Did the Romans have parade armour?

[Kegluneq]

I can think of a few who fought in the frontlines at least once. Litorius died leading a cavalry charge at the Battle of Tolosa in 439.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head.

I'm fairly sure Titus fought at the front as well during the wars against the Jews, and Julian would later die from battle injuries. The Barracks Emperors in between will almost certainly have had battle experience.

With regards to 'parade' armour, it seems the discussion runs parallel to the 'sports' armour worn by auxiliary cavalrymen during special displays of equestrian skill. The full face helms associated with these would have been impractical in battle so may have been used solely in demonstration roles, although I don't know what the final word on that is.

Decorated armour - tinned, embossed etc - can be sturdier and more resistant to corrosion than stock armour, so that's not necessarily a sign of display use only. However, the two shouldn't be held in opposition; a striking and unique armour design can have a powerful effect on an enemy and appear to emphasise your own skills and stature. That's a pretty powerful and significant material effect.

The same goes for 'decorated' weapons such as the Sword of Tiberius, which it is now being argued is more likely to have been owned by a low-ranking soldier than a senior officer, as it is tinned rather than silvered. Pugio scabbards, also decorated, have the added bonus of being carried on more occasions than the full military outfit.