The Imagnifer and the Aquilifer

[D B Campbell]

Do we have any idea what sort of animal pelt the Aquilifer would have worn?

It's usually assumed that he wore a bear skin. When Angel Garcia Pinto and I worked on the painting of Corbulo and Tiridates for Ancient Warfare magazine, Vol. III, No. 5, we decided on a bear skin. Vegetius (Mil. 2.16) certainly says that signiferi wore bear skins ad terrorem hostium ("to terrify the enemy"), but he doesn't give any specific details on the aquilifer.

Curiously, whenever an aquilifer is depicted, he seems to be shown bare-headed (not bear-headed!) -- on tombstones, this may simply be the convention (other soldiers are similarly shown bare-headed), but (iirc) the aquilifer on Trajan's Column is also bare-headed, although his signiferi comrades wear animal pelts.

[P Sertorius Scaevola]

I could provide a couple of general pointers as to the status and position of the aquilifer. We know for a fact that the Aquila was the prime standard of the legion, we also know that the Aquila represents the omnipresent allseeing eys of Iuppiter and that religion and the military are intwined at a deep thorough level. Hence there must be a connection between the standard and the bearer, likely providing the bearer with extreme honor both from a military and a religious point of view.
As loosing the Aquila brings extreme shame to the legion, up to the point of disbanning the legion as such, the bearer should be someone who could stand his ground. It would be foolish to solely rely on the troops surrounding the Aquila to protect it. I was under the impression that the position was one that honored the man.
We know for a fact that the centurionate befell on those that distinguished themselves in battle. Old centuriones were hence men with a nature to survive. Brutal men no doubt, possibly -if I may be permitted to use this way of adressing them by todays standards- not unlike The Expendables. You do not mess with these men or you pay the price. So, I figure these men were basically your worst nightmare and chosen from the ranks of the senior centuriones. Senior in the respect that they had prooven themselves worthy in battle time after time.
Possibly, this was sort of an honorary position for a centurion who hadn't the prospect of rising further in the centurionate. That might imply that the position be open to both a younger and an older centurio. But I lack the knowledge to back this.
Influx into the Aquiliferii could thus be from the ranks of the centuriones, but possibly not be limited to that. I am convinced the man should be a prooven meat grinder.
As for the pelt(s) he might wear, there is virtually no evidence for it beeing that of a lion. This seems fed by our sense of logic only; given the rarity of the position, it ought to be reflected in the rarity of the pelt. We can't rule this out as an option. Neither, as fas as I know, is there solid evidence for it beeing that of a bear. Sculptural evidence of aquiliferii's pelts is debatable; I have never been able to pin it down to lion/bear or even wolf. Probably, again, the radiance of the man was more important, plus the necessity to actually wear any sort of pelt as was customary for the signiferii as a group.
This reflects my thoughts only, and even though I think I know a bit about the matter, I welcome input from others. Meanwhile, I continue to sport one of the most impressive male lions as part of my Aquilifer impression, with great pride.

[D B Campbell]

Old centuriones were hence men with a nature to survive. Brutal men no doubt, possibly -if I may be permitted to use this way of adressing them by todays standards- not unlike The Expendables. ... Possibly, this was sort of an honorary position for a centurion who hadn't the prospect of rising further in the centurionate.

That's quite a pay-cut for a legionary centurion! Not to mention the loss of (social) status.

[P Sertorius Scaevola]

I can't quite follow your line of reasoning Duncan; do you know anything about the financial position of the Aquilifer for sure? If indeed it was an option for a centurion to make -let's call it a horizontal promotion- the transfer to the position of Aquilifer I'm confident pay wouldn't be affected. The nature of the position is exclusive and I'm pretty sure pay would at least be maintained at the same if not a higher level. As for status...what more can I say

[Nathan Ross]

We know for a fact that the centurionate befell on those that distinguished themselves in battle.

Is that a fact? The majority of Roman legions spent decades without seeing battle - how would they chose their centurions? Plus many men were directly commissioned into the rank, at least one as young as 18... I'd say there were many qualifications for being a centurion, not all of them to do with fighting ability!

Influx into the Aquiliferii could thus be from the ranks of the centuriones

But of all the 50+ career inscriptions for aquilifers not one shows a previous position as anything but a signifer IIRC. Promotion goes the other way, if at all - two aquilifers went on to be centurions. Pretty clearly a centurion was higher in rank.

[Titus Manlius Verus]

I am in favor of the Aquilifer wearing a bear skin. As a member of the signiferi, it could only make sense that the Aquilifer would wear a bear skin. I truly doubt that an Aquilifer would go into battle bare-headed as they would have wanted to protect the Aquilifer, and as an extention, the Aquila.

[P Sertorius Scaevola]

I've not written an iron truth Nathan, just been reasoning from the point of view that the Aquila was of prime importance to the legion from many perspectives. This must have been an argument to choose the one to be the next Aquilifer in line.
As for the centuriones, both my arguments and yours hold their ground. Those who became a centurio through direct commision were no doubt there because it was an interesting annex to their CV thrusting them forward in their career. The other influx was definitely from the fighting men.

[Renatus]

but (iirc) the aquilifer on Trajan's Column is also bare-headed, although his signiferi comrades wear animal pelts.

This is certainly the case in Cichorius taf. VII and almost certainly in taf. XXXV.

[D B Campbell]

do you know anything about the financial position of the Aquilifer for sure?

If you're looking for certainty, my friend, then you need to abandon ancient history! :wink: But better men than both of us have spent a lifetime studying the career patterns of the Roman army. One thing seems certain: glory and honour were in the Roman bloodstream, so the careers that men proudly proclaimed on their inscriptions were based on promotions, not on demotions. (The only "horizontal promotion" I can think of involved the posts in the centuria, which -- it seems -- could be held in any order, with the centurionate as the ultimate goal for the lucky few.)

If indeed it was an option for a centurion to make -let's call it a horizontal promotion- the transfer to the position of Aquilifer I'm confident pay wouldn't be affected.

I would suggest to you that it isn't an option.

Earlier, you questioned my certainty that the centurion earned more than the aquilifer. Now, you claim certainty that the aquilifer was on a par with the centurion. The vast majority of aquiliferi start and end as aquiliferi (I can think of one man who seems to have started as signifer, and one or two who made centurion), whereas the legionary centurionate opens the door to a high-level equestrian career (for those who did not already possess equestrian status). You claim that the two posts are equal, yet no aquilifer ever reached the dizzy heights of the equestrian order. Doesn't that seem odd to you?

[Renatus]

Possibly, this was sort of an honorary position for a centurion who hadn't the prospect of rising further in the centurionate. That might imply that the position be open to both a younger and an older centurio. But I lack the knowledge to back this.
Influx into the Aquiliferii could thus be from the ranks of the centuriones

Von Domaszewski placed the aquilifer on a par with the optio spei (or optio ad spem ordinis) and the two of them as the senior principales in the legion. Optio spei was the rank immediately below centurion but, whereas the optio spei was earmarked for promotion when a vacancy occurred, it was exceptional for an aquilifer to be promoted to centurio (A. von Domaszewski, Die Rangordnung des Römischen Heeres, 2nd Edn. (ed. B. Dobson), Cologne 1967, pp. 41 & 49).

[D B Campbell]

Von Domaszewski placed the aquilifer on a par with the optio spei (or optio ad spem ordinis) and the two of them as the senior principales in the legion.

I think he is undoubtedly correct, Michael. It's maybe worthwhile explaining his reasoning: namely, that a signifer could be promoted to become aquilifer, and an aquilifer could be promoted to become centurion, which demonstrates the relative positions of the three posts. However, Domaszewski noted that the promotion to centurion was exceptional, whereas promotion to centurion from the posts within the centuria (particularly the optio ad spem ordinis) was normal.

[Titus Manlius Verus]

According to Goldsworthy's The Complete Roman Army, Aquilifers were on the double-pay salary of an immunis(?) (500 Denarii at the time of Trajan), where as a centurion's salary was exponentally higher.

[D B Campbell]

According to Goldsworthy's The Complete Roman Army, Aquilifers were on the double-pay salary of an immunis(?) ...

Again, it may be worthwhile explaining his reasoning (or, in this case, David Breeze's reasoning,* which has never been disputed, as far as I am aware):
1. we know that the principales (unlike the immunes) received enhanced pay of either pay-and-a-half (the so-called sesquiplicarius) or double-pay (the so-called duplicarius);
2. we are fairly certain that the optio and the signifer received double-pay;
3. we know that the next step (actually, a leap!) for the optio and the signifer was to centurion;
4. we know that the next step for the aquilifer (for those few who took it) was to centurion;
5. ergo, the aquilifer was on the same pay-grade as the optio and the signifer, i.e. double pay.

* D.J. Breeze, "Pay grades and ranks below the centurionate", Journal of Roman Studies 61 (1971), pp. 130-135.

[Titus Manlius Verus]

Aquilifer equipment must have been expenseive-even on double pay. I wonder if there was a system for outfitting aquilifers, or the Aquilifers had to pay for it themselves?

[P Sertorius Scaevola]

Well, it's certainly been an interesting discussion with all the points of view shared. I appear to be the only one approaching it from the importance of the Aquila to the legion. Quite the gap remains to be breeched and hopefully more evidence will be unearthed to shed more light on the matter.

Thanks to all who contributed.