Help support TMP


"Shield painters - the real ones - some idle curiosity" Topic


7 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please don't call someone a Nazi unless they really are a Nazi.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Utter Drivel Message Board


Areas of Interest

General

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Profile Article

Tool Bench Hardware Painters Tape

Why do wargamers need painters tape, and is the dollar-store variety good enough?


1,100 hits since 1 Mar 2020
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Korvessa01 Mar 2020 11:50 a.m. PST

As I look at the many photos of people's forces, from ancient to middle ages, I can't help but admire the skill of the modeler. Whether they are hand painted like my brother does, or with the use of decals like I often do.

That got me wondering. Are all shield painters created equal? If someone was painting their own, there must have been some pretty ugly looking shields.

Did the shield "factory" (term used loosely of course) hire someone just to paint shields, so they look kind of the same? I bet even a good artist would have a hard time painting the same design twice exactly the same…

Would they have shield bargain discount tables, for when the design came out lousy?

Would the local lord keep the best ones for himself and cronies, and give the worst to the rabble?

Was the shield painter an honored profession? Or was it down there with "Robin the dung gatherer?" Or worse yet the guy who collected the horse urine to make yellow dye?

Since I doubt they had templates (maybe they did?) I bet even Roman Legions had a variety of painting quality in the unit.

freerangeegg01 Mar 2020 1:19 p.m. PST

The Romans probably used stencils for things like legionary shields. Sergeant majors from time immemorial have had an abhorrence of rough hand painted designs. I am sure medieval heraldry would have been the same. Gallic/ Individual type shield designs were probably done by an artistic village/ tribal member, and he'd get be paid and respected for it, or possibly a shaman.
You wouldn't intimidate anyone with a slopped on kids drawing on your shield.

Personal logo Herkybird Supporting Member of TMP01 Mar 2020 1:20 p.m. PST

I guess like tailoring, there were folk who were especially talented in painting in a village/unit, and they would get to do all the shields to a good standard, for a small fee!

Personal logo etotheipi Sponsoring Member of TMP02 Mar 2020 9:23 a.m. PST

I always assume this is highly individualized and skill dependent unless there is strong evidence to the contrary.

I guess like tailoring, there were folk who were especially talented in painting in a village/unit, and they would get to do all the shields to a good standard, for a small fee!

If they are home guard at the village or castle, I agree. Once they go a-viking, all bets are off!

Zephyr102 Mar 2020 3:47 p.m. PST

"The Romans probably used stencils for things like legionary shields."

Yes, they invented 'paint by numbers', e.g. I, II, VI, IX, etc… ;-)

jamemurp03 Mar 2020 10:47 a.m. PST

Shields is also a very broad term- the shields of medieval house retainers and retinues would be very different from peasant levies, for example. "Roman" encompasses a tremendous swath of history and geography. Late Imperial legates would have different expectations for regulars vs. provincial or tribal auxilla. Hierarchy and discipline would be reflected in equipment.


As for rougher shields, yes they would probably be much cruder than those of well funded professionals. A farmer called upon to leave his lands isn't (generally) going to have the same resources or investment in his time as a professional soldier. Many would still have a measure of pride, however. Others, especially in more peaceful times, would likely see their gear fall into some level of neglect, assuming it wasn't just hastily converted anyway.

Liming, tarring, or or painting would have often have been practical as much as anything to seal the wood. Peasants and laborers would have been unlikely to be able to afford the paints or dyes needed for more elaborate ornamentation, though some regions may have had greater access(such as using a local flower for color) and it would not be unusual for individualization (carving/marking names, initials, religious symbols, etc.).

Robert le Diable09 Mar 2020 5:45 a.m. PST

There's a story told in Vasari ( Lives of the Artists) of Leonardo da Vinci, whose father, a notary, was asked by "one of the country people" to get the young Leonardo to paint a design on a circular piece of wood, from a fig tree. In brief, having decided to paint something with a similarly frightening effect as Medusa, and for this purpose studied the aspect and anatomy of various creatures including bats and snakes, Leonardo produced a shield of such quality that it fetched three hundred ducats from the Duke. The peasant, meanwhile, was supplied with a similar round shield painted with a simple design of a heart pierced by an arrow (I assume the conventional heraldic device rather than one of Leonardo's anatomical works). That Leonardo's father was able to purchase this easily suggests that there were indeed "manufactories" producing such items. Andrea del Verrochio, to whom Leonardo was apprenticed, ran one of the biggest in Florence, making anything from items of jewellery to entire altarpieces, so no doubt a painted shield was turned out in little time, or bought "from stock".

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.