Rank and Armor

[Antonius]

I know this is going to spark some kind of bashing but I was curious. The movie Gladiator takes place during the reign of Marcus Aurelius (161-180 A.D) They referred to Maximus as "general". Can someone tell me if his armor, crest and weapon were historically accurate for the period. If so, what title would he have held in Roman terms. He admittedly was not of noble birth, a farmer in fact. I don't like to use movies as reference but I do like to find out truths, if any to a great movie like that. His sword by the way appears to be that of Roman cavalry. It is certainly longer than a gladius. Since I am really just delving into the real knowledge of the time I would love some answers. During the reign of Aurelius were all infantry using longer cavalry models or were the gladii still being used??

Thanks in advance for any replies.
Tony

[A_Volpe]

http://www.larp.com/legioxx/orgoff.html

and

http://astro.temple.edu/%7Etlclark/lorica/problems.htm

"General" in case of Gladiator, could be seen as either a Legatus, or possibly a Tribune, Praefectus, or Primus Pilus Centurion (Legatus being "highest" ranker, down, but all of these are the highest rankers in a Legion, but a Legatus appears to translate as closely to "General" as we can get apparently)

The problem with a Legatus is that historically he's comissioned by the Government, and would have to have some sort of Senatorial or Council ties/ancestry. If he's supposed to be worked up from the ranks in the army itself, he'd probably be a Praefectus Castrorum (Prefect/Camp prefect, still a very high ranker, though).

Matt Amt's page explains this in more details, so I won't repeat much here.

As for a general's kit, the Movie version is "close" to what we think...Just get rid of that ridiculous fur cloak he's got going on....And the "Segmentata" shoulder guards never appears on "lorica musculata" - It's much closer to the earlier Greek style with the shoulder parts from Linothorax and bronze cuirass. The Generals and higher-ups seemed to really prefer to look closely to the Greek influence for spiffiness and "tradition".
There's no evidence of romans wearing vambraces/bracers on thier wrists that I know of, certainly not metal. Although the ptergyes, the leather straps on the bottom of his curiass and the shoulders we DO know was used.

Close in terms of him wearing a "muscled cuirass", we're pretty sure that's most likely what they would have worn...Of course what it was made out of is as complicated as tunic color - so see Clark's website for info on that.

And at that, the cuirass that Maximus wears is closer than the one Commodus wears to what is shown in actual sculpture. (there doesn't seem to be any evidence for ropes/tassles or 2 layers of shoulder panels as seen on Commodus ~ Max's cuirass also has him wearing a disctintively tied waistbelt - there is evidence for this and it appearly was a symbolic piece to indicate rank as an officer, if not Legatus or an Emperor himself; rank also includes different boots (more enclosed and apparently tied with a ribbon than a leather string like on Caligae)


On a side note, speaking of that waistbelt - I wonder if that was just as functional as it was decorative/symbolic, in that I wonder if that was used to help secure the "armor" onto the body? Since the belt seems to be tied high up on the waist, that to me looks like it would be an ideal place in the middle of the armor as opposed to closer to the bottom, like the regular soldiers seem to wear the balteus. Which again I think reinforces the idea it's just as much as a symbol of rank as much as it is "functional" ~ the balteus on Lor. Hamata helps hold the armor up on the hips; if the Musculata is hinged or seamed at the sides, clamshell-style (like the Greek style), then tying a belt in the middle may help prevent the armor from opening at the chestline/armpits, (of if say the hinge/seam broke or opened up from wearing) which i think would be a problem if the armor was tied around lower on the waist like a soldier is usually seen wearing it.

But anyways.

[Matthew Amt]

Avete!

No, no one's going to bash you, though we will certainly bash Hollywood... The basic rule of thumb for ANY movie is to assume that EVERYTHING is wrong and go from there. The only exception I know of so far is Alexander, in which much of the hardware looks darn good (at least in the few stills I saw)--the rest of the movie is somewhat debated, of course! In the case of Gladiator, there were some decently-shaped shields and a couple nice mailshirts. That's about it. And that includes plot, script, acting, directing, cinematography, sets...

Even the worst Osprey book you can find on Romans will give you more reliable information, in a handier format.

A legatus was a senator, a noble-born aristocrat. The Hellenistic style of armor and clothing worn by aristocrats was distinctive and very traditional. Those men were very much slaves to fashion, though there could certainly be some variation for actual battles. The sash tied around the torso is part of that, though it may be related to one's imperium (not sure about that--it isn't always seen in artwork).

Well, don't get me started! It's nice to see folks inspired to learn more by movies, but it would be nicer if we didn't have to spend so much time and effort fixing the misconceptions. Keep on learning!!

Vale,

Matthew

[Antonius]

Would a boiled leather muscled cuirass provide ANY protection against a direct blow from any sword of the period. I mean the Greeks (Spartans) did use it and I'm sure it worked well. I just can't see the point overall. Brass I'm sure was much heavier but metal. I think that the muscled cuirass is much nicer looking than a standard lorica segmentata. I would like to wear one of these. But from a "live action" battle perspective I want to know if I'm going to be protected. I intend to go into live steel matches with some friends interested in the period as well. All of us are sport fencers who have wanted to get into this for a long time. Fencing just doesn't give us all we ask for.

Tony

[Felix Canus]

Despite the more recent trend toward "leather bashing," boiled leather is a very durable material against chops, slashes, and thrusts.

Several years ago, a Texas prison guard, who is also a member of the SCA, was on his way to an event. He was running a bit late (and the event was close by) so he was partially armored before leaving home. En route, he got an emergency call-in to help with a riot. On arrival, he had enough time to strip off his maille, throw on the kevlar vest and strap on the crash helmet before being in the thick of it.

An inmate stabbed him with an icepick hard enough to leave a five-inch bruise over his spleen. It missed the vest but was stopped cold by the boiled leather jerkin.

No armor is impervious and accidents will happen but, if boiled leather can stop a full thrust of finely tapered modern steel, I feel confident in saying it can handle the demands of live steel reenactment.

[Arahne]

Great story Felix!

[Ti Cl Nero]

The problem with a Legatus is that historically he's comissioned by the Government, and would have to have some sort of Senatorial or Council ties/ancestry. If he's supposed to be worked up from the ranks in the army itself, he'd probably be a Praefectus Castrorum (Prefect/Camp prefect, still a very high ranker, though).

Salve,
consider, though, that the most obscure equestrian from the farthest provincia, could attain senatorial rank by means of a commendatio principis , a direct order of the emperor.
Right aquaintances and ties would help in this, a good career (particularly in the army) and proven loyalty to the emperor too: birth was not all.
Vespasian was an equestrian by birth, no senatorial ancestors, and followed an equstrian career in the army till the tribunate: then he had the uncommon chance of starting senatorial cursus honorum and finally became emperor.
This principle could apply to the "Gladiator" as well, provided his family had earned enough to qualify for equestrian rank, but I guess this also could be easily by-passed with emperor's favour - and we must also remember that equestrian rank could also be directly attained through the primipilate.
Also, gens Ulpia in Spain (their origins were italian) was not originally of senatorial rank (not even equestrian): gradually, they qualified for equestrian rank, and before Trajan's father's generation, they had attained senatorial rank through their relationships and service.

As for the term "general", during the principate the governor of an imperial province was also commander of the legionary armed force there (senatorial provinces had no legionary garrison) : in imperial provinces with one legion, the legatus legionis was also governor; in imperial provinces with more than one legions (two or three), governor (legatus Augusti) had also overall command of this legionary garrison.
When specific campaigns had to be prepared involving even more legions, one overall commander could be appointed.
I would apply the term "general" to the 2 latter figures.

Two interesting references for equestrians :

H. Hill "'Equites' of Senatorial Rank"
in The Classical Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1929), pp. 33-36

P. A. Brunt: "Princeps and Equites"
in The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 73, 1983 (1983), pp. 42-75

For Gens Ulpia:

Bennett, "Trajan Optimus Princeps", 2000


Valete

[john m roberts]

"He was originally not of noble birth, a farmer in fact."
The two were not mutually exclusive. Throughout history, the nobility have been the greatest landowners. This goes doubly for the Roman Senate, which was made up of Rome's landed gentry, and the Romans made a cult of agriculture. The image of Cincinnatus leaving his plow to take up the office of Dictator, solving the State's difficulty, then returning to his plowing, was one of Rome's most powerful. Farming was always an honorable calling. In the late Republic, senators would live much of the time on their country estates and pretend to be real farmers. As late as the 19th century, the English nobility regarded income from agriculture as the only respectable source of wealth. There was much more money in trade, but trade was lower-class. Same for Rome, where senators were forbidden to take part in business. Of course, they used clients and freedmen as fronts for business dealings, but the proprieties had to be maintained.

[Matthew Amt]

Would a boiled leather muscled cuirass provide ANY protection against a direct blow from any sword of the period. I mean the Greeks (Spartans) did use it and I'm sure it worked well.

There is virtually no evidence that the Spartans or other Classical Greeks used leather armor. Bronze was used, and layered linen. And I don't think there is any evidence at all that the ancients use *boiled* leather--the few references to leather armor are vague and may be refering to rawhide.

Brass I'm sure was much heavier but metal.

Original bronze muscled cuirasses weighed 10 pounds or less. There was one discussed on the Roman Army Talk board a while back that weighed about 6 pounds. If you make the leather thick enough to be as protective as the metal, it isn't going to be any lighter, and it will be much thicker and bulkier. Sure, you can make very protective armor out of leather, but it doesn't look like the folks back then used it very much at all.

Khairete,

Matthew

[MeinPanzer]

Matthew- I've always been curious about the weights of metal cuirasses. Could you point me to some publications which deal with this topic?

[Matthew Amt]

I wish I could! I've never seen any. For generations there have been only arm-chair experts who go on at great length about how horribly heavy the armor is, and sadly mis-informed archeologists who go on at great length about how ALL the armor they've found is "too thin and flimsy" to be any use in combat. Turns out both groups are talking about the exact same stuff! In the last couple years I've seen a few references to thicknesses, actually mostly of Bronze Age items, generally about 1mm (the Dendra cuirass, for example). So I made my own cuirass from bronze c. 1mm thick, and it weighs about 9 pounds. Antiquities dealers are actually more help, because they sometimes mention weights (not realizing that such information is apparently meant to be kept secret!). There was a great list of helmets (Corinthian, Illyrian, Chalcidian, etc.) on Hermann Historica recently, all about 2 to 3 pounds each. So bronze armor was surprisingly light, yet still very effective. And it looks good!!

Khairete,

Matthew

[Theodosius the Great]

Vespasian was an equestrian by birth, no senatorial ancestors, and followed an equstrian career in the army till the tribunate: then he had the uncommon chance of starting senatorial cursus honorum and finally became emperor.
This principle could apply to the "Gladiator" as well, provided his family had earned enough to qualify for equestrian rank, but I guess this also could be easily by-passed with emperor's favour -

Quite right. I was just going to mention that in the specific case of Marcus Aurelius that he ran something of a meritocracy if I'm not mistaken. He needed men with proven ability during his tumultuous reign and couldn't afford the luxuary of appointing men according to their social rank.

So, for similar reasons as Nero just cited, I think it's a plausibility as well.


~Theo

[Ti Cl Nero]

Marcus Aurelius (...) needed men with proven ability during his tumultuous reign and couldn't afford the luxuary of appointing men according to their social rank.

Absolutely.
Adlecting deserving (for their actions and/or their acquaintances) men into ranks they didn't belong to, was certainly a common “trendâ€