traits of a Roman legionary

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Certainly makes it easier in our anti-equitas formation. Easier t ocrouch in the front than hike scutum over taller person in front....same with testuedo, shorter to front would be easier......

[Matt Lukes]

Gettin' a bit off-topic here folks- perhaps start a new thread about army requirements or something so we can get back to helping Rich?

Me, I'd agree that wearing caligae would be the simplest way for an ex-soldier to be recognized in the story; it's simple and conclusive since 'the soldier's boots' are supposed to have been quite unique to legionaries and given that it's a children's book, I suspect no more more difficult to defend details (size, demeanor, etc.) would be necessary.

[Tarbicus]

And don't forget that possibly the most common term for a soldier was 'caligatus'.

[richsc]

'caligatus'.

I usually think of the military belt being the single trait of the soldier, but would this make the caligae that? Or in addition to the belt? Caligula was not called Balteula after all.

[Tarbicus]

'caligatus'.

I usually think of the military belt being the single trait of the soldier, but would this make the caligae that? Or in addition to the belt? Caligula was not called Balteula after all.

That's because as a small child he wore miniature caligae, not a miniature military belt.

'Little Boots'.

[richsc]

Yes, diminutive of caliga, the point being that he could as easily have had a belt made for him, and probably did.

What shoes did the Herculanum 'soldier' have on?

[Graham Sumner]

There is no reason why all Roman soldiers would have well developed muscles. As someone else has pointed out a soldier could equally spend all his service life as a clerk or accountant. Whatever his service role an arrogant attitude towards non military personnel might be evident.

Some accounts even state that there were soldiers in the east who had not even carried out sentry duty but were content to laze about in the taverns!

There is plenty of evidence that soldiers and veterans alike treated civilians with contempt. One humorous example is a warning to pedestrians to beware their feet being stamped on by soldiers boots!

Off hand I do not know of references to Veterans still wearing military garb which was clearly distinct from civil clothing. But an ex soldier might possibly still wear some of his military awards.

Graham.

[Primvs Pavlvs]

I think the idea of the common soldier wearing military equipment after his term of service would be a rare occurrence. How many soldiers today continue to wear combat boots on a daily basis? I know when my father retired from the military, he resented wearing anything that had to do with his service. He was glad he could return to wearing civillian clothing on a daily basis.

As I said earlier, if you have ever been around proffessional soldiers (non-REMF) you would know what I mean. They have a certain "air" that surrounds them. Its in their speech, their behavior, manners etc etc. Its not the Hollyweird ideal either.

[John M McDermott]

There is no reason why all Roman soldiers would have well developed muscles.

Oh Jeez, come on! Anyone ever gone through boot camp? I put on 30 pounds of muscle in 10 weeks. It has tended to stay. I have also lazed around a tavern or two.

[Paullus Scipio]

Primus Paullus wrote:-

How many soldiers today continue to wear combat boots on a daily basis?

....classic error ! One should not label other societies in different times and places with our own cultural prejudices.......in other societies, soldiering was not disapproved of, as tends to be the case in our own, but rather honoured.
Even in our own societies, within living memory, ex-soldiers wore some (un)subtle sign of their profession, had a 'military haircut', walked 'with a military bearing' wore some ex-military piece of clothing ( caps, berets, and even boots) and generally made it clear who they were......

Just take one look at John McDermott's avatar!! Surely this 'trait' is universal?

[Graham Sumner]

Oh Jeez, come on! Anyone ever gone through boot camp? I put on 30 pounds of muscle in 10 weeks. It has tended to stay. I have also lazed around a tavern or two.

I think we like to believe the Roman army was always a lean, mean, fighting machine

...The army you took over was demoralized by luxury and immorality and prolonged idleness.....more often found in the nearest tavern than in the ranks....horses shaggy from neglect but every hair plucked from their riders: a rare sight was a soldier with arm or leg hairy........the men were better clothed than armed.....horses saddled with cushions.......few of the men could vault upon their horses, the rest scrambled clumsily up by dint of heel or knee or thigh.....not many could make their spears hurtle but tossed them like toy lances......gambling was rife in camp, sleep night long....if a watch was kept it was over the wine cups. Fronto. Letter to Lucius Verus.

The most demoralized of all were the Syrian soldiers, mutinous, disobedient, seldom with their units, straying in front of their proscribed posts, roving about like scouts, drunk from one noon to the next, unused even to carrying their arms, and as one man after another from dislike of toil laid them aside, like skirmishers and slingers half naked! Fronto Elements of History xi-xii

....classic error ! One should not label other societies in different times and places with our own cultural prejudices

Quite right, the Roman Legions were nothing like the United States Marine Corps! :wink: :wink:

Just take one look at John McDermott's avatar!! Surely this 'trait' is universal?

You have just made the same error Paul. There is no evidence Roman soldiers wore baseball caps and sunglasses! :wink: :wink:

Graham.

[Carlton Bach]

There is no reason why all Roman soldiers would have well developed muscles.

Oh Jeez, come on! Anyone ever gone through boot camp? I put on 30 pounds of muscle in 10 weeks. It has tended to stay. I have also lazed around a tavern or two.

The problem is we do not know whether Roman soldiers all went through anything resembling 'boot', or how m,uch (or little) training they put in afterwards. Combat troops under the watchful eyes of diligent commanders would certainly match that idea. We know that discipline was not always up to the exacting standards of the senatorial imagination, though. Plus, we should probably not underestimate the importance of string-pulling, the appeal of noncombat duty and the effect of long stints of service away from camp.

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

One has to remember that Syrian and more generally Eastern laxity was a literary topos well established for centuries prior to the writing of the passages quoted above. Besides, judging from the works of literature, the Roman elite did not suffer from much affection to the Roman soldiers. To counterbalance, here is an account of an eye-witness, who saw the Roman army, mostly composed of the Syrian legions BTW, in action:

And, indeed, if any one does but attend to the other parts of their military discipline, he will be forced to confess that their obtaining so large a dominion hath been the acquisition of their valor, and not the bare gift of fortune; for they do not begin to use their weapons first in time of war, nor do they then put their hands first into motion, while they avoided so to do in times of peace; but, as if their weapons did always cling to them, they have never any truce from warlike exercises; nor do they stay till times of war admonish them to use them; for their military exercises differ not at all from the real use of their arms, but every soldier is every day exercised, and that with great diligence, as if it were in time of war, which is the reason why they bear the fatigue of battles so easily; for neither can any disorder remove them from their usual regularity, nor can fear affright them out of it, nor can labor tire them; which firmness of conduct makes them always to overcome those that have not the same firmness; nor would he be mistaken that should call those their exercises unbloody battles, and their battles bloody exercises...In a case, therefore, where counsel still goes before action, and where, after taking the best advice, that advice is followed by so active an army, what wonder is it that Euphrates on the east, the ocean on the west, the most fertile regions of Libya on the south, and the Danube and the Rhine on the north, are the limits of this empire? One might well say that the Roman possessions are not inferior to the Romans themselves.

Josephus, BJ 3.70, 107.

[Primvs Pavlvs]

[ One should not label other societies in different times and places with our own cultural prejudices.......in other societies, soldiering was not disapproved of, as tends to be the case in our own, but rather honoured.

Exactly! What says the Roman soldier continued to wear his military identifiers after his service?

[Tarbicus]

Isn't it just possible that by the time he retired, his scars, missing teeth, broken nose, scars, and did I mention scars, would give him away as a veteran? Or maybe if asked he said, "I'm a veteran. Wanna see my diploma?"

I also don't particularly agree with the idea a soldier has a different air about hm. It took myself and the bar staff at least two hours to figure out who the 30+ party crowd were before I simply asked them (I had a suspicion, but it was tough to tell). Just back from the front lines of Afghanistan. Otherwise they were just like any other bunch of working class lads out on the razzle dazzle, including the police giving them a warning to behave :wink: Maybe it's different in the States, but the Romans were mostly Europeans after all

NB: An American friend on a visit to Liverpool did ask if every man in the city was in the army - short haircuts are the usual thing, plus most are pretty fit.