Roman military belts: Symbols of social status and Auctoritas

While browsing the collections of the Museum of Fine Arts Boston, I saw this fragmentary figurine of a Roman soldier from the 3rd century CE found in Naukratis, Egypt by legendary archaeologist Flinders Petrie.  Looking at it I noticed the knotted sash just above the waist and realized this is not just any soldier but a senior officer.

The plated military balteus was not worn with a muscled cuirass.  Instead senior officers wore a fabric belt or sash with fringed ends, a traditional distinction of command worn since the Hellenistic period.

The balteus, also known as the cingulum militare from the 3rd century CE onwards, worn by all legionaries, was often elaborate, too, though.  

"The narrator of Apuleius’ satirical novel ‘The Golden Ass’ describes a man as being recognisably “miles elegione” (a soldier and legionary) and he also tells us how he recognized this: Through his “habitus atque habitude” (dress and manner)," points out archaeologist Stefanie Hoss.  "This and other writings in a similar vein make it quite obvious that soldiers were easily recognizable, even when they were not wearing full armour."

"In Rome, a man’s dress and his social cultural and political identity in Roman society were directly connected. The toga was both the prerogative and the iconic symbol of the Roman male citizen.  In a similar way, other sartorial choices spoke clearly of the status and station in life of the wearer. What then, was the distinguishing dress of the Roman soldier? We know that in Apuleius’ time unarmoured soldiers usually wore a belted tunica, nailed sandals and a long, heavy cloak, fixed on the right shoulder with a fibula. Neither the tunica nor the cloak seem to have differed much from average well-off civilian clothing. The truly distinguishing factor of the military dress were the sandals (caligae) and the military belt."

"It [the military belt] became invested with meaning to such an extent that taking away the military belt of a soldier in public for hours or days was a humiliation used as a dsciplinary measure by their superiors. Taking away the military belt permanently after a capitulation or during a dishonourable discharge from the army seems also to have been practised. The significance of the belt as a symbol of ‘being a soldier’ continued well into the late empire as is demonstrated by the symbolic act of Christian soldier-saints openly refusing to remain in the army by throwing off their military belt in public." 

"The military belt of the Roman soldier can therefore be defined as a symbolic object, both an article of clothing and a piece of military equipment, setting the soldier apart from civilian men and marking him as a "miles."

Hoss tells us the belt was decorated with "elaborate buckles, metal plates, strap-ends and other attachments, which made it heavy, eye-catching and "jingly". 

"Together with the crunch of hob-nailed sandals, the jingling of the metal belt pieces must have given soldiers a distinctive ‘sound’, announcing their presence," she observes.

I found it interesting that experimental archaeology indicates the heaviness of the military belt produced a swaggering, wide-legged manner of standing and walking. It also seemed to hinder running!

Mosaics and wall paintings also depict the military belt as red indicating they were often dyed.

"Most of the metal parts of the belt were made from copper alloys," Hoss observes. "Some were made from silver, gold or ivory, which were more expensive than copper alloys, while the pieces in bone and iron can be seen as cheaper versions. Especially in the 1st century CE, belt pieces were regularly tinned or silvered ,later it is more of an exception. "

"On the whole, the metal belt pieces were made with two different techniques, casting (lost mould or two-part mould) or embossing, or a combination of both. Ivory or bone would be simply cut. The surface of the metal plates could then be further decorated by engraving and cutting or by using niello or enamel decorations."

"The military belt of the ‘typical’ infantryman during the pre-Flavian 1st century consisted of two rather narrow belts worn crossing at mid-body, ‘cowboy-fashion’...Except for centurions and standard-bearers, the soldier wore one sidearm on each belt: his short sword on the right hip and a dagger on the left."

Hoss reports that experimental archaeology has indicated that the "apron" of leather straps (baltea) with decorated studs (bullae), supposedly designed to protect the groin of the soldier, proved to be more of a risk to the groin during violent movement like running. So researchers propose that it was merely a mark of status that maximized the characteristic jingling. 

I've always considered the Romans to be quite practical, especially when it comes to their military prowess. But Hoss points out that the "apron" disappears by the Antonine Period so perhaps the archaeologists are correct in this assumption.

Hoss goes into great detail about the evolution of belt decoration over the centuries and how iconography changed based on the cultural influences the Romans encountered in their empirical expansion. Although belt decoration changed across the centuries and provided the best opportunity for a soldier to express his individualism, Hoss says the archaeological record provides evidence that there was a surprising degree of homogeneity in belt decoration across the Roman empire as a whole from Hadrian's Wall in the west to Dura Europos in the east.

"According to a theory developed by Pierre Bourdieu, “[taste] functions as a sort of social orientation, a ‘sense of one’s place’, guiding the occupants of a given […] social space towards the social positions adjusted to their properties, and towards the practices or goods which befit the occupants of that position”, Hoss observes. "In Bourdieu’s theory, symbolic capital (e.g. prestige, honour) is a crucial source of power, enabling the holder to exercise symbolic violence over non-holders. To attain this symbolic power, one must be able to conform to certain social expectations (the ‘right’ manner of speaking, walking, eating, dressing, etc.). While Bourdieu explored how parents would teach their children to conform to these expectations, it seems convincing that similar mechanisms take place in other social groups than the family. Tight-knit hierarchical groups like army units also constitute a group in which a certain set of rules is passed from a group of older and/or higher ranking men to a group of younger men. This set of rules naturally includes the ‘technical’ knowledge of the job: knowledge of arms, warfare, camp building and other necessities of army life, but it also includes ‘the right way’ of walking, talking, eating, dressing, etc. In a outwardly traditional society as the Roman, the older and/or higher ranking soldiers would ‘set the tone’ in their unit, establishing which fashions were acceptable and which were not, the verdict then being ‘executed’ by peer pressure. The surprising ‘uniformity’ of Roman military belts was thus not forced on the soldiers from above, but rather a product of their own desire for conformity.

Hoss' full article is available here:  

https://www.academia.edu/212354/The_Roman_Military_Belt

Terracotta figurine of a Roman soldier, 3rd century CE, from Naukratis, Egypt, now in the collections of the Museum of Fine Arts Boston, courtesy of the museum.

A bronze statue of Gaius Julius Caesar beside the Via Foro Imperiali in front of the Forum Julia that I photographed in Rome, Italy. Notice the command sash knotted just above his waist.

Armored statue of the Roman emperor Hadrian, 2nd century CE, with the fringed command sash, at the Antalya Archeological Museum , courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Wolfgang Sauber.

Roman relief depicting two baltei criss-crossed in the "cowboy" fashion, pre-Flavian 1st century CE. Image courtesy of Stephanie Hoss.

Modern reconstruction of lorica squamata with military belt at the 2013 Cricău Festival courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Saturnian.

Modern reconstruction of lorica segmentata with military belt by LEGIO XXX ULPIA TRAIANA VICTRIX ONLUS courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Marten253.

Historical reenactor wearing Lorica Hamata armor with military belt courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Greatbeagle.

Detail of a display depicting a Roman centurion wearing a plated military belt at the exhibition "Romans on the Limes" courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor RömerWelt

Hardware from an ancient Roman military belt from Lower Bavaria, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Wolfgang Sauber.

Sketches of recovered decorations from Roman military belts across the centuries courtesy of Stephanie Hoss.

Bronze plates from a Roman balteus at the National Museum of Denmark, image courtesy of the museum and Wikimedia Commons.

Closeup of a bronze plate from a Roman balteus at the National Museum of Denmark, image courtesy of the museum and Wikimedia Commons.

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Barbarians in Roman art

From the 1st century BCE onwards, the Roman army began to deploy "barbarians" to protect Roman frontiers. This trend continued into the Imperial Period and the expanded borders necessitated the use of increasing numbers of foederati to defend the empire.  By the 4th century CE, of more than 75,000 troops stationed in Gaul, most hailed from Germania, an area stretching as far north as Scandinavia and as far east as the Vistula River.  

Fortunately for historians, the grave goods of these Germanic warriors both in and outside the empire have provided a treasure trove of information about the money, gifts, and often elaborately decorated military insignia these men acquired during their service to Rome.  

"Promises of Roman citizenship and military and economic support encouraged barbarian leaders to assist their wealthy neighbor, primarily by providing troops," observes Melanie Holcomb in her paper, Barbarians and Romans, published by the Metropolitan Museum of Art.  "Such arrangements permitted barbarians of high status to accumulate great wealth, in the form of direct gifts of jewelry from the empire and payments in gold coin. These, in turn, could be used to commission luxury objects of personal adornment from local artists."

However, although Rome depended on these "others," Roman citizens and the state itself wished to distinguish themselves which they perceived as civilized from their more barbarous residents not only in social situations but in art.  They did this through words, customs, clothing, and the use of colored marbles and brightly painted patterns in statues of barbarians or easterners in Roman art.

"The clothing we wear, and imagine others wearing, is an important way we signal who we are, and aren’t," points out Sarah Bond and Sean Burrus in their paper 'Barbarians and Sculpture's Color Barrier in Ancient Rome'.  "When Romans wanted to depict other non-Roman peoples, whether on statues, reliefs, mosaics, or frescoes, they often used clothing as a way to visually signal differences between them. For example, Romans typically depicted barbarians clothed in trousers. Although we take them for granted today, pants were once highly controversial indicators of the difference between the barbarian and the Roman citizen. "

In the 2nd and 3rd centuries CE at Dura-Europas, Roman soldiers in the local garrison are portrayed in military dress while local civilians are depicted in tunics and trousers. Parthian dress including trousers, a tunic, and a Phrygian cap associated with the followers of Mithras and easterners in general, adorn depictions of individuals in the local mithraeum.

The use of distinguishing color in sculpture included colored marbles to accentuate the difference between native Romans and local residents. By so doing, sculptors could not only take advantage of the stone's ability to add a dynamic aspect to the work but communicate social context to the viewer.

In addition to clothing and color, artists used gestures and poses to transmit the subordinate nature of the conquered peoples.  The vanquished are often depicted kneeling or supporting objects or structures.

Read more about it: https://hyperallergic.com/440466/barbarians-and-sculptures-color-barrier-in-ancient-rome/

 

Closeup of The Ludovisi Gaul thought to be a Roman copy of Greek original by Epigonus commissioned by Julius Caesar 1st century BCE that I photographed at the Palazzo Altemps in Rome

The Ludovisi Gaul thought to be a Roman copy of Greek original by Epigonus commissioned by Julius Caesar 1st century BCE that I photographed at the Palazzo Altemps in Rome

Statue of a conquered barbarian, likely a Dacian. He is wearing a Phrygian cap. The statue dates to the second century CE, perhaps during the reign of Trajan, and it may come from Forum of Trajan in Rome. It is made of green breccia marble from Egypt and is now at the Louvre Museum in Paris (image by Carole Raddato, CC-BY-SA-2.0)

Closeup of Seated Captive in Phyrgian Cap Roman 1st-2nd century CE Green Egyptian Marble that I photographed at The Louvre in Paris.

Closeup of Heroic Head of a Barbarian (probably a Gaul) 2nd century CE Roman copy of 250-180 BCE Greek original reportedly from Trajan's Forum that I photographed at "The Body Beautiful in Ancient Greece" exhibit at the Portland (Oregon) Art Museum.

Closeup of Heroic Head of a Barbarian (probably a Gaul) 2nd century CE Roman copy of 250-180 BCE Greek original reportedly from Trajan's Forum that I photographed at "The Body Beautiful in Ancient Greece" exhibit at the Portland (Oregon) Art Museum.

Statue of “Capitoline Gaul” also known as "Dying Gaul" From a Pergamene original Marble that I photographed at the Capitoline Museum in Rome.

Grand Ludovisi Battle Sarcophagus depicting Roman conquest of Barbarians 2nd - 3rd century CE Proconnesian Marble  that I photographed at the Palazzo Altemps in Rome.

Closeup of Colossal statue of a Dacian Roman 2nd century CE that I photographed at the Palazzo Altemps in Rome.

Portrait Head of a Barbarian (probably a Dacian) Roman Trajanic Period  1st - 2nd century CE Marble that I photographed at the Seattle Art Museum

Roman bronze statuette of a barbarian, 1-100 CE, now in the collections of the Cleveland Art Museum in Cleveland, Ohio, image courtesy of the museum (CC0 1.0)

The ‘Kneeling Barbarian’ sculpture from the Palatine Hill in Rome, dates to the first century CE, made of pavonazzo marble and nero antico, in the Naples National Archaeological Museum (image by Carole Raddato, CC-BY-SA-2.0)

Front seated figure from the Mithraeum at Dura-Europos wearing a Phrygian cap (image courtesy of the Yale University Art Gallery and is in the public domain)

Julius Terentius Performing a Sacrifice, paint on plaster, from Dura-Europos and dating to the third century CE (image courtesy of the Yale University Art Gallery and is in the public domain)

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Ancient Fibulae

Fibulae replaced straight pins that were used to fasten clothing in the Neolithic period and the Bronze Age. The first fibulae design, known as the violin bow fibulae appeared in the late Bronze Age. This simple design, with a unilateral spring, looks remarkably like a modern safety pin. The violin bow fibula has a low flat arch with the body running parallel to the pin so it resembles a violin bow. The bow could be round, square, or flat and ribbon-like in cross-section. Some had simple punched or incised decoration on the bow. Violin bow fibula were  introduced in the 14th century BCE by the Myceneans on the Greek Peloponnesus. The fibula soon spread to Crete, Cyprus and Mycenean trading posts in Sicily. 

While the head of the earlier straight pin was often decorated, the bow or plate of the fibula provided a much increased scope for decoration. During the Iron Age, the use of fibulae became more widespread and were usually highly decorated among the elite, with incised or moulded geometric designs.

The classic fibula of the late-Roman era, and in fact the best known of all fibula types, is the crossbow type. The crossbow fibula consists of a highly arched semi-circular bow, usually of squarish cross-section, and a long flat foot. The fibula has a wide transverse bar (or arms) at the head containing the pin-hinge.

Among some cultures, different fibula designs had specific symbolic meanings. They could refer to a status or profession such as single woman, married woman, man, warrior, or chief. Some Roman-era fibulae symbolized specific ranks or positions in the Roman legions or auxiliary. In some cultures, fibulae were worn in pairs and could be linked by a length of chain. 

A penile fibula, developed by the Romans from the Greek use of the kynodesmē, was a ring, attached with a pin through the foreskin to fasten it above the glans penis. Scholars think it was used to promote modesty when appearing nude in public such as participation in athletic competitions, or in the belief that it helped preserve an orator's voice.  It was also used by masters on their slaves to prevent intercourse. Penile fibulae were frequent subjects of ridicule among satirists in Rome. Somehow, I doubt if Marc Antony bothered with modesty when participating in the Lupercalia, though!

Gilded bronze crossbow fibula, 300-365 CE, at the Gallo-Roman Museum, Tongeren courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

A east Germanic bow brooch crafted of silver with gold-sheet overlay and inlaid garnets, 400-450 CE at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

The De Braganza Fibula, 250-200 BCE, Greek, from the Iberian Peninsula, now in the British Museum.

Germanic fibula with Gold plating on silver with inlaid garnet, glass, enamel, 430 CE, at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, Austria courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor James Steakley

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!