IIIrd C AD sword fastening.

[Anonymous]

In his recent and excellent book on Dura Europos Simon James writes that the IIIrd C AD sword was not attached to the baldric by a complicated system but could slide freely along the baldric.<br>
Indeed, sculptural evidence does not show a complicated system of fastening, the sword seem to be attached just by a leather strip going through the loop.<br>
A reconstruction by J. Oldenstein in Connolly's Greece and Rome at War shows the leather strap going around the sword a couple of times, then crossing on the back.<br>
Stephenson in his very short book about Roman infantry equipment states that this criss-cross type of fastening helped maintain the sword in a proper tilt forward position, making it easier to draw.<br>
Ther criss cross system (Oldenstein) seemed more logical to me at the beginning, since precisely it did not let the sword slide freely along the baldric and kept it in a proper position. But then, there is S. James and a wealth of scuptural evidence that says the contrary and that's when reenactors come handy.<br>
What does the experience of actually carrying a sword hanging from a IIIrd C.AD baldric tell us about it?<br>
Criss-cross system, or simple strap? What is the more practical?<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>

[Sassanid]

Criss-cross is much better on a practical level, and that is the way Quinta has done it in the past.<br>
<br>
I can't speak for the others, but this year I am going to try it the way Simon James, Aitor and the evidence seem to suggest. The slide will be tight against the scabbard and the leather of the baldric quite thick and stiff. I did even toy with idea of recessing the slide slightly into the scabbard to nip the baldric. No evidence though, and it would tricky with some of the slide designs.<br>
<br>
On balance the slide system hardly seems an improvement on the old ring system. Simpler, probably fashionable, but very flimsy. Perhaps the reason why so any slides have been found in the archaeological record.<br>
<br>
Andrew <p></p><i></i>