Login

02-25-2004, 10:00 AM

Hello, I was wondering if anyone has any information as to how the Romans spun or weaved their wool to create tunics or has any of the equipment/descriptions they had to make the tunics survived? Im curious as to whether the wool being used to make tunics now is the same fabric weight and the same weave pattern as the fragments found? If not, is there any place that still makes and sells wool in the same or similar pattern or would buying one from La Wrens Nest be fairly close? 
 
Also, I forgot where the Romans got their madder red dye from but does anyone still acquire it the same way and dye their wool with it to sell instead of making the red color artificially? Ive noticed through books and reenactor sites that there seems to be some variance of the color red and I would like, if possible, to have mine with exactly the same dye they used. 
 
Thanks for all your help everyone, I have recently been very interested in Roman things and I would like to buy or make a tunic that was made as closely as possible to the originals. (Yes, I know they also wore white and I do have one of those already in case this goes into another debate!) 
 
Brett

Daniel S Peterson · 02-25-2004, 05:16 PM

Wafensoldat, 
The best preserved tunics of 'earlier' Imperial times are those preserved in the Nahal Hever caves, and though definately Roman in type, are believed to belong to the Jewish Rebels of the Bar Kokhba revolt from the time of Hadrian. Many of these tunics could be booty captured from the Roman post at nearby Ein Gedi. It is believed a number of desecrated Roman bronze vessels found in the same cave were also from the Roman camp. 
 
In the book "Bar-Kokhba: The rediscovery of the legendary hero of the second Jewish Revolt against Rome" by Yigael Yadin, you can see excellent close up color photographs of these tunics, including a deep red one with black clavi which very likely may have been the Roman "war tunic" mentioned in the ancient sources. Although wool, they are woven very fine, and look more like linen. 
 
A cloth tariff should be lifted this year, so we may see some authentic Roman tunics, hand made with woven-in clavi from Deepeeka. I will keep everyone posted as to the developments. White dress tunics with clavi, madder red "war tunics" and natural of white plain fatigue tunics. 
 
Dan

**Robert Vermaat** · 02-25-2004, 11:57 PM

You will try and have them make Late Roman tunics as well, Dan? I'll send you some examples if you need any. 
 
Valete, 
Valerius/Robert

Crispvs · 02-26-2004, 01:04 AM

Dan, 
 
Although it is fairly easy to make a case for late Roman soldiers wearing red tunics for war, surely there is very little evidence to tell us what colour, if any, was standard during the early principate. On the tunic colour debate thread you said several times that the MAJORITY of coloured depictions of Roman soldiers in armour show them in red tunics. This presumably means that some do not. Although I am ready to believe that the late Roman wore white in peacetime and red for war, most of what we know about the army of the late empire shows it to be a very different beast to the army of the principate and what works for one may not work for the other. Although some other and earlier armies may have worn red this does not necessarily mean that the Romans did under the early empire. Most of the evidence that Graham Sumner listed that could be taken as incontravertabe was to do with cloak colour rather than tunic colour (which does not necessarily indicate a standard tunic colour). As I said on the Tunic colour debate thread (although posted without my knowledge under the name 'Novantico') I do not believe there is enough evidence to say that any particular colour was worn as a military colour, although I could conceed that some colours may have been more common than others. 
 
Now, on a completely different tack, I could be interested in a tunic with properly woven clavi. The clavi on my formal tunic are painted on, that seeming like a good compromise at the time between applicayed on one hand and hyperexpensive on the other hand. Will they be offering undyed tunics with blue clavi? 
 
Crispvs Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=crispvs>Crispvs</A> at: 2/26/04 2:07 am

02-26-2004, 01:30 AM

From a personal standpoint, I consider that the most important thing I learned from my reconstruction of the BGU 1564 tunic was that the weight of the fabric could be as heavy as what we would term blanket weight today. Refer to the posts under "My latest tunic reconstruction: results and conclusions!" in the Re-Enactment & Reconstruction forum pub45.ezboard.com/fromana...=989.topic to get an idea of this. 
 
An idea of the range of shades which can be obtained from madder dye may be seen at www.brain.net.pk/~mannam/dyeM.html 
 
Anothother interesting, if brief historical synopsis of the development of moder madder dyes may be found at webexhibits.org/pigments/...zarin.html 
 
Hope this helps. 
 
Sam Kimpton 
LEG II AVG 
Portland, OR

**richsc** · 02-28-2004, 01:31 AM

Madder is a root and I was about to try using it until our German shepard ate it all. 
No color is going to be consistent. The roots will vary in quality, the type of wool will vary in its ability to absorb dye, the base wool color will vary, the mordants will be different, etc. 
I have one book on using natural dyes but it leaves a lot of steps out, so if you do find one with a good description of the process I'd like to know about it. Legio XX 
Fortius Conamur

Daniel S Peterson · 02-28-2004, 08:30 PM

Crispus, 
I believe the only evidence of white tunics worn with armor in in the Principate is in reality, 'non-evidence". This of course is the infamous Nilotic mosaic that I believe virtually every bonafide art historian identifies as a Roman copy of a known Ptolemaic era work. I am fully convinced of this when the entire mosaic is seen. It documents a famous expedition into the African interior by Ptolemy I in which fantastic animals were reported (and depicted on the mosaic). This as I recall was the only piece of evidence in the entire "white tunic study" that suggested white tunics were worn under armor. 
 
On the contrary, virtually every piece of colored artwork of ancient soldiers on the Italian penninsula (as well as Greece) showing the warriors wearing armor are also wearing red tunics. Most of this artwork dates before and after "everyone's favorite Roman period", but there is no evidence to suggest this would have changed simply because no evidence exists for this period in between. In fact, simple logic would dictate the the practice was carried through the Principate, which is why we see it in the Dominate, and on into Byantium. 
 
In fact, the accurate reconstructions of known "white" tunics, prove they are so baggy, it is highly unlikely armor would have been worn under them. This is probably also why certain tunics were specifically designated 'military' tunics, besides being the 'color of Mars', they were likely less voluminous as well. 
 
An interesting fresco that may well represent soldiers in their military tunics was posted by Titus on the Roman table leg thread. It is from a Pompeiian tavern, and depicts four men, one possible civilian with a long ungirded white tunic and Clavii, and three men with SOLID RED TUNICS. The civilian's tunic drapes well over the knees to mid-calves, while the 'soliders' tunics are all hitched up with belts above the knees with well defined draping effects. Think how rare it is to see ANY red tunics in Roman art, yet here are three men together, all with hitched up/belted red tunics! Since the fashion of this time was to have Clavii on a normal citizens tunic, the solid red tunics are fairly inexplicable apart from the men being soldiers wearing thier "war" tunics, which normally would be worn under armor so the expensive addition of Clavii was largely unnessarry. Certainly no slaves would have tunics in this color, nor would slaves likely be playing dice with the citizen in the white tunic with Clavii. I would not be surprised if this scene were from some popular story in which the hero (civilian with white tunic with clavii), might "outwit" the band of soldiers, depicted in solid red tunics to be readily identifiable as soldiers. Regrettably, none of the red tunic men are wearing weapons, but this may have been a universal law in drinking establishments, much like the Old West Saloon lore. Further evidence that these men are soliders is the fact that two of the three are wearing poncho style Paenula over their heads, the seated man with a classic military yellowish brown one, and the standing man with what appears to be a bluish gray one, the typical color of nearly all the solider's cloaks in the Fayum paintings. Yes, this is speculative, but far less than any of the "evidence" of white tunics worn under armor in the Principate, (for which there is ABSOLUTELY NONE), and which real experimental archaeology (meaning more than a weekend "Roman Days" picnic, suggests is a total absurdity, as personally learned from wearing a white tunic on extensive campaigns lasting several weeks (Junkelmann Limesritt). 
 
Although the Fuentes article which began the whole 'white tunic revisionist movement' seems scholarly enough to dupe the uninitiated, its deliberate exclusion of all red tunic evidence suggests it is what I suspected all along, something of a 'gag' deliberately aimed at the 'red tunic-wearing' ESG to ridcule them, by a disguntled? former member. It continues to amaze me how many people 'fell for it', and are now too prideful to admit their mistake. 
 
Dan

JRSCline · 02-29-2004, 04:16 AM

Not tunic colors again? 
(mock terror) 
 
Moving this to Re-enactment and Recreation. 
 
Cheers 
Jenny

02-29-2004, 01:10 PM

Dan, 
 
Is there a web source for the Nilotic mosaic? I'd like to peruse it. 
 
I think red is a good choice for tunics because if you are bleeding it'll probably just look like sweat. Maybe that's why the Roman army chose this color in the first place. 
 
Valete, 
Owain/Cicero/Dave http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Segontium/

Daniel S Peterson · 02-29-2004, 05:17 PM

Dave, 
Of course the red tunic helped mask blood. This is why it seems to be virtually universal throughout the ancient world. I think most people have no idea how much blood would be spurting everywhere in a hot ancient battle. The notion of wearing white in this environment is simply idiotic. 
 
Regarding the mosaic, don't know the website but found a photo of the whole thing in an art history book. The soldiers are only a small and insignificant part of the complete work, near the bottom. Much of the rest shows the fantastic and exotic animals seen on the expedition of Ptolemy, and everything is written in Greek of course, even though it was found in Italy. (What does this have to do with Augustus and Agrippa???-- 
nothing of course, Nick didn't volunteer that information as it would have taken all the wind out of the 'keystone' of his entire white tunic "study". Without this, the only thing his "evidence" proves is that "when soldiers weren't wearing armor, they wore the common, off white, unbleached tunic of every other 'blue collar worker' in Rome, and for dress occasions they wore bleached white tunics with clavii like every citizen of Rome. I have always supported this, I only believe that when going into combat he wore the red military tunic as so much evidence before and after the Principate period establishes. The only piece of real evidence for the 1st century in color of a contemporary Roman soldier in armor is the green tuniced praetorian. But this confirms darker colors, other than white were worn under armor. Green because Nero liked this color but more commonly red. 
 
Dan

Crispvs · 03-01-2004, 10:36 PM

Dan, 
 
Thanks for your reply. 
When I read Fuentes paper a few years ago I too noticed how selective and contrived some of the evidence was and so therefore I never took it seriously. I think however that there are still questions which may be asked and which may not yet (if ever) have satisfactory answers. 
 
I find that I am uncomfortable with the idea of "the classic military yellowish brown" paenula. Although Graham Sumner made a case for these in his first Osprey book, his list of colour evidence showed in fact that a variety of cloak colours were used by the Roman army during the Principate. The examples which were used to make the case for the yellow-brown cloak were also unable to be proven to have been soldiers. 
 
Thank you for reminding me of the Pompeii fresco posted by Titus. Looking at it I have to agree with your colour identification but whilst the tunics of the men to left and right are certainly hitched up I cannot see evidence of specifically military belts and the tunic of the seated figure seems to hang below his knees, lessening the likelyhood that they are soldiers. I have not heard either, that the use of the paenula was limited to the military. I am not trying to discredit this as evidence but I think that as evidence for soldiers it is rather too subjective. 
 
Concerning the dress of other peoples of the Italian peninsular, didn't the Samnites, from who the Romans seem to have learned a lot, have a liking for parti-coloured tunics during warfare, suggesting that although there are depictions of Samnites in red tunics this may be only part of the picture? The Osprey Republican armies book also illustrates a fragment of an armoured statue in a blue tunic. 
With regards to the red hiding blood argument, I think that this makes little practical sense. During a battle, as you say plenty of blood would be flying about and nobody on the front line would expect to remain free of it. This begs the question surely: why bother to hide it? In any case fresh blood on a tunic will still show, whatever the tunic's colour and when it dries it is likely to look black or at least much darker and so will still show. I don't think that a red tunic would have hidden blood any better than a white one (or a blue or green one). Blue, yellow, green and checked wool fragments have all been found on military sites in addition to the well known red and undyed fragments, although as with the red fragments there is no evidence to say that they were originally parts of tunics. 
 
My major query to there having been a recognised 'military' colour during the early Principate rests on the statement by Suetonius that soldiers guilty of minor offences were made to stand outside the headquarters building without their belts and were thus deprived of their signs of being soldiers, namely the tunic which hangs above the knee and the military belt. If tunic colour had been an issue surely they would have had to strip off their tunics as well. Vegetius, as far as I know, also fails to attach any significance to tunic colours (apart from the classis brittanicus), despite the fact that he frequently harks back to earlier times and gives us a lot of information which can be applied to the Principate. This silence seems strange when we consider how much more evidence there is for colour in his times coupled with the fact that if something is a good idea he tends to mention it, even if it is as obvious to the reader as the fact that day follows night. Could he have disapproved of designated colours in the contemporary army that he so despised? 
 
Crispvs 
 
By the way, I own a red tunic and an off-white one with blue clavi, but I don't wear either of them under my armour.

Daniel S Peterson · 03-04-2004, 09:00 PM

Crispus, 
Samnites did tend to have more tunic color variation than other Italians, though red was still one of the most common. Likewise, the armored warriors on etruscan terra cotta funerary urns are virtually always red. 
 
All three 'red tunic men' in the Pompeii fresco have their tunics girded up as indicated by the folds. Unfortunately, these folds obscure what might be a military belt. The point remains that it is an almost unheard-of circumstance that three out of four Roman 'civilians' would be wearing red tunics, which also happened to be girded by a cord or belt. 
 
The bit about the "no belt punishment" holds no weight, for when not in armor, the soldier would usually wear an off white fatigue tunic, or a bleached white dress tunic, exactly like any other average Roman male. 
 
Red most certainly masks blood and rust stains better than white and most colors. Junkelmann's group marched over the Alps wearing the same red tunics the whole trip, and still looked good when they marched into Augsburg. If they were wearing white, they would have looked filthy, and probably never could have been completely cleaned again. this was proven by our wearing some white tunics on the initial stages of the trans-Limes cavalry march. Cleanliness was an important aspect of Roman culture, not to mention most military establishments. It is impossible to keep a white tunic clean just doing the day to day activities of a Roman soldier under arms, in the field, not to mention battle. This has been proven on Roman experimental marches lasting several weeks. When doing these things it comes to no surprise that nearly every color representation of a classical soldier wearing armor has a red tunic underneath. Typical "weekend Roman reenactors" cannot determine these things from their very limited activities. 
 
It is unfortuanate that there are virtually no color representations in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD, so ppular with the current crop of reenactors. This is why we must look before and after, and in both cases there is ample evidence red tunics were usually worn under armor, not to mention red tunics being referred to as the 'military' tunic. 
 
This white 'military' tunic passion has truly become a 'religion', for it requires a great deal of faith to dismiss all of the evidence to the contrary. 
 
Dan

Hibernicus · 03-04-2004, 09:44 PM

Dan writes: "It is impossible to keep a white tunic clean just doing the day to day activities of a Roman soldier under arms, in the field, not to mention battle. This has been proven on Roman experimental marches lasting several weeks." 
 
We learned the value of red tunics years ago during SCA war combat. Two to three days of combat, in armor for 6+ hours per day... The Segs rusted very quickly with sweat and water... the red tunics masked the rust tranfered to the tunics. Same for the oils from leather straps and oils from the metal. 
 
Gaius Valerius Tacitus Hibernicus, Centurio 
LEGIO IX HISPANA COH III EXPG CEN I HIB 
 
Vexillatio I: Los Angeles, Riverside, Orange, San Diego, Camp Pendelton 
Vexillatio II: Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, 
Vexillatio III: Washington, Okinawa , Northern California 
 
www.legio-ix-hispana.org

Flavius · 03-05-2004, 08:45 AM

Salve, 
The red colour means, at least in the republican period, the status of the citizen-soldier, different from that of the citizen-civilian. Virtually everything dealing with the war is red, the colour of Mars. The citizen, after the "sacramentum", the military oath, became a soldier, and can kill, plunder, get dirty with every crime, only if ordered by his commander, of course. But he is completely relieved of his "normal" duty of citizen, as well as the red colour hides the blood with that he stained himself. 
In this sense the red tunic should have to be worn not only in the battle, but during the whole service, as a symbol of his actual condition of soldier. 
Nothing as the (dark) red colour hides better the blood, yours or coming from the enemy: the same trick used by the Spartans, to seem to be invulnerable... (yes, you can anyway notice the stain, but not from a distance or during a battle). 
And... try to wear a pale tunic in a campaign for more than a day or two: your aspect will become in short repulsive, and Romans were a lot careful about their appearance and being tidy! 
Valete omnes. 
--------- 
Fecisti patriam diversis gentibus unam; 
profuit iniustis te dominante capi; 
dumque offers victis proprii consortia iuris, 
Urbem fecisti, quod prius orbis erat. 
(Rutilius Namatianus - De Reditu Suo, I, 63-66)

Crispvs · 03-05-2004, 06:08 PM

Flavius 
 
Apart from red being the colour of Mars and soldiers' known ability to get away with things civilians would not have been able to, can you cite any contemporary evidence for the rest of this? 
 
By the way, my tunic often gets rust on it, especially on hot days but it seems to disappear again after colder days, and of course washing it not only helps to preserve the material but also gets rid of most of the rust (if it is there in the first place). 
 
Crispvs Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=crispvs>Crispvs</A> at: 3/5/04 7:13 pm

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Wool type for tunic	mjsanta83	5	2,319	09-12-2016, 02:26 PM Last Post: Marcus Cassius LegioXIV
	Tunic Wool and Dye? US Sources.	Anonymous	14	3,567	04-08-2009, 04:46 PM Last Post: Hibernicus