Gloves and stuff

[Caballo]

Was in the Bath area yesterday for a family thing, and visited the museum. I remember ( but can't find) a question some time ago about whether the Romans wore gloves. Well, here is a curse table from Bath/ Acquae Sulis.

"Dodimedis has lost two gloves. He asks that the person who has stolen them should lose his mind and eyes in the temple where she appoint."

That seems fairly certain- though I have not yet found the Latin original transcription.

It had been a long time since I had visited, and though crowded and expensive, a good visit, with new to me computer generated reconstructions and a light show recreating the temple pediment featuring the famous bearded head.

Also new to me was a curse tablet written in British Celtic- sadly not yet translated.

[Robert Vermaat]

I remember ( but can't find) a question some time ago about whether the Romans wore gloves.

I recall that the discussion originated from the modern use of gloves by reenactors, and that we danced around the (unanswerable) question whether the Romans used gloves or mittens. It's all in the translation I think, but I assumed at the time that mittens were meant, not real fingered gloves.

[Manius Acilius Italicus]

Robert, like everything else we are finding out about our ancestors, he who has the dough does. I would like to think that those Romans, citizens or soldiers, who had the funds, could probably have had gloves, mittens or some type of hand protection made for them by craftsmen. When I went into snow country (Minnesota)I had to have my gloves on or my hands got numb. I know they were tough, but also intelligent. Remember the preserved body found north of Italy in the Alps had all kinds of cold weather gear (and mittens) and he was dated roughly two thousand years before the Empire.

[Robert Vermaat]

Robert, like everything else we are finding out about our ancestors, he who has the dough does.

I see what you're driving at but it's not as simple as that. Of course it 'seems' logical, but then again, even though it seems to be so it does not 'have' to be so. Gloves are, so far at least, things I would 'like' the Romans to have used but so far I did not see any real evidence for them.

When confronted with 'of course the Romans could do this' I always like to remind people of very simple things which the Romans did not use:

Pockets in their tunics.
Buttoned shirts.
Heeled shoes.

I'm sure other can think of more 'simple' things which the Romans 'could have had but did not have'.

[Epictetus]

When confronted with 'of course the Romans could do this' I always like to remind people of very simple things which the Romans did not use:

Pockets in their tunics.
Buttoned shirts.
Heeled shoes.

I'm sure other can think of more 'simple' things which the Romans 'could have had but did not have'.

That would be a good idea for a thread, actually.

[john m roberts]

The Romano-Gallic warrior depicted in the sculpture from Vacheres appears at first glance to be wearing cuffed gloves, but the "cuffs" are probably the turned-back sleeves of his tunic. Gloves remain a possibility, though.

[M. Demetrius]

That's a tough one, that statue. But as you say, it could either be gloves or cuffs. The people who have reported actually seeing the sculpture in person are not united in view. The fingers would be the giveaway...as much detail as is shown elsewhere, the presence or lack of seams in the finger parts should be the giveaway.

Some also say, "...even if he did wear gloves, there's no proof he is a Roman soldier...." Which is possible, of course, either way. I've tried to make a pair of gloves, and it is not easy in any way. Mittens are not that hard, even when made with the correct angle and a separate thumb piece. (But gloves are very specific and precise sewing, and not something I personally would attempt. Cheaper to buy them then spend all that time making them.)