VEMBRACES

[Tarbicus]

And please lets not play the "If there's no evidence then it didn't happen" game. We have no evidence the Roman soldiers wore red tunics, red was a more expensive dye, it would be impossible for everyone to have a red tunic, but yet we a consider it generally acceptable for everyone to march around with red tunics.

Madder was the most common dye, and there's also bedstraw and lady's bedstraw (galium verum), according to Graham Sumner's book, anyway. Then we have natural red-brown wool from sheep, such as those from Carnusium. The jury may be out on why soldiers were nicknamed russati, but it's fifty-fifty as to whether it referred to the colour most associated with soldiers. Even the Thorsberg tunic has lately been found to have traces of red and purple, and is now thought to have been red in colour.

Another thing, the artists that did these "columns" that we all love, we very talented, but still were not perfect. If we went by what these reliefs we would all assume segmentata looked like this: http://www.legionsix.org/Equipment/Basic...gmenta.htm

I think examples such as the Adamklissi metopes and grave stelae are seen as far more reliable. They're certainly my choice of reference. With specific reference to Trajan's Column, I personally see no reason why the sculptors would have seen a Roman unit in full battle gear in their lives, let alone a soldier in full armour, being probably based within Rome's walls. But I look forward to Jon Coulston's book on the subject.

I think we take too seriously hard evidence, that is a good thing that helps us be accurate, but I think also gives us tunnel vision

You can't take the hard evidence seriously enough, IMHO, otherwise most re-enactors could be running around in buckle-fastened leather segs :-)