Login

02-17-2005, 11:27 PM

What writing was put on the front of the scutum(if any writing at all). I have seen things like LEG XI and other legion numbers. What is the historical value of these markings? were they common? What exactly would be written on them? spatha190

02-18-2005, 04:02 AM

To my knowledge, there's not a single peice of evidence showing something inside the tabulum, legion number or otherwise. Nor has there ever been a legion number or writing painted anywhere on the front surface of the shield. 
 
However... 
 
We do know that the shields were marked with various information at different times, if not where exactly. Vegetius mentions the legionary's name and cohort (but not legion), a shield boss was found with a legionary's name (and that of his century or centurion, I believe) scratched into it, and so forth. So that Roman legionaries marked their gear is an established fact. 
 
We also surmise that much of the sculptural evidence was originally painted to make it look realistic, the same as was done with statues. There are numerous reliefs showing, for example, shoes with a raised, central ridge up over the top of the foot, indicating them to be caligae; but without the latticework normally accompanying a caliga depiction. In those instances, the strapping was probably painted on, and has long since flaked off. The same may be true for shield designs, although in all fairness, most of the sculpted shields I am aware of (Trajan's, et al.) already have the unit designs carved into them. 
 
Then there's the tabulum shape itsef: it is, quite simply, a nametag. You find them throughout the Roman world, over doorways, on walls, around dogs' necks in mosaics, on soldier's equipment, etc. (Interestingly, you also see them on early [Roman-inspired] US sculpture, again always serving as a nametag of some sort.) 
 
The tabulum on the shield as reenactors portray it is copied from the famous grave stele of T. Valerius Crispus (late of Legion VIII Augusta). 
 
So, put it all together, and you have an original image of a guy with large tabulae on his shield (on either side of the boss), the fact that this is the Roman "nametag" shape, and literary evidence that soldiers marked their shields with names, units, etc. Reenactors have added all this up, and subsequently standardized what may have in fact been a single shield design from a single legionary, and made it standard throughout the reenacting world. 
 
Some units, LEG II AUG UK, LEG XX USA, and most auxiliary reenactors, for example, have resisted the temptation to emblazon their legion name across their shields. These units have adopted real shield designs seen on monuments instead, although they're usually no where near as flashy as the reenactor-inpired ones (esp. II AUG... reeeeeaally plain, n/o!). But, now another fact looms up: we're fairly certain different units had different logos. So, if II AUG has the famous yellow-squiggles in the corner motif, then any unit NOT II AUG would not want to adopt the same design. Consequently, they make up their own, usually borrowing bits from different designs here and there to make it unique. 
 
But they almost always incorporate those big tabulae originally seen on the Crispus shield, regardless of what else they have on there. 
 
Me personally, I'm not so sure the soldier's name didn't go there... after all, the design clearly denotes what unit, so a unit designator is redundant. But swiftly identifying your shield from 4,999 just like it, that may have been closer to the truth. Just my thoughts. 
 
Vale, 
Darius

Caius Fabius · 02-18-2005, 10:41 PM

If I recall correctly, Dan Peterson's LEG XIV shield design is an actual copy of the LEG XIV shield design found on a stele. 
 
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer

***Praefectusclassis*** · 02-18-2005, 11:06 PM

Yup, it comes from the stone of Gnaeus Musius. Greets 
 
Jasper

Tarbicus · 02-21-2005, 09:34 AM

This is the actual quote from Vegetius' De Re Militari: 
 
"Lest the soldiers in the confusion of battle should be separated from their comrades, every cohort had its shields painted in a manner peculiar to itself. The name of each soldier was also written on his shield, together with the number of the cohort and century to which he belonged" 
 
Jim/Tarbicus

***Praefectusclassis*** · 02-21-2005, 03:06 PM

True, and in this case he might be right. In general, however, Vegetius isn't known as the most dependable ancient source. Greets 
 
Jasper

**Robert Vermaat** · 02-21-2005, 05:50 PM

Quote:<hr>In general, however, Vegetius isn't known as the most dependable ancient source. <hr> 
I'm of the opinion that this depends on which topic you're questioning Vegetius. 
For a long time it has been held commonplace that Vegetius was a source for the 1st, 2nd c. legionary structure. And (of course I would say) a great deal of this was found wanting. And as a result (which also happens all too often), most if not all of what he wrote was judged untrustworthy. 
 
However, if his 'ancient' legion would have been a mid- to late 3rd century one, some of what Vegetius wrote may less wanting. Personally, I find his writings about the 4th c. army not at all bad. 
 
But even if Vegetius is a difficult source, and some parts of his books are indeed nonsense, I find that nontheless no reason to disqualify him as a generall untrustworthy source. Valete, 
Valerius/Robert 
[url=http://www.fectio.org.uk/" target="top]fectienses seniores[/url]

***Praefectusclassis*** · 02-21-2005, 07:01 PM

Ok, Robert, you're right. Maybe I was a little too fast with that claim there. Perhaps I should've said that he can and should be used with care. And that in this case, Tacitus story about the soldiers disguising themselves with shields of another unit was a more trustworthy argument. Greets 
 
Jasper

Lucius Aurelius Metellus · 02-21-2005, 10:10 PM

I tend to agree with Tarbicus and Severus; the insignia painted on the front is the actual indicator of the specific military unit, so it makes sense that the tabulae ansata on the front would contain the name or number of the soldier's cohort, and then the other perhaps containing his name. Lucius Aurelius Metellus, draconarius, Secunda Brittanica 
www.greeneknightforge.bravehost.com

Tarbicus · 02-21-2005, 10:19 PM

Quote:<hr>the insignia painted on the front is the actual indicator of the specific military unit, so it makes sense that the tabulae ansata on the front would contain the name or number of the soldier's cohort, and then the other perhaps containing his name.<hr> 
 
Okay, we have no absolutely reliable way of knowing what went where with which colour on a shield. But, how about this: 
 
Colour & imagery = Legion 
Tabula part #1 = Cohort 
Tabula part #2 = individual 
 
So many things could be deduced from those 3 bits of info on the shield, there could be no confusion as to who was holding it and where they belonged. It's not as if they were the SAS. I think it's time for more Photoshop examples (sorry Vortigern) Edited by: <A HREF=http://p200.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=tarbicus>Tarbicus</A> at: 2/21/05 11:44 pm

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me