02-12-2004, 06:41 AM
Reference: Sumner's "Roman Military clothing (1) 100 BC - AD 200"<br>
<br>
Note the illustrations D 2, D 3 and H 1 as well as that of the legionaries working from Hadrian's collumn on page 11 (Upper left).<br>
<br>
Tonight I completed a rudimentary reconstruction of a military tunic based on Papyrus BGU 1564 from Egypt as described in Sumner (p. 5), the dimensions of which are given as 3.5 cubits in length and 3 cubits 4 dactyls wide. Sumner converts these values to 1.55 m and 1.40 m respectively.<br>
<br>
Assuming a value of 39.4 inches per meter this works out to aproximate values of 61 inches and 55 inches.<br>
<br>
The weight is given as 3.5 Minae (converted by Sumner to 1.6 Kg)<br>
<br>
1 Kg =2.20462 lbs so the garment would have wieghed 3.57 pounds.<br>
<br>
I assumed that the above describes a standard tunic described in Bishop and Coulston (p. 99) as being made "from two rectangles joined with a central neck opening and two holes for the arms."<br>
<br>
I found 61 inches to be far too long when the tunic was worn with out a belt and decided to shorten the garment by removing about ten inches from the top (I wanted to retain the selvedge edge on the "hem") the resulting tunic when layed out flat measured about 55 inches in width and 48 linches in length and weighed 3.875 pounds. This indicates that the fabric weight was greater than that documented in the papyrus by a factor slightly less than 1.2 (estimate based on a total weight with the removed fabric of four pounds).<br>
<br>
The hem of the tunic was situated aproximately 8 inches below my knee when worn without a belt.<br>
<br>
My tunic also featured a head slit measureing 24 inches to accomodate exposure of the upper body in part as shown in the relief from Trajans collum on page 11 of Sumner.<br>
<br>
The garment was worn with a belt and the hem raised by bunching the fabric above the belt. The neck opening was moved to expose both shoulders for one test and a horse blanket pin (Note to self: I need to get a brooch) was used to gather up the excess fabric at the base of the neck in the fashion shown on Hadrian's collumn.<br>
<br>
Conclusions; The garment is no fashion statement. so much material was gathered above the belt that the belt itself could not be seen at all.It is big enough for two people with room to spare. re-examination of the depictions in the collumn reliefs substantiate that the tunics were indeed very loose (at least more so than most reconstruction I see in use by reenactors). and the folds of the garment<br>
<br>
Considering that the romans of the first Century were much smaller than the average American of the current era, The tunic described in BGU 1564 is a tent.<br>
the length and width are excessive on me. Although I am only 5 foot 8 inches tall and weight about 180 pounds I think I would be considered big by Roman standards. I can not imagine what this would look like on a legionary in classical times.<br>
<br>
My next experiment will be to alter it retaining the length of 48 inches but proportioning it so that the length to width ration matches that of the one described in the papyrus ( 1: 0.9) This will give a width of about 43 inches.<br>
<br>
I will begin with a standard sized neck opening in order to obtain an apraisal of it appearance and then "modify" it with a larger neck opening so I can work in the tunic.<br>
<br>
I will keep you all apraised.<br>
<br>
Sam Kimpton <p></p><i></i>
<br>
Note the illustrations D 2, D 3 and H 1 as well as that of the legionaries working from Hadrian's collumn on page 11 (Upper left).<br>
<br>
Tonight I completed a rudimentary reconstruction of a military tunic based on Papyrus BGU 1564 from Egypt as described in Sumner (p. 5), the dimensions of which are given as 3.5 cubits in length and 3 cubits 4 dactyls wide. Sumner converts these values to 1.55 m and 1.40 m respectively.<br>
<br>
Assuming a value of 39.4 inches per meter this works out to aproximate values of 61 inches and 55 inches.<br>
<br>
The weight is given as 3.5 Minae (converted by Sumner to 1.6 Kg)<br>
<br>
1 Kg =2.20462 lbs so the garment would have wieghed 3.57 pounds.<br>
<br>
I assumed that the above describes a standard tunic described in Bishop and Coulston (p. 99) as being made "from two rectangles joined with a central neck opening and two holes for the arms."<br>
<br>
I found 61 inches to be far too long when the tunic was worn with out a belt and decided to shorten the garment by removing about ten inches from the top (I wanted to retain the selvedge edge on the "hem") the resulting tunic when layed out flat measured about 55 inches in width and 48 linches in length and weighed 3.875 pounds. This indicates that the fabric weight was greater than that documented in the papyrus by a factor slightly less than 1.2 (estimate based on a total weight with the removed fabric of four pounds).<br>
<br>
The hem of the tunic was situated aproximately 8 inches below my knee when worn without a belt.<br>
<br>
My tunic also featured a head slit measureing 24 inches to accomodate exposure of the upper body in part as shown in the relief from Trajans collum on page 11 of Sumner.<br>
<br>
The garment was worn with a belt and the hem raised by bunching the fabric above the belt. The neck opening was moved to expose both shoulders for one test and a horse blanket pin (Note to self: I need to get a brooch) was used to gather up the excess fabric at the base of the neck in the fashion shown on Hadrian's collumn.<br>
<br>
Conclusions; The garment is no fashion statement. so much material was gathered above the belt that the belt itself could not be seen at all.It is big enough for two people with room to spare. re-examination of the depictions in the collumn reliefs substantiate that the tunics were indeed very loose (at least more so than most reconstruction I see in use by reenactors). and the folds of the garment<br>
<br>
Considering that the romans of the first Century were much smaller than the average American of the current era, The tunic described in BGU 1564 is a tent.<br>
the length and width are excessive on me. Although I am only 5 foot 8 inches tall and weight about 180 pounds I think I would be considered big by Roman standards. I can not imagine what this would look like on a legionary in classical times.<br>
<br>
My next experiment will be to alter it retaining the length of 48 inches but proportioning it so that the length to width ration matches that of the one described in the papyrus ( 1: 0.9) This will give a width of about 43 inches.<br>
<br>
I will begin with a standard sized neck opening in order to obtain an apraisal of it appearance and then "modify" it with a larger neck opening so I can work in the tunic.<br>
<br>
I will keep you all apraised.<br>
<br>
Sam Kimpton <p></p><i></i>
