may have filtered down in the well itself there could just as easily be yet another plate or indeed two that may not have been retrieved.
What I have found from experience is that when I have made belts and given gaps between plates of say 5mm at times a belt can have around 10 to 12 plates, with maybe a greater gap 8 or maybe 10 plates could complete a full belt.
In fact putting all these 8 plates together touching one another gives us approx' 42cm therefore given a reasonable gap in the plates we could reach about 85 to 90cm almost a whole belt.

[Crispvs]

Brian,

You say you have read Morel and Bosman's article. Fine, but so have both Christian and I. It does say quite plainly that the well's contents were thoroughly sifted, hence the finding of the suspension ring and terminal expansion. I am sure any further belt plates would have turned up as well.
As I said above, it is possible that the plates were spaced out, but I think the deliberate shortening of one plate argues against that and argues instead for the plates being placed close together.

As to 'bling', don't let modern desire or assumptions blind you to what the evidence tells us. Whilst we cannot be 100% sure, the evidence we do have does suggest less, rather than more plates. Also, arguing on the basis of something you have made yourself, regardless of the technical expertise involved is, by definition, circular and our arguments should always be based on the evidence of antiquity.

Crispvs