Paint brushes?

[Tertius Mummius]

Roman paintings have been found aplenty, pots for colours, mixing tablets etc. - and brushes? I know that the encaustic "hot wax paintings" of Fayum were painted mostly with scoops (spatulae), but the al-fresco or tempera paintings paintings definitely weren't.

[Senovara]

I'm not an expert, but I'd imagine they used natural materials for brushes, such as animal hair, twigs, rushes, that sort of thing ... perhaps tied onto a wood or bone stick for grasping.

[Tertius Mummius]

True, from the paintings themselves one can suppose the paintbrushes were not too different from those we use today, except for the metal hilt. Do you know if anything has been found that would give us a clearer picture for reconstruction?

[Senovara]

Do you know if anything has been found that would give us a clearer picture for reconstruction?

Alas no - I have no idea if any survive today. I tried to Google any information, but came up empty.

[Tertius Mummius]

Do you know if anything has been found that would give us a clearer picture for reconstruction?

Alas no - I have no idea if any survive today. I tried to Google any information, but came up empty.

Thank you nonetheless – I did the same, with the same results. It seems as if - just as with the famous toilet sponge-sticks - the most popular and wide-spread things have vanished as if they've never existed. I think I'll have to delve more deeply into the local institute's libraries.

[Carlton Bach]

Can't help you with archeological finds, but I have manageed to unearth a few depictions that may help if you can track them down (my camera's sick ATM).

A red-figure vase dating to c. 475-450 BC shows painters at work (on vases) using relatively short brushes. The handles are about twice the length of a handbreadth and the thickness of a finger, without noticeable taper. The tips have the typical 'pointy foxtail' shape today seen in hair paintbrushes (rather than the flat or conrtoured shape of bristle brushes) and look about two fingerbreaths long and a little thicker than a finger at the widest point. The painters are holding them with all fingers as though in a fist, loosely, not like the modern position held between thumb and index and resting on the middle finger. The image is from Die Arbeitswelt der Antike (Authors' Collective of the Martin-Luther-University Halle-WEittenberg, Leipzig 1983, p. 63 qand the original item is in the Milan Museum (no further details given)).

Another vase painting dating to c. 450-425 BC and attributed to the Komaris master also shows a painter at work with a similar brush. It is held in a similar position (in fist, thumb upwards, point down) and here the juncture between handle and hair is marked by a clear taper of the handle and two parallel lines that probably indicate binding with some kind of string. The image is Plate 40 from the same book and the original is in the Ashmolean museum (no further details given).

The author portrait of the Vienna Dioscurides (fol 5v) also ahows a painter at work, at a modern-looking easel. His brush is about the same length as the previously mentioned ones, but thin (only about half the thickness of a finger I guess) and seems to have a marked binding between the light wood of the handle and the dark hair, again with its characteristic foxtail shape. It is held in the 'modern' style between thumb and forefinger, point down.

[Tertius Mummius]

Laudes to you, Volker! That's very helpful information!!
D D

[Marcus Julius]

I wonder if the method for binding hair into a helmet crest might give some insight into a method for attachment?

[M. Demetrius]

There is a type of sign painter's brush called a "quill" in the US, which has a stick (of course) then a ferrule made from plastic (but thin brass would work just fine) that holds a bundle of carefully arranged grey squirrel hair, I think from the tail. They vary in diameter, but if you look up sign painter's supplies, and find a source, you can see how they're made.

Basically, they wrap a wire tightly around the tube to press the hair in. I think some art brushes work the same. Check at a real art supply store and see if they have something like that. It would not be impossible to make a "replica" of them using anciently available materials. Would it be "authentic"? Don't know. But it could work, and I suppose that's what you're interested in doing, right?

[Tertius Mummius]

As far as I know (which is not far), brushes of any kind have never been found, which makes me suppose that the brushes of old must have been 100% organic and thus decomposed. Wires are handy today, but Roman brushes must have been made with string, bound very tightly.

There are several kinds of brushes still made that way, e. g. most chinese kalligraphy brushes (and they look like the kind described by Volker). That would be the closest approach to authenticity that is possible at the moment - nothing more is my intention.

[Senovara]

Yes, you can find inexpensive chinese brushes at the art supply ... I use them for watercolour!

:? However, I believe the handle is made of bamboo, so if you want it to look more "authentic", perhaps paint the handle a brownish shade to hide the bamboo look ...

[M. Demetrius]

I did forget to mention about the quills above, that the originals used a piece of goose quill instead of the modern plastic tube. Hence the name.

[Tertius Mummius]

Instead of bamboo, local juniper or elder bushes - or simply reed - could be used. I think I'll have some happy hours of experimenting ahead … :wink:

Thanks to you all for your support!

[Graham Sumner]

Hi
Instead of Google try any of these :
'Wall Painting in Roman Britain' by Roger Ling.
'Roman Painting' By Roger Ling
The Mysterious Fayum Portraits. By E. Doxiades.

The last book is worth getting just for the wonderful pictures. All have details of painting techniques and brushes, including the various types of hair used and the material for the brush handle itself. The wax portraits show evidence of brush strokes as well as marks made by some sort of tool which it is suggested might have been the other end of a brush as no other specific instrument appears to have been found.

With regards to brushes the two books by Ling have the same information in each so only get both if you are interested in the wider subject matter.

Graham.

[Tertius Mummius]

Woohoo! I found one in the British Museum, alongside some other painter stuff of less interest here (a papyrus envelope for pigments, for example). The beautifully preserved brush is of rather long wool threads, tied to a stick. Must have been a rather drippy experience, then, learning to paint ... but as there are single animal hairs preserved in pictures and wall paintings, there must have been other brushes too.

Sorry if I annoy anyone by unearthing this old thread here ... I did not want to keep my find all to myself.