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!

A physician as "lower middle class" in the Roman world

Galen blood letting by Robert Thom (before 1958)

A history resource article by Mary Harrsch © 2020

I'm working on my article about the House of the Prince of Naples based in part on my translation of Hauser in Pompeji by Professor Volker Michael Strocka.  In the text, he concludes that the less skillful paintings and roughly finished earthquake repairs in the Casa del Principe di Napoli point to the occupants of the house being members of the lower middle class.  However, he seemed to have overlooked the findings of surgical instruments in several locations as well as a Roman version of a mortar and pestle which, to me, points to the last resident being a physician. So I wondered if physicians would be classified as "lower middle class" since they are  definitely more respected and usually much more well compensated in the modern world.  Yesterday, I was researching the issue of the social status of physicians in the ancient world and found a fascinating paper about the topic on JSTOR written by H. Horstmanshoff in 1990, entitled "The Ancient Physician: Craftsman or Scientist?" published in the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences.  In it Horstmanshoff points out that our modern opinion of physicians as a scientifically educated practitioner of a legitimate profession of high social status was not shared by the ancients and only emerged in the second half of the nineteenth century.

"The physicians of antiquity did not belong to a legitimate profession protected by legal and official recognition. For the most part he lacked scholarly academic training and he did not always enjoy a high social status. He had to compete with quacks and miracle workers.  He could not afford to risk his reputation by treating patients who had no chance of recovery...The borderline between rational and irrational medicine was not sharply drawn. There were priests who furnished medicines and dietary regulations and performed bloodletting, just as there were physicians who used amulets and prayers." - Horstmanshoff, "The Ancient Physician: Craftsman or Scientist?"

He points out that physicians, including those who treated emperors like Galen, were actually more respected if they spent time expounding philosophical observations about humoral theory and engaging in rhetorical discussions of prognosis than in actually practicing their craft.

"The Hippocratic physician constantly invested in his reputation, since with a good reputation he would not repeatedly have to demonstrate his competence, especially in the continual competitive battles waged with physicians of quite different alloy." - Horstmanshoff, "The Ancient Physician: Craftsman or Scientist?"

Horstmanshoff notes in Homer's Iliad two types of physicians are described, the "gentleman practitioner" who is more knowledgeable in the treatment of battle wounds than the average warrior (who can treat elemental wounds), and the traveling healers who are equated to manual workmen on par with builders, who do not belong to the noble elite but are not landless laborers.  So, depending on the type of physician, their social standing was somewhere in between the extremes of social hierarchy.

"The most desirable position for a physician was that of city or community physician.  The city physician enjoyed public recognition and, probably, a fixed minimum income by virtue of a contract through which he was obliged to remain in a given city for a number of years.  The advantage for the physician was that he no longer had to contend with other physicians in competitive forays.  The advantage for the city was that it could be assured of medical services." - Horstmanshoff, "The Ancient Physician: Craftsman or Scientist?"

Apparently epigraphic evidence of these arrangements during the Roman Imperial Period have been found.

Horstmanshoff quotes Cicero's De officiis to illustrate the prevailing attitude towards physicians in the late Republic and summarizes it in this way.  "A physician was a craftsman who had to live on what his craft would earn him, but in antiquity work for wages was considered to be of inferior worth, actually a form of slavery, compared with the ideal of the self-sufficient landowner who possessed wealth obtained through long-standing inheritance and who did not need to work for a living. The arts of healing, architecture, and teaching in the honorable disciplines (included are grammar, rhetoric, and philosophy) were respectable only if one exercised them as an amateur, not if one wanted to earn one's daily bread from them."

As for the roughly repaired earthquake damage, I researched the House of the Surgeon, (Reg VI, Ins 1, 10, 23) a site recognized as a probable home of a physician because of surgical instruments found there and also located in Region VI of Pompeii, and learned that it was actually in worse repair than the House of the Prince of Naples. Archaeologists point out they found holes in the floor of the atrium that they think were left by poles holding up its roof after the earthquake of 62 CE or subsequent quakes before Vesuvius' devastating eruption in 79 CE.

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