Caesars Armor

[Corvus]

Salve
Is there any description what armor/helmet Julius Caesar wore? What roman generals wore for armor and helmets?
What happened to it after he got killed? Wouldn't it be a sort of a symbol for any of Caesars successors ( Octavian, Antonius) to be in possession of this armor and to wear it on campaigns?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Helmets were usually of the Attic type in Caesar's day. He probably wore an iron or bronze muscle cuirass.

Something like this probably, but likely far more decorative, and probably sheathed in gold or silver, or gilt.

http://www.royaloakarmoury.com/portfolio...s-cuirass/

[AMELIANVS]

Should parts of Caesar's personal equipment become a kind of relic after his death?-yes.However Caesar had without any doubts many differrent armours and other parts of equipment during his career not just one armour suit only !

[Dan D'Silva]

Legio XX has a good overview on Roman officers (see "Equipment of the Legatus and Tribunes" about two-thirds of the way down). They have a picture of a statue of J. Caesar himself, but here's a higher-res version. The Roman Attic helmet at this time looked somewhat different from older Greek and Italian versions.

[Corvus]

Thank you for the answers!
The attic roman helmet and the armor from the statue seems to me too stereotypic.
What other helmet types roman commanders wore?
The cuirass looks pretty unpractical

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Well in the photo that Cuirass and helmet are Deepeeka and aren't that historically accurate.

The cuirass I posted is historically accurate, and is very practical indeed. Steel was great stuff after all (and yes, by this point the Romans were making medium carbon and high carbon steel, better than the stuff that's used in most of our equipment.)

Here is a better Attic Helmet, made by DSC:

[Dan D'Silva]

Well in the photo that Cuirass and helmet are Deepeeka and aren't that historically accurate.

I should've elaborated on that. I was posting it for the helmet in the foreground. I don't believe that one is a Deepeeka, although the cuirass is and does indeed bear no resemblance to anything historical that I've ever seen. I think the helmet is accurate by what I've seen of Roman Attic helms, but I'll try to find some original art.

Can't comment on the guy in the background's armor.

Thank you for the answers!
The attic roman helmet and the armor from the statue seems to me too stereotypic.
What other helmet types roman commanders wore?
The cuirass looks pretty unpractical

Well, there is a certain stereotypical quality to how Roman leaders were portrayed in art. And the muscled cuirass and Attic helm did have a long history of use in battle; they drew on centuries-old traditions, after all, so I wouldn't dismiss their practicality.

[Youngster]

The Romans practiced inheritance in a manner not totally dissimilar from modern systems. As Caesar's legal heir, Octavian presumably would have inherited any arms and armor that had not been otherwise disposed of. However, it does not seem that Roman, at least by the late republic, had the same sort of "superstition" about weapons and armor that was characteristic of so many other societies. Although they did have a few sacred objects, I don't think the Romans had a concept like the medieval relic. By this I mean that they had no idea of objects being associated with a famous person giving that object some sort of prestige or power. I suspect that Octavian's legal adoption was enough; he didn't need to prove it by wearing Ceasar's armor.

Also: where did the design of those awful muscle cuirasses come from? They don't bear any resemblance to any real armor, and they don't even look like real muscles! You would think that even if they didn't have an authentic artifact to base it on, they could at least look at actual muscles!

[Dan D'Silva]

Wikipedia has a fairly high-res pic of the so-called Praetorian Relief, which is the clearest image of early imperial officers' helmets I know of. This is what Legio XX says:

... the heads of the three men in the front row are early modern replacements! Those men might not have been wearing helmets at all, originally. (The helmets are pretty much copied from those in the rear rank, however, so they are not necessarily inaccurate as such.)

[Alexand96]

Gentleman, with respect, I definitely disagree about the Attic helmet being worn by Roman generals (particularly in this period), for a few reasons:

1) We have 0 depictions or archaeological evidence for Roman generals wearing the typical (typical being, say the Attic helmets worn by the Praetorians in the louvre relief here: http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/r620-68a066...633055.jpg) Attic helmet. In fact, in statue/relief evidence, Roman generals/emperors are all shown helmet-less. As far as I am aware, there is only one statue with a Roman general and a helmet (unworn, on the ground), and that helmet is definitely a hellenistic style helmet. This isn't the best image, but there are many of this particular statue on the internet:

2) The stereotypical Roman Attic helmet is really only found in Roman art from mid-1st century AD on. It becomes wildly popular in Roman military depictions in the 2nd century, but I've never seen any depiction of the Roman Attic helmet in a Roman military context prior to mid-1st century AD. What I mean by the traditional Roman Attic helmet is exemplified perfectly by MMFA's link above - it is the most famous Attic helmet associated with the Roman military, and used widely in most modern impressions.

3) I think, despite all the arguments regarding the Autun helmet (whether it was just a temple display piece or real kit), it is probably closer in reality to the extravagant, and to us silly or unaesthetic looks the Romans were attracted to:

4) An example of what I believe a Roman general of this period would really have looked like was just recently brought to my attention in another thread about legionaries of the Varus disaster. This image was taken from the Amazon preview function of this book here: http://www.amazon.de/Das-Heer-Varus-Hilf...3938447524



I don't know if I agree with the use of the manica in the above impression, but I think it is pretty close to reality in all other respects.

Although this is just a doll, the artist did his homework, and I think this panoply is also fairly accurate (influence definitely taken from the statue of the Roman general's panoply found on the island of Rhodes):


Link to image of original statue I believe is referenced: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alaskapine...XR3-62ryME

[Flavivs Aetivs]

This would also explain the usage of Hellenistic helmets in 3rd-10th century Roman art. IMO, I think both were used.

Luckily we know that Late Roman general's helmets looked like because we've found them before (Berkasova-I).

[Corvus]

Alexand96 brought up some points that I had also in my head.
Regarding the praetorians relief: I think its the wrong thing to put it as an example, it is known that praetorians wore exactly the same armor and equipment as the legions ( and also civil clothes)
The armor on the relief is parade armor.

I never like the classic attic helmet look
I don't remember where I find the attached image, but I think its the reconstruction of Scipios helmet.
That would make more sense to me, if republic generals wore helmets like this.

Regarding Caesars Armor: It is said that Augustus took Alexanders armor for himself, when he was visiting Alexandria.
Why he shouldn't than kept Caesars armor?
I think it would also be symbolic if he would wear this armor, since a lot of his soldiers were veterans that served Caesar...

[Flavivs Aetivs]

The Parade armor argument has been discussed to death: logic and archaeological/artistic evidence simply says there was no such thing as parade armor as far as we, the modern historical community, know. The Romans made everything to work on the battlefield.

[Dan D'Silva]

Regarding the praetorians relief: I think its the wrong thing to put it as an example, it is known that praetorians wore exactly the same armor and equipment as the legions ( and also civil clothes)

Did you look at the Legio XX page? They're quite firm that "[w]hile this is often said to portray Praetorians, what it actually shows is OFFICERS, Praetorian or otherwise." Actually I take Alexander's objections more seriously; perhaps the imperial Attic helmet hadn't reached its form in Caesar's day, though on the other hand, there might be some sort of missing link -- forms of the Attic helm had been used in Italy since republican times.

I never like the classic attic helmet look

Eh. I don't like the tiara, but it's correct for the time and culture I reenact, so it's what I wear. The question here is simply what helmet(s) did generals wear when Caesar was active.

Regarding Caesars Armor: It is said that Augustus took Alexanders armor for himself, when he was visiting Alexandria.
Why he shouldn't than kept Caesars armor?
I think it would also be symbolic if he would wear this armor, since a lot of his soldiers were veterans that served Caesar...

Maybe, maybe not. Do historical sources support it? That's pretty much what we're about here.

In the meantime, might I suggest a possible reason if he didn't -- maybe Julius' armor didn't fit him.

[Urselius]

The Parade armor argument has been discussed to death: logic and archaeological/artistic evidence simply says there was no such thing as parade armor as far as we, the modern historical community, know. The Romans made everything to work on the battlefield.

They also made armour for entertainment purposes - for use in the arena.