Early Imperial Roman Brachae, colour suggestions please.

[Johnny Boy]

Morning all, I've recently started a project involving Caesarian and Early Imperial Romans facing Gauls, Britons and Germanic tribes, not all at once of course! Anyway the box of Victrix EIR attacking I have are wearing Brachae and I've been trying to source a colour scheme for them. Could anyone point me in the right direction please.
Thanks in advance
JB

[carlos marighela]

Morning all, I've recently started a project involving Caesarian and Early Imperial Romans facing Gauls, Britons and Germanic tribes, not all at once of course! Anyway the box of Victrix EIR attacking I have are wearing Brachae and I've been trying to source a colour scheme for them. Could anyone point me in the right direction please.
Thanks in advance
JB

Probably brown when facing Boudica’schordes. 

[Mad Doc Morris]

Morning all, I've recently started a project involving Caesarian and Early Imperial Romans facing Gauls, Britons and Germanic tribes, not all at once of course! Anyway the box of Victrix EIR attacking I have are wearing Brachae and I've been trying to source a colour scheme for them. Could anyone point me in the right direction please.
Thanks in advance
JB

Like with all things concerning 'Roman uniforms': fairly free choice.
You can't go wrong with light to dark brown colours. These are all natural shades of leather and undyed wool, i. e. the most likely materials for said trousers. Wool in particular adds off-white and more than fifty shades of grey…
Yet dyed fabrics were also available, and they could come in a great variety of colours and patterns. Think 'Celtic' chequers for example. Most basic dyes would've been (rust) red and (mustard) yellow, because they're easy to do.

[Johnny Boy]

Thanks guys, very much appreciated. Point taken Carlos, I did see one portrayal of  Boudicca that looked horribly like my ex wife, I don,t know about your average Legionary but she always put the fear of God into me. . .   . 

[cadbren]

Yet dyed fabrics were also available, and they could come in a great variety of colours and patterns. Think 'Celtic' chequers for example.

I've never seen anyone do it but that has occurred to me too. Is there any evidence that auxiliaries wore a standard uniform outside of shield and possibly helmet? Many times they were recruited from tribal warbands and I wonder if anyone really cared if they showed up in whatever tunic and trousers their tribe wore?

[Mad Doc Morris]

I've never seen anyone do it but that has occurred to me too. Is there any evidence that auxiliaries wore a standard uniform outside of shield and possibly helmet? Many times they were recruited from tribal warbands and I wonder if anyone really cared if they showed up in whatever tunic and trousers their tribe wore?

See my comment on 'uniforms' above. There's no evidence for standardised equipment among distinct troop types other than monumental sculpture (like Trajan's Column), and these depictions add a whole lot of questions. Even a popular consensus like "segmented armour = legionary" is dubious, since quite a few fragments have surfaced in "auxiliary forts". So either auxiliaries wore this armour as well or mixed garrisons were a thing?
The same issue comes up with 'ethnic identity' vs 'assimilation'. Once recruited auxiliaries would be shifted all over the place and henceforth, despite overarching logistics, also draw on ressources (both men and equipment) local to their garrisons. Thus a unit stationed at one place for a while would possibly adopt some kind of local fashion. On the other hand, soldiers were perhaps the most mobile people of the period, hence spreading cultural habits to become 'mainstream' across the empire. But again, which is the dominant factor here? I'd say at this point there's no right or wrong, only a broad range of possibilities.

[Atheling]

Serious question, is there any real evidence that most Late Republican and Early Imperial Legionnaires wore red predominantly?

(I don't know the answer)

[A Lot of Gaul]

Serious question, is there any real evidence that most Late Republican and Early Imperial Legionnaires wore red predominantly?

(I don't know the answer)

A real ‘can of worms,’ that one. See this thread for one example discussion: https://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=122579.msg1539905;topicseen#msg1539905

The short answer, IMHO, is ‘no.’ 

[Mad Doc Morris]

The short answer, IMHO, is ‘no.’ 

Based solely on the amount of evidence – however small in general – red is the most likely colour though. At least for tunics worn in battle, which is assumedly the focus of most wargames collections.
FYI, a more recent collection is Graham Sumner's Roman Military Dress. Shouldn't prevent anyone to paint their minis in whatever colour they like, of course.

[A Lot of Gaul]

In point of fact, and after having studied this subject for 20+ years, I have found the literary and archaeological evidence to be ambiguous at best, while the existing visual evidence suggests red for centurions and other officers, and off-white for ordinary legionaries. I am not convinced by Sumner’s suggestion of red for battle and white for off-duty, but I also don’t want to hijack this thread with a lengthy debate on the subject, of which there have already been many. 

My best suggestion for Darrel is to do your own research using a wide variety of primary sources and draw your own conclusions, rather than rely entirely on responses to this thread, or for that matter a pair of Osprey wargaming books. 

[Mad Doc Morris]

In point of fact, and after having studied this subject for 20+ years, I have found the literary and archaeological evidence to be ambiguous at best, while the existing visual evidence suggests red for centurions and other officers, and off-white for ordinary legionaries. I am not convinced by Sumner’s suggestion of red for battle and white for off-duty, but I also don’t want to hijack this thread with a lengthy debate on the subject, of which there have already been many. 

My best suggestion for Darrel is to do your own research using a wide variety of primary sources and draw your own conclusions, rather than rely entirely on responses to this thread, or for that matter a pair of Osprey wargaming books. 

You're totally right, it's a tiresome discussion.
Minor correction though: Roman Military Dress is not to be confused with Osprey's Roman Military Clothing. Same author, therefore similar results. One may draw different conclusions, but it's a starter on the dreaded primary sources.

[Atheling]

My best suggestion for Darrel is to do your own research using a wide variety of primary sources and draw your own conclusions, rather than rely entirely on responses to this thread, or for that matter a pair of Osprey wargaming books. 

That's a very similar answer to what I say when I'm asked questions about Heraldry and Liveries etc. And to be honest it's a very good answer. The way to learn, to form opinions is to "do it yourself".

The reason I asked is that I was once a member of a Sub Roman Yahoo Group with some preeminent members (I won't mention names) and it was pointed out to me that we actually know very little about the subject of the Roman army in general, which I have to say, came as a bit of a surprise. Then after giving it some thought it just made sense.

I agree re: (most) Ospreys, they are often taken as gospel when they are at best a general summary

[A Lot of Gaul]

You're totally right, it's a tiresome discussion.
Minor correction though: Roman Military Dress is not to be confused with Osprey's Roman Military Clothing. Same author, therefore similar results. One may draw different conclusions, but it's a starter on the dreaded primary sources.

Agreed.