Login

07-16-2002, 12:32 PM

Other than as a means of execution was the practice of headhunting widespread in the Roman army and would it have been chiefly limited to auxiliaries? 
 
On a similar note, I've been reading a bit on the 'French and Indian War' and learned that scalping was practised not only by the Native Americans but also by the French and British. This has caused me to wonder if the practise was brought to the New World by Europeans or if it was picked-up by the Europeans from the Native Americans. If of European or eastern origin I wonder if Roman soldiers would've taken scalps. Are there references? <a href=http://pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm6.showMessage?topicID=53.topic>Rules For Posting

07-16-2002, 01:18 PM

Salve, 
 
Headhunting is attested for Roman troops, but not on a very regular basis. The volones chopped heads off at the battle at Beneventum (Livius, 24.15) and Roman auxiliary soldiers are depicted as bringing severed heads to Trajan and clasping heads in their mouths on Trajan's column. Tiberius Claudius Maximus had it recorded that he brought the head of Decebalus to the emperor. It has been linked to pre-Roman traditions by troops of foreign descent (eg in Goldsworthy's The Roman army at war). Decapitation of important enemy figures may have served primarily to serve as confirmation of their decease, eg in the case of the emperor Galba and of Decebalus. 
 
Regards, 
 
Sander van Dorst

Matthew Amt · 07-16-2002, 01:34 PM

Ave! 
Hey, good lunchtime topic, hee hee! As I recall (been a few years since I dipped into the 17th century), scalping was indeed introduced by New World colonists, possibly the Dutch but don't quote me on that. There were bounties being offered for killing Indians, and it was easier to tote around scalps than whole heads or bodies as "proof of purchase". Individual identification wasn't necessary. The Indians then picked up the habit partly in retaliation, and also to have neato decorations (and proof of prowess) for their attire and accoutrements. 
 
In the case of the Romans (as well as Japanese and many other cultures), taking the whole head was insurance that Yes, it's the right guy, and Yes, he IS dead. There are records of people surviving a scalping. Major bummer, that, plus it makes it harder for the next guy who wants to "lift your hair"! 
 
Valete, and keep your helmets on, 
 
Matthew/Quintus

Richomeres · 07-16-2002, 03:07 PM

Somewhere I saw a reference about Scythians scalping their dead enemies. Unfortunately I cannot lay my hands on the publication. And of course there were the Celts, who were pretty fond of head hunting. 
 
Helge

07-16-2002, 03:10 PM

Just as a side note, during WW 2 there was a unit of strictly Navahoe and I belive Apache? Indians that were notorious for scalping german soldiers, and leaving the bodies to rot. Had quite a pyschological impact on the germans, and they absolutely feared this Native American Indian unit. 
 
"Remember, pillage first....then burn."

Richomeres · 07-16-2002, 03:14 PM

Tiberius, 
 
you are alway a source of delight and tasteful details.

Caius Fabius · 07-16-2002, 03:49 PM

"Just as a side note, during WW 2 there was a unit of strictly Navahoe and I belive Apache? Indians that were notorious for scalping german soldiers, and leaving the bodies to rot. Had quite a pyschological impact on the germans, and they absolutely feared this Native American Indian unit" 
 
Documentation on this please? I would like to know more, for several reasons. 
 
The 45th Infantry Division, from Oklahoma had many native American soldiers, from many different tribal affiliations. They were not kept in separate tribal groupings to my knowledge. (Code talkers being a noted exception.) 
Some of the "elite" troops of the US Army wore "Mohawk" haircuts and "warpaint" whether or not they were of native American ancestry. 
Mutilation of enemy bodies and leaving enemy soldiers' bodies unburied to decompose was a factor on all fronts in WW2 and probably by most ethnic and national groups in most conflicts. 
 
My histories seem to show that the North Eastern native Americans were introduced to "scalping" by the French and British, who paid bounties for each other's scalps. Over the next 100+ years this practise spread west-ward. American "settlers" were known to just ride up and shoot a native American and take his or her scalp, so that they could brag about killing an "injun" or "redskin". The native Americans responded, and began taking trophies of enemy scalps. It was considered much better for many plains "Indian" warriors to mutilate the corpse of their enemy, so that he would have infirmity in the next world. "Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987

07-16-2002, 06:04 PM

Salve, 
 
Scenes with decapitated heads on Trajan's column include scene (Lehmann-Hartleben) 24, 56 72, 147, all depicted with soldiers of the auxiliary type. Adamclissi metope 31 also shows a decapitated foe. On the column of Marcus Aurelius prisoners are beheaded, this time by auxiliaries in German dress (longtrousers, long sleeved tunics) (Ferris, Enemies of Rome plate 42). 
 
Regards, 
 
Sander van Dorst

Daniel S Peterson · 07-16-2002, 07:18 PM

Contrary to PC Native American revisionism, yes Matt, the Indians took scalps long before the arrival of the Europeans. Read the journals of the earliest European explorers. The difference was, the original Indian method often removed the entire face. This was too grisley for the europeans, and when bounties were established to have one tribe of natives exterminate another, only the "scalp" of hair was considered adequate proof of a "kill". Some of these early "face scalps" can still be seen in museums. Many native american tribes delighted in torture. One of the greatest compliments a chief could bestow on a visiting dignitary, was having a live enemy to be gruesomely tortured and mutilated for their amusement over dinner. As far as headhunting is concerned, don't forget the huge monuments made of human skulls of the Aztecs (not to mention the ripping out of the still-beating hearts of their prisoners, by the tens of thousands. 
 
Dan.

07-16-2002, 07:39 PM

Caius Fabius, 
 
If I can remember, the book was a compilation of stories told by veteran snipers of WW1,WW2, Korea, Viet Nam, and Beirut. My friend who is a cop, has this book, so when he comes home for some time off, I'll track it down, and provide at least the title and the author. (the book also contained some stories by Carlos Hathcock, the marine sniper with the most recorded kills for the Viet Nam war, a very good read.) "Remember, pillage first....then burn."

Caius Fabius · 07-16-2002, 08:38 PM

Of course, the Spanish explorers record the Red River cannibal tribes as well, and some of the southern and north western tribes removed the whole skin, or at least the flesh from the head, as trophies. Is that what you are talking about Dan? The North Eastern Iroquois "confederation" practiced ritual torture, burning alive followed by ritual feasting as early as the first contacts recorded by Europeans, but I didn't know that they kept "scalps" as trophies. Even though this is really off topic, unless we can find the Roman colonies in North America. 
 
Tiberius Lantanius, you can e-mail me the book title "off list" if you wish. Thanks. "Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987

07-17-2002, 01:09 AM

I have to defend the Celts' supposed 'fondness' for headhunting, here. 
 
It was not a sporting thing, as many believe. 
 
In the book The Ancient World of the Celts, historian Peter Beresford Ellis quotes Roman sources: 
 
Quote:<hr> They cut off the heads of enemies slain in battle and attach them to the necks of their horses. The bloodstained spoils they hand over to their attendants and carry off as booty, while striking up a paean and singing a song of victory; and they nail up those first fruits upon their houses... They embalm in cedar oil the heads of the most distinguished enemies, and preserve them carefully in a chest and display them with pride to strangers, saying that for this head one of their ancestors, or his father, or the man himself, refused the offer of a large sum of money. They say that some of them boast that they refused the weight of the head in gold.<hr> 
 
Mr. Ellis goes on to explain: 
 
"But the Celts believed that the soul reposed in the head. Strabo, among others, says that the Celts believed that the human soul was indestructible. Thus the head was venerated as the source and power of the human spirit. It was a mark of great respect to take the head of one they admired, to embalm it in cedar oil and offer it up in a temple or keep it as a prized possession. Dr. Simon James, however, argues: 'By keeping the head of an enemy, they may have thought that the spirit was also controlled.' (Boudicca's argument: Why did he feel the need to argue it? He said basically the same thing, in fewer words!) We are told by Livy that the Boii, having killed the Roman consul Lucius Postimius, in 216 B.C., took his head to their temple. The Celts also put heads into sacred rivers as votive offerings." 
 
"It is quite wrong to interpret this as evidence that the Celts were 'head hunters'. They did not go out looking for heads. Decapitation only took place after the victims were slain in battle, or died, and then only if they were deemed worthy of respect." 
 
"Archeological evidence from various sources supports the information on temple offerings. A number of skulls have been found in Celtic shrines, for example at Roquepertuse, Nages, and Entremont. At Roquepertuse in Provence there is a skull portico dating to the 4th and 3rd centuries B.C. The skulls in this portico are of adult men, most of whom were obviously slain in battle as scars and sword damage to the bone demonstrate. The sanctuary itself was constructed as early as the 6th century [B.C.] but fell into disuse after the Roman conquest of the area in the 2nd century B.C. At Entremont, capital of the Saluvii, fragments of a statue have been recovered and a reconstruction shows a figure seated in the lotus position bearing on its lap six severed heads. The figure wears a conical war helmet and a torc around his neck." 
 
"Entremont was destroyed by the Romans in 124 B.C. Excavations of the shrine have shown that it was on the highest part of the hill and approached by a pathway lined with statues of heroes and heroines. Within this shrine stood a tall pillar carved with twelve heads. Entremont is remarkable for a large array of severed head sculpture." 
 
"One of the most interesting severed head sculptures comes from Noves in southern France, a stone sculpture dating to the third or second century B.C. It is of a fearsome-looking scaly beast which squats on its hind legs. It has apparently devoured a human being, for an arm protrudes from its mouth. Under its forepaws it holds the severed heads of two people who are beared and apparently wearing caps." 
 
"Heads have also been uncovered at a shrine in Cosgrove, in Northants, while a coin of the British king Cunobelinus [1st century, A.D.] shows a warrior brandishing a human head that he has taken after a battle. Skulls have been found placed in pits, and some excavated from fortresses where they had been fixed on poles on the walls or over gateways." 
 
"A large number of skulls from the Celtic period have been discovered in the River Thames at London, at the point where the Walbrook flows into it. The Thames was probably considered, like most rivers, to be sacred. But why were the votive offerings placed near the mouth of the Walbrook?" 
 
"When the Anglo-Saxons took over London, the evidence is that they did not occupy the old city, but built more to the north, in the vicinity of Moorgate. It is obvious, simply from the place-name, that the Celts clung to the area of the Walbrook, hence Weala-broc, the brook of the foreigners. Welisc (foreigners) was the name that the Anglo-Saxons gave to the British Celts. (Boudicca's note: Seems odd, since the Anglo-Saxons were the invaders.) But why did the Celts hang on here of all places? And why were there so many skulls and other votive offerings? [The Battersea shield, and the Thames helm were also discovered closeby.] It is clear that this was a sanctuary which the Celts were loathe to leave. Fascinatingly, the major gate from the city, facing on to the river, was called Bile's gate (Billingsgate) and Bile was a god of the dead who transported souls to the Otherworld. The Celtic dead of the city were probably taken out of the gate to commence their last journey on the Thames, just as their fellow Indo-Europeans are carried to the Ganges for burial. Maybe just the heads of the important citizens were taken through the gate to be deposited at the sanctuary now marked by the Walbrook?" 
 
"The mythological traditions of Ireland and Wales are full of references to the importance of the head. Heads were endowed with the ability to live on once separated from the body, confirming the idea of the soul reposing there. In the Mabinogion, Bran Bendigeidfran is mortally wounded by a poison. He orders his men to cut off his head before the poison reaches it, and to take the head back to Britain. On the journey, the head talks, jokes and gives advice to them." 
 
"Heads often talk once stricken from the body. (Boudicca's note: ) The famous decapitation game in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight has its origin in Celtic myth and appears in one of the Red Branch tales with Cuchulainn in the role later assumed by Gawain. Cuchulainn takes the heads of his enemies without compunction, and, like the Celts mentioned by Diodorus Siculus, he hangs them from his chariot: 
Quote:<hr> '...terribly, he comes. He has in the chariot the bloody heads of his enemies.'<hr>" 
 
"This reverence for the head was not displaced by Christianity for many centuries. The doorway from Dysert O'Dea and the doorway from Clonfert, Ireland, both Romanesque, display a preoccupation with heads. Professor Barry Cunliffe has remarked that it is often impossible to distinguish pre-Christian and Christian Celtic head carvings. The gargoyles, corbels, and other decorative forms on churches, particularly down to the 11th and 12th centuries A.D., owed much to the Celtic belief that the soul dwelt in the head." 
 
 
From that, it is probably more accurate to conclude that it was for spiritual and reasons of war, that the Celts collected heads. Mostly male (though I dare say that female warriors of merit probably had their heads removed, as well), and well-respected. Not as a pastime, or thoughtlessly. 
 
Boudicca 
 
 
<center>What bargains we have made, we have kept. And as the dogs of the hours close in,</center>
<center>nothing can be taken from us but our lives.</center>
 
<center> "Victory" - Charles Bukowski</center>

07-17-2002, 11:31 AM

One unfortunate Byzantine Emperor (Nikephorus I think) lost a battle again the Bulgars (betrayed) and had his head cut off and turned into a drinking cup buy the Bulgar King, Krum!! 
 
Beat that! 
 
Celer.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me