Trajan\'s Column - interesting Auxiliary - Batavian?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

@ Jens. Perhaps a training kit? Woodens swords, and a pole for keeping the men in a line? similar to the optios staff? Or maybe even a barge pole? Just a thought.

[Paullus Scipio]

Robert wrote:-

Wheeler and others suggest this very weapon as this 'hasta' (yes, I know, it's a generic name) came into use for the regular infantry from the 3rd c. onwards.
The description of compact infantry sounds very much like the description of Late Roman infantry in synaspismos, before opening up the ranks and using the spatha.

.....I can't speak for writers of the Greek East deliberately using what may well have been archaic terms like 'synapsismos', because they saw them in 'ancient' manuals, nor, over such a time scale, can one confidently assert that weaponry did not change under 'germanic' influence.....but I have strong doubts, as you know. :wink:
The fact is, we just don't have enough information ( indeed very little literary evidence at all?)as to what weapons 3C AD Roman Infantry carried, though pila and spear or lancea heads continue to be found in the archaeological record ( see e.g. Bishop and Coulston "Roman Military Equipment" ch7). In Sir Mortimer Wheeler's day, even less was known, hence such speculation.
Certainly in Arrian's day, no-one would suggest the the Army had any significant 'germanic' influence....so he almost certainly didn't mean 'a long cavalry spear' when he translated some common Roman weapon as Kontos . The evidence for it just isn't there, as we have discussed elsewhere.... lol:

[Paullus Scipio]

Jens wrote:-

Nor were the men themselves a less frightful spectacle, bristling as they were with the skins of wild beasts, and armed with huge lances, while in their strangeness to the place they were embarrassed by the crowds of people, or tumbling down in the slippery streets or from the shock of some casual encounter, they fell to quarrelling, and then had recourse to blows and the use of their swords.

......a most useful reference that I had overlooked earlier when referring to Tacitus!
The Vitellian army, of course, came from the Rhine, and the reference here is obviously to Germanic auxiliaries.....BTW, it has just occurred to me that we don't hear much of any Germanic auxiliaries other than Batavians at this early date (68 AD)....what does the inscription evidence say about the earliest Germanic auxiliary units? Could Batavians be the only ones at this time?

[Peroni]

Here's the scene (sorry it's a bit late!) :wink:

Fur-covered helmets (Like the Krefeld) with no neck guard or cheek guards visible on a couple of the soldiers. There's also a second clearly different shield pattern to the one posted in your drawing Paul.

[Paullus Scipio]

Tks for finding that Adrian!....I had mentioned in my original post that...

If each figure represents a unit, (pure speculation, and possibly unlikely! ) then the 'Flying Column' might consist of 2 or possibly 3 cohorts armed like this

...which was a reference to the 2 or 3 different shield designs visible.

From the identification point of view, it is a pity that other 'germanic' Auxiliary units are known to have taken part in the Dacian Wars, such as Cohors II Mattiacorum and Cohors I Ubiorum, both from the Rhine region...

[Praefectusclassis]

Just to point out that the Batavians weren't with Vitellius anymore at that time. Hearing of the revolt, the Batavian units turned around and fought their way through the army back up North.
Also, Tacitus is not in a mood to describe the army as a very civilized Roman one at this point. He never is, but this is right after Roman (Otho's) soldiers killed the mother of Agricola, T's father in law. Skins of wild beasts and big pointy sticks obviously contribute to an image of a barbarian army, so I'd be a little hesitant taking this on face value.

[Robert]

Salve Adrian and Paul!

Could one of you tell me what kind of design is visible above and below the wreath design on the shield of the soldier front and center. I am doing a shield with a wreath design for Jaspers Batavian Wild Bunch and would like to get it right, withe the tops of the wreath slightly apart.
I had thought of using a crescent moon, but as this is associated with Krefelt helmets, would prefer to get this one right instead.

[Peroni]

This is the shape Robert.. It is seen on some other shields on the Column too. It could be a stylysed Greek letter M or P. There are lots of Batavian soldiers that have Greek names in the Vindolanda tablets.


Interestingly the soldier at the rear left is what our OLD shield design was based upon! A very old photo too.. :wink:

[Robert]

Thanks, Adrian! This one which will go on the shield for sure. Nice shape. Was on the verge of painting the cresents. Pheeh!

[Peroni]

There's another fur-wrapped auxiliary in this scene... Not too clear a picture but it's the soldier on the right. Nice fringe on the tunic hem possibly?

[Paullus Scipio]

Adrian/Peroni wrote:-

There's another fur-wrapped auxiliary in this scene... Not too clear a picture but it's the soldier on the right. Nice fringe on the tunic hem possibly?

....I think it more likely that this is the typical'dagged' edge to his mail armour, and that the clear line below it denotes his tunic hem..... :?

Robert wrote:-

Thanks, Adrian! This one which will go on the shield for sure. Nice shape. Was on the verge of painting the cresents. Pheeh!

....a slightly different interpretation of this shield device can be seen as number (lxxiv) on Folkert's post on the 'Auxilia shields, what options are there?' thread......or I can send a larger sketch if you PM me a normal e-mail address ( difficult to use RAT because of pixel image limits)

[Tarbicus]

Paul, get an account at http://photobucket.com/ where you can upload and link to images up to 1024 pixels wide.

[Praefectusclassis]

And at RAT the size limit is 1200*800... Ezthumbnails is your friend.

[Paullus Scipio]

Tks, Jim and Jasper....I forgot I had Easythumbnails!.....Here you go Robert...my original 1977 sketch of this shield....soryy the bottom of the sketch vanished over the years but the design is symmetrical....

[Robert Vermaat]

Robert wrote:-

Wheeler and others suggest this very weapon as this 'hasta' (yes, I know, it's a generic name) came into use for the regular infantry from the 3rd c. onwards.
The description of compact infantry sounds very much like the description of Late Roman infantry in synaspismos, before opening up the ranks and using the spatha.

.....I can't speak for writers of the Greek East deliberately using what may well have been archaic terms like 'synapsismos', because they saw them in 'ancient' manuals, nor, over such a time scale, can one confidently assert that weaponry did not change under 'germanic' influence.....but I have strong doubts, as you know. :wink:

I merely used the word ‘synaspismos’ as a technical term, Vegetius describes such a close formation as each soldier occupying a space of 3 ft. Later manuals continue to describe such a close formation, which is neither archaic (a formation where shields touch rim to rim or overlap is by no mean alien to Roman formations from time to time), nor does anyone suggest that this would have been a Germanic influence.

I don’t see why we shouldn’t confidently argue that weaponry changed under Germanic influence. Any argument to the contrary would mean accepting Germanic influence on military clothing, military terminology, military tactics, but denying that any influence existed where weaponry was concerned.
Of course, absolute proof is (as always) impossible to obtain, but it sure looks strange to accept the rest of the influence but to deny just one aspect.

But you are surely entitled to your personal opinion, I would not dare argue with that. :wink:

The fact is, we just don't have enough information (indeed very little literary evidence at all?)as to what weapons 3C AD Roman Infantry carried, though pila and spear or lancea heads continue to be found in the archaeological record ( see e.g. Bishop and Coulston "Roman Military Equipment" ch7). In Sir Mortimer Wheeler's day, even less was known, hence such speculation.

No-one would suggest that Roman weaponry did not begin to change during the third century though.
And since no spear shafts have turned up, no-one can argue for a specific length belonging to those spearheads. I would say that leaves room for discussion. :wink:

Certainly in Arrian's day, no-one would suggest the the Army had any significant 'germanic' influence....

No one would indeed argue about ‘significant’ Germanic influence during Arrian’s day, but then neither did I…. :wink:
But Germanic troops were used in the Roman army as early as Julius Caesar, and retaining (at least some of) their specific abilities and tactics. The Batavians swam better than Romans, Caesar’s allies operated together with cavalry. The man in your picture may have retained part of his military dress, and maybe part of his weaponry. Or he may have used something from Roman inventory, as Wheeler argues.

.. so he almost certainly didn't mean 'a long cavalry spear' when he translated some common Roman weapon as Kontos . The evidence for it just isn't there, as we have discussed elsewhere.... lol:

No-one argues either that Arrian was thinking of a ‘long cavalry spear’ when he wrote ‘kontos’, that’s just you Paul, no-one else. Which I keep finding odd, because otherwise you argue (rightly, I say) for other weapons that meanings can change, yet your ‘kontos’ always remains a 12-ft cavalry spear throughout the Roman period… :wink:

So yes, I agree with you, the evidence is indeed not there. Nor does anyone say that it is. lol:

But others do accept that the word ‘kontos’ could also mean a thrusting spear of less cumbersome length. And when I see your very interesting reconstruction from Trajan’s Column, that infantryman seems to carry what other are thinking about, a thrusting spear of considerable length. Not too long before Arrian wrote, either. :wink: