Uniformity

[A_Volpe]

Hmmmm….

I've been doing a lot of think about this topic (perhaps more than I should…) and I think I'm having to revise my statements and thinking about "uniformity". Maybe there were moments of "uniform standard", like with the Montefortino (which as mentioned appears to have been virtually unchanged for 200 years), but then we see new styles coming in (such as a 'brow guard' and 'neck guard' on Coolus/Bugenem helmets; which many examples themselves appear to be "mass produced" from spun bowls); and near the end of the 3rd century we see very large neck, brow, and check guards on types like the Neidermorter/Italic H. The later Intercisa/Berkosovo types seem to lose the brow-guard but retain a neck/nape guard, although it became a rather flat plate suspended from the back of the helmet.

Also, going back again to the "55 Syrian Coats" receipt from Egypt. Why only 55 wearing such a specific style? We seem to agree that Romans may have adopted "local" styles and fashions partly to meld with the local population and to be more 'appealing' (allegedly Caesar was known to wear long-sleeved tunics to "impress" Celtic tribesmen during the Gallic wars; Hadrian was obsessed with the "Greek-Egyptian" look; we also have the story of Vitellius' troops coming into Rome from the Germanic regions in the Year of the Four Emperors, and apparently they were not recognized as "Romans" by the people in Rome! Apparently they were "too barbaric looking" I believe that was from Seutonius?) Legions seem to appear to adopt local customs and even religions/gods/godesses. So, since III Cyrenaica was moved to Syria around the early 100's AD from Egypt, maybe they were looking to adhere to local styles in the new region? But 55 is only half of a Century, although it could have been for 55 Centurions. Since Centurions were usually the local town magistrates in Egypt nomes village districts, perhaps having them wear Syrian styled coats was an attempt at appealing to the local Syrian fashions and people?

This also seems to support the notion that some of us think the Romans had "Regional" styles. Germanic troops (via tombstones) seem to be slightly different from Egypt, from Britain, etc. (and, even T-C, or something like the Adamklissi monument)

Speaking of Egypt, the tunics that have been found (referencing Sumner's "Roman Military Dress"), the style in the late 1st or 2nd century seems to have been a white tunic with reddish clavi stripes (Fayum portraits; although one tunic found in Egypt was a yellowish color with black or very dark blue clavi); but the depictions of Romans in the Temple at Luxor has all of them wearing what we regard as 3rd of 4th century style long tunics, white with blue shoulder medallions and red cloaks.

More questions raised. It's been speculated that Romans might have had different clothing for different functions. If they had a "every day fatigue" vs a "dress" or "parade" outfit, that might explain why we see such variety in clothing. It might have also been a Rank Indicator or Status thing within the army. We're pretty sure the higher-echelons are allowed to wear different styles, such as shoes and belts, vs. the regular rankers (centurions and higher are never seen wearing the balteus with dangly straps, that appears to be specifically Miles for pretty much the 1st century). So, it MAY be that yes, there are "uniforms"/"uniform standards" after all.
Also, allegedly the Praetorian Guard were supposed to wear "older looking traditional gear" as part of their distinctive look….

What still seems to be true from my initial statement, is that the fashions and gear take some time to change. It does not appear necessarily to be "overnight" between one kind of gear and another. As I mentioned before, no document found has hinted on the idea of "we switched to this [helmet] on this day in this year". It seems the fashions and clothing change somewhat rapidly, as fashions do, but the metal armor and gear stays generally the same for a much longer time. Maybe that's the case. Sort of that "if it isn't broke, don't fix it" mentality. We have one Roman helmet that has 3 different names inscribed in it, indicating it went through 3 different owners in its lifetime, which could easily have been 60 years, but the clothing those soldiers were wearing might have changed once or twice in that same time period. Styles and details of mass-produced items usually don't change that dramatically from one year to the next. We tend to see a similar thing with military gear today, as with the case with firearms. The M-16 and AK-47 is at their basic level and look, unchanged after some 50 years. Accessories and customization has been available for only the last 15-20 years?