Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Reenactment Legion Uniformity vs Variety
#46
Quote:So lets consider the case of the shovel. Very few have been found /published in Roman contexts and I think none that can be linked to the legions for sure.. So should a reconstruction based on one of the few period examples be "banned" from reenacting until one is found in a Legionary context or allowed under a "known tool must have been used sometimes premise" Opinions?

Aren't shovels shown on Trajan's Column? If so, that's darn good evidence for their basic appearance. (Dolabrae shown on the Column are good matches for surviving examples, after all.) A quick glance at Fuentes' article "The Mule of a Soldier" and 2 Connolly books reveals at least 3 surviving shovel heads. None are specifically said to be from military sites, but other tools such as entrenching tools, hammers, and other items turn up on both military and civilian sites, with no distinguishable differences. That's good enough for me. Fuentes also cites some historical references to shovels (though I didn't read them carefully). To me, that's perfectly good documentation: pictoral, archeological, and literary, 3 for 3! Plus a range of styles: 2 iron shovel heads of different shapes, and a wooden one with an iron edge. So go for it!

Why should any item known to have existed be banned if it is legitimately a part of any given impression? Mind you, just because an item is well-documented does not mean that is appropriate for a soldier on campaign, for instance! I don't let my legionaries have stools in camp, because I have seen no evidence for their use in that context. Officers, sure, but not grunts! But I wouldn't let a senator's wife wear military caligae, either.

Valete,

Matthew
Matthew Amt (Quintus)
Legio XX, USA
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/legioxx/">http://www.larp.com/legioxx/
Reply
#47
Hailog thein,

I would think Christian is correct in noting that no ancient army could be precisely "uniform." Perhaps what has been described as "uniform" was actually "conforming" to identification. In the ancient Persian ranks, each unit had identifying characteristics. The Chalybes, for instance, had helmets affixed with bull's horns and ears, all in brass. They also had red leggings. Obviously the leggings varied with the quality of wool and dye lot, yet it was still red. The helmets-- evidently the Viking helmets that the Vikings never wore-- must have had some variation.
"Hey, wait a moment! Your bull ears are longer than mine!"
Nonetheless all the helmets had ears and horns, while the those of the Medes did not. This is a case of conforming identification but not true uniformity. With all the different items fabricated in the Roman Empire, some in Epirus, others in Gaul, we would find conformity, not uniformity.

Hasta Lavista,

Alanus, the old fart tyro

Alan J. Campbell
Legio III Cyrenaica, Maine, USA
Alan J. Campbell

member of Legio III Cyrenaica and the Uncouth Barbarians

Author of:
The Demon's Door Bolt (2011)
Forging the Blade (2012)

"It's good to be king. Even when you're dead!"
             Old Yuezhi/Pazyrk proverb
Reply
#48
Quote: historical references to shovels [...] To me, that's perfectly good documentation: pictoral, archeological, and literary, 3 for 3! Plus a range of styles: 2 iron shovel heads of different shapes, and a wooden one with an iron edge. So go for it!

Ow, and add one from the militairy site at the Kops Plateau, Nijmegen. And a reproduction of it is made right now. Big Grin
________________________________________
Jvrjenivs Peregrinvs Magnvs / FEBRVARIVS
A.K.A. Jurjen Draaisma
CORBVLO and Fectio
ALA I BATAVORUM
Reply
#49
Thanks! I am glad to hear the shovel information. So if you had an eight man group they could carry a VARIETY of tools such as:

Dolbaras 2
Chain 1
Shovel 2
Turf Cutter 2
Axe 1

With UNIFORMITY as each would be carrying part of the units basic entrenching equipment.

I am supposing that not all soldiers would be working as the same time
(Guard and other details) so not every soldier needed a complete set
of tools and that the required level of equipment would be divided up
among the soldiers available to carry it.

So in reenacting a variety tools could be carried and displayed. Too
bad most venues don't allow digging!
John Kaler MSG, USA Retired
Member Legio V (Tenn, USA)
Staff Member Ludus Militus https://www.facebook.com/groups/671041919589478/
Owner Vicus and Village: https://www.facebook.com/groups/361968853851510/
Reply
#50
I can say from experience that you need different tools for the work and, then again we even don't talk about special tools for woodworking, etc, which would have been carried with the legion, too. Also, you are now diging all at the same time, even when we don't look at other non constructing duties, there is less space to let all of them dig (I found that I need about 100 to 150 cm of ditch to move me around and be able to dig at a normal speed). Also, don't forget the people who're doing other construction jobs, or moving the baskets with the sand, etc.
________________________________________
Jvrjenivs Peregrinvs Magnvs / FEBRVARIVS
A.K.A. Jurjen Draaisma
CORBVLO and Fectio
ALA I BATAVORUM
Reply
#51
Hi all...

It should not be forgotten that we are talking about a body of men who would have an intense sense of unit identity. Bonds of fraternity, friendship, religion and loyalty to the empire would have been evident in every aspect of the units activities. Every effort would have been made to reinforce this unit cohesion and nothing does that better that a uniform. Sure the actual shade may have varied but if standing orders say that the tunic colour is green than some shade of green is what would have been worn. Same with shield designs..all it takes is a template and a reasonable supply of the right colour (variations in shade notwithstanding) paint and a fairly standard pattern is reasonably easy to achieve.

regards

Karus
john Hyland
Reply
#52
Quote: Same with shield designs..all it takes is a template and a reasonable supply of the right colour (variations in shade notwithstanding) paint and a fairly standard pattern is reasonably easy to achieve.

I agree with you, Karus, that it will 'uniformity' would support 'esprit de corps', but do we really know about uniform shield emblems in the republican period? Okay, there are columns and arches showing us uniform designs, but that all could be artist impression (e.g. the artist just saw that emblem).

As far as I know we only have the notitia dignitatum to show us shield designs bonded to particularly units and can we guess some of the arches shows us soldiers of that unit, but do we really know every soldier of a unit had the same shield pattern, or is this just some modern 're-enactment' standard, as we're discussing right now.

I'm very sorry if I totally missed some evidence which make clear there was uniformity in shield designs. I even remember I even heard sometimes about 'winning' pieces of your shield emblem, as a kind of military trophy, but I can't remember where that was. Should be nothing, I guess.
________________________________________
Jvrjenivs Peregrinvs Magnvs / FEBRVARIVS
A.K.A. Jurjen Draaisma
CORBVLO and Fectio
ALA I BATAVORUM
Reply
#53
there is evidence of unit shield designs..don`t have the actual reference to hand but there is the famous example where a praetorian unit surprised in camp grabbed the shields of another legion and completely destroyed the opposition who thought that they were facing someone else
K
john Hyland
Reply
#54
No evidence at all. That one has been discussed here several times already. :wink: Applying the historical-critic method all that can deduced from that text is that the shields were different. That may also be due to the shield´s form or size.

Quote:Every effort would have been made to reinforce this unit cohesion and nothing does that better that a uniform.

This argument has been in the discussion already, see above, and must be dismissed. See: De-individualization. In fact I can think of something that will bond a unit together far better than a uniform: Religion. Maybe here´s a clue about the cult around the Roman standards.


Quote:Same with shield designs..all it takes is a template and a reasonable supply of the right colour (variations in shade notwithstanding) paint and a fairly standard pattern is reasonably easy to achieve.

Right but did they do that? How would we know? Your argument could also be: Gunpowder. All you need is sulphur, coal and some nitre.
Without evidence wer´e not getting very far here.
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply
#55
Quote:An engine of remarkable size, belonging to the 15th legion, was crushing the hostile ranks with huge stones, and would have spread destruction far and wide, had not two soldiers ventured on a deed of surpassing bravery. Disguising themselves with shields snatched from the midst of the carnage, they cut the ropes and springs of the engine. They were instantly slain, and their names have consequently been lost; but the fact is undoubted.
Quote:magnitudine eximia quintae decimae legionis ballista ingentibus saxis hostilem aciem proruebat. lateque cladem intulisset ni duo milites praeclarum facinus ausi, arreptis e strage scutis ignorati, vincla ac libramenta tormentorum abscidissent. statim confossi sunt eoque intercidere nomina: de facto haud ambigitur.

Tacitus, Historiae, 3, 23.


Quote:Lest the soldiers in the confusion of battle should be separated from their comrades, every cohort had its shields painted in a manner peculiar to itself. The name of each soldier was also written on his shield, together with the number of the cohort and century to which he belonged.

Quote:Sed ne milites aliquando in tumultu proelii a suis contubernalibus aberrarent, diuersis cohortibus diuersa in scutis signa pingebant, ut ipsi nominant, digmata, sicut etiam nunc moris est fieri. Praeterea in aduerso scuto uiuscuiusque militis litteris erat nomen adscriptum, addito et ex qua esset cohorte quaue centuria.

Vegetius, de re militari 2, 18.
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply
#56
The translation I read specifies the shields as being from the opposing forces...which allowed them to approach the engines without challange.
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Reply
#57
Christian said on page 2:

"If you make up ideas first, then you will find yourself hunting for proof for these. "

I'm adding that to my sig...I've been guilty of that in the past. And to be honest, it's because I dont' have the patience to read dry manuals or the funds to put into expanding my library, but that's no excuse! So I come here and ask the pro's (saves me time and money too!)
____________________________________________________________
Magnus/Matt
Du Courage Viens La Verité

Legion: TBD
Reply


Forum Jump: