What Roman Soldiers Wear

[Vincula]

Some of you guys can probly answer this: http://antoninuspius.blogspot.com/

[Gaius Colletti]

I'm not sure if I understand, the article doesn't ask any questions per se, are you asking what ROman Soldiers wore?

[arminius]

I think “Antonius Pius” wants to know what information in the book is actually outdated.
Since the last 25 years of research are not considered in the book some stuff will be most likely outdated. But in order to put my finger on any details I have to see the book first.
For one thing, I don’t think anybody would nowadays show a centurion in musculata like it is done on the cover. RR was a genius, no doubt, but he could base his findings only on the facts known at the time.

[Paullus Scipio]

I think “Antonius Pius” wants to know what information in the book is actually outdated.
Since the last 25 years of research are not considered in the book some stuff will be most likely outdated. But in order to put my finger on any details I have to see the book first.
For one thing, I don’t think anybody would nowadays show a centurion in musculata like it is done on the cover. RR was a genius, no doubt, but he could base his findings only on the facts known at the time.

Indeed, the 'Centurion' figure shown on the cover and the plate on P.20 was an oddity - perhaps the most notable in the book, for it 'married'a body derived from statues of the Imperial family, complete with senior Officer's attributes such as the elaborate musculata with 'Gorgon' applique, the 'Knot of Heracles' girdle, and the eagle-pommelled 'parazonium'; with a bearded head wearing an Imperial Gallic helmet - perhaps a most unlikely combination.

This is not something new, for it was noted at the time in 1976, in a review IIRC, as being highly unlikely. In addition, as is so often the case, with damaged sculpture there is usually more than one interpretation - for example the 'Hamian archer' can be interpreted in several ways other than Russell-Robinson's reconstruction..... With hindsight,R-R's idea that Lamellar armour was widely used by cavalry ( he shows 3 out of 4 cavalry plates wearing lamellar armour) was perhaps a product of his earlier expertise with oriental armour.

Another real 'nit-pick' apparent now is that the barbed 'pilum' type socketed head that R-R called a 'gaesum' is now recognised ( from a number of similar examples coming to light) as more likely to be a Germanic 'angon.'

On the whole though, unlike many earlier studies, this one has stood the test of time well - more modern criticisms could be levelled at R-R's 'magnum opus' "Arms and Armour of Imperial Rome", such as the helmet typology ( many helmets labelled 'cavalry' are now thought by some to be more likely to be infantry) and other aspects - yet this too has stood the test of time well.

[D B Campbell]

the 'Centurion' figure shown on the cover and the plate on P.20 was an oddity - perhaps the most notable in the book, for it 'married'a body derived from statues of the Imperial family, complete with senior Officer's attributes such as the elaborate musculata with 'Gorgon' applique, the 'Knot of Heracles' girdle, and the eagle-pommelled 'parazonium'; with a bearded head wearing an Imperial Gallic helmet - perhaps a most unlikely combination.

Indeed, a curious combination for an auxiliary centurion. What a pity that Robinson didn't write an Osprey-style description, listing his sources. Ironically, the same figure is repeated by Ron Embleton (the illustrator) in Michael Simkins' The Roman Army from Hadrian to Constantine (Osprey, 1979), unfortunately again with no explanation.

Of course, the costume was less curious, perhaps, in Robinson's era, when the Epidaurus stele was thought to represent a centurion (still listed as such, e.g., in R.W. Davies, Service in the Roman Army, eds. Breeze & Maxfield, 1989, p. 169). The Epidaurus stele (it can probably be found in the imagebase?) depicts a similar muscle cuirass with the waist ribbon (Robinson's cingulum) often supposed to denote high rank. I would suggest that this was Robinson's prototype, with the addition of a medusa head, similar to the one on the Sextus Adgennius Macrinus monument (known to Robinson, Armour plate 425).

If this costume denotes high rank, would a legionary centurionate be high enough? Interesting thought. Robinson noted that the muscle cuirass is depicted on the well-known naval relief from Palestrina (or Praeneste?), where it seems to be worn by marines, not high-ranking officer types. They do not, of course, have the waist ribbon.

This is not something new, for it was noted at the time in 1976, in a review IIRC, as being highly unlikely.

I have never seen the book reviewed. Do you have an accurate citation?