There are some “truths” in reenactment that are not questioned even though they should be. These are called “reenactorism” and engaged by both newbies and veterans. In this article we will show one of these, the myth of a long belt in Early medieval Europe, following the work done by German reenactor Christopher Kunz.
It is fully evident from the preserved material that there was a number of approaches to belt wearing in the Early Middle ages. These approaches originated alongside cultural environment and local development, social ranking, gender and usage method. The assumption of using a uniform belt type with the same width and length is wrong. On the initiative of beginning reenactors who often raise questions about belt length, in this article we will try to map the legth of men’s leather belts according to iconography and finds in burial complexes.
Fig. 1: Grave no. 59 from the Haithabu-Flachgräberfeld burial site.
Arents – Eisenschmidt 2010b: 308, Taf. 10.
This form best resembles present belts, which are manufactured approximately 15 cm longer than the waistline. In seven graves from Birka, Sweden (488, 750, 761, 918, 949, 1030, 1076) the buckles are no more than 10 cm far from each other (Arbman 1943) and similar positions could be found throughout Europe – we can mention Great Moravian (i.e. Kalousek 1973: 33, Fig. 13) or Danish graves (Arents – Eisenschmidt 2010b: 301, Taf. 3). There are no belts with hanging strap-ends in Early medieval iconography, which is rather schematic than detailed. Belts are scarcely visible in painted iconography as they usually seem to be overlapped by pleated upper tunics, which can be interpreted as an element of fashion. As a result the belt looks like a narrow horizontal line.
On the other hand, several burial positions shows some of Early medieval belts had strap-ends that hung down, and the decoration of strap-ends is often understandable when seen in the hanging state. The most graphic evidence comes from depictions of people and animals which can be seen on the strap-ends and placed lengthwise. In some cases, there are figures of naked men depicted on the strap-ends, which could imply that the hanging end could reach down to the genitals and symbolically represent or emphasize them (Thomas 2000: Fig. 3.16, 3.27). In the listing below we will attempt to suggest several manners of tying these belts.
Fig. 2: A selection of painted iconography of 9-11th century depicting a belt hidden in tunic pleats.
From the left: British Lib. MS Arundel 60, 4r, 11th century; BNF Lat. 1, 423r, 9th century; British Lib. MS Stowe 944, 6r, 11th century; XIV.A.13, 29v, 11th century.
The simplest form is represented by a belt worn in its nearly maximal length. The end is then short enough not to obstruct manual labour and because it copies the belt, it can be hidden in a pleated tunic. Depictions of loose belt ends can be quite typically observed in 13th and 14th century. Moreover, we know a belt from Early medieval Latvia which had a metal ring at its end, used to grapple on a buckle tongue. The very same method was is also known from Čingul mound, Ukraine, from 13th century (Отрощенко – Рассамакин 1983: 78).
Fig. 6: Reconstruction of Haithabu type belts.
Arents – Eisenschmidt 2010b: 140, Abb. 61.
Tucked behind the belt
Another simple way of wearing a belt is tucking its end behind the already fastened part of the belt. We have at least one piece of evidence of this wearing from Anglo-Saxon England, where a belt passed through the buckle, flipped back and end tucked behind itself was documented (Watson 2006: 6-8). This forms a perpendicular line on the belt and keeps the face side of strap-end exposed. In case of pleated tunic covering the belt it can be easily adjusted to form a line.
Tucked in a slider
Metal belt sliders are very scarce in terms of archeological material. One of this kind was found within Gokstad Barrow (C10439) and adjusted to fit a strap-end from the same grave (Nicolaysen 1882: 49, Pl: X:11). Another slider was presumably found in Birka grave no. 478 (Arbman 1943: 138) and three more made of sheet bronze were apparently found in Kopparvik, Gotland (Toplak 2016: 126). According to sliders usually appearing in relation to spurs or garters where they are 2-3 centimeters wide (i.e. Andersen 1993: 48, 69; Thomas 2000: 268; Skre 2011: 72-74), we can assume that if the sliders were used with belts more, we would be able to detect them more easily. It is possible that they corroded over time, that organic sliders were used too or that they will be found during a more detailed research. Generally we can assume that the sliders were used in cases where the buckles did not include holding plates – in opposite cases the holding plates would not be visible after using the slider.
Fig. 8: Reconstruction of the belt from grave no. 478 at Birka.
Arbman 1943: 138, Abb. 83.
Fig. 9: Attempt for a reconstruction of the belt from Birka grave no. 949 applying a leather slider.
Author: Sippe Guntursson.
Puncturing two holes
A relatively elegant reenactor’s solution is to puncture two consecutive holes and tuck the belt behind its buckle. All the belt’s components therefore remain visible. This solution was documented in case of at least two archeological finds from Britain and Belgium, 6th-7th century. (De Smaele et al. in press; Watson 2002: 3). The same system is known from Early medieval Latvia. In case of pleated tunic covering the belt it can be easily adjusted to form a line.
Fig. 10: Puncturing two holes that enables threading the strap-end behind a buckle.
Author: Erik Panknin.
Attaching by a thong
Another aesthetical, yet undocumented manner of attaching a belt is adding a thong which holds the buckle’s tongue while the strap-end continues further behind the buckle. We have no evidence for this manner.
Fig. 11: Fixing the buckle with a thong attached to the belt. An unfounded hypothesis.
Author: L’Atelier de Micky.
Tucking into a buckle slot
Buckles having a rectangular slot aside from the typical loop are very common in Eastern-European regions. After fastening the belt using the loop’s tongue, the strap-end could be tucked into this slot and hanged downwards. In case of pleated tunic covering the belt it can be easily adjusted to form a line.
Knot on a belt
The most frequent solution among reenactors is undoubtedly a knot performed like this: after going through the buckle, the strap-end is tucked behind the belt from below and then passed through the resulting loop. This means achieving a perpendicular line on the belt and keeping the strap-end’s face side visible. This knot-tying, although with much shorter belt than standardly used in today’s reenactment, could be found in France during the Merovingian age (France-Lanlord 1961). With a high probability, the same solution was found in a grave from St Michael’s Church graveyard in Workington, England. Knots were often worn in 13th and 14th century.
Some of the Eastern-European Early medieval decorated belts are manufactured in a more complex way, having one or more longer ends. In case of a belt constructed to have more ends, one of these ends – usually the shorter one – is designed to be fixed by the buckle, while the others are either tagged on or formed by the outer layer of two-layered belt. Long ends of these costly belts are designed for double wrapping, tucking into a slider or behind the belt. The length of the ends is not standardized, however we are unable to find any belt that would reach below its owner’s crotch when completely tied. While looking for parallels, we can notice that a belt compounded this way has many similarities to tassels on horse harnesses. Apparently, the belts were worn by riders or emerged from such a tradition, then maintained the position of wealthy status even after being adopted by neighbouring non-nomadic cultures. At last we can state that longer belts were designed mainly to hold more decoration and to allow the owner to handle the length more flexibly, whether for practical or aesthetical reasons.
Fig. 14: Composite belts with long ends.
A, b – belts from Gnezdovo (Мурашева 2000: рис. 109, 113), c – belts from Nové Zámky (Čilinská 1966: Abb. 19), d – belt from Hemse (Thunmark-Nylén 2006: Abb. III:9:3), e – reconstruction of belt tying from Káros, Hungary (Petkes – Sudár 2014).
The topic of belt lenght in reenactment is definitely a controversional one as it touches every male reenactor. Belts are sometimes costly and even a hint, originally meant as constructive critic, can easily cause negative emotions. There is no need for them though, as there is probably no reenactor who has never worn a long belt. We suppose that this reenactorism, used in practice for more than 30 years over the whole world, is caused by these factors:
unwillingness to perform one’s own research leading to imitation of a generally accepted model
bad access to sources or their misintepretation
easily obtainable and cheap, yet historically inaccurate belts sold on the internet in standard length of about 160 cm
unwillingness to talk about the problem by both organizers and attendants
In this article, we demonstrated that historical belts often did not have any hanging ends and that the maximum length where the end would reach was the crotch, which could have a symbolic meaning. Any of the aforementioned manners of attaching should not be incompatible with the sources we have at our disposal, however as we already mentioned, both the length and style of wearing followed local traditions. Western Europe therefore preferred delicately hidden belts while in Eastern Europe, the richly decorated belts were worn on public display.
I hope you liked reading this article. If you have any question or remark, please contact me or leave a comment below. If you want to learn more and support my work, please, fund my project on Patreon or Paypal.
Andersen, A. W. (1993). Lejre-skibssættinger, vikingegrave, Gridehøj. Aarbøger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 1993: 7–142.
Arbman, Holger (1943). Birka I. Die Gräber. Text, Stockholm.
Arents, Ute – Eisenschmidt, Silke (2010a). Die Gräber von Haithabu, Band 1: Text, Literatur, Die Ausgrabungen in Haithabu 15, Neumünster.
Arents, Ute – Eisenschmidt, Silke (2010b). Die Gräber von Haithabu, Band 2: Katalog, Listen, Tafeln, Beilagen, Die Ausgrabungen in Haithabu 15, Neumünster.
Čilinská, Zlata (1966). Slawisch-awarisches Gräberfeld in Nové Zámky. Archaeologia slovacca, Fontes, t. 7, Bratislava.
De Smaele, B. – Delaruelle, S. – Hertogs, S. – Scheltjens, S. – Thijs, C. – Van Doninck, J. – Verdegem, S. (in print). Merovingische begraving en middeleeuwse bewoning bij een bronstijd grafveld aan de Krommenhof in Beerse, AdAK rapport 17, Turnhout.
France-Lanlord, Albert (1961). Die Gürtelgarnitur von Saint-Quentin. In: Germania 39, 412-420;
Kalousek, František (1971). Břeclav-Pohansko. 1, Velkomoravské pohřebiště u kostela : archeologické prameny z pohřebiště, Brno.
Мурашева, В.В. (2000). Древнерусские ременные наборные украшения (Х-XIII вв.), М.: Эдиториал УРСС.
Nicolaysen, Nicolay (1882). Langskibet fra Gokstad ved Sandefjord = The Viking-ship discovered at Gokstad in Norway, Kristiania.
Отрощенко, B. – Рассамакин, Ю. (1983). История Чингульского кургана // «Наука и жизнь», 1983/07, 78-83.
Petkes, Zsolt – Sudár, Balázs (2014). A honfoglalók viselete – Magyar Őstörténet 1, Budapest.
Schmitt, Georg (2005). Die Alamannen im Zollernalbkreis, Materialhefte zur Archäologie in Baden-Württemberg Band 80, Pirna. Available: https://publications.ub.uni-mainz.de/theses/volltexte/2006/907/pdf/907.pdf
Skre, Dagfinn (2011). Things from the Town. Artefacts and Inhabitants in Viking-age Kaupang, Aarhus & Oslo.
Степанова, Ю.В. (2009). Древнерусский погребальный костюм Верхневолжья, Тверь, Тверской государственный университет.
Thomas, Gabor (2000). A Survey of Late Anglo-Saxon and Viking-Age Strap-Ends from Britain, University of London.
Thunmark-Nylén, Lena(2006). Die Wikingerzeit Gotlands III: 1–2 : Text, Stockholm.
Toplak, Matthias (2016). Das wikingerzeitliche Gräberfeld von Kopparsvik auf Gotland : Studien zu neuen Konzepten sozialer Identitäten am Übergang zum christlichen Mittelalter, Tübingen : Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen.
Watson, Jacqui (2002). Mineral Preserved Organic Material from St Stephen’s Lane and Buttermarket, Ipswich, Portsmouth : English Heritage, Centre for Archaeology.
Watson, Jacqui (2006). The Identification of Organic Material Associated with Metalwork from the Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Smythes Corner (Shrublands Quarry), Coddenham, Suffolk, Portsmouth : English Heritage, Centre for Archaeology.24. března 2019
Rozvoj tohoto webu je mou prací na plný úvazek. Pokud se Vám tento projekt líbí a chtěli byste mne v jeho tvorbě podpořit, můžete se stát mým sponzorem prostřednictvím Patreonu.
The development of this site is my full-time job. If you like this project and would like to support me in its creation, you can become my Patreon sponsor.
Máte-li jakýkoli dotaz, nabídku či připomínku, můžete mne jednoduše zkontaktovat skrze kontaktní formulář. Těším se na Vaše zprávy!
If you have any questions, offers or comments, you can simply contact me via the contact form. I look forward to your messages!