Scuta

[Doc]

I have a few questions about Scuta. Any help would be appreciated.

I would like to have a scutum with curved sides to represent the mid 1st century AD hock: I would like the motif to be a laurel wreath around the face of it. I know that some groups already sport this type of design. However, from what I have seen, usually the wreath is green.

Would a wreath in yellow be "accurate" and would raw hide as the material be more likely or less likely than thin brass foil for the design.

The other question I have is does anyone know who makes good scuta.
I know only of Matt L. It appears that his reconstruction is very good.
However, if there is anyone esle that can be recommended please do so.

As far as the umbo is concerened, I was told that there is evidence showing that rectangular scuta with curved sides can have umbos similar to a clipeus shield . Is this plausible or not. I always see the rectangualr or hexagonal umbos.

I would like a decorative umbo but not the Dubitatus. I know of some from the Guttman collection where one is a medusa and the other an ornate umbo with some serpent? However, it appears that these belong to an oval or round shield not a scutum

Could they be used on a scutum with curved sides or just a scutum in general?

I apologize if the post is long.

Thanks for all your help

Paolo

[Matt Lukes]

Would a wreath in yellow be "accurate" and would raw hide as the material be more likely or less likely than thin brass foil for the design.

"Accurate" isn't really an appropriate term to use for scutum colors since we have no idea what they really were- everything is theoretical. Green is reasonable because leaves are green, but there's nothing that would preclude the use of other colors I think. And there's scant evidence of metal applique pieces on scuta (just a couple of artifacts that I don't believe can actually be proven conclusively to have come from scuta), paint is rather more likely to have been the most common form of decoration. I don't believe there's any evidence whatsoever of rawhide- assuming you mean some kind of raised, shaped skin- as decoration.

[Peroni]

I know of some from the Guttman collection where one is a medusa and the other an ornate umbo with some serpent? However, it appears that these belong to an oval or round shield not a scutum

The Guttman boss with the seated goddess and serpents is from the Tird Century, and as you stated mor likely to have been fitted to a round cavalry sports Hyppika Gymnasia) shield.

I cannot remember seeing any depictions of round umbones on curved rectangular shields.

I see no reason why the curved-sided (typically Augustan period) shield cannot be used to mid-first century.

[Doc]

Thanks Matt, I know that the term accurate does not apply really that is why I put it in quotes since I was not sure exactly what word to use to describe what I was trying to convey.

Yes, Matt I meant some shaped raised skin.

Thank you Peroni for the response. It does clear up the issue.


Paolo

[caiusbeerquitius]

just a couple of artifacts that I don't believe can actually be proven conclusively to have come from scuta

Why? Or better, where else do you suggest they might be from?

[Doc]

What about the Doncaster scutum. According to Michel Feguere (in his book) the picture seems to suggest a rectangular legionary scutum with a round umbo.


Paolo

[Peroni]

Its not curved. The Doncaster (Danvm) shield (Pictured upside-down in Fugere IIRC) was a flat board. The flange of the umbo was also flat. It has a vertical grip too, suggesting a cavalry shield.

There was a good discussion on this shield recently
http://w10.eleven2.com/~joorthuy/rat/vi ... 84096dfd34

[Matt Lukes]

Thanks Matt, I know that the term accurate does not apply really that is why I put it in quotes since I was not sure exactly what word to use to describe what I was trying to convey.

Yes, Matt I meant some shaped raised skin.

Paolo

Right, of course, sorry I just wouldn't have even used it in quotes but rather have asked if there's anything that's more 'reasonable' than something else, since it's all completely theoretical.

And as for the raised rawhide, I seem to recall someone discussing that not too long ago, but without the tiniest bit of real evidence (that I know of), I'd consider that more fantasy than even theoretical at this point. I don't even agree that there's sufficient evidence to believe rawhide was used on scuta regularly (don't kill me Christian! :wink: ) given that the majority of the Dura Europos and the Kasr El Harit shields had some kind of fiber in glue facing rather than animal skin.

just a couple of artifacts that I don't believe can actually be proven conclusively to have come from scuta

Why? Or better, where else do you suggest they might be from?

Well first there's no scale in any of the photos I've ever seen of them so unless anyone has the artifacts' dimensions, they might be too big or too small to reaonably have belonged to scuta, then there's the fact that both figures are EXTREMELY common so there are a hundred other things they might have been part of, and third unless they were found with clear scutum elements such as an umbo, edge binding, they might just as well belong to one of those hundred other possibilities, some of which, such as wooden chests, we know to have had applique decorated metal pieces- that's something we don't know for sure about scuta.

What about the Doncaster scutum. According to Michel Feguere (in his book) the picture seems to suggest a rectangular legionary scutum with a round umbo.

I've always seen it depicted as being very ovoid and to me its style has never looked remotely Roman- I've wondered for a while just why it's though to be actually. Couldn't it just as easily (or moreso) be a non-Roman Auxiliary (and thus some other peoples' design) or even British?

[Hibernicus]

Paolo.. write me direct at...

[email protected]

..maybe I can help.