Tents, to be linen or not to be linen.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

absolutely... with our period of investigation nothing is an absolute certainty...

M.VIB.M.

[Paul Elliott]

What is prescribed by the field manuals (or triumphal columns!) and what happens in the field can often be very different. Take the US army in VIetnam, for example. IN FM 21-15, for example, there are detailed instructions on how to carry the poncho and the poncho liner, as well as the shelter-half, which, with short interlocking poles, made up a pup tent for you and a buddy to squeeze into. This was the field camp of the day, the 1968 version of the leather squad tent.

But for men on a 3 day, 5 day or 10 day foot patrol, the shelter half was left behind almost routinely, and used only for base camp or firebase duties. Instead the soldiers often used the multipurpose wet-weather poncho as a tarp and expedient shelter, stringing it up, or using it to lay over a branch to create a simple rain shelter. Easy to carry and erect, you could get multiple uses from it, it didn't weigh as much ... I see the leather 'tarp' of the Deurne assemblage the same way, maybe a single canvas sheet too. A field expedient for troops on the move without wagons to carry a huge wet leather tent. Remember, that in Maurice's Strategikon, he does mention tying two cloaks together to use as a tent ... so the idea of using tent fabrics that were not leather was not especially alien to the (Late?) Roman mind.

[Astiryu1]

I have used the Poncho method myself and would fully agree. In basic I only remember setting up the tent on one occasion, "The Night Fire Drill" we camped out in the field in one place for 2 days and 1 night. Every other time was on the march and we used the ponchos.

Substitute Poncho for Cloak and liner for ground cover and you have got a quick shelter.
The ground cover could also be the fabric wrapping misc. gear such as the WW1 Infantry Pack of the US.

[Orlirva]

Theorizing away, I note that fur can be incredibally light and warm and weather resistant. at one extreme, A 7x4 cloak/blanket of erime/fox/mink would weigh little more than two pounds and would shed rainwater beautifully. Clearly, out of the question. cattle pelts: too heavy. Sheep pelts, getting close. Goat Calf and lamb pelts: 3 of calf and 5-6 of lamb or goat might be stitched into a 7x4 blanket of quite modest wieght and great protective qualities. pelts with lots of lanolin tend to not get wet but on the down side, if they get wet anyway they become heavy and start to smell funky.
Or, What might be a pelt that is not a pelt?
What is the latin word for felt? I just looked for it on-line and could not find it. Felt is basically pelt minus the integrated leather backing, and is an excellent and widely used tent and cloak material.
Another thought that comes to mind is frieze cloth, which I know from my 17th C. studies. frieze is made of yarn, and has a shaggy/hairy side, which when slanted down makes for great weather proof outerwear. Flokati (Greek shag rugs) are sort of an extreme example of frieze material on the bulky side, and are essentially like a lightweigth fake pelt - really very light!. Compared to cloth made from thread, yarn is very fast to spin and weave and yarn cloths have dramaticaly better economics for hand production.

[Orlirva]

OK, I found felt variations: pilleum, pillei, pilleus,

Latin guys... are we sure that sub -pellibus means under pelt vs under felt?

[Robert Vermaat]

Remember, that in Maurice's Strategikon, he does mention tying two cloaks together to use as a tent ... so the idea of using tent fabrics that were not leather was not especially alien to the (Late?) Roman mind.

My thoughts exactly.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

All the cows had been looted by barbarians by that time of course.... :mrgreen:

[M. Demetrius]

You are one bad, bad man, GJC. :lol: :wink:

[Orlirva]

On this thread, it was observed that the main quoted direct evidence that Romans used leather tents is a reference to “sub –pellibus”, However it was also observed that while pellibus may mean leather, the closer word for leather, and especially tanned leather, is corium. a better translation for pellibus might be pelt or hide.

This led to a discussion that perhaps the meaning was that legionaries carried a hide ‘blanket’ (think along the line of buffalo robes or a lightweight lambskin rug, rather than dense heavy cowhide) that might be used alone or combined to form field shelters

But It also happens that ‘felt’ is just about the same word: pilleum, pillei, pilleus, and that perhaps pellibus may have meant felt also (a latin expert is needed here)

Paul Elliott observed: “ in Maurice's Strategikon, he does mention tying two cloaks together to use as a tent ... so the idea of using tent fabrics that were not leather was not especially alien to the (Late?) Roman mind”.

Paul also offered this quote about Paul of Tausus: Every Jewish boy learned a trade — his was tent-making or more properly tent-cloth weaving. He was likely a weaver of the course goats-hair cloth known as "Cilicium," a name derived from the province of Cilicia where Tarsus was located. The felt-like cloth was preferred for tents and sails because of its toughness and the way it withstood weather. Like canvas, it was airy enough to allow air to escape in hot weather, yet in the rain the goat's hair swelled up and became waterproof. Bedouin throughout the Middle East still use it for their tents. The manufacture of this material was his means of support during his missionary travels.

And of course the practical utility of felt as a tent material remains proven in daily use even today by Bedouins and other nomads

The conversation ended there, but the question to the Latin guys (and tent experts, and especially my friend Matt who invested in a spectacular leather tent)... are we sure that sub -pellibus means under pelt and not under Felt?. Might a legion have slept under felt tents?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Very interesting question. But there are remains of leather tents.

[M. Demetrius]

I guess the leather remains are the primary reason we all talk about the Romans *always* using leather tents. Felt or woven fabric doesn't last long buried in the ground. We know the Romans had and used all three kinds of materials, but only leather scraps have been found. From a couple of corners, compared to some sculptural evidence, we've been able to come up with some pretty reasonable dimensions for the tents.

Linen would, indeed, make a lighter tent, but not as strong as leather. Leather would be easier to waterproof using what we think they had at their disposal. It almost makes sense that there would have been a cadre of tanners following along with the legions on campaign, since tanning leather isn't an overnight process, and the thousands of goats and sheep eaten would have delivered hides for tanning and making leather panels for tents, bags, belts, straps, tie strings, and who knows what else. It's hard to imagine the structural stress on a large praesidium type tent, which could be 6 to 8 meters wide. A hundred kg of leather hoisted up on poles, yikes. Big job. Linen would easily cut that weight to 20 or 30 kg. I don't know, though, I'm just speculating, as usual.

(For the record, using a special tool, I can get about 3-4 meters of approximately 4mm tie string from a disc of soft leather 15cm in diameter. With only a sharp knife, it's possible to do the same thing. These can be cut from the scraps left over after harvesting the tent panel rectangles. Not much goes to waste. http://www.tandyleatherfactory.com/home ... Product_26 )

[Forty-One]

But It also happens that ‘felt’ is just about the same word: pilleum, pillei, pilleus, and that perhaps pellibus may have meant felt also (a latin expert is needed here)

No. The words are completely unrelated. pellis is used for "skin" or "hide" or "leather" or "parchment" (as is corium). A pilleus is a hat made of felt or hair. It derives from Greek "pilos" (which means "wool", or maybe "felt") and Latin pilus which means hair. It is presumably nominalized from an adjective meaning "hairy" but none of my dictionaries explicitly say so.

sub pellibus means "under skins". It doesn't imply any other material - certainly not felt.

[Matthew Amt]

There is also Pliny's mention of how many calf hides it takes to make a tent, and depictions of tents made in panels (as they would not be if fabric or felt), as well as numerous finds of leather tent parts (and finds of fabric which are *never* tent parts if they are big enough to interpret). The use of leather as the primary material is therefore better documented than many other "facts" about the Roman army!

Textiles and felt were absolutely used for other sorts of awnings and flies at times, and for tents in other cultures. So what? Those are different uses or different ways of life. There's no need to make up items such as ponchos or "dog tent" halves, since the mule wouldn't care what the tent was made out of! Nor would the legatus care how hard it was for the grunts to set up his tent.

Matthew

[Robert Vermaat]

The use of leather as the primary material is therefore better documented than many other "facts" about the Roman army!

Undeniably so.

However, we should be warned about dogmas like these. The 'tunic colour debate' comes to mind, and all too often the combination of the words 'Roman' and 'uniform' too. The Roman army used leather tents, but Rick is right in that sense that we cannot exclude other materials. Like you say Matt, "Textiles and felt were absolutely used for other sorts of awnings and flies at times, and for tents in other cultures" but that should tell us that they could have been used by Roman soldiers as well.
Other material was bought locally, I expect that leather tents were no exception, or tents from other material for that matter. A leather tent is to be preferred in a wet climate, but if you're campaigning in Syria during the summer, why not use something else?

There's no need to make up items such as ponchos or "dog tent" halves, since the mule wouldn't care what the tent was made out of! Nor would the legatus care how hard it was for the grunts to set up his tent.

No need to make anything up there. Like Paul explained earlier, two clocks also make a tent, and not a leather one. :wink:

[Matthew Amt]

I'm just trying to stick with what we *know*. We know the Roman army used leather tents. We also know a leather tent works fine in any weather. It really doesn't matter what a certain region produced as a specialty, if (IF!) the Romans were requisitioning leather tents. We know the Romans might go far afield for necessary supplies, so if Cilicia just couldn't come up with goatskin or calfskin tents, I expect the army would get them somewhere else.

If you want to go beyond that, great! Dig up a reference to a fabric or felt army tent, or of soldiers carrying puptent halves. There may even be references to soldiers sleeping under their cloaks, which presumably would be typical for any force doing a fast march with less baggage.

Oh, by the way, Legio XX's leather tent weighs 35 pounds when dry (which doesn't seem to be very often, I'll admit!). Even with the poles, that will hardly overload the average mule.

Evidence, guys. That's all I ever ask.

Matthew