Login

Gregg · 08-24-2002, 11:03 PM

Roman Military Clothing (1) 100 BC - AD 200. Osprey Men-at-Arms series #374 
 
Got this in the mail yesterday and so far I've just rushed through it once. But here are my general first impressions: 
 
This book, the first of two volumes, is meant to cover all aspects of Roman military clothing and the evidence for them (except, interestingly enough, the subarmalis, which I suppose could be considered armor and not clothing) for the years 100 BC to 200 AD. 
 
First of all, if anyone is hoping this book will bring the whole tunic color debate thing to a close, you can forget it. Sumner goes over pretty much all the evidence, including some recent discoveries, in a balanced and detailed way, but makes it plain that in the end it's up to the readers to make up their own minds one way or the other. Sumner devotes more space to this topic than any other, and he goes a long way in showing that Nick Fuentes' theory (white tunics = legionaries & officers, red tunics = centurions) does not necessarily hold up under close scrutiny. However, he also seems to make it clear that the same close scrutiny applied to all the other evidence doesn't really get us any closer to an answer. After reading it through once, my impression is that we really can't say for certain, one way or another. Though Sumner himself says he will sum up the evidence in the next volume (which I assume will cover the later Empire). 
 
Like Sumner's "Roman Army: Wars of the Empire," Sumner has a few unorthodox ideas, but nothing really grating. And like "Wars of the Empire," this book is an excellent source of really high-quality drawings of surviving sculptures, a number of which I'd never seen before, and this alone makes it well worth the price. The color plates, done by Sumner himself, are truly excellent, superior to more popular artists like Angus McBride (in my opinion) because they present far more realistic interpretations of the evidence, and are much less "cartoonish." 
 
Basically, this book seems to me to be an excellent "down and dirty" exploration of Roman military clothing, and I learned a few things I didn't know before. I should think that most reenactors will find it quite useful. 
 
Gregg

**richsc** · 08-28-2002, 01:29 AM

I just got my copy in the mail today. The book covers every type of clothing, though I wish it had a better pattern for the paenula, though maybe we can figure that out. 
He covers 
-tunics through all time periods 
-military cloaks (three types) 
-dyes and dying 
-a catalog of evidence 
-other clothing: scarf, socks, trousers, waistband (very interesting illustrations of waistbands under the military belt) 
-boots 
 
nothing about hats of any kind that I can see. Richard Campbell, Legio XX.
http://www.geocities.com/richsc53/studies/

09-09-2002, 04:35 PM

Just got mine. I think it is a excellent guide, with all references under one roof. Can anyone throw some light on the Paenula pattern on page 16

**richsc** · 09-09-2002, 07:23 PM

We were wondering about that too, but it's in I think a Pennsylvania / Philadelphia museum, so we may make a field trip up to see it. Richard Campbell, Legio XX.
http://www.geocities.com/richsc53/studies/

derek forrest · 09-17-2002, 07:10 PM

sorry missed this thread

derek forrest · 09-17-2002, 07:12 PM

Just read in full although I have seen bits before as Graham wrote the book. 
Graham of course a mate and fellow member of the guard. 
That aside this book is a must for all who share our interest. 
It is written from the research point of view and not from the construction point of view so there are little in the way of patterns to help you make the stuff. 
However anyone thinking of making clothing has to read this before they start. 
Particuarly good on tuniic patterns and colours. Also boiots and shoes. 
Grahams drawings get better and better and undoubtedly we shall see these pictures on live bods all over the world. 
Its available from Osprey ( www.ospreypublishing.com ) at 9.99. There are 2 more to come!!!

Gregg · 09-20-2002, 02:18 AM

One thing that surprised me was the evidence of the size and general shape of the Roman tunic. Basically it's just two big freaking rectangles of cloth sewn together at the sides and top with holes for the arms and head. Sumner also states that the garment was seamed at the arms and sides, but the top and bottom - the holes for the neck and "lower openings" - were selvedges. Had to ask my wife what the hell that meant. But it's a good point for reenactors to keep in mind. 
 
Gregg

09-21-2002, 11:29 PM

I too was mildly surprised at Sumner's reconstruction of the tunic. I thought it looked poor-fitting (too baggy) and 'daggy'. I suppose then that tunics were not like modern t-shirts?

09-22-2002, 06:33 AM

Auxillia, I wouldn't think they would be like modern t-shirts simply because being made of wool or linen, they wouldn't stretch as modern fabrics seem to do. So you would need the extra size to get the darn things over your head. "A life lived day to day is a life truly lived." 
 
Magnus/Matt 
Optio 
Legio XXX "Ulpia Victrix"

Matthew Amt · 09-22-2002, 01:39 PM

Avete! 
Part of the bagginess of the Roman tunic is the lack of stretch, like Matt says, but they really were a LOT bigger than they'd seemingly need to be. That was just the fashion! We are too used to making ours too narrow, but probably the Romans would say that ours fit poorly because they are not nearly baggy enough. It might even be worse than that, since the clothing book by AT Croom indicates that there was a more narrowish tunic with short sleeves that was worn by women! So you might want to invest in a nice manly baggy one soon, eh? (Wink, wink!) 
 
Valete, 
Matthew/Quintus, Leg.XX 
 
PS: Actually, I think the narrowish short-sleeved one isn't really WRONG for men, might be more common among soldiers anyway.

09-22-2002, 11:53 PM

Thank you Magnus and Matthew for your replies. I guess the bagginess would also facilitate ease of movement, which would be an important issue for the campaigning soldier. 
 
I'm familiar with the 'unstretchability' of linen, having felt linen sheets before. But wool however has a bit of give to it, comparable to cotton. BTW, what was the history of cotton in relation to the Roman era? Was cotton even around then (as in used for cloth production)? With all the pro-cotton people nowadays lauding the comfort and breathability of cotton clothing, one couldn't help imagining how much more comfortable the legionaries would have been if they had cotton tunics. With the topic of cleaning tunics being covered in another thread, would cotton have been easier to clean/keep clean than linen or wool? 
Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/uauxilia.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Auxilia</A> at: 9/23/02 1:56:02 am

**Robert Vermaat** · 09-23-2002, 10:24 AM

Yes, cotton was a type of cloth used by the Romans, but it seems it was very much a luxury item. I can't be sure of course, but I guess the ordinary soldier did not own a cotton tunica. 
 
BTW about wide tunics, I realised mine was too narrow when I tried running in it. The width should be the same as your legs go apart while running, fighting, jumping, etc. Yes, that seems far too baggy when you put 'em on, but believe me, it's much more comfortable. As I'm re-enacting the Later Empire I not sure the fashion of the a4th c. was anything comparable to the 1st or 2nd centuries (I'll refrain from any comment about tunic colors here ), but tunics were usually bloused, so that would part of the excess width as well. 
 
Cheers, 
Robert 
 
'Cives Francorum, Miles Romanorum'

09-27-2002, 10:49 AM

I would have thought his sited evidence for the use of sash type waistbands, possibly with purses tucked into them would have aroused some interest considering previous threads on the subject. More interestingly, is his plate B1, showing a Kalkriese Lorica with the girdle plates secured by horizontal straps and buckles rather than lacing loops just speculation?

Matthew Amt · 09-27-2002, 12:58 PM

Avete! 
Yeah, I noticed that, too. My guess is that it's speculative, though there may be some girdle plate pieces that have turned up that haven't made it into English publication, yet. That would be great, but not counting on it. Maybe the upcoming tomes from Armatura press will shed a little light! 
 
Valete, 
Matthew/Quintus

mcbishop · 09-27-2002, 04:51 PM

Mea culpa. I think I may have mentioned that to him as a *possibility* (inspired by the 'Sarmatian' segmental cuirasses on the pedestal of Trajsn's Column) during a phone conversation - as you'll see when the forthcoming publication comes forth, there is no evidence as yet. To mis-quote Dowding in the BoB, we must trust in Kalkriese and pray for another Stillfried. 
 
Mike Bishop

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Review: Roman Military Dress by Graham Sumner	Salvianus	7	5,071	07-03-2009, 09:29 PM Last Post: Gaius Julius Caesar
	Roman Military Clothing (3)	Conal	80	26,151	07-18-2007, 10:36 PM Last Post: Graham Sumner
	Roman Military Clothing Vol 2	derek forrest	34	5,934	12-10-2003, 06:18 AM Last Post: aitor iriarte