When to use your pugio

[Primvs Pavlvs]

ACH DU MEINE GUETE, WO IST DIE FONDUE GABEL? hock:

[Robert Vermaat]

What's the green stain?

Ave Valerius,
the remarkable stain is pure garum, leaping out of the pugio’s tank in it’s hollow hilt.

Very informative, but I never asked that question ('twas Faventianus)... :?:

[A_Volpe]

Heiko

You forgot the keychain on the pommel, and the mini-torch for excusions out to the latrines at night... :twisted:

I seem to recall a note from somewhere that Legionaries while in Rome were forbidden to wear thier arms&armor, but they were still able to wear thier balteus belt...So is it possible that they could also carry thier dagger as personal defence? I'd also see this as the case when a soldier is busy during a work-detail and isn't in armor (in "fatigues"), I wouldn't want to be a soldier out in the field or Off Duty and NOT have a weapon on me at all times. A Pugio easily fixes to the belt, which is always around your waist (unless you're in town and 'checking the baggage' of the local female population, as it were :wink: ) and it's small enough to not restrict your movement and does not nessesarily stick out like a sore thumb like a gladius.

[Tarbicus]

One thing that really stands out about the pugio, and the expense that must have been lavished on it and particularly the scabbard, is the decoration. Michael Simkins was asked to reconstruct the Titelberg pugio and scabbard for an article by L. Vanden Berghe in JRMES 12/13. The point is that the engraving on the central cross plate couldn't be done by hand, it was too fine, and they ended up using computer aided engraving. It must have cost a fortune to get the original scabbard engraved like it is by the owner.

[FAVENTIANVS]

What's the green stain?

Ave Valerius,
the remarkable stain is pure garum, leaping out of the pugio’s tank in it’s hollow hilt.

Very informative, but I never asked that question ('twas Faventianus)... :?:

Yep! It was me!

[Crispvs]

"The point is that the engraving on the central cross plate couldn't be done by hand, it was too fine, and they ended up using computer aided engraving."

I find that very disappointing. Godfrey Knight seems to have had no trouble doing a very good reproduction and I am sure Erik Leckl (now known as Erik Koenig) could have done it without too much trouble. The idea that the engraving on the plate was too fine to have been done by hand in unsupportable. The original MUST have been done by hand - the Romans did not have computer engraving! The fact that Michael Simkins was not capable of doing fine quality engraving does not mean that it would not have been well within the capabilities of a competent craftsman of the time. The computer engraving strikes me as a cop-out alternative to going out and finding (and paying) a second craftsman to work on a hand made piece of equipment.

I agree with the point about the expense of the workmanship though. I was trying to make exactly that point above.

Crispvs

[Tarbicus]

The idea that the engraving on the plate was too fine to have been done by hand in unsupportable.

Crispus, I need to clarify something I omitted - the brief to Michael Simkins was that he could only use tools known to the Romans (as far as was known) at the time. Do Godfrey Knight et al use modern tools?

[Robert Vermaat]

Do Godfrey Knight et al use modern tools?

Yes he does.

[Crispvs]

Erik does all of his engraving and inlaying by hand.

Crispvs

[Robert Vermaat]

Do Godfrey Knight et al use modern tools?

Yes he does.

Oh you mean for engraving only? I think he does that by hand.