Not exactly a replica, it differs in some aspects. The original is so decayed that some things are highly speculative. The hilt is silver and ebony. THe scabbard still lacks a slide since I am not sure how to make it. The associated baldric is a mistery (the reconstruction proposed has no sense for me) so I made the pieces and I am open to suggestions. In the meantime I made a belt. The scabbard mouth piece has signs of having anothe grooved band but I made it as it remains.
One of the big problems of this sword is which side is the front. One would thing it it the side of the decorative rivet (much like a early menuki) But , judging from similar swords, it could have a gemstone or some kind of decorative piece on the other side and become lost.
So many questions!
The sword is light and the long handle kind of balance it. It´s a pleasant thing to use.
First of all WOW :woot: Leonardo beautiful. I may be ably to help you with the slide if you have a photo, and I can hopefully show you how to make it :wink: May I surgest that the buckles are attached to the belt along the edge and there would be a strap going through your slide with holes at the end to buckle your sword too the belt :!: I have done this myself but I dont tbink I have a photo. Looking forward to the finished sword
Regards Brennivs :lol:
Woe Ye The Vanquished
Brennvs 390 BC
When you have all this why do you envy our mud huts
Caratacvs
Centvrio Princeps Brennivs COH I Dacorivm (Roma Antiqvia)
Well, the baldric is an enigma.
I don´t speak german so I had to rely on the translation of a friend (who is an archaeologist) and from what I understood it is not perfectly clear what pieces were found with the grave.
The riddle is as follows:
1 The rosette, 3.6 cm wide, is over the chest or slightly lower. It is permanently attached to a strap end some 2 cm wide.
2 Three buckles are considered part of the same item, The three are for a strap around 2, 5 cm wide. One is slightly bigger and seems the model for the other two (highly debatable)
3 The stiffeners are 12 and also correspond to a 2,5 wide strap.
4. It seems to me that only two buckles are present in the grave, at the side of the place in the scabbard that the slide would be
5 There is a strap end in suite with the strap end of the rosette. But again it is not clear to me if it is present in the original find.
6 the position of the sword relatve to the body suggest the man was not wearing the baldric.
7 The grave has a coin form the middle of the IV cent.
The reconstruction proposed in the paper tries to stretch the style of this piece to the wide baldric format but it doesn´t work in many points.
The problem is that as far I know there are no hints about how IV cent baldrics are. The wide baldric is at least 100 years earlier.
Now the possibilities:
First I tried to explore the initial suggestion: a wide baldric variant.
[attachment=12111]HGR003_rec_04.jpg[/attachment]
This much later arrangement is on what I based my reconstruction. AS Tonny suggested, I understood that two buckles should be attached to the baldric and a single strap with holes in the ends would pass through the slide. Still on a wide baldric configuration. This was my solution with the buckles paralel to the main strap, not hanging, since they are the same width and I don´t what other reason could have.
[attachment=12112]11081581_10206313772424036_1593770023_n.jpg[/attachment]
The problem was that sword place is too displaced to the back, otherwise the rosette will be too high in the chest and I believe the wide baldric has the disc shaped objet very low. Also a baldric needs to have an angle.
I didn´t like it so I reworked it. I made a belt and I´ll wait to see if somebody else has a better solution.
It remains to explore a hip possibility like this
[attachment=12113]brut_kurgan_2_schwert_bild_326.jpg[/attachment]
or the misterious Stilicho one.
Thak you very much but I tried to say that I don´t know which type of scabbard slide I should make. I would love to use a stone one, like a han slide. But I am not completely sure it will be correct (this is not so "pontic")
maybe your first baldric version might work if you would remove the strap section between the two buckles facing each other and rejoin the straps by fixing the end of an additional, narrower leather strap to buckle B and C (cf. Image below). The additional or auxilliary strap would also be wrapped around the scabbard and therefore serve two purposes (connecting the baldric segments and attaching the scabbard to the baldric). The narrowness of the auxilliary strap and the buckles B and C would make the baldric very flexible and therefore allow the scabbard to dangle. Regarding the importance of the ability of scabbards attached to baldrics being able to dangle, see: http://www.romanarmytalk.com/20-roman-re...=15#350338
Quote:Also a baldric needs to have an angle.
Because of the flexibility mentioned above, the right angle would automatically set in.
Quote:The problem was that sword place is too displaced to the back, otherwise the rosette will be too high in the chest and I believe the wide baldric has the disc shaped objet very low.
Given the right distance between the rosette and buckle B, the right position of the rosette would result in the right position of the sword.
The photo is upside down but you can see the buckle there is another further along, which the sword can buckle too. Like I said the two buckles might be placed along the edge.
Regards Brennivs :lol:
Woe Ye The Vanquished
Brennvs 390 BC
When you have all this why do you envy our mud huts
Caratacvs
Centvrio Princeps Brennivs COH I Dacorivm (Roma Antiqvia)
Thomas: Actually you are the person to blame all this, because I found the papers by Margit Bagy from your posts about wide baldrics in the iv cent
Yes, that is a better possibility, If you see At my picture youll find that the conecting strap is cut, because I tried that arrangement too. But I still have doubt about what exactly was found in the grave.
Quote:If you see At my picture youll find that the conecting strap is cut, because I tried that arrangement too.
Ah, this would explain the seam between the two buckles.
Quote:
The photo is upside down but you can see the buckle there is another further along, which the sword can buckle too. Like I said the two buckles might be placed along the edge.
Regards Brennivs :lol:
Nice to see the belt parts of the grave Weßling 14 reconstructed! I know it's OT and I feel like a crumb criticising the cake: The belt might quite probably be assembled the wrong way. The construction priciple of late roman belts, be it chip-carved or stamp-decorated ones (e.g. Weßling 14), and the fact that the rivets of the two rectangular counterplates are about twice as long as the ones of the u-shaped terminal plate suggest the following construction:
[attachment=12129]BeltWeling14.jpg[/attachment]
the attached photo suggests that the baldric construction wich I proposed above (closed through a buckle, scabbard attached by means of a narrow auxilliary strap) might indeed work (i.e. achieving the right position of the sword and the proper angle of the baldric).
[attachment=12131]Baldric.jpg[/attachment]
i have already done the baldric following your sugestion!!! pictures in a few hours.
But I am afraid that the reconstruction you posted has a conecting leather strapbehin the sword,so itis a continous baldric as my first reconstruction.
![[Image: P4090063.jpg]](http://s162.photobucket.com/user/brennivs/media/P4090063.jpg.html)
