scuta colors

[Tarbicus]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Caesar walks into a bar and asks for a Martinus. The barman smugly tells him, "I think you'll find that's Martin-i, sir." Caesar grabs him, "Listen sunshine, if I want a double I'll ask for one!"

[caiusbeerquitius]

:lol:

[Matthew Amt]

The yellow tunic is from one of Caesar's works... but I read them all so long ago I cannot remember. It specifically refers to the yellow tunics of the VI'th legion.

I heard this same vague theory years ago, with a tentative suggestion that it was Caesar's "African Wars". So I bought it and read it cover to cover, specifically looking for any reference to tunics and/or colors. There were none. Zippo. I think this is another instance of speculation turned into "parrot syndrome"! But like everyone else, if someone can come up with anything solid, I will be very happy!

Not to be picking on you, Rusty!! Just trying to nail down the EVIDENCE.

Matthew

[Graham Sumner]

Matthew wrote:

I heard this same vague theory years ago, with a tentative suggestion that it was Caesar's "African Wars". So I bought it and read it cover to cover, specifically looking for any reference to tunics and/or colors. There were none. Zippo. I think this is another instance of speculation turned into "parrot syndrome"! But like everyone else, if someone can come up with anything solid, I will be very happy!

Not to be picking on you, Rusty!! Just trying to nail down the EVIDENCE.

Matthew

I agree with you entirely Matthew. As I was told the reference was to do with Caesar's campaign in Alexandria I read his Alexandrian Wars. Likewise nothing unless I missed something.

Graham.

[Crispvs]

Graham,

Thanks for your reply. Obviously my statement was rather too general. What I should have said was that where a figure in a fresco is securely identified as a soldier, such as in the magistrates court fresco, we can read more from the colours the tunics are shown in, as the identification is secure. Even then though, there is room for debate. Is, for instance, one of the figures wearing pale blue or is pale blue being used as shading on a white tunic? I would not like to be the one to make that decision.
Where a figure is not securely identified as a soldier, such as the man on the pub sign, assumption must necessarily come into play. The colour of this man's clothing is in no way ambiguous but there is nothing like a belt or weapon head to prove he is a soldier, although your reasoning does make a lot of sense.
It is when it comes to literary references where ambiguity really becomes a major factor. If, for exampl, soldiers were known as 'russati', does that necessarily have to mean that it was their tunics which were red. It could just as easily mean that they often had ruddy faces or were sunburnt. Here we might bear in mind Caesar marching bareheaded at the head of his soldiers in Gaul. Then again it could mean that they were hot blooded and fierce. Similarly, if soldiers were said to be wearing the dreadful colour of Mars, does that necessarily mean red tunics? Could it not as easily be cloaks, angry aggressive facial expressions or even a military standard? I think you see what I mean.

In no way would I ever criticise your efforts to bring to our attention the fullest possible catalogue of colour evidence and I have often noted with some admiration your impartiality. It is simply here that I think that some of the evidence is closer to being potential evidence rather than solid evidence. As such it has to be interpreted, as the authors are not here to advise on what they meant. I think that your interpretations are perfectly legitimate but I submit that in a number of cases there are other possibly interpretations. This is not to belittle your achievement. I think that you have spared no effort to give the full list of all evidence and potential evidence available and we have all learned a great deal from your research. A richly deserved laud point is thus awarded.

Demetius,

Where is that quote from? Is it a novel or an actual account from antiquity which I was previously unaware of. Then again, does my question simply demonstrate that I sometimes take jokes too literally.

Crispvs

[Magnus]

I'd like to know that as well, it's excellent!

[M. Demetrius]

Demetius, Where is that quote from

It's just a recycled pirate joke, Romanized. I'm sure it never happened, because, of course, the tunic colors are wrong, right?
(M. Demetrius raises scutum in preparation for fiery darts incoming...)

Tarbicus: That was too much! Hilarious!

[Tarbicus]

More on Russati/Russetti/russata.

[url:3qqsfa98]http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?p=42251#42251[/url]

Actually, the quote from Isidore clearly suggests the habit of wearing red when soldiering was a custom from the remote past and not one of his own days.

[Peroni]

Crispvs wrote..

If, for exampl, soldiers were known as 'russati', does that necessarily have to mean that it was their tunics which were red. It could just as easily mean that they often had ruddy faces or were sunburnt.

Or.. that they were Batavians who dyed their hair and beard red for war?

At the risk of going slightly off-topic, M. VALERI MARTIALIS epigrammaton liber XIV CLXXVI ‘Persona Germana’. states;

"Sum figuli lusus russi persona Batavi. Quae tu derides, haec timet ora puer."
"I am a potter’s jest, the mask of a red faced Batavian. Though you make fun of it, a boy fears this face."

In my research I have found evidence that Batavians used dye to colour their hair red, and this included their beards too. The reddish hair, rutilae comae, mentioned by Tacitus in Germania 4 was not always natural. A hair dye used by Romans was called 'spuma Batava' or Batavian foam (Martialis, Epigrammata 8.33)

Plinius the Elder also records use of sapo, a Gallic invention used by Germanic men to colour their hair. (Naturalis Historia XXVIII LI)

"Potest et sapo, Galliarum hoc inventum rutilandis capillis. Fit ex sebo et cinere, optimus fagino et caprino, duobus modis, spissus ac liquidus, uterque apud Germanos maiore in usu viris quam feminis"

'Sapo ('soap') is also useful, an invention of the Gauls to dye hair red. It is made from tallow and ash, the best from goat fat and beechwood ash, in two manners, one solid and one liquid, both of which are in greater use among the Germanics by men than women'

Further delving produced snippets regarding Iulius Civilis' hair dye from Tacitus. According to Tacitus, Iulius Civilis, leader of the Batavian revolt grew his hair and beard as well as dying it red (Historiae 4.61).

"Civilis barbaro voto post coepta adversus Romanos arma propexum rutilatumque crinem patrata demum caede legionum deposuit."

"Then Civilis fulfilled a vow often made by barbarians; his hair, which he had let grow long and coloured with a red dye from the day of taking up arms against Rome, he now cut short, when the destruction of the legions had been accomplished. "

So, yes, I have to agree - It could just as easily mean that they often had ruddy faces, were sunburnt or had dyed their hair red!

[Graham Sumner]

Hello Crispus.

Thanks for your comments, I always value your opinions and have given you a laudes in return. considering our respective reenactment backgrounds I really do appreciate your views on my impartiality. One such example of this was my decision to omit one of Dan Peterson's favorite pieces of evidence for red tunics, the tavern scene from Pompeii with the argument over the dice game. There was nothing about the men in this fresco which suggested to me that any of these men were soldiers, other than the red tunic. As you quite rightly observe elsewhere there were no weapons or military belts present in this particular fresco which could have added weight to the argument that any of the men in the scene were soldiers.

With regards to the examples of evidence you have taken from my book, if all I had written was as you say I think anyone would feel those examples were indeed very ambigous. However you seemed to have ommited the supporting evidence I presented which I include here to balance things out.

What I should have said was that where a figure in a fresco is securely identified as a soldier, such as in the magistrates court fresco, we can read more from the colours the tunics are shown in, as the identification is secure. Even then though, there is room for debate. Is, for instance, one of the figures wearing pale blue or is pale blue being used as shading on a white tunic? I would not like to be the one to make that decision.

I do in fact state that while Fuentes said the man wore a white tunic, Sekunda said it was light blue and I added my own observation that it could indeed be an attempt to show shading on a white tunic.

If, for example, soldiers were known as 'russati', does that necessarily have to mean that it was their tunics which were red. It could just as easily mean that they often had ruddy faces or were sunburnt.

This refers to the quote by Isidore of Seville. So it could be argued instead that the passage of seventh century date was too late as a source for the Roman period. Although not always considered reliable Isidore was using old sources and in the context of the passage about red dye I think the nickname 'russati' is more relevant to clothing colour than red or sunburnt faces! Isidore also adds that a red colour was worn by the soldiers and displayed before the commanders tent on the eve and day of battle. Not blue, green or any other colour. And Plutarch, possibly one of the sources Isidore used, says it was a tunic that was displayed.

Where a figure is not securely identified as a soldier, such as the man on the pub sign, assumption must necessarily come into play. The colour of this man's clothing is in no way ambiguous but there is nothing like a belt or weapon head to prove he is a soldier, although your reasoning does make a lot of sense.

As you rightly point out in this case no weapons are visible on the body of this man because the cloak obscures everything. However the man does hold what looked to me like a weighted pila so in this instance I thought it was relevant.

Similarly, if soldiers were said to be wearing the dreadful colour of Mars, does that necessarily mean red tunics?

In my book I did include a reference with this example to a figure of mars from the Villa Borghese with both a red tunic and cloak. The red circus faction also dedicated red clothing to mars so I think the passage does equally refer to tunics. As the passage itself from Quintillianus, Declamationes III Declamatio, Pro Milite Contra Tribunum describes a battle scene one alternatively could argue that soldiers are not always seen fighting in cloaks so it must be tunics that are meant.

Certainly as a result of being involved with RAT and it's members it has been brought to my attention that some of my conclusions were indeed incorrect. Aitor pointed out that the translation of helmet rather than hat made better sense in one quote I used and also that it was not a hat but the helmet lining used by Ammianus Marcellinus to draw water from a well as practically every other modern scholar had also assumed. Hat lovers will be happy to note however that since publication actual examples of hats have been found which in future works will replace those incorrect translations.

I am therefore more than happy to make changes as new evidence comes to light. Perhaps Paul you will be the person who can find that reference, or not, to Caesar's troops in yellow or that equally elusive passage that says Severus allowed his centurions to parade in white which Y le Bohec mentioned in his book but omitted to supply a source!

To keep the thread going on scuta colours...... there are a number of cases of metal fittings being attached to shields as well as or instead of colours.

Best wishes

Graham.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Crispvs wrote:

Again, for scutum colours we are left with a choice of several shades and colours and the only thing I am aware of from ancient literature is Tacitus' reference to two of Mucianus' legionaries picking up shields dropped by fallen soldiers in Vitellius' army and using them to disguise their true identity long enough for them to get close enough to an artillery piece to disable it during the second battle of Cremona. This suggests that shields were specific to units and strongly suggests, given that the action took place at night, that it was the blazons which acted as the main identifier.

I disagree. All we learn from this passage is that the shields of the factions looked differently - but not in which way - form, colour, decoration etc. differences claimed to be fact on basis of this text are pure speculation.

[Crispvs]

Graham,

Thanks for your reply. To clear up any remaining ambiguity in my own remarks, I am satisfied and have been since first reading your book that you have acted with far more impartiality than most of the rest of us normally manage to achieve. I also think that every piece of evidence you cite is relevant and I have always been impressed with the number of references you uncovered. Even if the true nature of any of the items mentioned can be interpreted in different ways, they are all still relevant and deserve their place. Also, as I said above, I think your reasoning over most of the evidence you cite is very good. I should also add that I have not had the opportunity to look at your books in the last week or two, so I have been dependant on memory. Incidentally when your big book with Dr Raffael D'Ammato comes out, I WILL be buying and reading it and will be encouraging others to do so too.

Crispvs

[Graham Sumner]

Thanks for that Paul. There are many things in the new book that I have never seen before so I hope you will be impressed. No idea of a publication date yet but I will let you know as soon as I find out..

Graham.

[Octavianvs]

I was just going through this thread and I have never formed one definite certainty on tunic colour however I was under the idea that yellow was the colour what Roman Brides wear on thier wedding. Unfortunately I do not have the source for this information and at this time I cannot recall where I had read this. Now my ONLY point in this is that would a ROMAN soldier wear Yellow even though others would. And should a Roman end up in yellow would not this be unique enough to be noted in some writing somewhere? As far as first c. bc / ad I would say yellow was porbably not used by standard legionaries. - Octavianus

[Graham Sumner]

I was just going through this thread and I have never formed one definite certainty on tunic colour however I was under the idea that yellow was the colour what Roman Brides wear on thier wedding. Unfortunately I do not have the source for this information and at this time I cannot recall where I had read this. Now my ONLY point in this is that would a ROMAN soldier wear Yellow even though others would. And should a Roman end up in yellow would not this be unique enough to be noted in some writing somewhere? As far as first c. bc / ad I would say yellow was porbably not used by standard legionaries. - Octavianus

Hello Johnn.

This very point is raised and discussed in one of the chapters in 'The World of Roman Costume' eds, Sebeste and Bonfante. The Brides veil is probably best described as flame yellow more like egg yoke yellow.

One could argue then that the Roman military might consider yellow as an effeminate colour but against that some tunics in Roman art showing military type figures look almost yellow ( some of the more expensive tunics would in fact be woven with gold thread so could look yellow on a mosaic) and the most common colour for cloaks is a yellow brown.

Graham.