The purpose of the Late Roman Draco standard.

[ValentinianVictrix]

I would be very interested in others views on this topic- exactly what was the purpose of the Late Roman 'Draco' standard?
Yes, Vegetius mentions it several times and may indicate it had a signalling purpose, but signalling what? I've already discussed in various other threads my reasoning which I will again state here.

My belief is that the Draco standard was the physical representation of the Emperor which every unit carried, much as the Legiones carried the Eagles that denoted the might of the Legiones. The colour of the Draco appears to have been purple, the Imperial colour, lending some weight to my argument.

Here are two important passages from Ammianus which I believe supports my view, with the Latin for those who wish to examine the translation more closely.

'Meanwhile Silvanus, stationed at Cologne and learning from his friends' constant messages what Apodemius was undertaking to the ruin of his fortunes, knowing the pliant mind of the fickle emperor, and fearing lest he should be condemned to death absent and unheard, was put in a most difficult position and though of entrusting himself to the good faith of the savages. But he was prevented by Laniogaisus, at that time a tribune, whom I have earlier stated to have been the sole witness of Constans' death, while he was serving as a subaltern. He assured Silvanus that the Franks, whose fellow countryman he was, would kill him or on receipt of a bribe betray him. So Silvanus, seeing no safety under present conditions, was driven to extreme measures, and having gradually spoken more boldly with the chief officers, he aroused them by the greatness of the reward he promised; then as a temporary expedient he tore the purple decorations from the standards of the cohorts and the companies, and so mounted to the imperial dignity. ' Amm Bk XV, 2, 15-17

'Agens inter haec apud Agrippinam Silvanus assiduisque suorum conpertis nuntiis, quae Apodemius in labem suarum ageret fortunarum et sciens animum tenerum versabilis principis, timens ne trucidaretur absens et indamnatus, in difficultate positus maxima barbaricae se fidei committere cogitabat. Sed Laniogaiso vetante, tunc tribuno, quem dum militaret candidatus solum adfuisse morituro Constanti supra rettulimus, docenteque Francos, unde oriebatur, interfecturos eum aut accepto praemio prodituros, nihil tutum ex praesentibus ratus in consilia cogebatur extrema et sensim cum principiorum verticibus secretius conlocutus isdemque magnitudine promissae mercedis accensis, cultu purpureo a draconum et vexillorum insignibus ad tempus abstracto ad culmen imperiale surrexit. '

The passage below describes the famous entry into Rome by Constantius II. Whilst it does indeed describe draco's in conjuction with the Emperor, you get the sense that it is the standards of all the legiones and auxilia units that are being paraded, not just the Emperor's personal standard, much as modern military parades have the units displaying their colours etc in the presence of their rulers-

'So soon, then, as much had been disbursed in regal preparation, and every sort of man had been rewarded according to his services, in the second prefecture of Orfitus he passed through Ocriculi, elated with his great honours and escorted by formidable troops; he was conducted, so as to speak, in battle array and everyone's eyes were riveted upon him with fixed gaze. And when he was nearing the city, as he beheld with calm countenance the dutiful attendance of the senate and the august likenesses of the patrician stock, he thought, not like Cineas, the famous envoy of Pyrrhus, that a throng of kings was assembled together, but that the sanctuary of the whole world was present before him. And when he turned from them to the populace, he was amazed to see in what crowds men of every type had flocked from all quarters to Rome. And as if he were planning to overawe the Euphrates with a show of arms, or the Rhine, while the standards preceded him on each side, he himself sat alone upon a golden car in the resplendent blaze of shimmering precious stones, whose mingled glitter seemed to form a sort of shifting light. And behind the manifold others that preceded him he was surrounded by dragons, woven out of purple thread and bound to the golden and jewelled tops of spears, with wide mouths open to the breeze and hence hissing as if roused by anger, and leaving their tails winding in the wind. And there marched on either side twin lines of infantrymen with shields and crests gleaming with glittering rays, clad in shining mail; and scattered among them were the full-armoured cavalry (whom they called clibanarii), all masked, furnished with protecting breastplates and girt with iron belts, so that you might have supposed them statues polished by the hand of Praxiteles, not men. Thin circles of iron plates, fitted to the curves of their bodies, completely covered their limbs; so that whichever way they had to move their members, their garment fitted, so skilfully were the joinings made.' Amm XVI, 10, 4-8

'Ut igitur multa quaeque consumpta sunt in apparatu regio, pro meritis cuilibet munera reddita, secunda Orfiti praefectura, transcurso Ocriculo, elatus honoribus magnis stipatusque agminibus formidandis tamquam acie ducebatur instructa, omnium oculis in eo contuitu pertinaci intentis. Cumque urbi propinquaret, senatus officia reverendasque patriciae stirpis effigies ore sereno contemplans non ut Cineas ille Pyrri legatus in unum coactam multitudinem regum sed asylum mundi totius adesse existimabat. Unde cum se vertisset ad plebem, stupebat, qua celeritate omne quod ubique est hominum genus confluxerit Romam. Et tamquam Euphratem armorum specie territurus aut Rhenum altrinsecus praeeuntibus signis insidebat aureo solus ipse carpento fulgenti claritudine lapidum variorum, quo micante lux quaedam misceri videbatur alterna. Eumque post antegressos multiplices alios purpureis subtegminibus texti circumdedere dracones hastarum aureis gemmatisque summitatibus inligati, hiatu vasto perflabiles et ideo velut ira perciti sibilantes caudarumque volumina relinquentes in ventum. Et incedebat hinc inde ordo geminus armatorum clipeatus atque cristatus corusco lumine radians, nitidis loricis indutus, sparsique cataphracti equites, quos clibanarios dictitant, [personati] thoracum muniti tegminibus et limbis ferreis cincti, ut Praxitelis manu polita crederes simulacra, non viros: quos lamminarum circuli tenues apti corporis flexibus ambiebant per omnia membra diducti ut, quocumque artus necessitas commovisset, vestitus congrueret iunctura cohaerenter aptata.'

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Adrian,

As to the purpose, the main one moust have been to signal where the wind came from. It was used by many peoples before the Romans, especially steppe peoples, which gives credence to that.
Also, as Arrian describes it, the first use of the draco was by no mean anything imperial.

For a reddish/purple colour of the Roman draco I have found even more evidence:

Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Severus 4.1

The night before he was born his mother dreamed that she brought forth a purple snake, ..
..mater eius pridie quam pareret somniavit se purpureum dracunculum parere, ..

Julian (still a caesar then) had a purple dragon with him at the battle of Strassbourg:
Ammianus Marcellinus 16.12.39:

'On recognising him by the purple ensign of a dragon, fitted to the top of a very long lance and spreading out like the slough of a serpent, the tribune of one of the squadrons stopped, and pale and struck with fear rode back to renew the battle.'
Quo agnito per purpureum signum draconis, summitati hastae longioris aptatum velut senectutis pendentis exuvias, stetit unius turmae tribunus et pallore timoreque perculsus ad aciem integrandam recurrit.

HOWEVER, the colour by itself is still not enough evidence that 'therefore' the draco would have to be linked to the emperor. Mind you, I'm not saying that it's impossible, but there is more evidence needed to insist that it is.

There is evidence that other peoples also used the colour purple for the tail of a draco, for instance this one from Persia:
Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Aurelianus 28.4:

Then were brought in those garments, encrusted with jewels, which we now see in the Temple of the Sun, then, too, the Persian dragon-flags and head-dresses, and a species of purple such as of nation ever afterward offered or the Roman world beheld.
tunc illatae illae vestes, quas in Templo Solis videmus, consertae gemmis, tunc Persici dracones et tiarae, tunc genus purpurae, quod postea nec ulla genus detulit nec Romanus orbis vidit.

This could very well signify that the clour purple for a tail of a draco was not an imperial symbol, but simple following an example of other peoples, something the Roman army did time after time (weapons, armour, dress).

You have proposed that the eagle was the 'physical representation of the Emperor' for the lgions. I do not think that the latter was the case. Eagles (and originally other animals) were the deities of the legions long before there even was a Roman emperor. Do we have evidence that somewhere along the line, the eagle BECAME the 'physical representation of the Emperor"?

[ValentinianVictrix]

I'm not implying that the Eagles represented the Emperor, I've read in a number of books that the Eagles represented the might of the Legiones, were in fact the physical representation of the Legione. It would have been a good way of indicating on the battlefield which units were legiones and which were auxilia, something that during the Late Empire period may have been something of some importance as some historians claim the arms and equipment of the Legiones and Auxilia were the the same at that time.

What symbols were used to denote the presence of the Emperor or to depict him if he were not present.

[Robert Vermaat]

Moved from the thread about auxiliary standards:

Whithout appearing to be overflating my ego, I believe I am the only person to have made this connection, and I am astonished that no historian, including Matthews, has examined this matter as I believe it really merits further investigation. It may well be that as the Roman state became 'Christianised' that another means had to be found to represent the Emperor, as human representation such as imagio's may have fallen out of favour as they may have been reserved soley to represent Christ himself.

Maybe others who thought of it found too little evidence to make a case for it? Just speculating of course.
Your ideas about Chritianization I must rject, because the representation of the imperial family continues throughout the 4th and 5th century - there's no evidence that this became reserved for Christ only. We find the images of emperors on shields and banners I think, so there would be no reason that this was dropped during the period we're discussing.

Just because no source confirms what I have stated does not disprove it, only that perhaps the sources are there but no historian has bothered to make the link.

Well, that's not how I like to discuss evidence. Just because there's no source confirming something, usually means there's no way to confirm it. If you still want to maintain something without proper evidence from any source, you're on purely speculative ground. If there are indeed sources out there, but yet unmentioned (which is of course possible), I'd suggest you find them, but in the meantime admit that there is not enough evidence.

[ValentinianVictrix]

Moved from the thread about auxiliary standards:

Whithout appearing to be overflating my ego, I believe I am the only person to have made this connection, and I am astonished that no historian, including Matthews, has examined this matter as I believe it really merits further investigation. It may well be that as the Roman state became 'Christianised' that another means had to be found to represent the Emperor, as human representation such as imagio's may have fallen out of favour as they may have been reserved soley to represent Christ himself.

Maybe others who thought of it found too little evidence to make a case for it? Just speculating of course.
Your ideas about Chritianization I must rject, because the representation of the imperial family continues throughout the 4th and 5th century - there's no evidence that this became reserved for Christ only. We find the images of emperors on shields and banners I think, so there would be no reason that this was dropped during the period we're discussing.

Just because no source confirms what I have stated does not disprove it, only that perhaps the sources are there but no historian has bothered to make the link.

Well, that's not how I like to discuss evidence. Just because there's no source confirming something, usually means there's no way to confirm it. If you still want to maintain something without proper evidence from any source, you're on purely speculative ground. If there are indeed sources out there, but yet unmentioned (which is of course possible), I'd suggest you find them, but in the meantime admit that there is not enough evidence.

What do you consider 'proper evidence'? I have shown two passages from one source that indicate that the Draco's were purple, and that in one such instance they were not in the presence of the Emperor himself. We know that purple was the imperial colour, so why make the Draco's that colour if their only purpose was to act as a windsock, indicating the wind direction, as you stated?

[Robert Vermaat]

I'm not implying that the Eagles represented the Emperor, I've read in a number of books that the Eagles represented the might of the Legiones, were in fact the physical representation of the Legione.

OK, fair enough. But in order to introduce a standard representing the Emperor, you'd first have to establish that anything like that was indeed present. As I've shown with the purple colour of the Persian standard earlier, the colour of the draco tail is not necessarily leading to an identification of the standard with the emperor by definition.

It would have been a good way of indicating on the battlefield which units were legiones and which were auxilia, something that during the Late Empire period may have been something of some importance as some historians claim the arms and equipment of the Legiones and Auxilia were the the same at that time.

Well, auxilia were not the same as the 'old' auxilia anymore. Late Roman auxilia were new, elite, regiments newly raised. Therefore I would see very little sense in any reason why it should have been necessary to indicate on the battlefield which unit was a legion and which an auxilia? Such differences were gone by the 4th century. There were old-style legions and new-style legions, as well as auxilia, scholae and other types of units.

What symbols were used to denote the presence of the Emperor or to depict him if he were not present.

That's a good question. I'd like to hear more about that myself.

[Robert Vermaat]

What do you consider 'proper evidence'? I have shown two passages from one source that indicate that the Draco's were purple, and that in one such instance they were not in the presence of the Emperor himself. We know that purple was the imperial colour, so why make the Draco's that colour if their only purpose was to act as a windsock, indicating the wind direction, as you stated?

Adrian, are you even reading my posts?
a) proper evidence is anything (textual or artistic) that mentions the draco as imperial. Of course emperors had a personal standard. that an emperor had a draco present of course does not mean that every draco <therefore> was a representation of the emperor.
b) the colour purple was not the imperial colour. Yes, the emperors used the colour as colour representing their status, but as I've shown from other examples, that does not have to mean that each time we come across the word 'purpure'an imperial connection is meant. It was also used to describe a colour red. If indeed the colour of the tail was reddish rather than purple, the imperial connection fails.
I've shown even more evidence than you about purple tals! But also a Persian one of the same colour.
c) I never said that the only purpose of the draco was being a windsock. But it was the initial purpose, no doubt.

[markhebb]

the colour purple was not the imperial colour. Yes, the emperors used the colour as colour representing their status, but as I've shown from other examples, that does not have to mean that each time we come across the word 'purpure'an imperial connection is meant. It was also used to describe a colour red. If indeed the colour of the tail was reddish rather than purple, the imperial connection fails.
I've shown even more evidence than you about purple tals! But also a Persian one of the same colour.

Robert - you make a good point regarding the use of the latin word 'purpure' - there is some ambiguity here that I will need to think about. However, I would like to draw your attention to Arrian's Ars Tactica 35.1-6 where he talks of dragon standards of many colours. This seems to have shifted by the 3rd century to an exclusive colour which I believe to be purple (although your comments give me food for thought) - indeed in our literary sources for this period I cannot find reference to dragon standards of another colour in the 3rd or 4th Century (happy to be proved wrong however)

[markhebb]

You have proposed that the eagle was the 'physical representation of the Emperor' for the lgions. I do not think that the latter was the case. Eagles (and originally other animals) were the deities of the legions long before there even was a Roman emperor. Do we have evidence that somewhere along the line, the eagle BECAME the 'physical representation of the Emperor"?

re: your point on the eagles - we do have evidence in Suetonius that the Julio-Claudian emperors, Augustus in particular, attempted to link themselves with the eagle (I'll find the exact reference for you) - more broadly we should also remember that Tacitus gives us evidence that from the reign of Tiberius that the signa (by which I mean all types of standards) were considered a gift of the emperor to a unit (Tac 1.42.3). Finally, the integration into the imperial calendar of the signa, as well as the central role the standards played in the swearing of the Sacramentum and in set imperial ceremony cannot be underestimated (a good example is from the fragment of Dexippus that describes Aurelian hosting enemy emissaries.

[ValentinianVictrix]

What do you consider 'proper evidence'? I have shown two passages from one source that indicate that the Draco's were purple, and that in one such instance they were not in the presence of the Emperor himself. We know that purple was the imperial colour, so why make the Draco's that colour if their only purpose was to act as a windsock, indicating the wind direction, as you stated?

Adrian, are you even reading my posts?
a) proper evidence is anything (textual or artistic) that mentions the draco as imperial. Of course emperors had a personal standard. that an emperor had a draco present of course does not mean that every draco <therefore> was a representation of the emperor.
b) the colour purple was not the imperial colour. Yes, the emperors used the colour as colour representing their status, but as I've shown from other examples, that does not have to mean that each time we come across the word 'purpure'an imperial connection is meant. It was also used to describe a colour red. If indeed the colour of the tail was reddish rather than purple, the imperial connection fails.
I've shown even more evidence than you about purple tals! But also a Persian one of the same colour.
c) I never said that the only purpose of the draco was being a windsock. But it was the initial purpose, no doubt.

Sorry if I gave the impression of posting before reading, I assure you thats not the case.

Of course I fully accept this is my own, personal theory, which could be complete bunkum. I have read some papers by historians with even less evidence for their theories which have gained credance. But then again, I'm not a published academic who others are not willing to challenge!

I do believe all Draco's were purple in colour during at least the 4th Century AD, and that there must have been a reason for this other than the Draco being a signalling device as stated by Vegetius (although, having served in the armed forces myself I fail to see how such a standard would be used in a signalling role, waving it about would appear to be a complete and utter nonsense!).

I am very glad you posted the other references to purple draco's, even those used by other nations are evidence perhaps that all Draco's were this colour by convention only, thereby at least dispelling one claim that they were all different colours to denote the unit the Draco belong to.

[D B Campbell]

I do believe all Draco's were purple in colour during at least the 4th Century AD, and that there must have been a reason for this other than the Draco being a signalling device as stated by Vegetius.

I may be mistaken, but your case appears to be based on the claim that the draco in particular was purple; hence, it must have been "the physical representation of the emperor" (your words).

Unfortunately, the passage that you quote has been mistranslated:

'Meanwhile Silvanus, stationed at Cologne ... was put in a most difficult position and thought of entrusting himself to the good faith of the savages. ...; then as a temporary expedient he tore the purple decorations from the standards of the cohorts and the companies, and so mounted to the imperial dignity.'

The passage (it is actually Amm. Marc. XV.5.15-17) tells us that Silvanus "assumed the imperial power, the purple finery having been ripped, by necessity, from the decorations of the dracones and vexilla".

So the relevant phrase (cultu purpureo a draconum et vexillorum insignibus ad tempus abstracto) indicates that, on this particular occasion, it was not only the dracones that were purple, but also the vexilla, too.

Would you then argue that the vexillum was "the physical representation of the emperor", as well?

[ValentinianVictrix]

Would you then argue that the vexillum was "the physical representation of the emperor", as well?

Yes, that is a vexing question, because this would also be the first time a vexilla standard is mentioned as being purple in colour. My only thought on this is that the Draco windsock was purple, and that is borne out by the other descriptions posted, and the material was ripped from those standards, along with the purple adornment on the vexilla standards, which everyone assumes is normally red in colour (which I agree with having a number of colour photographs of vexilla standards depicted from murals and wall paintings, all of which show them in the typical red colour).

[Robert Vermaat]

Would you then argue that the vexillum was "the physical representation of the emperor", as well?

Yes, that is a vexing question, because this would also be the first time a vexilla standard is mentioned as being purple in colour. My only thought on this is that the Draco windsock was purple, and that is borne out by the other descriptions posted, and the material was ripped from those standards, along with the purple adornment on the vexilla standards, which everyone assumes is normally red in colour (which I agree with having a number of colour photographs of vexilla standards depicted from murals and wall paintings, all of which show them in the typical red colour).

Well, there we have it - as the word for purple (purpure) can be interpreted as red as well, and vexilla have been known to be of a red colour, how purple was this 'purpure' in the case of Silvanus? Andeed of the other dracones? Bright purple or perhaps more red than we have assumed here so far?

The Fectio draco always has had a bright purple tail:

[ValentinianVictrix]

Would you then argue that the vexillum was "the physical representation of the emperor", as well?

Yes, that is a vexing question, because this would also be the first time a vexilla standard is mentioned as being purple in colour. My only thought on this is that the Draco windsock was purple, and that is borne out by the other descriptions posted, and the material was ripped from those standards, along with the purple adornment on the vexilla standards, which everyone assumes is normally red in colour (which I agree with having a number of colour photographs of vexilla standards depicted from murals and wall paintings, all of which show them in the typical red colour).

Well, there we have it - as the word for purple (purpure) can be interpreted as red as well, and vexilla have been known to be of a red colour, how purple was this 'purpure' in the case of Silvanus? Andeed of the other dracones? Bright purple or perhaps more red than we have assumed here so far?

The Fectio draco always has had a bright purple tail:

You have certainly opened this debate up to even more questioning!

So, we could either have the Draco standards in a purple colour, or both the Draco's and the Vexilla standards in a uniform red. In either case, I think the evidence shows that the Draco standard was a uniform colour and that it remained this colour in whatever unit it was attached to.

Now, if only we could narrow down its purpose... :lol:

[Ron Andrea]

I though ancient purple (derived from sea shells) was less mauve and more violet. Am I wrong?