Why We Can't Trust Ancient Depictions of Roman Soldiers
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 03. 2024
- In this video, Mark Hatch from the Roman Military Research Society explains why the stereotypical depiction of Roman legionaries and auxiliaries can't entirely be trusted. While the Hollywood portrayal of uniform Roman legionaries wearing identical armour might have its basis in Roman propaganda art, the reality is that all types of Roman soldier would have carried a range of armour and equipment.
If you enjoyed this Short, check out the full length episode and please consider supporting the channel at: ko-fi.com/survivehistory
Well he's honest, I wish more people would say I don't know rather resort to wild speculation.
It's either Aliens or Atlantean who gave them with enough lorica segmentatae to pose for the column.
Yup. Doctors and scientists would benefit from some of this humility as well. Most of what I've ever heard come out of a doctor's mouth was wrong. But said with absolute confidence. Eroded my respect for them down to zero.
@@ranvabclcpfft, right?
Curious if you feel the same regarding the "scientist/doctor" comment above? Or, "na we should trust them tho?"
@@drew7155Depends on the doctor/scientist, depends on what they're saying. If it's a sole quack claiming something outlandish with no evidence to back it up, then it's fair to assume they are wrong. If multiple doctors/scientists all conduct the same experiments and come to the same conclusions, make reasonable and provable claims, and cite trustworthy peer-reviewed sources, then odds are that they are correct about what they are claiming. But even then they might get a few key details wrong. Be open to accepting new information and keep an open mind but also maintain a reasonable level of skepticism, especially when dealing with authority figures and powerful institutions.
“We don’t really know”
My respect for him as a reenactor just went up 500%
"i know nothing at all" is often the feeling of the most literate people
Most us can agree that Trajan's column depicts the Roman legions like Trajan wanted it to look at that moment in time.
Oh crap
To be fair Apollodorus was there in the war to witness it, and the soldiers would see the column after the war. It couldn't have been THAT different
But what's said in the video is true
It's like a military recruitment poster. You show the guy piloting the F22, not the guy inspecting the fuel tanks.
@@NeutroniummAlchemistI don’t know why but I get your words.
Different legions, different resources, different standards.
I can tell you straight-up that from a production standpoint, carving or painting big broad smooth bands of lamellar armor takes FAR LESS TIME than making stuff look like tiny scales or link of chain maille.
Propagandists in the Roman era "Whatever, it's armor, people will get the idea that we have armored dudes in Dacia."
Modern historians: "Omg what could this mean?!"
Such a good, obvious point yet I would not have thought about it
Honestly, that's one of the first thoughts I had, and I think it's a fair guess since it's not reading into things too much. People will be people, no matter what time. 😂
@@SoiBoi_Kelda1059 Lol, this is why the career of "experimental archaeologist" has become so genuinely vital for the understanding of long-lost history. Sometimes you just gotta *do* a thing to understand *how & why* it was done that way. After all, the hairstyles of the Vestal Virgins stumped & mystified both archaeologists & historians for a very long time, until a *hairdresser* figured it out!
I think we can get a decent idea by looking at more recent history.
Consider how WWII propaganda footage from Nazi Germany showed the Wehrmact as a cutting edge motorized/mechanized force with tanks and halftracks everywhere. However, we know that the large majority of their army was horse-drawn, foot-powered infantry right through the course of the war. And still the former is the popular understanding of the WWII German military.
Imagine how much more prevalent that effect is when looking at ancient history where almost all the records we have are propaganda of some sort.
E
Propaganda works really well!
A very good example!
@Nitroaereus
Wait till you learn how many portraits of royalty were about as realistic as modern Photoshop.
Maybe. But the armor was deducted from the pay abd purcharsed by the soldiers themselves. Mail armor was more comfortable and in some aspects also more protective. It was less prone to rusting and more easily repairable.
That is a gorgeous suit of scale!
E
Honestly i think of reporting this shorts because of Pornographic imaging when i saw that marvelous scalemail.
@@VojislavMoranic LOL, that’s a good one! xD
Roman architecture and uniforms have always been amazing
Look how often modern media gets current military stuff wrong even with how easy it is to look that stuff up. We really expect ancient artists to be better?
Imagine being the artist or supervisor of Trajans column and being asked, "sir, should I put segmentar, hamata or squamata amor on this man" for hundreds or a thousand times. Answer is clear. Plus, other monuments show both legionaries and auxiliaries using the same armors.
It would’ve taken more effort to depict scale or mail. All the rings. Vs basically drawing lines
What I do know is that the legionaries had a model of the ideal gear the Roman citizens would recognize but, in the real world, legionaries would be equipped from stocks that could be sourced more consistently especially when they had been stationed out on the frontiers for some time. Roman equipment could vary not only because of supply but also function.
An artist will have limited access to what he new but not necessarily know all the variations and styles being adopted across the empire.
I would venture a guess that individual legionaries also had considerable leeway as to what they wanted to wear - if they could get it. Many enemy warriors used captured Roman armor as well. Why not the singular Roman soldier?
In any event: It doesn't matter. We know they wore all contemporary types, with helmets being passed down from father to son to grandson - or just picked up from the armorer's stores.
@@user-fu9vj9ix3g Rome standardized everything for their armies, from the length of the length of the gladius, to the size of the shield, to the size and shape of arrowheads and javelins. I doubt they allowed anyone to wear what they wanted, unless they were a high ranking officer.
@@mrvk39 Yes, within the designs that were in use - or were in prior use by a past retired or killed soldier. But there was considerable variation in body armor and helmets. And, at a time when it was considered barbaric to wear trousers, the legions did just that. No one knows what color was the standard, or even if there was a standard color of cloak or long shirt. Most likely these items were purchased locally and varied widely in hue.
All soldiers throughout history get issued their initial gear, but it quickly changes to suit the needs of the individual in the field.
@@mrvk39 they bought most of their own equipment, so you've also fallen for some historical gimmick. They were uniformed, yes, but they had an array of shoes, cloaks, and other items because they were shipped by family members or bought while marching. Shoes from Rome are going to be different from the shoes they got off the market in Spain.
@@lastsong7159 US army can also buy their own boots and other equipment but it still HAS to be standardized. I am not fallen for any gimmicks. Any student of history will confirm that large part of success of Rome was standardization of equipment of all kinds, which made logistics and supplies far more efficient than anything the world had seen up to that date.
I'm guessing its to avoid confusion. It makes it clear which is full roman and whose the auxillaries?.
Auxiliaries had their own shields with unique designs and usually had worse or lesser equipment. I might be totally wrong though.
@@THECHEESELORD69 Depends on where they originated. Though they usually used oval shield instead of a scutum. And bronze helmet, and a sleveless lorica hamata body armour. Their shields usually had a markings that tells where they came from.
@@aetius7139 ah ok thanks for telling me!
As someone who works with metal, i would not enjoy a bronze/brass helmet as much as I would a nice iron or steel helmet
at least the brass and bronze would be easier to care for
I had a wool helmet when I was in the Roman army
Look how I turned out
🤪
I had a wool helmet when I was in the Roman army
Look how I turned out
🤪
@@willl7780 Yet the top brass would never have stooped to cleaning their own armour anyway. ;_;
@nightmarethunderfist Brass doorknobs or whatever you're familiar with probably won't tell you much about military bronze at the peak of bronze age technology. High quality bronze, as hard as good iron, could be produced consistently, while iron technology was still in its infancy.
Would you enjoy a slag helmet? =P
@@Meevious as good as iron? You mean better?
Don't need to be historian on this one. In military terms it is called Bbbbbbudget Cuts.
Yes, that's true. The lamellar version was much cheaper and easier to repair. But more restricted in terms of movement, which is why the legionnaires weren't thrilled.
@@gjk282 The segmentata is laminar, not lamellar. The Romans wouldn't start adopting lamellar until a few centuries later around the 4th century or later. I've read mail might be easier and cheaper to repair in the long run even if it was more expensive to make initially - as it is easy to replace a few broken rings that are basically uniformly produced than it is to replace the different types of brass joints/buckles and larger plates that broke/wore down in the segmented armor.
@gjk282 The segmentata is laminar, not lamellar. The Romans wouldn't start adopting lamellar until a few centuries later around the 4th century or later. I've read mail might be easier and cheaper to repair in the long run even if it was more expensive to make initially - as it is easy to replace a few broken rings that are basically uniformly produced than it is to replace the different types of brass joints/buckles and larger plates that broke/wore down in the segmented armor.
@@Intranetusa funny, I wasn't aware of that distinction in English. In my native language, the segmentata is Lamellenpanzer, and I wrongly assumed it would be the same in English. Thanks for the learning opportunity!
@@gjk282 Ah, I didn't realize that laminar and lamellar are treated as the same thing with the same word in German. Thank you for the learning opportunity as well.
I love history. “Things aren’t what they appear, what are they? Idk”. Deciphering the past is the greatest mystery story ever told. It would take a thousand lifetimes to truly appreciate it.
I guess after using mail for some 500 years, the Roman army had thousands of tons of it stockpiled and it was used to equip newly recruited legions or any unit or individual who didn't have immediate access to Lorica Segmentata.
Segmentation also wasn't superior. It's nothing like plate armor from the Middle Ages. Only high ranking officers wore proper plate armor in the Roman army.
It wasn't really much to do with stockpiling armor, especially given it was tailored to individual recruits.
Segmented armor is just MUCH more difficult to make and especially to make en-masse than riveted mail.
All you need for the latter is just a wire, and at that point, even an untrained shop apprentice could finish it, it'd just take him a good amount of time.
In comparison It's not nearly as simple or easy to forge solid bands of iron.
@@joshuabacker2363 there has been some theories that it might not have been that difficult, or long to make segments. Basicly the romans created huge flat metal sheets and just cut up pieces from it, bam segmentata. I dont remember all that much of the theory but apperantly they if they had the capacaty to create these huge flat sheets(which they robably did) it would but really easy to just create piece en masse, and dont have to worry about anything fitting for a specific person as you can just send boxes filled with the segments and the legion blacksmiths or soldiers themselves coukd just make a kit from scratch. Pretty interesting idea, but then again how much were these armours even used. As far as ive seen they seem to have been mostly used in north-eastern europe. Maybe its easier to clamp the segments on over warm thick clothing? Idk really
@@cognitivedisability9864 See, the issue with your theory here, is that making a huge, flat metal sheet is way, way, way, wayyy harder than making individual segments.
@@joshuabacker2363 Its not my theory anyway, I cant remember where I saw or read it so its probably flawed like you mentioned. Thought I could've sworn it was based on some way the romans made large sheets. but maybe it was completely rubbish.
I found it it was a quora question lol. the response on mass production of lorica segmentata: "This has lead some to believe the Romans used rolled iron sheets. There isn’t any evidence of rollers used for this kind of manufacture but it was within their technological capabilities and would to some degree explain the uniform thickness of the metal used."
one key sign that they may have used large sheets to mass produce it is the fact that the thickness of the armour is uniform, instead of most armours being thicker in important areas and thinner in areas that rarely get hit or are less important. Its a waste of material if they hand crafted them to make them of uniform thickness, the fact that the existing examples we have of the segmentata is completely uniform in thickness is a pretty good indication that it was made from sheets. But maybe the examples we have are just of really high quality.
Opulence maybe? The Legionnaire is the Roman citizen and depicting them with richer equipment makes them appear better/more imposing than the Auxiliaries.
Just speculation, we may never know the exact goals of the choice.
Not sure. Mail & lamellar & more labour inducing to make than laminar/segmented armour. Atleast in Asia mail & lamellar were status symbols. In Japan for example the more higher nobles wore lamellar while laminar was of the more lower ones. On top of that many tried to make laminar look like lamellar.
Love the honesty, no speculation just nah dunno tbf
Good stuff. Thank you, centurion!
I remember there being evidence that the lorica segmentata was a cost saving measure and applied primarily to legions in the North West of the empire (think Varus). And it wasn't particularly well received by the legionnaires, for that matter. The hamata was much better for movement.
Soldiers will find something to hate about their gear from time to time. But I think it has to do with money?. Soldiers actually had to pay for a lot of their equipment. Aside from shields, swords, and 2 pila which the state provides. Any gear is deducted from pay. In fact many armours were loaned. And upon retirement, given back to the state, and was given to new recruits. Even the food aside from their basic ration had to be sourced by themselves.
My theory is that legionnaires are shown in their siege equipment: rectangular shields used for testudo and lorica segmentata which wasn't as flexible as other loricae but could better resist a hit from above. I think legionnaires would prefer oval shields and squamatae or hamatae when not conquering.
Artistic license and irregular supply of equipment are most likely.
Trajan switched armor of his forces due to the lethality of the Dacian falx against lorica segmentata. Switched chain/scale distributes the blow's force better.
the biggest thing he did not mention is that the armor change a lot depending on when and where.
the Empire got big and exist for a long time
Didn't Romans have to buy their own armor? I thought the only things they were issued were weapons and a shield.
Depending on the time i believe
early republic yeah, but during the late republic, the principate and later the dominate period the state issued the standar equipment for the roman soldier, excluding auxilia and foreign alae, which usually wore their own equipment
The current working theory is that there weren’t that many regulations on what *type* of armour you wore, just that you wore it. This is based of off accounts of army life as well as the writings of nobles.
The depictions were probably to diversify the soldiers a bit. Maybe show how elite they look with plate cuirasses rather than typical chainmail or scale. There probably could be a bunch of other reasons why units depicted with chainmail might be more common in different examples too.
They found the segmented armor from the battle. Just recently dug up a complete one.
Teutoburg 09. Legends were made
I think the simple answer is that legionaries in segmentata are mostly posted in Rome/Italy while the army that went to Dacia wear mail and scale. That's why the sculptor that made the column thought that all legionaries wear lorica segmentata and only auxilia wear mail.
im not sure...the dacians had beaten rome and were really tough...trajan may have equipped his soldiers better going into dacia...we really dont know...i dont think its crazy to think they were equipped better
It's on the record that the legions sent to take Dacia not only reintroduced more mail and scale than usual, but Trajan and his officers also ordered that greaves, reinforced helmets, and manica, articulated protection for the sword arm, to be produced for protection against the Dacian falx, which they did not appreciate fighting against. To equate this to modern infantry, the extra armor pieces equate to everybody actually wearing _all_ of the body armor they're assigned to have in combat rather than ditching various bits and pieces but keeping the torso and side plates.
I think they depicted them with the plate because drawing so many little scales and chain links would be incredibly tedious for the artist.
Hollywood always predicted Romans to wear the segmented plate. The reality is that Romans wore mail armour because it was easier to equip.
When I re-enact myself I prefer to be an Auxiliary. They're the true bulk of Romes legions.
The only bonuses is segmented plate is that is cheap and quick to make and can easily be made to size, so they could make a lot of it fast, but once the army is around the same size for a while they swapped to a fuckton of mail because it was just objectively better in the being armor and maintenance departments unlike segmented plate which had worse protection and was harder to maintain
@@centurion7993 I think you’re spewing BS unfortunately. Doesn’t plate protect against arrows better?
@@timothymatthews6458 Yeah you're right, he's just yapping. Segmented plates are way harder to manufacture and provide far more superior protection than riveted mail. Solid plates of iron or steel will just not be nearly as easy to penetrate as even fine meshes of riveted mail.
It's worth noting that Segmentarii fell increasingly out of use as Rome's economy declined, and armor that utilized solid plates of metal only re-appeared afterwards among the rich or noble classes once the western empire fell.
easier to equip if there are hand me downs, maille has production bottleneck of riveting all those pieces together. while segmentata is metal bands that doesn't require that much skilled metalworkers.
the HBO rome series didnt...made me happy
Column of Trajan was crafted by artists while Romanian monument was done by the troops themselves. The idealism vs reality issue.
What I'd like to know was the quality of the various military units through time. Film and television tends to portray all Roman soldiers and armies at all times as these super efficient, super well trained and disciplined, nearly identical things yet, even in modern armies, there are huge differences in quality, training, morale, etc. between units and between elite units like the Praetorian Guard and the regular soldiery, and even more between the main Roman army and native recruits (auxilaries) and allies who, I would imagine, were less well trained and equipped (after all, you don't want your auxilaries to be as good as your own in case they rebel).
YOU CAN'T LEAVE ME HANGING LIKE THAT!!!
BRO!!! C'MON!!!
The artist probably wanted something easy to differentiate between the two groups so it would easier to create the image...but that is speculation.
I think the reason why some soldiers wear maille over scale or segmentata is they are superior design. Big problem with maille is production due to riveting all those rings together. But they are easier to maintain than segmentata. Segmentata is easy to produce because they don't need that many skilled smiths since its metal bands tied together.
I'm not saying he's necessarily wrong, and what he said is probably 100% true and all that.
But what if the world did a historical repeat, where America falls, the world goes into another dark age, then 2,000 years later someone is looking at depictions of modern US soldiers in their full gear and all that, and they suggested that "it's inaccurate and was some sort of propaganda piece, cause there's no way that all of those soldiers had the high quality gear, clearly they must've had more of the low quality gear as shown in this other depiction here", even though if we were present we could confirm that yes all of the soldiers depicted did wear all the gear in the way it's depicted.
What if that's the case with the Romans as well, and Trajan's column is accurate in showing the difference between the Roman Legionaries and Auxiliaries. And perhaps those other depictions are either featuring more Auxiliaries, or they're depicting garrison forces that wouldn't have been as decked out as perhaps the Legionaries.
Again, not saying that he's necessarily wrong, but for the time being I'm also going to give the Romans the benefit of the doubt until I learn more.
Also perhaps it was true to form but for different units. An elite unit of army rangers and navy seals decked out in the latest gear with night vision and best optics and custom equipment would look somewhat different than the average army infantryman.
@@derek8149 That's something I was thinking about. Perhaps the guys wearing the segmented armor were Rome's expeditionary forces, so they would've been more armed and armored when sent off to expand the Empire and such, while the guys left at home would have less of the armor and weapons since they wouldn't be needed as much, unless they were stationed as defensive troops along the frontier, at which point they'd probably have the heavier stuff then as well.
I guess the famous Lorica Segmentata was more something for Veterans, "rich" Soldiers that can afford to buy and more important for sure to hold it on constant 100% battle ready on thier own or are able to pay some(better)Craftsman for it because i read or hear it once it is a hellish work to repair it. I dont know if its more easy to repair a Scale Amour but as a LARP Guy i must change/repair from time to time the Chains if not put new ones "in"(the right word for it?)... it is a more and way cheaper and more easy doing than repair a Segmentata Armour that have this Plates, leather parts and Vulcanus knows what else. I would say in the End that a Chainmail would be the first Choice for every of every Quarter Master/Recruit/young Legionaire as a all in all thinking or maybe a Scale Armour and if they want a "Upgrade" that comes with more costs(both money and time) for more protection/less weight than a Chainmail(has it less weight?)/comfort to wear(is it more easy to wear/move or fight in it?) in the End.
History is fascinating
most likely the scale armour was issued to veteran soldiers in the legion, so Trajan wanted to show those who probably did most of the fighting instead of the newer recruits
Tbf as having had the pleasure of maintaing lorica segmentata and homata, maintaining the mail is much easier and cheaper and from a practical militaristic standpoint it makes much more sense to wear mail icl
Seems pretty clear to me: The column showed everyone back home the army was mostly in the most expensive, best armor available, while those out in the field saw mostly the cheaper, lighter armor.
Fuck I love this channel
Mail cost more to make.
Segmented rings vs punching holes in strips.
I doubt that effective armor would be binned. Even segmented armor represented a significant investment in time and materials.
But each sort requires different skillsets and equipment to maintain. Some would be better for garrison and parade duty. Other types might be more suited to the field. Chain mail can be made in the field to keep soldiers busy. Scale and plate are more technical.
"Boiled" leather requires molds and the like. Its likely a depot level craft.
It will be used for difficult to replace archers and slingers because it's light and still effective. I am not certain if Romans used it in that period, but it would be difficult to differentiate it in a carving.
Every legion have nearby regions manufacture their armaments. Due to the vastness of the empire, there might be only some region that know how or have the capacity to mass produce segmented armor like Gaul due to good craftsmanship culture. Others have more scale or mail producers due to low quality of iron available and/or the level of skill local craftsmen have.
Wasn't the mail armour adopted later in general?
Yay! We get to play Legionarie Dress Up.
The truth is probably that the armor was not as standardized as is usually depicted and there was greater variation in armor styles and quality but as long as everyone had the bare minimum quality and amount of equipment necessary to perform thier given tasks and training was standardized and everyman knew what he should be doing and how to do that is much more important then making sure everyone looks the same
Romans would be turning in their graves if they saw anglo saxon barbarians 2000 years in the future cosplaying as legionaries lol
I do hope future archaeologists don't find my scale models. One of them is a Ju-87 Stuka with twin jet engines on the fuselage and a lot of canons on its nose.
Speculation on my part, but by the time of Trajan's column the legions were basically always outside of Italy and had been for some time. Even if laminar armour had been phased out, it may have still been how Romans in Rome imagined the legions. Plus artistically it differentiates the Proud Roman Legions (TM) from the auxiliary forces. Neither force was really made up of Romans or Italians by then but propaganda wise they would probably be seen as less forgien
Cost is a big factor, mail is expensive.
Dude talking has Elton John's armour 😂
The campaign has been VERY LONG. When Trajans Colum has been constructed the default model manufactured for the roman armies has changed. The artist could not have known that. The other option would be that there was another model reserved for the Elite Class of the Roman Society, Mercenary Leaders or close friends of leadership at the time.
I would assume that its a basic logistical issue. Especially in those times. Could also be distinct ranks or subgroups
also taking into account how the segmentata was expensive and high quality piece of armor that can rust and degrade, and also requiring multiple people and time to put on/take off whilst a hamata is cheap, lasts a long ass time, and you can literally put on yourself in a short amount of time for similar armor benefits of the segmentata. it makes you wonder how common the segmentata actually was, and which unit had them
the best.
callin a lorica hamata cheap is so wrong its maybe cheaper to mantain but a lorica segmentata is way easier to make than putting together thousands of iron rings together
Roman Legionnaires were outfitted with the Lorica Segmentata as standard issue for nearly 200 years due to soldiers comprising a superior caste within Roman society represented by their higher pay and greater ability to maintain such complicated equipment. They only disappear from the archaeological record in the 3rd century AD, when the military lost it's social superiority after all non-Romans within the empire were granted citizenship. Also, it was made of iron and steel, not bronze. Nor were the helmets or weapons. Bronze had been out of fashion as a practical metal for centuries at this point, though it still popped up as a decorative martial, even in small amounts on pieces of armor and weapons.
From what I know, the idea of uniform was not really invented, so most soldiers would have to provide their own kit. So most likely the legions would appear much more heterogenous than we think
Did you know the bronze helmet and the mail shirt was create the first time by the " gaulois" the people live in France " gaule"( gallus in romain) at the same time and romain took it and "re"create it for they' re own légion
Lorica Segmentata supremacy. Top ten armour to ever exist
same reason as us today, we rather look at the cool and mightiest looking which is lorica segmentata
Mail, Scale or Segmentata, it ALL depended on the Legion or Auxiliary, they “built” and maintained the Legionnaires and Centurions gear, the “Officers” who were, in the main, nobles slumming it with the Legions, on their “Cursus Honaria” equiped themself, usually in a more lavish fashion. About 20% of a Legions strength (more sometimes) were “Specialists” of one type or another, from making footwear, to making clothes, to shoeing horses, to fixing armour and arms OR making it!
I’ve always believed that the legionaries wearing the fancy segmented armor were from either the richer parts of the empire. Either way, chain mail was good enough for most men, and was good enough for most men until true plate armor became cheap and mass produced in the renaissance
I cannot cope with this revelation that the romans probably didn’t look as cool as we think they did
The answer is they wore what they could afford to supply the troops with at that particular time
The most likely answer is:
They mostly wore chain mail….
Late republic legionaries mostly wore mail, mid empire legionaries mostly wore mail, and late empire Commitatus mostly wore mail 🤷🏽♂️
Look it’s the Scipii!!!
Ironically. Then Centurion with chain and segmented armour was the highest causilty
Perhaps the auxiliaries were more visible to the locals, while the legionnaires may have stuck closer to their camps.
the real history is that they went into battle with peacock feathers and tutus....with devastating shock value :-)
Most if not all the legions were funded by the families of the commanders like Julius Cesar, scipo, pompa, germanicus. From my research all the legions also had different colors caps and tunics depending on who they serve under so why would that not affect armor and weaponry
Symbolism and recognised characters were the aim.
This was a hugely expensive representation for the Romans.
From the defeat of Carthage to the fall of Rome was about 600 years, and Dacia was 'peak Rome' in military occupations.
that's about the same time as the fall of Constantinople to the present day.
There is no typical roman that encompasses that time.
Yet, lorica segmentata is still recognised as 'Roman'
Chainmail is incredible expensive compared to plating
As with most discrepancies between artwork depicting historical events the answer is probably: the artist wasn't actually there
Actually, he was. Apollodorus accompanied trajan to dacia during the second dacian war.
Interesting so the scale armors from the Byzantine period may be a holdover from the empire and republic periods?!
God what I wouldn’t give to be in an air balloon over a Roman battle. This changes my entire mental image of them in the field.
This goes to show you can't trust ancient works because we've always been prone to bias or propaganda. I doubt Trajan intended it to be fooling us so late in the game, but he'd probably be real satisfied.
My respect for “we don’t really know” :D
I am from Romania and love history…and yes the column was basically propaganda :D
In Romania the romans can be seen depicted in scales mostly and it makes sense since romans would adapt to the environment & to the enemy even absorbing the “enemy” into it’s own legions :D
I'm sure there was far less uniform back then than originally suggested. It's not like just one blacksmith could make armour for an entire army! Maybe it just came down to the skill of the smith, or the tools and material available. It seems silly to suggest all roman soldiers would have worn the same thing just based on time period.
Probably new soldiers where given new kit so there was a mix as they filltered in as replacments
Well in theory Dacia may have been predominantly conquered by auxilia but rome not wanting to give the credit exclusively to their forgien troops and depicted the conquest diffrently in Rome than in Dacia
Segmented armor looks more impressive, so while it may not have been as common, perhaps it was simply depicted because it looks impressive. Sort of how early medieval armies were often depicted in tapestries and the like wearing mail; when the vast majority were actually levies who probably couldn't afford mail.
Your last point is true and also untrue, it depends when you're talking about tbh, the early medieval period you're correct, but the later medieval period mail was much more widespread.
Something often overlooked is cost, if you're just some guy who is levied into an army for the chance to get bit of loot and extra cash, you're not going to immediately spend all your money on the best of everything, you'll weigh your options up, padded armour isn't as bad as people seem to think, it protects against slashes and cuts, some stabs, and there's also the cost of repairing armour, if you're unable to repair it you have to scrap it meaning you've lost the worth of your investment
@@the98themperoroftheholybri33 That's why I specified early medieval armies. Another thing that people overlook when talking about "period specific" armor, is that a lot of arms and armor were passed down. So a farmer called as a soldier in the 1300s may very well have been wearing armor from the 1100s or earlier (metal armor that is, padded cloth armor obviously wouldn't survive hundreds of years, but mail and helmets and spears or axes were definitely passed down).
@@jowolf2187 weapons and armour were generally not passed down in any medieval period among common people, the early period levies used repurposed farming tools like the early billhook, sickle and hand axe, late and high medieval levies were issued with weapons from an armoury, much like a modern military.
Lorica segmentata was far more expensive than lorica hamata.
How does us not knowing something mean they can't be trusted?
In many video games they make scale armor having worse stats than mail. But in ancient depictions, sometimes we see Roman officers wearing scales or lamellar and soldiers wearing mail. Surely the officers can't be wearing even worse equipment than the soldiers?
Scale offered more mobility and was more protective, but segmentata was easier to repair and offered enough protection.
It's like comfort over utilitarian
Logick of course.
They used what was available to them?
Chainmail and scale are not expensive to make ,dont require sofisticated forge or professional blacksmith to hammer the shape metal .Rings and scale are quite easy to forge and after sclaves will take so time to stich together. So the only down fall is taking quite some time to make
Probably a lack of resources lead to the armies giving the Legionaries whatever they had at the times captured from other places. I personally believe its a mix of heritage having good steel armour passed down by a wealthy father and when needs must using chainmail and scale for your average legionary Rome loved their army and would bend over backwards just to improve them
I think the factor in play would have been cost. Armour wasn't cheap and the Romans needed lots of troops, and they needed to replace a lot of those due to the amount of casualties.
Romans who had a bit of money to spare might choose to get a suit of banded armour made for them instead of demonstrating their cash wealth in order to join the Praetorian or Equestrian Order. Plebians probably wouldn’t afford it or even be allowed to wear it.
Trajan’s column depicts North African auxiliary cavalry barefoot, riding bareback in nothing more than tunics. I think it would be pretty uncomfortable to dress like that in a Romanian winter. It’s obviously some kind of stereotyped depiction, the equivalent of drawing someone in a cowboy hat and spurs to emphasize they are from Texas.
Well, I assume most of the inconsistencies in armor has to do with the rich Roman's were funding their own legions, especially before Cesar, and they would be armed differently
Segmentata was cheaper than mail.
I think its more likely the depiction is of the equipment the artists knew about and could recognisably depict.
There's as much artistic limitation as well as propaganda.
Soldiers had to pay for their own equipment. of course it will vary
They obviously knew they were having a picture taken. Everyone goes with their best attire to picture day duh.
Thinking about the Roman Empire again today, fellas?
I'm disappointed at the answer, but I get why he has to say he doesn't know
I don't think it is a stretch to say that people want things to look cool. It's probably fair to say that when Trajan's column was made the banded armor, or lorica segmentata if you want to sound scholarly, was concidered cool so why wouldn't they want to depeict every roman soldier as such.
I had no idea Roman legionaries wore blue in any part of their uniform.
The colour of the tunics was not universal across different units, individuals and time. While some might have worn a red colour the most common dye for that purpose in the Mediterranean world would have been madder which is an orange-red and would have faded with washing and the sun. Traces of dyes found on tunics in military bases suggest a wide range of colours in common use.