Marching under the yoke.

[Pict]

I have been a student of history for nie on 50 years and in all that time I have never heard of the practice of forcing defeated troops to march under a yoke. I have been reading bseveral biographies of noted generals and there was references to it in Adrian Goldsworthy's books. I believe he was referring to the early Principate expeditions against the Parthians wherein several defeated cohorts were so subjected.

Could anyone elaborate on the practice. Was it a Roman procedure or "barbarian". Goldsworthy mentions it was an ancient practice even at that time. I understand it was one of the more demoralizing treatments for captured troops ment to enforce their change of status from "warrior" to slave, something not easily tolerated by fighting men.

I appreciate all input.

Cheers,
Pict

[Paullus Scipio]

Apparently, the enforced humiliation of going 'under the yoke' and it's symbolism of transition from free warrior to slave/beast of the fields was an old Roman custom going back to antiquity. As to what it meant, here is Livy on the most famous occasion, when the Samnites under Gavius Pontius, in the fifth year of the second ( of three) Samnite wars ( 321 BC) which lasted 20 years, tricked the Romans and trapped both Consuls and their armies in a defile.They were forced to surrender. Pontius offered generous terms, more generous than Rome would have offered - withdraw from Samnite territory, not re-open the war, and the Army would not be ransomed or sold into slavery, but first they must bow their heads and pass under the yoke.......
Livy IX.6
"The consuls were the first to be sent, little more than half-clothed, under the yoke, then each in the order of his rank was exposed to the same disgrace, and finally, the legionaries one after another. Around them stood the enemy fully armed, reviling and jeering at them; swords were pointed at most of them, and when they offended their victors by showing their indignation and resentment too plainly some were wounded and even killed. Thus were they marched under the yoke. But what was still harder to bear was that after they had emerged from the pass under the eyes of the foe though, like men dragged up from the jaws of hell, they seemed to behold the light for the first time, the very light itself, serving only to reveal such a hideous sight as they marched along, was more gloomy than any shape of death. They could have reached Capua before nightfall, but not knowing how their allies would receive them, and kept back by a feeling of shame, they all flung themselves, destitute of everything, on the sides of the road near Capua. As soon as news of this reached the place, a proper feeling of compassion for their allies got the better of the inborn disdain of the Campanian; they immediately sent to the consuls their own insignia of office, the fasces and the lictors, and the soldiers they generously supplied with arms, horses, clothes, and provisions. As they entered Capua the senate and people came out in a body to meet them, showed them all due hospitality, and paid them all the consideration to which as individuals and as members of an allied state they were entitled. But all the courtesies and kindly looks and cheerful greetings of their allies were powerless to evoke a single word or even to make them lift up their eyes and look in the face the friends who were trying to comfort them. To such an extent did feelings of shame make their gloom and despondency all the heavier, and constrain them to shun the converse and society of men. The next day some young nobles were commissioned to escort them to the frontier. On their return they were summoned to the Senate-house, and in answer to inquiries on the part of the older senators they reported that they seemed to be much more gloomy and depressed than the day before; the column moved along so silently that they might have been dumb; the Roman mettle was cowed; they had lost their spirit with their arms; they saluted no man, nor did they return any man's salutation; not a single man had the power to open his mouth for fear of what was coming; their necks were bowed as if they were still beneath the yoke. The Samnites had won not only a glorious victory but a lasting one; they had not only captured Rome as the Gauls had done before them, but, what was a still more warlike exploit, they had captured the Roman courage and hardihood."
And Appian on the same episode:
Appian's 'History of Rome- Samnite Wars' (translation courtesy Jona Lendering's Livius.org website)
" When these terms were communicated to the camp there was wailing and lamentation, long and loud, for they considered the disgrace of passing under the yoke worse than death. Afterwards, when they heard about the knights who were to be held as hostages, there was another long lament. Yet they were compelled by want to accept the conditions. Accordingly they took the oaths, [Gavius] Pontius on the one side, and the two consuls, [Spurius] Postumius [Albinus] and [Titus] Veturius [Calvinus], on the other, together with two quaestors, four division commanders, and twelve tribunes - all the surviving officers. When the oaths had been taken, Pontius opened a passage from the defile, and having fixed two spears in the ground and laid another across the top, caused the Romans to go under it as they passed out, one by one. He also gave them some animals to carry their sick, and provisions sufficient to bring them to Rome. This method of dismissing prisoners, which they call sending under the yoke, seems to me to serve only to insult the vanquished.
When the news of this calamity reached the city there was wailing and lamentation like a public mourning. The women mourned for those who had been saved in this ignominious way as for the dead. The senators discarded their purple-striped tunics. Feasts, marriages, and everything of that kind were prohibited for a whole year, until the calamity was retrieved. Some of the returning soldiers took refuge in the fields for shame, others stole into the city by night. The consuls entered by day according to law, and they wore their usual insignia, but they exercised no further authority."

Roman annalists seem to have tried to ameliorate the disgrace by claiming the Senate repudiated the agreement, and referring to vague Roman victories which seem fictitious. In fact, the peace seems to have been observed - the Romans surrendered the colony of Fregellae, and war does not seem to have resumed until 316 BC.

As for the generous Gavius Pontius, who spared Rome's Army, his fate was as follows.( Livy: Periochae 11) Nearly thirty years afterwards,(292 BC) he was led as a prisoner in a Roman Triumph, and then basely beheaded in the usual Roman barbaric manner, while the Triumphal car of the victor ascended the Capitoline Hill.
His death can be seen as one of the darkest blots on the Roman name, though they doubtless saw it as cleansing/expiating a Great Shame from themselves.
"Such a murder," we are told, "committed or sanctioned by such a man as Q. Fabius, is peculiarly a national crime, and proves but too clearly that in their dealings with foreigners the Romans had neither magnanimity, nor humanity, nor justice."

[antiochus]

I remember reading a paper on the symbolism of going under the yoke. The paper mentioned to the Romans it meant a loss of virtus. For those who went under the yoke at the Claudine Forks, it has some mystic power and meant you had lost your manhood. You were no longer fit to lay with a woman. I'll see if I have this paper in electronic form and if so post it on the forum.

[SigniferOne]

Marching under the Yoke is a famous element of Roman Republican history. As mentioned before the Samnites were the first to force them to march under it, so that when victorious the Romans forced them to march right back. It persisted, so that in the late 2nd century the Cimbri forced Roman troops under the yoke as well. The word for yoke was "jugum", and thus the process was called the "sub-jugum", which is the root today for our word "subjugate". The Cimbri subjugation was the root for a famous Charles Gleyre painting:

[Pict]

Thank you all for the great replies.Amazing information. Its difficult for us in the 21st century to understand the power this had over them. My natural instinct today would be not of shame but supreme indignation and a burning desire to get even.

It seems odd that a warlike race such as the Romans would be so utterly whipped by this bit of stage craft but in the context of a supernatural act taking away their manhood, I can understand it somewhat. If so powerful, I wonder why we did not hear more of it as Goldsworthy said it had all but died out by the Principate.

Interesting about it being the root word for subjugation. Excellent piece of information for the "cocktail" circuit :roll:

Cheers all,
Pict.

[antiochus]

Ok found the paper "Passing under the Yoke." Now I will try and attach it. Never done it before in this forum so here goes.

Whoops. Sorry file is too big. Send me your email to [email protected]

[D B Campbell]

The paper mentioned to the Romans it meant a loss of virtus.

Hmmm ... I've heard sub iugum explained (by the religion experts) either as an act of priestly initiation or as an act of purification. But neither explanation would seem to fit the circumstances of the Caudine Forks.

[Tarbicus]

The paper mentioned to the Romans it meant a loss of virtus.

Hmmm ... I've heard sub iugum explained (by the religion experts) either as an act of priestly initiation or as an act of purification. But neither explanation would seem to fit the circumstances of the Caudine Forks.

Did the men have to utter some sort of oath when they passed under the yoke, putting the ritual into a religious context?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Not sure about ritual oaths, but it's possible the term 'Coleus' was muttered under the breath as the soldiers ducked under.... :mrgreen:

[M. Demetrius]

I think you're right, GJC, and in Late Rome, they said, "Rigatoni e pomodori".

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

lol: I'll have to dig out my Latin dictionary for that one!

[Boudicca]

I was just reading about the Romans forcing the Carthaginian soldiers to pass under the yoke prior to the final destruction of Carthage. I found your posts as I looked for a definition. Now that I see the picture and hear that it is a loss of virtus, I have an idea. In Roman custom or law it was not allowed for a male Roman citizen to be on the receiving end of male sex. That would make them a submissive like a female or a slave. Roman men were allowed to be the aggressor or dominant with any slave. That was considered manly. Public rape while bound under a yoke of a beast of burden would be very humiliating to a Roman army, obviously, but better than death, probably.