+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Reenactment (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Roman Re-Enactment & Reconstruction (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Thread: Just starting- C3rd Roman (/showthread.php?tid=19469)
Just starting- C3rd Roman - InsulaVecta - 09-05-2011
Hello there, I have been re-enacting for many years but never done this period. I want to put together a 3rd Century soldier portrayal and would appreciate some guidance!
As I have a moustache with/ without facial hair (can shave or not) wondered if an auxiliary role would allow this?
From initial research I guess a linen under tunic, red wool tunic, quilted submiralis, riveted mail lorica hamata, 3rd century boots, spatha, round shield and spear with a Intercisa II helmet.
Any good or am I way off?
Any ideas on good quality spatha makers for combat (was thinking Paul Binns...
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Virilis - 09-05-2011
Hi Jim!
For starters, Intercisa style helmets are from the 4th-5th century
...
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Gaius Julius Caesar - 09-05-2011
Hi, I am thinking this may be close...mind you I could do with a sword!
And perhaps a slightly different belt, but hey...
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Nathan Ross - 09-05-2011
Quote:For starters, Intercisa style helmets are from the 4th-5th century
That's the acceped theory, although Jens Horskotte suggested here that the Augst helmet might date to c280 instead...
Generally, though, something like a Niederbieber or a Buch would be better - there's pretty secure evidence for these throughout the 3rd century. Plus they look really cool...
I think (as Byron mentions) the broad waistbelt in that picture might be more 4th century, or very late 3rd maybe, but I'm still unsure about the earliest evidence for these. The 3rd-C-credentials of the Deir-el-Medineh helmet have also been questioned, I think... the ones on the Arch of Galerius do look very much like it though...
As for moustaches - probably not. A full beard would be fine, although short and stubbly with a crewcut seems to have been the preferred 3rd-century look!
- Nathan
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Paul Elliott - 09-05-2011
Can I recommend looking at my 3rd century website, The Roman Recruit? It distils everything I've picked up about the equipment and life of a 3rd century legionary, though skewed a little toward my own kit choices. I do look at other weapon and armour types, though!
http://romanrecruit.weebly.com/
Gaius J C, I'm afraid the 4th century stuff only gets you part of the way: the belt and helmet are the wrong period, though the trousers, tunic and mail are OK. The shield is of the right 'Dura Europus' dimensions, but you'd have to loose the Praesidiensis emblem from the Notitia Dignitatum.
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Paul Elliott - 09-05-2011
Quote:Virilis post=295271 Wrote:For starters, Intercisa style helmets are from the 4th-5th century
That's the acceped theory, although Jens Horskotte suggested here that the Augst helmet might date to c280 instead...
- Nathan
Yes, it seems that the 4th century 'look' had been established by Diocletian's era, and was quite a rapid transformation. Ring buckles and cavalry helmets were out, the new ridge helmets, spangenhelms and big heavily stiffened belts were in.
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Nathan Ross - 09-05-2011
Quote:I could do with a sword!Some feet would be handy too! :wink: Good pic btw.
And perhaps a slightly different belt...
Quote:it seems that the 4th century 'look' had been established by Diocletian's era, and was quite a rapid transformation. Ring buckles and cavalry helmets were out, the new ridge helmets, spangenhelms and big heavily stiffened belts were in.That's the theory we have to go on, though it would be nice to have a bit more dateable evidence to show the transformation. As I've said before hereabouts, the late 3rd/early 4th is one of most fascinating periods in Roman military equipment studies, largely because whatever was going on during that period is almost completely missing from the record - we have the before and after, but in between?... :???:
.
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Paul Elliott - 09-05-2011
I agree with you. I have some theories on what spurred the transformation that kickstarted the 3rd century look, but no idea what was going on to completely change the equipment horizon during the age of Diocletian. I read in Bishop & Coulston, or Simon James, how the Roman army adopted equipment piecemeal, locally, without any grand central equipment patterns or centrally planned logistics. But that's what seems to happen at the end of the 3rdC. Perplexing...
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Gaius Julius Caesar - 09-05-2011
Quote:
http://romanrecruit.weebly.com/
Gaius J C, I'm afraid the 4th century stuff only gets you part of the way: the belt and helmet are the wrong period, though the trousers, tunic and mail are OK. The shield is of the right 'Dura Europus' dimensions, but you'd have to loose the Praesidiensis emblem from the Notitia Dignitatum.
Well I think the helmet is debateable, as it is touted quite often as 3rd cent.
The belt I admited is wrong, but the shield, minus emblem is passable...but I would prefer a dished one!
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Gaius Julius Caesar - 09-05-2011
Like the website, Paul, I see you've made some updates!
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Paul Elliott - 09-05-2011
Ah, many thanks ... as I get new photgraphs (my own or kind donations) I add them in. And as I read I realise this or that needs to change ... Currently its the curved scutum, it could really be updated with a 3rd c design and loose the brass edging ....
Moneywise, its all metalwork, I suppose. What would be the earliest date for the Deir el Medinah? The spatha from the 4th century stays the same, but the scabbard chape may change depending on your current design (I couldn't tell from your photo). The belt is the cheapest part of all!
I give this advice as someone who got into re-enactment via the third c group quinta gallorum, moved into the 4th c with Comitatus, then moved back to the third c, but paying alot more attention to the details and newer research.
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Gaius Julius Caesar - 09-05-2011
I have seen it touted as late third cent, but also recently seen it dated as 4th cent...
so seems it can be a bit of a crossover....
As for a sword, I am lacking a late one, but am working on it.
The choice of chape is telling of course, also the handle style too, I believe.
You see the T type handle more in th 4th, but not so sure of the third, I think it's still the onion or other organic shapes??
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Kai - 09-05-2011
Hi all,
this might be the right place to ask if there is a early/mid 3rd century alternative to the big, bulky Roman helmets of this era (like Buch/Nieberbieber/Heddernheim). I especially dislike the huge neck guard. Is a Spangenhelm already in use with the Roman army e.g.?
regards
Kai
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Paul Elliott - 09-05-2011
I searched and searched for exactly the same type of helmet Kai. I've worn the Niedermormter with its huge neck guard, and also the Auxiliary E types, all-enclosing, heavy hard to wear.
I found that a type of Imperial Italic, the G, very much like the AD130 Bar Kochba helmet was found at Thielenhoffen fort dated to 189AD. So, for the very early 3rdC, this type of helmet (the only reconstruction I know of is made by Danyel Steelcrafts) is a possibility.
![[Image: 2672667.jpg]](http://romanrecruit.weebly.com/uploads/3/4/3/3/3433372/2672667.jpg)
![[Image: combined.jpg]](https://www.armamentaria.com/store/images/combined.jpg)
Is it representative of helmets worn at the turn of the 3rdC? I don't know. On spangenhelms, though, the very earliest depiction of Roman soldiers wearing them comes from the Arch of Galerius, post 300AD, although depictions of 'auxiliary archers' and barbarians wearing it go back to Trajan's Column I seem to remember.
Re: Just starting- C3rd Roman - Robert Vermaat - 09-05-2011
Quote:I read in Bishop & Coulston, or Simon James, how the Roman army adopted equipment piecemeal, locally, without any grand central equipment patterns or centrally planned logistics. But that's what seems to happen at the end of the 3rdC. Perplexing...Not necessarily perplexing. After all, the last decades of the 3rd century saw a much-changed political reaction to the chaos of the previous half-century, which successfully tried to re-assert the power of the central government. This was going hand in hand with a military reorganisation that must have seen the rebuilding of a system wracked by decades of civil war. As anyone who plays strategy games knows, this presents a problem: a low tax yield combined with high expenses leads you into trouble. My games won’t let me lend with banks (thus while escaping a budget deficit it does lead to an immediate bankruptcy) but it teaches me to either patient or inventive about costs. When you have need of money you look elsewhere. I am thinking that this situation lead to a change in Roman production of arms and armour. The ridge helmets could, being produced in small parts that were assembled later, represent a much cheaper helmet that the Imperial Gallic types which were produced by one smith over a longer period of time.
It would have been a gradual process allowing the Augst helmet to date to the 280s without a need for a total introduction across the Empire.