Neck scarf brooch

[Geoff5]

Iv`e just purchased a square type neck scarf, for a 1st century legionaire. Is a brooch required for this. I have been shown a brooch, that I`m told would be good for this. If so, what would be a good brooch for the above, looking at 30ad to 60ad. Britannia.

Ta, very much, thanks.
Geoff.

[Alanus]

How about a no-frills Celtic brooch, similar to a cross-bow brooch but with exposed spring wire. Here's a pic of an original one from my collection. It was quite common, I think, and I believe reproductions of it (or something like it) are being made. I think the origin was Celtic, but I'm not sure. Someone who's an RAT brooch expert can correct me. :-)

[attachment=12643]DSC_0138.JPG[/attachment]

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

That's what I use. No real evidence, but I've tried it without and find this is the surest way to keep it in place. A knot can be uncomfortable under a seg or even scale or mail.

[deepeeka]

You could look up some reproduction models by Gautam at primusgear.com.

The link to the fibula as shown above is:
http://www.primusgear.com/product/filbula

Gagan

[Crispvs]

I think that type of brooch is known as a knee brooch (although I'm hardly an expert on brooches either so am quite prepared to be corrected). I will deal with scarves in a moment, but first the brooch.

I read an interesting article a few years back which attempted to come to grips with whether certain brooch types may have been specifically linked to male or female dress styles. One of the conclusions was that trumpet brooches (which typically feature a ring at the 'trumpet' end) and 'headstud' brooches could well be specifically female types of brooch, as both would be suitable for fixing a chain to. It noted that it seems to have been common for women to wear a chain suspended across the breast, attached at either end to a brooch, and as such, trumpet and headstud brooches would be ideal for the purpose. The article is entitled 'Sexing Brooches' and is by Alex Croom, who I felt argued a very strong case. You should be able to find it quite easily on the web.
Although the brooch in the picture above is neither a headstud or trumpet brooch, it does feature a stud at the 'tail' end and in form seems to me to be a forerunner of the trumpet type. Therefore I would be very wary of using that type of brooch. To employ an example used in the article: if a genuine Roman saw you wearing one, it might be the equivalent to seeing a man today wearing a distinctly female style of watch. That it not to suggest that all sprung brooches would have been women's brooches but you would still be on safer ground if you stuck with a pennanular brooch if portraying a soldier.

Of course, you might not need a brooch. I hope that by now you will have read Graham Sumner's first book on Roman military clothing and will have read what he has to say on scarves. If not though, let me re-iterate it here. What evidence there is suggests that scarves were long and narrow not triangular, and often featured tasselled ends, as modern scarves often do. There is no evidence to suggest that Roman soldiers ever wore the triangular scarves which are so often seen on re-enactment. This would include square pieces of cloth folded into a triangle, as I have sometimes seen people using. Therefore, I sincerely hope that the scarf you have purchased is at least four feet long and can therefore be folded into a narrower shape for use like a normal scarf. If however, it is not big enough to allow you to do this, then I am afraid that either the person you bought it off was not very up to date in his knowledge (best case scenario) or (somewhat worse scenario) you have been had by an unscrupulous trader. If so, chalk it up to experience and get yourself a new scarf four feet or so long and eight to ten inches in width. You will not need a brooch for it. I simply wrap mine a couple of times around my neck, cross one end under the other, draw it relatively tight and then stuff the ends down the front of my tunic. It doesn't go anywhere and protects my neck from the sawing effect of my sword baldric all day. It is not uncomfortable either.
This is not to say that as a soldier you would not use brooches - you probably would - just not for your scarf. If you wore a sagum type cloak you would certainly need one, and if you wore an exomis style tunic you would require one for each shoulder (which was presumably the style worn by the Velsen soldier, as two brooches were found with him in the well).

Please don't think that just because you have bought something which turned out to be inaccurate (if you have done, that is) that you owe it to yourself to use it regardless of advice. If that bothers you, don't let it. Most of us (me included) have bought or made items for use in re-enactment which later turned out to be wrong and which we then had to retire from use (or in some unfortunate cases, some of which Byron can tell you all about, not enter into use in the first place. It is an unfortunate part of the re-enactment experience.

Incidentally, if you read what I have just said, then look at my avatar picture and conclude; 'what a hypocrite - he is wearing a brooch with his own scarf', I would say in my defence that it is an old photo and was taken before I read Graham's books. Almost as soon as the first book hit the shelves in 2002, we in the RMRS stopped issuing triangular scarves to new members and replaced all our existing scarves with straight ones.

I hope this has been useful.

Crispvs

[ANTONIVS MAGNVS]

I think that type of brooch is known as a knee brooch (although I'm hardly an expert on brooches either so am quite prepared to be corrected). I will deal with scarves in a moment, but first the brooch.
Crispvs

I think it is actually a Kraftig profilierte type.

A good reference for brooches is Richard Hattatt's Visual catalog. Also the numiswiki page on fubula here:

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswi...key=Fibula


BTW I do the exact same thing as you. A nice long scarf simply wrapped around my neck and then stuffed either into my tunic or between it and my subarmalis. Not need for a fibula.

[Graham Sumner]

As Paul say's there is no evidence for scarf brooches until modern day re-enactors!

There is equally not much evidence for scarves either. However I was informed by a leading textile historian that the Romans did not cut garments to shape, so a triangular type was very unlikely (unless as Paul adds they were square folded). When scarves are shown clearly in sculpture they are similar to modern scarves. However the 'US Cavalry' type worn on Trajan's column by some Auxiliaries appear to be much smaller. Also as depicted worn outside the armour, that appears to defeat the object that we all assume they were worn, which was to protect the neck from chafing from the armour.

When out of armour and in just a tunic, soldiers do not generally appear to wear them. However they might be worn with Paenula type cloaks.

Paul also raises an interesting point about brooches and Gender. However bracelets were also considered feminine but soldiers wore them as military awards.

Graham.

[Geoff5]

Very useful and interesting.

thank you.

[Geoff5]

Great information.

Thank you.