08-24-2003, 09:58 AM
Indeed, they were most probably local boys, Gauls and Rhineland Germans (and maybe some Alano-Sarmatians).<br>
What struck me is that, contrary to a popular belief, they still were clearly recognizable not only by their standards (draco?) but by their clothing, down to the shoes (the typical IV/Vth century sandals?)<br>
The weaponry at that time was pretty much the same for everyone and the different available styles (German, Central Asian, Persian and so on) were more a question of personal taste than of ethnicity. A "hunnic" sword doen not mean a hunnic warrior, for instance. It may have been made in Constantinople in the "hunnic" style, and sold to a roman soldiers of gothic origin (born in Northern Greece..) or an Isaurian, or anybody else wealthy enough to purchase it..<br>
So I wonder what exactly those differences were.<br>
What kind of shoes did the Wisigoths wear, for instance?<br>
Did these former roman soldiers still wore the late roman tunic with the clavii and the roundels?<br>
Did they still decorated their shields with the designs found in the ND.<br>
Or maybe with the Chi-Rho since the matter aprears to have been a religious one (catholics vs arians)?<br>
Besides, Procopius does not specifify whether these soldiers were horse or foot.<br>
As for wildly varying styles of armament: an example is the famous ivory panel of Stilicho. The man is shown carrying a sword that looks definitely central asian, if not more eastern than that.<br>
Some swords of that period show very definite asiatic (chinese) influences like stone pommels, handguards and scabbard slides.<br>
His belt also does not look like a "germanic" belt --whatever that mean-- but again like a central asian double belt system.<br>
I read somewhere (here?) someone asking why the belt supporting Stilicho's sword did not look like it was pulled down by the weight of the sword.<br>
I think the explanation could be that Stilicho is shown as a cavalryman and he wears a cavalry sword belt that makes the sword hang low behind the left thigh when in the saddle, like the later napoleonic era arrangement.<br>
In the panel, it could be that the sword tip is resting on the ground. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antoninuslucretius@romanarmytalk>Antoninus Lucretius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://localhost:1094/Homesteads/_1750094854/files/Cesar_triste.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 8/25/03 2:14 pm<br></i>
What struck me is that, contrary to a popular belief, they still were clearly recognizable not only by their standards (draco?) but by their clothing, down to the shoes (the typical IV/Vth century sandals?)<br>
The weaponry at that time was pretty much the same for everyone and the different available styles (German, Central Asian, Persian and so on) were more a question of personal taste than of ethnicity. A "hunnic" sword doen not mean a hunnic warrior, for instance. It may have been made in Constantinople in the "hunnic" style, and sold to a roman soldiers of gothic origin (born in Northern Greece..) or an Isaurian, or anybody else wealthy enough to purchase it..<br>
So I wonder what exactly those differences were.<br>
What kind of shoes did the Wisigoths wear, for instance?<br>
Did these former roman soldiers still wore the late roman tunic with the clavii and the roundels?<br>
Did they still decorated their shields with the designs found in the ND.<br>
Or maybe with the Chi-Rho since the matter aprears to have been a religious one (catholics vs arians)?<br>
Besides, Procopius does not specifify whether these soldiers were horse or foot.<br>
As for wildly varying styles of armament: an example is the famous ivory panel of Stilicho. The man is shown carrying a sword that looks definitely central asian, if not more eastern than that.<br>
Some swords of that period show very definite asiatic (chinese) influences like stone pommels, handguards and scabbard slides.<br>
His belt also does not look like a "germanic" belt --whatever that mean-- but again like a central asian double belt system.<br>
I read somewhere (here?) someone asking why the belt supporting Stilicho's sword did not look like it was pulled down by the weight of the sword.<br>
I think the explanation could be that Stilicho is shown as a cavalryman and he wears a cavalry sword belt that makes the sword hang low behind the left thigh when in the saddle, like the later napoleonic era arrangement.<br>
In the panel, it could be that the sword tip is resting on the ground. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antoninuslucretius@romanarmytalk>Antoninus Lucretius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://localhost:1094/Homesteads/_1750094854/files/Cesar_triste.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 8/25/03 2:14 pm<br></i>
