Pugio Blade by Stock Reduction Method - Scabbard Completed

[Peroni]

please axplaine to me axactly the difference between this two type of pugiones...I am a few ingnorant in this

Sure, Here you go..

[munazio planco]

avete Omnes


thank you Peroni,I suspected that was like that...but i ask for you is not possible that this kind of blade could finish in one scabbard of type A?

[Peroni]

Oh! Yes, completely possible! One of the Leeuwen daggers is just like that!

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Ahhh, almost exactly like the one Sulla is copying... :lol:

[Crispvs]

Actually, it is the one Sulla is copying.

As Peronis says the picture is slightly more complicated than one would at first imagine. In fact, we can define three types of blade, based on their cross sections, namely 'A', 'B' and 'C'. In the case of type 'C', the blade has little or nothing, either upstanding or sunken, which could be called a midrib. The blades tend to be quite triangular in shape as well. To add to the sheaths, there are also frame type sheaths, which probably came in several different types, and which can certainly be associated with type 'A' blades and probably the other types as well. Peronis has already pointed out that the Leeuwen dagger is a type 'B' blade in a type 'A' sheath and I can add that the Velson dagger ins a type 'A' blade in a type 'B' sheath. In other words I think that as far as the Romans were concerned any blade could go with any sheath, as long as they fitted. To add to the mixture, there are two types of tang (one could even argue three types) and several different ways of consructing handles.

Incidentally, Peronis' suspension loops are fine if you are planning on making a type 'A' sheath, but do not use them if you plan to make a type 'B' sheath. For this you would need hinge plates and type 'B' suspension rings (which resemble small buckles).


Crispvs

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Actually, it is the one Sulla is copying.


Crispvs

Yes Crispus, I know.... :roll:

[munazio planco]

avete Omnes


so,dear Peroni you have to do the loops suspensions for scabbard B too 8)

[M. Demetrius]

Forgive my ignorance about pugiones, but is there a time/era span that is commonly accepted for them? For example: Is A older than C, is B used during all the times pugiones were used?

[sulla felix]

PierPaolo,

These rough sketches show the basic shaping process I followed using the Angle Grinder.

After I had the basic shape hours of work with files and stones!

[Crispvs]

"Forgive my ignorance about pugiones, but is there a time/era span that is commonly accepted for them? For example: Is A older than C, is B used during all the times pugiones were used?"

Type 'A' blades were probably in use from the time the Romans adopted the dagger from the Spanish and continued throughout the time daggers were in use, although the overall blade shape changed gradually. The type 'B' blade seems to have been a later inovation and may have entered service early in the first century AD. Type 'C' blades appear to be more or less concurrent with type 'B' blades.
Type I tangs (whose shape echoes that of the overall handle) seem to have gradually given way to type II (rod) tangs so that after the middle of the first century AD most daggers probably had type II tangs.
Similarly, type 'A' sheaths seem to gradually give way to type 'B' sheaths as the first century AD progresses, with the result that virtually all sheaths which date to the second half of the first century AD are of type 'B'. In all probability frame type sheaths predated both other types and survived them both as well.

There is as yet no evidence to show that the dagger continued in use with the Roman army throughout the second century AD but it now seems that some soldiers were still carrying them at the beginning of the second century AD. They re-appear in the archaeological record late in the second century in a different form but displaying rod tangs and raised midribs and being associated with frame type sheaths, although these appear to be constructed differently to first century BC and first century AD frame sheaths.


"so,dear Peroni you have to do the loops suspensions for scabbard B too "

Type 'B' rings will not be so easy to do I am afraid.

Here are a couple from Vindonissa. The one on the left is an unfinished casting.



These would need to be fitted into hinge plates as well.

Crispvs

[M. Demetrius]

If the one on the left is an unfinished casting, then that would indicate something like sand casting instead of lost wax, because in wax casting, the idea is to do as much of the metalwork in the wax as possible, so as to reduce filing and finishing. Just an observation. Am I thinking right?

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Sometimes, stone carved moulds were used. That pieces are plain in the back, so you only need a carved mould and a flat contramould. A contramould is needed, or the back of the pieces will don't be plain...

[Crispvs]

Good point Cesar. I don't think this was done in a stone one piece mould though, as the extensions on the left appear to be 'sprues' resulting from the metal having been poured down channels to reach the mould itself.

Crispvs

[Peroni]

so,dear Peroni you have to do the loops suspensions for scabbard B too

I have a pattern made ready for casting! I will speak to the master Nodge Nolan, It is with him at the moment! :wink:

[Robert]

In the item on the left, the sprues as you call them may have been left intentionally to allow folding inwards to make the hinge. It is very difficult to cast a hole where the connecting rod goes through, much easier to fold the metal back to shape around a thin rod to create the hole for the hinge. Or am I just imagining things