Trajan\'s Column

[Tarbicus]

Nope, IMHO



(found a better photo)

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Ah i see what you mean!

BTW it is interesting that in this image of the column of Trajan, there are no rings to be found on the helmets, just crossbars!



M.VIB.M.

[Tarbicus]

Ah i see what you mean!

BTW it is interesting that in this image of the column of Trajan, there are no rings to be found on the helmets, just crossbars!

That's at the very top of the column:

It has been proposed that the roofs of the two flanking libraries could have been used as viewing platforms (the height of these may have been about equivalent to the current street level from which visitors now peer at the column).
[url:1bcusle5]http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~trajan/introductory_essay.html[/url]


[url:1bcusle5]http://schnucks0.free.fr/trajan.htm[/url]
Second row down.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

yes... i saw it, and what i find striking is the fact that the legionaries have their helmets attached to their armor in a very similar way re-enactors do these days, namely with the laces of the back-plate!!

Also a nice detail is that the artists have depicted horses of the right size (however obvious that would be of course...)

I rather see re-enactors ride small horses....



M.VIB.M.

[Jeroen Pelgrom]

http://schnucks0.free.fr/trajan.htm

interesting website!

What really strikes me of Trajan's column is the amount of auxilia in the pictures. Most of the fighting is done by them, while the legions only fight a small number of cases.
Really shows the importance of the auxilia in the Roman army.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

i also observed that but took it as a fact...



M.VIB.M.

[Praefectusclassis]

Or, it shows a story the emperor likes to tell: "Look, we got those barbarians to fall in battle for us, no Roman blood needed to be spilt" in the Tacitean Mons Graupius manner. :wink:

[Jeroen Pelgrom]

i also observed that but took it as a fact...

IMHO the role of the auxilia is underestimated by "ordinairy people". People only imagine the legions doing all the fighting.
I think that Trajan's column in this case shows the reality

Or, it shows a story the emperor likes to tell: "Look, we got those barbarians to fall in battle for us, no Roman blood needed to be spilt" in the Tacitean Mons Graupius manner.

Did the Romans viewed the auxilia like that?

[Tarbicus]

Apparently there is an instance of a unit bringing shame by running from the enemy, which is seen somewhere on the column depicted by legionaries turning their backs on the enemy. The way they're depicted (the Fleeing Legionary) would have been recognisable as such by Roman military men of the time, and it's been suggested he represents the XXI Rapax which suffered damnatio memoriae. His shield is also bereft of emblems, apparently.

So, yes, it's propoganda which makes it a bag of ...., but it doesn't hide everything for those who would know. Theoretically.

[Tarbicus]

What really strikes me of Trajan's column is the amount of auxilia in the pictures. Most of the fighting is done by them, while the legions only fight a small number of cases.
Really shows the importance of the auxilia in the Roman army.

Lendon has a theory that the legionaries became more and more involved with siege warfare while the auxilia took on the combat role. He also believes that is why such things as helmet neckguards got wider, to protect from missiles from above.

[Graham Sumner]

Jim wrote:

Actually, you've raised a good point. The likelihood is that the external carvings are just decoration that didn't really mean much at all, so long as the story of the campaign was adhered to. The most important aspect of the column was the viewing gallery at the very top, accessible from the internal spiral staircase, which showed the forum and Trajan's Markets.

So, can we deduce that what's carved on the column is irrelevant to any accurate portrayal at all of soldiers as it simply didn't matter? Can we, quite frankly, completely throw out any use of the column as having any vestige of accuracy in its depiction of soldiers and their equipment, and anyone seeking to use it as a military reference needs to give up and find something more useful to do, like travel to Romania?

Compare this with the Adamklissi monument which is viewable from the ground, and the huge difference in the depictions of soldiers there.

Hi Jim

The column itself was surrounded by viewing platforms on a couple of levels so it would have been possible to see the higher images. Remember these too would all have been painted as well, so I guess it was perhaps just about feasible to make out many of the details the sculptors went to otherwise extraordinary lengths to depict. This was also an Imperial commission and one can only imagine the effects mistakes and botched work would have led too. Starring role in the next circus performance perhaps!

Graham.

[Robert Vermaat]

Or, it shows a story the emperor likes to tell: "Look, we got those barbarians to fall in battle for us, no Roman blood needed to be spilt" in the Tacitean Mons Graupius manner. :wink:

The very interesting thing is that when Theodosius does that with his Gothic federates at the river Frigidus in 394 AD, the Goths are very angry (because they remain federates) and even Roman writers chide Theodosius for not being very nice.

O tempora, o mores…

[Tarbicus]

Hi Jim

The column itself was surrounded by viewing platforms on a couple of levels so it would have been possible to see the higher images. Remember these too would all have been painted as well, so I guess it was perhaps just about feasible to make out many of the details the sculptors went to otherwise extraordinary lengths to depict.

I'm just wondering where that information comes from? I take the McMaster essay as a very good reference, yet they seem puzzled about the viewing of the column, and make no reference to it. Is it a recent discovery, or a very educated guess on someone's part?

This was also an Imperial commission and one can only imagine the effects mistakes and botched work would have led too. Starring role in the next circus performance perhaps!

I hate to disagree with you on this, but Heads of State tend to be far more interested in the message and propoganda, the politics, than the minutiae of the piece. As much as Hadrian may have been there in Dacia and participated militarily, I honestly believe he couldn't care less if the helmets or segs were correct. His overriding concern would be that any viewer got the message. If the fine detail being correct were a matter of life or death for the artists and artesans concerned, we would surely see far more variety in equipment within units or troop types.

There is a tale of Hadrian where an architect 'outflanked' him. Hadrian did not like him at all, and wanted to prove to the architect he wasn't needed, so he commissioned a less famous architect to make the plans for a new building or structure and sent them to the disliked architect to get his opinion, in the hope he would have nothing to say and take on a bit more humilty (he was apparently very arrogant). But, a message was sent back with a scathing comment that Hadrian could not deny was valid.

Now, the disliked architect was executed as Hadrian lost patience, but it certainly wasn't because of skills or ability, but simply because the guy had crossed the line and had insulted Hadrian one time too many. The fact that that was the reason says to me that Hadrian held such people in high regard (he had been insulted by him before but Hadrian did nothing), and I believe that if the artist behind the column had preferred to do it his way (provided the message was told as Hadrian desired) then Hadrian really wouldn't care, and if the man who designed the column simply used anecdotes and models close to hand, then it wouldn't matter. Bear in mind that if the designer, not being a military man, recognised the soldiers for what they were supposed to represent, then so would the general populace. If the column were primarily designed for soldiers it would probably look very different, and the average viewer may well have been confused and would not be able to follow the plot, so to speak.

That's only my opinion, but it was no tall Osprey book, more a dedication to triumph and a political piece.

My two cents worth.

[Graham Sumner]

Hi Jim

In the past I have seen a number of reconstructions of the Trajan's forum complex which show the column rising up from the small courtyard of a building not standing in isolation like Nelson's Column. Basically only the statue of Trajan himself is shown higher than the structure around it. However just looking through Connolly's 'Ancient City' he shows something entirely different but adds that scholars can not agree upon how the Basilica Ulpia looked. Until looking through his book I had never seen anything different before. I guess as per usual we can pick and choose and find arguments to back up either case.

I am still unsure if it was not necessary and simply propaganda why the sculptors of TC went to so much trouble over the details of military equipment. If it was simply propaganda for an ill informed public then surely a load of guys in the bog standard muscled cuirass riding over naked barbarians would have done the job equally well. Otherwise as I am sure you are aware there is indeed a hell of a lot of minutiae on the column which has caused endless debate ever since.

Having said that the population of Rome was shocked when during the arrival of Severus' army into the city they saw what their frontier armies actually looked like. I guess maybe we would too!

I also guess that after last night you are still in a state of shock Jim and even worse living in Londinium too!

Graham.

[Tarbicus]

Hi Jim

I also guess that after last night you are still in a state of shock Jim and even worse living in Londinium too!

Graham.

The contents of a text I got this morning:
"Nine goals two cups what a happy new year hope the form keeps up for the prem"

I won't post my reply. :evil: