03-19-2006, 06:00 PM
Did soldiers carve Adamklissi? I think that one pointer to this is to look at exactly what the depicted figures are doing. Looking at No.XVIII again, this depicts a combat between a Roman infantryman (presumably a legionary) and a Dacian (because of the latter's headgear). The Roman is depicted in the 'classic' legionary stance - namely using the shield as a battering ram to unbalance the opponent and then reaching around the right side of the shield with the sword held low for a blow to the lower abdomen. This was what Roman soldiers were trained to do and is described by a number of Roman writers.
The whole attitude of this carving smacks of having been done by someone who knows this manoeuvre intimately. The stance is "right". It just doesn't look like it has been executed by a professional Greek-influenced Roman sculptor (as so much of the Trajan's column does). Or, indeed, by some local stonemason.
It is widely held that the army depicted on the column is being presented in a coded form. Instead of writing something like: "These are Roman soldiers storming a fortress, while these are auxiliaries bringing in Dacian prisoners", the scultor used visual clues. The Roman legionaries always wear lorica segmentata armour, while the auxiliaries wear scale or mail armour and the Prætorians wear 'attic' helmets and are always shown in close proximity to the Emperor. All sorts of attempts have been made to identify the legions involved, no no-one's complete satisfaction. I doubt that we can read more into this than that, unless someone comes up with a 'Rosetta stone' sometime!
The question as to whether the plate armour was used by legionaries alone or whether auxiliaries used it as well has also made for some interesting discussions (I did my Masters on this topic, so I'm well aware of the arguments).
Which brings me back to one observation. The girdle plates of the lorica segmentata tend to overlap downwards. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?
The whole attitude of this carving smacks of having been done by someone who knows this manoeuvre intimately. The stance is "right". It just doesn't look like it has been executed by a professional Greek-influenced Roman sculptor (as so much of the Trajan's column does). Or, indeed, by some local stonemason.
It is widely held that the army depicted on the column is being presented in a coded form. Instead of writing something like: "These are Roman soldiers storming a fortress, while these are auxiliaries bringing in Dacian prisoners", the scultor used visual clues. The Roman legionaries always wear lorica segmentata armour, while the auxiliaries wear scale or mail armour and the Prætorians wear 'attic' helmets and are always shown in close proximity to the Emperor. All sorts of attempts have been made to identify the legions involved, no no-one's complete satisfaction. I doubt that we can read more into this than that, unless someone comes up with a 'Rosetta stone' sometime!
The question as to whether the plate armour was used by legionaries alone or whether auxiliaries used it as well has also made for some interesting discussions (I did my Masters on this topic, so I'm well aware of the arguments).
Which brings me back to one observation. The girdle plates of the lorica segmentata tend to overlap downwards. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?
visne scire quod credam? credo orbes volantes exstare.
