Shield design linked to units

[A_Volpe]

I'm curious -

The scuta that have been found, is there any evidence that the ones that are leather covered, that the leather is dyed a red color, wings and thunderbolts et. al. painted in [yellow, white] directly ontop of the "red" background color of the leather?

Or was it that the shield was covered in a leather, whichever color the leather turned out to be, and then painted over entirely?

What about linen covered scuta? Was the covering linen dyed red, and then the designed painted on top after being glued onto shield surface? Or is it like many of us reenactors who just cover it with an [off white] linen and then paint it red, and details ontop?

[Daniel S Peterson]

Andy,
I believe all of the dura europas scuta have a red base color. Other colors are known but most are mosaics and frescoes of scutua in the hands of gladiators. The Fayum scutum is missing its outer layer where any color would be applied. There is no hard and fast rule that says that a 1st century scutum should have a red background, but this is a logical color given the association of the color red with the God of War, Mars, the mention in a contemptorary account of red being the color of "military" tunics, and the aforementioned Dura scuta.

The best preserved Dura scutum has linen over its protective rawhide front to allow a good base for the elaborate painted design. One cannot say if the simpler shield motiffs of the first century would also have a linen base for the paint. There is some evidence to suggest that the emblems of the 1st century shields were thin metal appliques. Several fragments of lightning bolt insignia have been found at Kalkriese, complete with nail holes, and the best guess is that they were shield devices. An intact, probable auxilliary shield from Doncaster has a very large decorative sheet of cupric alloy metal on its face, and a number of other finds of the period can be interpreted as metallic shield decorations.

Normal leather is not an effective defense. We can be certain that the mention of "leather" shield facings was intended to mean "rawhide" which dramatically increases the strength of what are otherwise fairly light and flimsy shields.

It is very possible that the frenquent depiction of legionary scuta in "relief" may not be artistic license, but rather, the shields themselves were purposely embossed rawhide in the same manner as some surviving early medieval shields.

Dan

[Tarbicus]

purposely embossed rawhide in the same manner as some surviving early medieval shields.

Hi Dan,

I assume you mean embossed with gypsum beneath the rawhide? Aside from the cosmetic look, what really practical purpose is there to this?

Cheers.

[A_Volpe]

very interesting, thanks.

I was trying to keep my question as simple as possible, I had only used specific colors (red) as an immediate example, since that is what most of us currently use; regardless of color, would the leather (or linen) have been pre-dyed a specific color for a background or field, and then designs and motifs painted ontop of the pre-dyed covering, that's more of what I was asking.

You mention that there is a thought that sctua on sculpture could imply that shields had embossed rawhide designs - but could it be instead as you had mentioned with the Kalkriese metal appliques?

Do we know if, or, when Scuta were painted? At the end of the line in the Fabricae, or by individual soldiers at Base? Or do we not know?

[Crispvs]

"the mention in a contemptorary account of red being the color of "military" tunics"

I have never heard of this 'contemporary account'. Can you cite your source please Dan?

Incidentally, regarding "unappealing" oval shields, I am only aware of four stelae of soldiers of Legio XIIII which feature shields. All four are oval! Gnaeus Musius has a narrow oval shield; Quintus Luccius Faustus and Gaius Valerius Secundus both have (apparently) shorter oval shields; and Marcus Flavoleius Cordus (who I believe you omitted) has a wide oval shield on his back, which he appears to be holding on a strap. Of these only the stele of Gnaeus Musius shows the well known blazon. The other three are all the wrong way around. One of the Mainz column bases shows a soldier with a (more or less) rectangular shield with a blazon which strongly resembles the blazon on the Musius stone, with wings, thunderbolts and tabulae ansatae, but there is no inscription of any sort to prove that the soldier depicted is a member of Legio XIIII, although there is certainly a possibility, given that Legio XIIII was one of the legions based at Mainz for a time. The only other soldier from the Mainz bases whose blazon can still be made out has wings on his shield but no tabulae ansatae or thunderbolts. Therefore it cannot be counted as having a sufficiently similar appearance to the Musius blazon to allow it to be considered as being an attempt to render the same blazon.

Perhaps then, we who claim to depict the Legio XIIII should all change to carrying oval scuta, unappealing as they may be to some. :wink:

Crispvs

[Daniel S Peterson]

Crispus,
It can be reasonably surmised that legionary heavy infantry of the 1st century AD carried the rectangular scutum, just as the soliders on a myriad of contemporary illustrations confirm. Gnaus Museus was an Aquilifier and like the two LEG XIIII signifiers on tomstones also at Mainz, all carried a more manageable small oval, and there is evidence that small round shield were also carried by standard bearers. Other oval shield carrying legionaries on first century tombstones could very likely be light infantry, who assumed the role of the velites in the Imperial legions. In one case, the legionary is even equipped with light throwing javelins as I recall.

Red tunics are specifically referred to as "military tunics" in the Historia Augusta. Graham Sumner's clothing books provide a great deal of additional evidence for the use of red military tunic, and the color red, in general, being closely associated with the Roman God of War, Mars. There is also no question, that the primary color of the Dura Europas scuta is red.
Dan

[Praefectusclassis]

Hi Dan,
Just out of interest, where in the Historia Augusta is that mentioned? It's kind of a big book, you see. :wink:

[Crispvs]

Dan,
On what basis can it be "reasonably surmised that heavy infantry of the 1st century AD carried the rectangular scutum"? Please be specific.

"just as the soliders on a myriad of contemporary illustrations confirm"

Can you cite some of this "miriad" that you refer to? I can only think of the Mainz column bases (three of the five which show soldiers at any rate) and the Orsova reliefs. If you wanted to stretch the period somewhat you could include the Adamklissi metopes, but even there, if you look carefully, you will see that very few of the scuta are actually 'rectangular' as such, with several being capable of being described as 'multiangular'.

Also, you seem to have neglected Flavoleius Cordus again, who is clearly shown carrying a large oval shield, unless he was what you were meaning when you spoke of light infantry. On the subject of legionary light infantry, is there any basis past bald assumption on which this idea is based? Although I do not doubt that soldiers in the same unit might have been differently equipped, surely providing light infantry was one of the roles of the auxilia. Flavoleius Cordus carries a pilum, by the way. Incidentally, I do not believe that the fact that some soldiers are portrayed on their tombstones without armour indicates that they were light infantry. If they were, then what are we to make of the soldiers shown reclining in togas at a (presumably) funery meal? Were they all tribunes? I think not.

I have read Graham Sumner's Osprey books on Military clothing. If you look carefully at volume 1 you will see that the only references which give specific colour references and can definitely be tied to clothing in military use refer to cloaks, not tunics. The references to tunics are ambiguous and, in the main, open to interpretion. Graham may like to comment himself on this.

Oh, and I seem to recall that one of the other scuta from Dura was primarily green. :wink:

Crispvs

[drsrob]

Dan,
[...]
Also, you seem to have neglected Flavoleius Cordus again, who is clearly shown carrying a large oval shield, unless he was what you were meaning when you spoke of light infantry.
[...]
Flavoleius Cordus carries a pilum, by the way.
[...]
Crispvs

Flavoleius Cordus is the one he meant, and he definitly carries throwing javelins with thongs.
C. Castricius of Leg II Adi. does carry a pilum or actually two, and they are of the light variety. making him probably light infantry too.

[Antonius Lucretius]

Dan,
The idea that the Dura rectangular scutum was faced with linen stems from a mistake made during the first excavations there. Simon James, who studied the shield more recently, discovered that in fact it goes like this: wood, then linen glued with a mixture of glue and fibrous material, reinforcing the shield board much like a modern fiberglass coating, then leather.
That is more rational I think..
Of all the shields recovered at Dura, only the rectangular scutum had a red background. The so-called "parade" oval shields had a pink background, however they might have been discolored. However again the rectangular scutum was not discolored..
A third oval shield bore a much simpler decoration: a man, or rather a god, holding a horse by the bridle, on a dark green background.
The painting techniques used were either casein paint, or encaustic.
Needless to say I totally agree that some of the decorations were made of metal. Remnants have been found, I think in Germany. At Dura gesso was also used if I remember --I don't have S. James' book at hand now-- and I assume that the medieval technique was similar. Another technique that cannot be ignored is tooled leather, the technique used to decorate western type saddles.
I don't think sculptural evidence can be used to demonstrate that the shield decorations were in relief. It may have been a method allowing the painter to work quicker, and saving him from trying to remember what the decoration looked like in case of repainting.
Needless to say I am totally convinced that the decorations on the shields were designed for identification, with many variations around a few "main" themes: the wings and bolt and the laurel crown being the two most often encountered.

[Tarbicus]

At Dura gesso was also used if I remember

Was that just as a simple foundation to paint on? Here's a medieval shield with extreme gesso relief:

[url:3ic3guxa]http://www.philipresheph.com/a424/gallery/course/welch/ch2.htm[/url]
Unless there was a real practical purpose for adding gesso/gypsum relief work to a shield, I don't see why they would have bothered. All metal fittings seem to make more sense, adding more protection to the shield. Unless gesso or gypsum also add protection?

Cheers.

[Caballo]

"The idea that the Dura rectangular scutum was faced with linen stems from a mistake made during the first excavations there. Simon James, who studied the shield more recently, discovered that in fact it goes like this: wood, then linen glued with a mixture of glue and fibrous material, reinforcing the shield board much like a modern fiberglass coating, then leather."
So if you were making a replica, what would be the best way of painting the leather?

Cheers

Britannicus

[Tarbicus]

As gesso is a common primer for painters (of Art with a capital 'A'), and was also used as a base coat for medieval shields, I think (?) I'd be correct in saying "Here goes" -

1 wood;
2 linen with glue and fibrous material;
3 leather (goatskin ?);
4 a coat of gesso (can be built up for relief, but may not be authentic);
5 paint (encaustic or casein) on top of the gesso;
6 (as an option) metal detail fittings.

Anyone care to correct me, I'm more than willing :?
I have a blank Augustan type waiting to be finished here, as soon as I get a break.

[A_Volpe]

"like a modern fiberglass coating, then leather"

Oh, dude, that is just way too cool! How fascinating! Wasn't there a mention of one shield (republican?) that was covered in Felt? Would that have been applied in a similar fashion, with lots of glue and crossing the fibers? (imagine the sticky, gooey mess that must have made )

Paint - just keep in mind 2,000 years will deterioriate the vivid shade of paint...So the "pink" may have been darker, but I don't know that much about caesin paints. (however the example I think of from Ancient Painting class is that the Medieval Icons with Mary, her cloak being black, but was actual Lapis Lazuli (egg tempera), which oxidized to a very dark blue/black color over a moderate amount of time, esspecially when it's exposed.)

leather add ons for design - I like this theory better than metal, I'd at least hope the Romans would want to keep the wieght of the Scutum down to a minimum, and having thin strips of leather for [thunderbolt&wings] designs would be much lighter than thin sheets of brass or other metal they used....I also would think the leather would be slightly more durable than the metal.

...Random thoughts outloud. Just ideas and personal theories.
I really like the implication of the "fiberglass" layers. Very cool.

[drsrob]

As I understand it the metal reinforcements on the outside served as rivets for the internal bars. They would include not just the corner angles, but also the tabulae ansatae at each side of the boss. And I would add spines to replace the wooden ones.
When a design was painted in these positions on the old republican pattern it would have been handy to fashion the metal reinforcements in the same shape. Hence the metal lightning flashes and the metal Capricorn. The latter was namely painted next to the boss on a shields on Arch of Orange which possibly was the shield design of the II Augusta

All speculation of course.