A Legionary of the Marcomannic Wars.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Not sure whether I could help too much with this.

Personally I have no objections to the red tunic myself but for a Centurion one would expect it to be better quality material textile than that of an ordinary soldier. However that is something very hard to put across in an illustration, I could only suggest that dye wise it was a deeper red and not a salmon pink.

Graham.

You make my day some times! That is great to hear!

[M. Demetrius]

Well, when the full color Trajan's Column pictures are available, maybe we'll have some new tunic color arguments to begin. I don't have a dog in that race, so I don't fight that battle. I have reddish, whitish and natural linen tunicae, and whatever is the color of the day where I go, that's the color I wear. The battle on that front is over for me.

[Graham Sumner]

Byron wrote:

You make my day some times!

Glad to be of some use to someone!

Graham.

[Tim Edwards]

I now see colour as a side issue.

I can understand that illustrators and wargamers may be more concerned with colour, but re-enactors should look to sturdy outdoor clothing that is faithful to original finds wherever this is possible.

If one has taken time to research and develop period weaving and stitching, plus plant dyes where appropriate, your impression will be ten times better. Sadly the number of Roman re-enactors who use plant dyed textiles is tiny compared to many other re-enactment eras.

I hope with the growth of 'progressive' Roman re-enactment we will see more discussion on the evidence and practicalities of particular weaves and stitches, than simply over colour.

Maybe we should be asking what twill weaves our Marcomannic Wars legionary might have used...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yes, there are some very nice weaves coming out of poland from time to time.
And there is a lot to say for woad dyed tunics....not as blue as modern but very authentic.

[M. Demetrius]

And I'll bet they're actual size, too!

[Paul Elliott]

What is the general opinion of a final date for the Imperial-Italic 'G' Hebron style? Obviously this piece is finely dated, but would 'G' types be current in the 160s and 170s? The Theilenhofen is dated to this period and is categorized as an Imperial-Italic 'G'. Its just that I have the chance of picking up a Hebron helmet, and wondered if its suitable for the Marcomannic period.

[Crispvs]

I don't know how common they would be by that time but I am sure there must still have been a number in service. A forty or fifty year old helmet would probably not be at all uncommon in a Roman unit of pretty much any period. As long as it is combined with other items of kit which date to closer to the Marcomannic wars then there should not be any problem. The most important item to get right to get the period right is probably the belt fittings, as these always seem to be the items most subject to fashion.

Crispvs

[Paul Elliott]

True enough about the belt fittings, a nice buckle was found at Newstead dated to the Antonine period. Regarding helmets, the Hebron has cross-bracing, and I think this is crucial for any helmet, old or new, for the Second Century.

[Tita Iuventia Martia]

Avete omnes,
thank you for this usefull topic :-) We have really paucity of the Roman sights to day :-( cry: Only Musov (The military and also civilian settlement) and few other archeological sides (mainly temporrary marching camps) deeper in our country but nothing bigger than this.

Interesting are mainly following military finds in Musov, forinstance the breast plate with the innscription BRVTI (Bruti), the part of scale armor, spear parts, some brooches and buckles and perhaps also some belt fittings. I can ask my friend for the archeological overview of all finds, if somebody will be interested.

I would like to purchase following items for Marcomanic wars, can you give advice for the autenticity?

Clothing: I have allready done it: natural linen tunica, scarf, fascia ventralis, socks, trousers, military shoes (I am ussing them also for my late first and early second century legionary kit). My new more autentic hand sewn subarmalis is now in progress and my new scutum is almost finished.

I would like to use and wear Newstead lorica segmentata, Imperial Italic G or H type helmet, rectangular scutum, the ring pommel sword with scabbard, pugio, pilum, brass greaves but I am not sure about the right and autentic design of my new balteus militare. Can I use open work plates and the buckle from Newstead also for this period? I know some finds from the Antonine area and I would like to portray the soldier from the reign of the enperor Marcus Aurelius, not only from the Marcomanic wars. The military belt with Vtere Felix (Utere felix, use with luck) is a bit latter design, is not it?

And one more question: Can I use also the pugio frogs in my belt? I am not sure about it.... And what about the appron straps? Have they been still in use in this period?

Thank you so much for your answer and best regards from Prague :-) )

[Paul Elliott]

Wow, Radka, I can't wait to see your finished impression!
From my own research, I believe the Newstead buckle is fine for this period. I would include a cingulum, but there is no evidence yet (there are very few images at all). Is your tunic long sleeved or short? TheCroy Hill figuresare short sleeved; I would make myself a long sleeved tunic. Pugio should be on a baldric I believe, not frogs. 2nd and 3rd C daggers look very similar.

Your other choices look spot on to me. I'm prefering hamata (its what I already have) but without shoulder doublings.

[Crispvs]

I'll be looking forward to seeing it too Radka.

As an added couple of notes to what Paul has said, to be on the safe side it may be better to choose femenalia than full length trousers. Full length trousers may well have been worn by legionary soldiers by that time but we cannot be sure, whereas we *can* be sure that femenalia were being worn by soldiers by that time.

As to your pugio, pugiones do not seem to have been as common during the Antonine period as they were a century before, but nevertheless they undoubtedly existed. If you do decide to carry a pugio, try to get one which features a crescentic pommel expansion (with the two points pointing upward) and a frame type sheath (there is no evidence for type 'A' and 'B' sheaths remaining in use past the late first century AD). If you have to get one made try to get it modelled on these examples. The grip plate comes from the Antonine period fort at Bar Hill and the blade and sheath from Tuchyna may actually date from the Marcomannic wars.
http://s129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig080.png

The dagger sheath appears to be similar in style to the third century examples from Kunzing and other sites, although as you will note from the previous picture it should also feature a back plate as well. It would, of course have been made of iron.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig104.png

The period you want to reconstruct is probably slightly too early for 'Felix Utere' fittings so for more appropriate belt fittings have a look at these, some of which you should be able to get from Peronis' Armamentaria site (two or three plates per belt are probably sufficient as belts were almost certainly not fully plated in this period):
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig088.png
I would avoid apron straps if I were you, as they had probably dropped out of use by that time.

You should also consider a shafted weapon, either a spar or pilum. Pila are shown being carried by the soldiers on the Croy Hill relief and some third century pila are shown here:
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig074.png

As you may need to make the scabbard for your ring pommel sword yourself (or have it made for you) here are some suitable scabbard fittings:
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig078.png

All the pictures are by Mike Bishop.

You will probably also want a cloak. The paenula was still in use at the time, as was the sagum, so you could go for either of these.

I hope this helps a bit. Keep us up to date on how you progress goes.

Crispvs

[Tita Iuventia Martia]

Thank you all for your usefull help :-) )

[gaiusseptimiuslucianus]

I'll be looking forward to seeing it too Radka.
As an added couple of notes to what Paul has said, to be on the safe side it may be better to choose femenalia than full length trousers. Full length trousers may well have been worn by legionary soldiers by that time but we cannot be sure, whereas we *can* be sure that femenalia were being worn by soldiers by that time.
As to your pugio, pugiones do not seem to have been as common during the Antonine period as they were a century before, but nevertheless they undoubtedly existed. If you do decide to carry a pugio, try to get one which features a crescentic pommel expansion (with the two points pointing upward) and a frame type sheath (there is no evidence for type 'A' and 'B' sheaths remaining in use past the late first century AD). If you have to get one made try to get it modelled on these examples. The grip plate comes from the Antonine period fort at Bar Hill and the blade and sheath from Tuchyna may actually date from the Marcomannic wars.
http://s129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig080.png
The dagger sheath appears to be similar in style to the third century examples from Kunzing and other sites, although as you will note from the previous picture it should also feature a back plate as well. It would, of course have been made of iron.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig104.png
Crispvs

Crispus and (Paul too),

A few questions about 3rd century pugiones if I may...

In Simon James book on the Dura finds he illustrates 4 copper alloy plates from dagger scabbards (nos. 585-588). Are they from pugio scabbards of the frame type that you illustrate, or some other, and if they are from the frame type, how would they be applied? Or is the word "dagger" not referring to pugios at all?

Paul mentions that pugios would have been suspended from a baldric. How would that work? I have visions of crossed baldric straps looking rather like Pancho Villa :wink: , which I haven't noticed before.

Any light you might be able to shed on this would be gratefully appreciated.

Best,

Gaius

[Crispvs]

Unfortunately I don't own Simon James' book on Dura yet. Its price tag is still well beyond my budget. The only report I actually own on Dura is a copy of the report on the siege mines from the original final report series, published (if I recall correctly, off the top of my head) in the late 1960s. Therefore, I have not actually seen pictures of the plates you mention. If however they closely resemble ones in this image (again courtesy of Mike Bishop), then they will almost vertainly be pugio sheaths.
http://s129.photobucket.com/albums/p239 ... fig104.png

Other than the ones you mention, I am not aware of any other copper-alloy pugio sheaths of third century date, but given that some first century AD sheaths were of copper-alloy rather than the more common iron, and helmets could be of either iron or copper-alloy, I see no reason why there might not be copper-alloy sheaths of third century date. If, however the plates you mention are not sheaths as such but something which might be thought to have been attached to a sheath, I would have to say that I would be dubious as to the identification as parts of pugio sheaths. I have seen many fragments of metal described in the past as plates form Roman dagger sheaths which were actually nothing of the sort. Unfortunately there is a widespread misconception that some first century AD dagger sheaths featured attached copper alloy plates, riveted to the iron sheath. This misconception (and all of the incorrect reconstructions which have arisen from it) is based on a mistaken interpretation of a line drawing of a silver inlaid iron sheath from Kempton about twenty years ago by Michael Simkins. So far I know of no evidence for these sheaths with applied copper-alloy plates. However, I have not had the chance to see Simon James' book so do you know if the plates you mention were associated with daggers or not. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to the shape and context of the plates. If you could illustrate them that would be even better.

As to suspension, we simply do not know. I am not aware of any third century images of soldiers which show daggers being worn, yet they have been found in a number of third century AD contexts, notably Kunzing. As far as I am aware, no belt fittings from third century AD contexts resemble first century AD 'frog' plates. However second and early third century AD contexts have produced plates which have a ring cast into them, which may or may not be connected with weapons suspension. In the absence of good evidence for how these later pugios were carried, suspension on a baldric is as legitimate a solution as any other. As I said, none are shown being carried on third century images of soldiers so we do not have visual clues to guide us in the way we do for the soldiers of two centuries earlier.

A pugio is a dagger by the way, in answer to your question, although just to be confusing, in the later empire a number of other types of dagger came into use which do not resemble earlier pugios and are therefore not called pugios (by modern commentators at any rate).

Crispvs