RomanArmyTalk

Full Version: Osprey \'Legionary\'
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Has anyone seen this one yet? I was rather looking forward to it, as the full title is 'Roman Legionary 58BC-69AD', and I hoped therefore that it might actually cover Caesar's Gallic army as well as the usual early imperial troops. However, as far as the plates are concerned (I've only had a scan through it so far), the earliest representation is of a legionary at Actium - the remainder of the plates being Augustan or principiate troops. With all the titles Osprey publishes, it does seem odd that the late Republican Romans are consistently ignored!<br>
Anyway, the pictures look pleasant as always. Incidentally, the 'Actium legionary' is portrayed as a 'marine' - i.e dressed in Vegetius' blue outfit. He's also from Legio XII Antiqua, whereas Antony's Legio Classica would seem a better bet as far as strictly naval soldiers go! But I believe I might have to take a closer look at this one... <p></p><i></i>
I just got notice that it, and the siege engine publication, are available today. <p>Richard Campbell, Legio XX<br>
<br>
</p><i></i>
These are some advance pages<br>
www.ospreypublishing.com/...3SPR1S.JPG<br>
<br>
Looks like white tunics for legionaries and red for centurions. Also some more realistic pictures of marching legionaries. I wonder how the shield is supported??<br>
<p></p><i></i>
I saw a copy of Legionary in Borders last week, so it is making its way into the retail stores, but alas I'm still waiting for my copy from Osprey. <p>Richard Campbell, Legio XX<br>
<br>
</p><i></i>

Anonymous

White tunics for legionaries -- yeeks! Makes you wonder how (or even if) they kept them presentably clean while on campaign, doesn't it?<br>
<br>
The shields had a leather strap on the inside for attaching to gear, didn't they? <p></p><i></i>
Tunics - don't even go there! As for the shield hangings, the relevant plate (legionaries in marching order) features a reconstruction 'carrying strap'.<br>
I'm quite surprised that so few people have seen this title yet - it was out in my local Borders (UK) about two weeks ago! <p></p><i></i>
I have mine now . First reaction is good . It has a lot of Kalkreise stuff so the emphasis is early Empire. Lots of pics I have not seen before but some odd line drawings of Helmets.<br>
Illustrations are more graphic than Graham Sumner but with odd faces but then I am biased.<br>
He uses the Junkelman method of holding the shield on the back.<br>
More later when I have read it through. <p></p><i></i>
I've mine too. Also first impression is good, but I've got questions too.<br>
I thought the idea of individual soldiers standing in chequerboard formation had been abandoned. Is this a revival?<br>
Cowan states (p. 50) that <em>tessararii</em> were represented with the same staff as the optiones. I had considered this possibility, but this is the first time I read it as a fact. There are no references unfortunately.<br>
On p. 48 Cowan notes the two different meanings of the word <em>antesignani</em> (skirmishers or front rankers, see [url=http://pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm1.showMessage?topicID=400.topic" target="top]my discussion with Sander[/url], [url=http://pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm1.showMessage?topicID=502.topic" target="top]followed here[/url]), but unfortunately does not try to resolve the discrepancy.<br>
Interesting is the helmet handle on p. 44. This would suggest that the Imp. Gallic type G already existed at the beginning of the 1st cent. AD. <p>Greetings<br>
<br>
Rob Wolters</p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=drsrob>drsrob</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://images.honesty.com/imagedata/h/573/16/25731628.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 7/28/03 11:51 pm<br></i>
Being my main interest the late Roman army, I bought the book expecting to have some fine Mc Bride plates. Unfortunately, Mr Mc Bride have been rather lazy, this time! (even the depicted equipment is in a rather sketchy way, not accurate enough for the Warrior series!)<br>
The text is interesting, though.<br>
<br>
Aitor <p></p><i></i>
I bought my copy last week, and since I'm no expert on the field, I thought it was rather enjoyable. I always enjoy the plates on the osprey series. It taught me much about the 1st cent. legionary. About the Kalkresie (Varian distater?)stuff: has there been any recent findings on that site? <p></p><i></i>
I think you should visit the site he suggests www.kalkriese-varusschlacht.de .
Surprisingly he does not refer the reader to Mathews sitel He refers to the Guards but not the American XX!!<br>
Exceedingly odd<br>
<br>
He has added to my vocab though with his use of calones for military slave. I am looking for volunteers. <p></p><i></i>

Anonymous

Hi,<br>
<br>
Was surprised to see a picture of the Fulham blade described as a Mainz type blade ?<br>
<br>
Is the Fulham blade a Mainz type ... I got the impression it was a type of its own ?<br>
<br>
Conal <p></p><i></i>

Anonymous

Particularly on page 40, see the way the pugio is attached to the belt. This is the first time that I've seen it mounted that way. <p></p><i></i>
3rd or 2nd Century BC Spanish pugio's had two rings, diagonally opposed. So at that time they must have been carried in a slanting position.<br>
1st Century Roman pugio's often had the lower two rings made of silver. Apparantly at that time they were no longer used and just a relic.<br>
Somewhere in between a carrying method requiring four rings must have been used, so it is unlikely that pugio's were still carried slanting at the beginning of the empire. <p>Greetings<br>
<br>
Rob Wolters</p><i></i>

Anonymous

I haven't read the entire book yet, but upon further study I notice the photo of the grave stone on the right hand side of page 49. It looks like the pugio is mounted on a diagonal. This stone is from the late 1st centruy AD. Maybe perpendicular or on the diagonal was a fashion statement, and up to the individual. <p></p><i></i>
Pages: 1 2