Centurio\'s Belt and Gladius

[Julius Verax]

Hi , Can anyone tell me if a 1st/2nd century Centurion could wear his Gladius and cingilum like the bog standard Legionary ? or would he definatley wear his Gladius and Puggio on the opposite side to the Legionary and have a Belteus instead of a cingilum ?

look forward to your comments ,

Julius .

[Peroni]

All grave stele that I remember seeing of centurions have no apron decoration on their belts.

Have a search in the imagebase for the rank of 'Legionary Officer'

http://www.romanarmy.com/cms/component/ ... Itemid,94/

[Matt Lukes]

Right- of course it could never be said for certain that none ever did, nor that it was even necessarily the usual, but the evidence so far does show that- granted it's a very small sample.

One of the postulates for why a soldier would wear his sword on the right is that it's rather harder to draw from the left while carrying a big scutum- but then if that were true, the same would go for a Centurio in battle as it's surely difficult to imagine them simply not using shields.

What can be said is that it is not unique to Centuriones as there's the Aquilifer Sertorius Festus, the Signifer Pintaius, and an unknown standard bearer from Chester who are all shown with their swords on the left.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Plus auxiliaries too IIRC?

[Tarbicus]

It must have been a simple sign of rank superior to miles gregarius, surely? While in tunica, not armour, it would be a clear sign to an ordinary soldier that he was a superior officer, even from a distance.

A speculative thought on why they wore their gladius on the left even though it was more awkward to draw than on the right; A miles gregarius could not draw his sword while the centurio, optio, etc, still had theirs in their scabbard. One of those types of military rules to discourage acts of mutiny, or threatening a superior officer. Show of intent, etc. Possibly even to discourage engaging an enemy prematurely? Are there any later, more modern examples of this kind of rule that anyone knows of?

[Julius Verax]

Yes Tarbicus , While on " Operations " with the British army , when fixing Bayonets , my platoon wouldnt fix until I did , its like a visual order along with the command said verbally . Another example is that of the British Napoleonic soldier , a Fugal man ( marker ) would step out of the friont rank and go through the stages of " Fix Bayonets " the rest of the Battalion would follow his lead .
So maybe this was the same procedure with the Legions .

Julius .

[Peroni]

What can be said is that it is not unique to Centuriones as there's the Aquilifer Sertorius Festus, the Signifer Pintaius, and an unknown standard bearer from Chester who are all shown with their swords on the left.

Many auxiliary soldier images show swords on the left too. Trajan's Column the Metopes of the Tropeum Traiani etc.

[PhilusEstilius]

It would appear that most officer ranks carried their swords on the left side, where the ordinary ranks had it to the right. In having said that when we read Josephus in his account of the Roman soldier he tells us that the soldier wore the long weapon on the left with the shorter on the right. Here of course we have to ask ourselves is Josephus talking of HIS right, or would he be refering to the view of a soldier from the front as one would face him. ??

[Julius Verax]

So for a centurio impression I should really wear my Gladius on my left and wear a Belteus instead of a cingilum , I was just experimenting with the Idea .

Julius .

[Tarbicus]

It would appear that most officer ranks carried their swords on the left side, where the ordinary ranks had it to the right. In having said that when we read Josephus in his account of the Roman soldier he tells us that the soldier wore the long weapon on the left with the shorter on the right. Here of course we have to ask ourselves is Josephus talking of HIS right, or would he be refering to the view of a soldier from the front as one would face him. ??

Thanks Brian, you just made me a happy man knowing someone else suspects so too
<!-- l <a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?p=96730#p96730">viewtopic.php?p=96730#p96730<!-- l

Many auxiliary images show swords on the left too. Trajan's Column the Metops of the Tropeum Traiani etc.

They're not legionaries, Ade. Maybe the distinction was unnecessary simply because they were clearly auxilia to the familiar eye, and even ear, or their usual choice of shield was a clipeus? Then there's the idea that the sculptors were clueless anyway, or put them there simply as a visual clue to the citizen in Rome that "these men are different".

[PhilusEstilius]

I begin to wonder about this statement of Belteus and Cingilum as not being a clear cut discription of things, the Cingilum Militiare is the sash worn by an officer around his rib cage and tied with a Hereclese knot. The term Belteus I would consider to be a belt as in waist that is with or without apron straps, then the term baldric is for sword suspension and comes over the shoulder and across the chest.

I don't know maybe I'm just old fashioned where I find a Gladius to be a Sword, a Pugio to be a dagger, a Scutum to be a shield and so on....