Scutum on Galerius Arch

[F. MAXIMILIANVS ITALICVS]

Hello, whats your interpretation of soldiers with scutum depicted on the arch of Galerius in Thessaloniki? I´ve red that somebody indenified these soldiers as non Romnas, probably Armenians. The arch was erected in the end of the 3rd century by tetrarch Galerius.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

The ones wearing the Deir El Medineh Helmet? Actually that would be interesting, because I recently saw a coin of an Armenian King wearing a Deir El Medineh that dates to roughly 450ish.

Although I'm pretty sure it DOES depict Romans.

[Nathan Ross]

These are the rectantular shields shown in one of the battle friezes, which appear identical to the 'classic' legionary scutum, but are apparently being used by the enemy troops, while the Romans themselves use large oval shields...



H. P. Laubscher (Der Reliefschmuck des Galeriusbogens in Thessaloniki, 1975) believed these soldiers were Armenians, apparently because their equipment appears so unusual and distinctive, and the battle appears to be portrayed in a rocky landscape. The problem with this interpretation might be that the Armenians at the time were supposedly Roman allies, and fighting with Galerius to evict the Persian occupiers from their country!

Margaret S Pond Rothman, in 'The Thematic Organization of the Panel Reliefs on the Arch of Galerius' (American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 81, 4, 1977) instead supposes that the figures are indeed Persian infantry, and that the scene represents the final battle of the campaign.

It seems that nobody has any better theories than that! The campaign was fought in AD298, but the arch probably not constructed until c302. The men with the rectangular shields are certainly fighting against the Romans, not for them - unless they're intended to represent a rival anti-Roman Armenian faction (still using old-style Roman equipment?), I think we'd have to assume they were Persians of some sort.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Didn't the Persians have some rectangular shields?

[AMELIANVS]

I believe it is quite possible it is indeed Persian infantry(because Evan yes-their infanty is reported with something like this).Most of all it gives me quite clear impression(together with late 3rd century coins or Arch of Constantine who had no problems with recycling art with such shields)this type was at least still in use by early 4th century and perhaps still even in limited use by the Roman army itself.

[AMELIANVS]

Hello, whats your interpretation of soldiers with scutum depicted on the arch of Galerius in Thessaloniki? .

Massimiliano keep in mind that term "Scutum" does not reffered exclusively to rectangular type od shields but to any shield in generall.Those Roman soldiers with big oval shields also have scutum despite their oval shape.Deeply into medieval times some Roman("Byzantine" )infantry was still called scutatoi although certainly equiped with oval not rectangular shields.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Yeah, by the late 2nd century Scutum referred to any shield, there was no longer "Scutum" and "Clipeus"

[Titvs Statilivs Castvs]

Was that distinction made by the Romans before that, then?

[Nathan Ross]

Sassanian Persian infantry did apparently use a rectangular shield; Ammianus describes one made of wicker or sticks covered in rawhide.

Some people (Simon James, for example) see the three or four fragmentary wood and leather shields found at Dura Europos as possibly Persian (although he notes that similar items have a long history in the area, and have been found as far away as Siberia!). These are flat at one end and sort of pointed at the other:



Trouble is, the shields on the Galerius arch clearly have central semicircular bosses and are used legionary fashion, whereas the wicker and leather ones from Dura were fairly lightweight and had no boss.

It could be that the artists working on the frieze heard that the Persians used rectangular shields and, never having seen a real one, simply depicted a rectangular Roman shield instead... I'm never too keen on these 'ignorant artists' explanations though... so it could just as easily be an accurate depiction of a Roman-style rectangular scutum being used by the enemies of Rome...

[Flavivs Aetivs]

As far as I know, yes it was. The Oval Auxiliary shields (which were markedly different from Late Roman shields in that they were narrower and flat) were each called a Clipeus, while the Rectangular or semi-rectangular Legionary shields were called Scuta. However, it is known some Legions used the Clipeus too, and thought some Auxiliaries used the Scutum.

[Titvs Statilivs Castvs]

As far as I know, yes it was. The Oval Auxiliary shields (which were markedly different from Late Roman shields in that they were narrower and flat) were each called a Clipeus, while the Rectangular or semi-rectangular Legionary shields were called Scuta.

Source?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Wikipedia gives a few good ones:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipeus#Roman_Use
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scutum_%28s...29#History

[caiusbeerquitius]

lol

[Titvs Statilivs Castvs]

That's not evidence that the Romans used the terms 'scutum' and 'clipeus' like we do nowadays, Evan.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

No, I'm saying that Wikipedia gives sources in the text I linked to. Bishop and Coulston, Hugh Elton, etc.