Roman Armor

[kranger3]

As far as I'm concerned, the Trajan Column contains too many detailed pieces of information for its authors to be totally ignorant about military regalia and therefore letting artistic license override any semblance of reality.

It is possible that the sculptors had access to a limited number of soldiers which they took as models, therefore duplicating those men in great numbers and giving the units a false sense of uniformity, in what I like to call the "Rome Total War" effect. For example, it is totally possible that a few deserving, or particulary sharp, soldiers of several types of units (both legionary and auxilia units, which might have served or not in Dacia) were given leave time to travel to Rome and help as "advisors" and "models" for the sculptors who were about to start working on the column. Sketches would have been made of these soldiers, along with drawings of siege equipment, camp gear, etc. Then, armed with these precious pieces of information, the sculptors would start carving out the scenes, and inserting educated guesses and some artistic license where needed to fill in the gaps and fulfill the wishes/goals of their patron. Therefore, a single individual, could have been "copied and pasted" dozens of time to serve as a "typical" legionary or archer. Hell, if a legionary posted on a frontier in the middle of nowhere can have pieces of equipment mailed to him from his family, then it would be a simple matter to ship half a dozen soldiers on leave to act a models for a commemorative work. You don't have to send a full legion to Rome for that.

As far as the Adamclissi metopes go, I personally think of it as a hybrid of propaganda monument (like the TC) and frontier funerary stelae. Since it was built on the frontier, most probably even while active units were currently garrisoning the area, the sculptors could have had access to a good number of soldiers for their modelling, in similar fashion to the funerary stelae. It could therefore show a more regional, realistic view of the soldiers' dress. At the same time, the propaganda goal could have necessitated a bit artistic license, which could distort some details.

The important thing is that from the uneducated masses' point of view, then and now, they all look like Roman soldiers and are all similar in appearance. The educated eye will stumble upon the differences in detail, but the goal is still reached as far as making these soldiers of Rome instantly recognisable.

The good thing with experimental archaeology/reenacting is that each group (for those, of course, that make the necessary effort) can portray a specific interpretation of the evidence. We can then obtain of full range of possible alternatives, which in turn broaden our understanding of the material culture of the period. Still, even today, the general public will most likely not notice the subtility in the different interpretations (like the difference between a Corbridge A and Newstead segmentata. They all looked identical to me until I actually sat down and started analysing their respective details.) but they can still identify a Roman soldier (same thing for a resident of Rome who might have looked at the TC column in AD150).

People who study a subject for so long tend to forget the big picture. They are so focused on details that are so evident to them that they often refuse to get back to basics. For them, if a particular ridge on a helmet is not present on a sculpture, then it means that the sculptor knew nothing about what he's doing. To me, that's bullshit.

[Nathan Ross]

Therefore, a single individual, could have been "copied and pasted" dozens of time to serve as a "typical" legionary or archer.

That's a pretty good theory I reckon. Remember also that the Praetorian Guard were based in Rome, and had sent several cohorts to the Dacian campaigns. They were probably equipped in legionary style, and would be close at hand to act as models if required. Even if the average Roman on the street may not have seen a legionary in campaign dress for more than a generation (since AD69, in fact, when the Flavians fought their way the city), there would have been plenty of men in Rome in 110-113 with experience of active military service to act as advisors.

Here's an old thread that picks over some of these points:

Trajan's Column v Adamklissi

- Nathan

[Tarbicus]

There's nothing on TC that doesn't look like it was the result of a verbal description, perhaps with sketches based on memory, in my honest opinion. There is a theory that TC is a funerary monument that Trajan had built in anticipation of his death some time in the future.

Just as we see with a provincial grave stele, the metopes may be coursely rendered in comparison to Trajan's Column, but there was far more likelihood of the their being rendered based on what the sculptors actually saw with their own eyes, where the army would not have had the restrictions placed on them as they would have in Italy and especially within Rome's walls. This would most certainly explain the closer correlation between what's been found in the ground and the portrayals on the metopes.

I'm not even convinced that weaponry, aside from pugiones and perhaps a Praetorian's gladius, would have been allowed within the walls for reference regardless of the Column being for the emperor. We are talking about blasphemy, not only breaking a tradition. When within the Pomerium, even the Praetorian's had to wear togas and were known as the cohors togata.

But I'm willing to wait until Jon Coulston's book is published to see if he's had any insights into this particular aspect.

[Nathan Ross]

I might be wrong, but I think that the pomerium regulations related to bodies of armed troops, rather than weapons in general - citizens could carry arms in the city if they could prove they were so equipped for self defence IIRC (rather a legalistic definition!).

However, there were certainly arms and armour kept in the Castra Praetoria, as we read of the Guard equipping themselves with such on occasion. This wasn't a huge distance from the site of the column.

Quite how the sculptors of the column went about their business, and why the details they recorded are so various in terms of accuracy we may never know. I think it's safe to say, though, that the intended audience (ie the Roman people, some of whom at least will have been acquainted with military equipment) would have seen soldiers represented in something approximating lorica segmenatata and equated them with legionaries. This suggests that, whatever the facts on the ground, the segmentata was popularly considered at that time to be the quintessential body armour of the Roman soldier.

[Titus Marius Secundus]

That's a wonderful but disturbing truth! We may never know, at least until we find or make a time machine... chances?
So I think we do tend to fall for the RTW effect more than we should and write a letter to Sega saying me want more variety in our units! I also think that today's replicators tend to wear their armor too shiny...I don't think that the Romans were capable of such polishing in which we use today...reminding me this...
I have recreated a gladius Hispaniensis. It's almost finished, just the leathery of the scabbard and brass or a more accurate metal, trims, and decor, etc. I will very soon post some pics of it on here and ask for as much advice as possible. I have chosen real, dark blood red leather!!! :-) About segmentata. I believe it would have been easier to make than mail armor, and offer more protection against arrows, stabs, and slashes! Why it survived for a short period may because the hinges* broke too often :lol:

[Tarbicus]

I might be wrong, but I think that the pomerium regulations related to bodies of armed troops, rather than weapons in general - citizens could carry arms in the city if they could prove they were so equipped for self defence IIRC (rather a legalistic definition!).

I thought they could carry clunbs and the like, but not weapons of a military use, per se, except for pugiones. The soldiers who had their belts cut by youths and went on the rampage had their pugiones (which they put to good use), but no swords. Caesar's assassins escaped the charge of blasphemy because they committed the act outside of the pomerium, in Pompey's Theatre.

However, there were certainly arms and armour kept in the Castra Praetoria, as we read of the Guard equipping themselves with such on occasion. This wasn't a huge distance from the site of the column.

But I believe the Castra Praetoria is outside of the pomerium and was added onto the outside of the walls.

I think it's safe to say, though, that the intended audience (ie the Roman people, some of whom at least will have been acquainted with military equipment) would have seen soldiers represented in something approximating lorica segmenatata and equated them with legionaries. This suggests that, whatever the facts on the ground, the segmentata was popularly considered at that time to be the quintessential body armour of the Roman soldier.

Agreed, but I've yet to see any evidence for auxilia wearing segmentata, and one easy way to differentiate legionaries would be to have them wearing only that which auxilia did not wear. That doesn't exclude squamata or hamata from legionary use in any way. For those unfamiliar with the variety of arms and armour used within the legions as a whole, and unable to differentiate between the types of unit, the code would have been easy to recognise; not as in "born with the knowledge", but a simple explanation would have sufficed and they would be able to read the story.

[Sean Manning]

I'm not even convinced that weaponry, aside from pugiones and perhaps a Praetorian's gladius, would have been allowed within the walls for reference regardless of the Column being for the emperor. We are talking about blasphemy, not only breaking a tradition. When within the Pomerium, even the Praetorian's had to wear togas and were known as the cohors togata.

But I'm willing to wait until Jon Coulston's book is published to see if he's had any insights into this particular aspect.

I don't think there is any evidence that the pomerium was supposed to keep all weapons outside of the city. It was about the arma/toga distinction. Where would the Romans have kept their kit? How would all the arms factories in early Rome have operated? Weapons by themselves were probably fine; it was men armed for war which were forbidden.

This thread discussed the Roman laws a bit and seemed to conclude that Roman law was generally based on intent (much like Canadian law is today). It doesn't discuss the special status of Rome though.

[ruski94]

Fidelis, please make your own thread about your gladius, I prefer that people stay on topic on the thread I created and not branch off on giving you advice.

[Titus Marius Secundus]

I did stay on the topic for the most part. I just briefly stated that I'd been making my own sword. If I would have known that by briefly talking about my sword would trouble u so much I would not have said anything sorry

[Titus Marius Secundus]

Now we have to remember, when a legionary signed up, he was supplied by the state, standardized equipment, thus mass production. People would be receiving many of the same versions of armor. Of course there would be all sorts of time period armor being used, as it lasts. But I'm sure there was standard of equipment given to new recruits. This is just a rough point, but might go along way, think bout it

[Dan Howard]

I'm more inclined to think that a soldier would have been supplied only with equipment that he didn't already have.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Just a thought on the marine wearing hamata..perhaps because this would be the easiest to discard in the water? undo your belt and stretch your arms and go head down...?

[Titus Marius Secundus]

They might have arrived in the legions with a pugio or a sword, unlikely tho, but a raw recruit would probably have nothing to begin with, plus when Marius reformed the army to be open to citizens who didn't even own land, many new recruits with nothing would have arrived, thus the state had to provide mass amounts of equipment for them, either all being hamata, and maybe then at higher ranks being given lorica... I think it's possible rank also had to do with armor type.

[Tarbicus]

I don't think there is any evidence that the pomerium was supposed to keep all weapons outside of the city. It was about the arma/toga distinction.

How does that explain taking weapons inside the pomerium was a blasphemy? I'm fairly certain Caesar's murderers were wearing togas at the time. Had they done the deed inside the pomerium they'd have been charged with blasphemy. Not for murder, but for carrying weapons inside the pomerium.

[Sean Manning]

I don't think there is any evidence that the pomerium was supposed to keep all weapons outside of the city. It was about the arma/toga distinction.

How does that explain taking weapons inside the pomerium was a blasphemy? I'm fairly certain Caesar's murderers were wearing togas at the time. Had they done the deed inside the pomerium they'd have been charged with blasphemy. Not for murder, but for carrying weapons inside the pomerium.

I don't remember any source that says it was forbidden to simply bring armae inside the pomerium, but its not one of my areas of expertise. Can you find the reference for the murderers being threatened with blasphemy charges?

My understanding was that the Romans tried to keep civil and military authority (and the role of citizens as quirites and milites) apart by forbidding men from entering the city armed and organized for war, and requiring magistrates to give up their imperium while inside the city. It wasn't a concern about weapons per se as much as a concern about military force and military authority overpowering the laws.

A lot of people wore arms inside the city in the last 50 years of the Republic without being prosecuted for sacrilege; I don't think any of the accused Catalinans who had stockpiled arms in their homes were charged with sacrilege, even when Cicero was trying to accuse them of every imaginable sin. Similarly, arms were needed for gladiatorial shows at Rome.