Quote:As far as I'm aware officers and seniors have always been distinguishable on the battlefield, and the removal of obvious high ranking insignia is a mid to late 20th C concept to avoid snipers.
Polybius, 6.22-23. 39, describes that it was ensured that soldiers were conspicuous on the battlefield for their commanders, by wearing animal skins (velites), or crests and feathers (regular legionaries). Ross Cowan seems pretty certain that decorations were worn on the battlefield, as well as at ceremonies. One aspect of that is it takes the argument in a different direction - is the real question to ask whether soldiers wanted to stay inconspicuous to the enemy, or was it more practical for them to be overly conspicuous to their superiors?
Its quite hard to discuss in a language you didnt used 6 years and which isnt your native tongue.
I never talked about the rank insignias and its known by me that in the napoleonic wars first time it becomes a rule to kill the officers.
The death of the centurions cant just be caused by their "first line place", what indeed is another discussion as well, as same as it cant just caused by "standing the ground". So, it perhaps wasnt a rule, but they were targets already for those, who wanna kill an important man or wanna help the enemie loosing their leading (and like varus show, without a head romans were to be beaten).
And if you just wanna look for the awards which officers can get, thats no problem. I really can imagine how Caesar looked like, while he was standing at his little top in corona triumphalis, tunica palmata, toga picta and an eagle crowned staff in his hands...
Ok, back to the try to explain what i ment. The romans, in fact, made a big crying for their awards and status, rank and place in society, and even for their families if it was a famous one. We all know about the civilian and military details to show the wealth and richdom, the own might.
But thats the fact! They, espacially the centurions, didnt need to risk their awards in battle and didnt need to risk to get still more enemies in hunting for that stuff instead of the usual guys which wanted to kill the commanders.
The full troop can see their group awards at the signum or show it all in their full name. All around you know your status and know pretty well what you done before.
About the worth and the behaviour to give awards suetonius wrote some interesting words in Aug XXV, 3-4 ( i try to translate i just have it in latin or german): As war honors Augustus much generous chest decoration and chains (right word for jewels around neck?), whose value existed in the gold and silver, lent as wall coronae, which was much more honorable to possess. These it assigned only after earnings and therefore also to the common soldier.
These sentence show us, that the coronae was the real sign of honor, but the "normals" get them not as often as it would be worth to raise the courage of the comrads.
And even if we would come to a point, they would were it in battle, whats up with the soldiers gregalis? How would they get the phalera above the segmentata? And why it isnt shown anywhere? Not at Trajan column, not in Mainz, not at another column? Or why its not shown on military representations like the metopes from Adamklissi (whose guys even didnt wear segmentata, just plumata / squamata or hamata)?
On the tombstones they are shown, proud, with parade equipment. Tell all visitors (and we know that the respect of graves wasnt that big) what this man did in his live. But neither on Adamklissi nor in Orange i can see any detail of award at a man.
And like Kate said, your sources arent evidence for the use in battle of awards.
The best was Tacitus, but as i wrote it know he wrote following before this sentence:
"Vitellius itself, caming from the milvian bridge on a splended horse, in the dress of an imperator and a sword at his side, the people and senators before itself let float, but took the advice of his friends not to march in the city like it would be captured, so he dressed himself in the purpurn toga."
After this and before your sentence of him he described the march of the legions and alae, cohortes and explorates. So this wasnt a battle dress they worn, it was a kind of triumphatical uniform. Not to compare.
The march ended by honoring the his mother with the titel Augusta...
And know what? While i march regulary or fight, i m thankfull also about every pennyweight i dont have to carry and put it to my equipment or perhaps, and thatsquite a real idea of me, to the treasure, managed by the signifer (we dont need to discuss that, i dont have any evidence for that).
And my last words to this interesting discussion are: also today and in past times, the most armies didnt shown the awards on combat dress, and mostly they did or do, its in a "practical" way.