Making a (first century AD) tunic

[Titvs Statilivs Castvs]

Very useful, but I still have a question. What size need the "sleeves" to be? Or better, the holes-to-put-your-arms-through? And what for the head?

[Tarbicus]

I've heard that instead of a belt a long waistband (a fascia ventralis) was used....

This is far from certain and is based largely on interpretations of some of the sculptures of soldiers tombstones such as the broken stele from Cassaco in Northern Italy. However a recently discovered tablet from Vindolanda refers to the repair of a ventralem so it is possible this item was a part of the military kit. Pliny Nat Hist book VIII 193 mentions a ventralis which he describes as a money belt. As the rectangular object seen on soldiers tombstones possibly tucked into a waistband has often been identified as a purse this would seem to reinforce the idea that waistbands were worn. As to size and method of putting them on we can only guess and use analogies with more recent examples such as those used by the French Foreign Legion. I believe one re-enactor has suggested the scarf doubled up as the waistband when it was not used under armour. However the Vindolanda tablet refers to a ventralem not a focale. In addition a mosaic from Apamea in Syria shows a hunter wearing a red tunic with both a white scarf and a waistband.

There are also the papyrii of Tarentianus acknowledging receipt of a 'girdled tunic'. That one really makes me wonder.
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?p=91064

Finally, Jim can you post me a better quality picture of your tunic?

Haven't got one yet, Graham, sorry (I completely forgot about these posts). Work keeps getting in the way of doing anything right now.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

But surely to be entrenched and inflexible is a good quality. If you are facing a numerous and well equiped foe.... :lol:

[Et tu brute]

Very useful, but I still have a question. What size need the "sleeves" to be? Or better, the holes-to-put-your-arms-through? And what for the head?

Hi, I suppose it depends on the period, but I do late roman 4th/5thc and the sleeves on my tunic are down to my wrists, however i've seen them far shorter, expecially in earlier periods.

[Marcus Mummius]

Hi Sander,

About 30cm should be okay for arm holes I think.

Like you have read the tunic should idealy be as wide as the distance from elbow to elbow with your arms outstreched (In 'Jezus-aan-kruis houding'). I think the middle 1/3rd of this distance left open is good for a head hole. If you look at the sources you see that the head hole was wide enough to put your arm trough and wear the tunic 'tarzan style' while doing heavy work.

Such a big neckhole can be tied together behind your head at the neck or you can use a fibula to keep it closed.

Vale,

[Salvianus]

Nice summary, Crispus.

To avoid confusion, would it be possible to add a time frame to the top post or title? I'm not sure when these designs changed to Late forms.

Cheers

[Titvs Statilivs Castvs]

Hi Sander,

About 30cm should be okay for arm holes I think.

Like you have read the tunic should idealy be as wide as the distance from elbow to elbow with your arms outstreched (In 'Jezus-aan-kruis houding'). I think the middle 1/3rd of this distance left open is good for a head hole. If you look at the sources you see that the head hole was wide enough to put your arm trough and wear the tunic 'tarzan style' while doing heavy work.

Such a big neckhole can be tied together behind your head at the neck or you can use a fibula to keep it closed.

Vale,

Ok, thank you!

[Crispvs]

Good point Salvianus.

The time frame I was intending when I wrote the initial post was the early imperial period which most people do and where I feel most mistakes are made when it comes to tunic size and shape.

Graham (who knows much more about these things than me) has added some useful material, but as I was trying to describe a first century AD tunic I had intentionally left out the later period material from Isadore of Seville, the Scriptores Historia Augusta (which is a highly suspect document in any case) and the descriptions of the martyrdoms of Christian soldiers. The lists of clothing from the SHA are also references to clothing worn by generals and emperors rather than common soldiers. In all likelihood Isadore, the SHA and the military martyrdoms are relavent to third century and later clothing studies but these periods were intended to be beyond the scope of what I was writing about.
I do not know exactly when the Romans started adopting the later forms of tunics, but certainly by the time of the final siege of Dura Europos in the mid third century, long sleeved tunics and trousers were being worn. The question is whether late tunic styles were already coming in in the late second century AD or whether they first made an appearance in the early third century AD.

A somewhat more detailed thread on making a late Roman tunic ( or various types of late Roman tunic) might perhaps be an idea, perhaps written by someone with an excellent knowledge of this area - Graham?

Crispvs

[Titus Petronicus Graccus]

Crispvs,
Great article. Would you happen to have a pattern or instructions on what a soldier would wear under the tunic?
I haven't seen anything about underwear, other than the undertunic, yet.
Though maybe I haven't looked closely enough.

[Marcus Mummius]

Crispvs,
Great article. Would you happen to have a pattern or instructions on what a soldier would wear under the tunic?
I haven't seen anything about underwear, other than the undertunic, yet.
Though maybe I haven't looked closely enough.

Here you go: http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... rg+caligae

You should not wear anything else than those under your tunic

Vale,

[Titus Petronicus Graccus]

Crispvs,
Great article. Would you happen to have a pattern or instructions on what a soldier would wear under the tunic?
I haven't seen anything about underwear, other than the undertunic, yet.
Though maybe I haven't looked closely enough.

Here you go: http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... rg+caligae

You should not wear anything else than those under your tunic

Vale,

So, essentially, Romans were all "regimental" in the same way the Scots use the term?
Wow, the possibilities for embarrassment are pretty high in this hobby I see...
:lol:

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Well, it is frowned apon to go commando in re-enactment, so I would suggest something be worn! :wink:

Armillum had roman under wear once, but no longer. not sure what evidence can be proven, one way or the other.

[Crispvs]

Actually, I think it was probably a matter of personal choice for the Romans. Some probably did go 'commando', but loin cloths were certainly known and at least one soldier serving at Vindolanda near the end of the first century AD owned a set of underpants, as evidenced by the surviving letter from his mother, who had sent him a gift of socks and underpants. A pair of leather pants was found in the Roman baths in Bath but it is entirely possible that these had something to do with bathing activities rather than being underwear as such (mind you, a catapult washer was also found in the same drain - the mind boggles!).
As a rule, though, I find that when members of the public ask what I wear under my tunic and I show them that I am wearing an undertunic, they normally seem satisfied and don't ask what I am wearing under that.

Anyway, this is a little off topic as this is supposed to be about first century tunics.

Crispvs

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

So, does mine pass muster?

[fashion-robe]

i like to wear the tunics and especially the tie that is worn around the waist