Slitherine

Is there any rhyme or reason to the design on the semi-cylindrical shields for imperial roman legionnaires? The style I notice most often are the "wings & lightning bolts" and the "laurel". Do these mean anything specific?

All terribly symbolic I'm afraid - lightning relates, IIRC, to Iupitter and laurel wreath is, of course, for victory.

nikgaukroger wrote:All terribly symbolic I'm afraid - lightning relates, IIRC, to Iupitter and laurel wreath is, of course, for victory.

Is there any rigid standard to this? In other words, does a black shield with a laurel design mean something different than a red shield with the lightning design as far as the troops are concerned? Would there ever be a mix of designs within an army? For instance, a battle group of legionnaires with the red shield/lightning and another legionnaire battle group with black shields and laurels? Does the color of the "tunics" they wore mean anything (usually red or white)?

vivsavage wrote:

nikgaukroger wrote:All terribly symbolic I'm afraid - lightning relates, IIRC, to Iupitter and laurel wreath is, of course, for victory.

Is there any rigid standard to this? In other words, does a black shield with a laurel design mean something different than a red shield with the lightning design as far as the troops are concerned? Would there ever be a mix of designs within an army? For instance, a battle group of legionnaires with the red shield/lightning and another legionnaire battle group with black shields and laurels? Does the color of the "tunics" they wore mean anything (usually red or white)?

Truth is, nobody really knows the answer to this. The evidence for shield designs for this era is largely based on monuments (Trajan's column etc) showing different designs on shields. What most people assume is that a shield design is likely to be standard for a legion, rather than cohortes within the legion. As to shield colour, theres even less evidence. The background colour may be consistent throug ha whole legion (eg all red) or the pattern may be the same but background colour different for individual cohortes. So in a way you're not tied by historical evidence. If you assume a FoG principate roman army represents 1 legion then use a single shield pattern, but perhaps a different background colour for each BG if you want to distinguish them. If you want to vary the patterns, work on the basis that the army represents 2 legions, with each using different patterns (for instance, 1 wings/thunderbolt and the other laurel wreath). Plus, it's likely that the auxiliary foot & cavalry would have different shield patterns to the legionnaries. If you can find a copy of Phil Barker's "Armies & Enemies of Imperial Rome" there's a good summary with pictures of typical patterns of this era

Phil, thanks for the info. Any idea why the thunderbolt design seems so popular? I was rather favoring the laurel design simply because its easier to paint on... but I can't find any images of the laurel being used with the semi-cylindrical shield shape of the legionnaire.

vivsavage wrote:Phil, thanks for the info. Any idea why the thunderbolt design seems so popular? I was rather favoring the laurel design simply because its easier to paint on... but I can't find any images of the laurel being used with the semi-cylindrical shield shape of the legionnaire.

...(adopts pedant mode) it's legionary, legionnaire is strictly Beau Geste....

bobm wrote:

vivsavage wrote:Phil, thanks for the info. Any idea why the thunderbolt design seems so popular? I was rather favoring the laurel design simply because its easier to paint on... but I can't find any images of the laurel being used with the semi-cylindrical shield shape of the legionnaire.

...(adopts pedant mode) it's legionary, legionnaire is strictly Beau Geste....

D'oh!

vivsavage wrote: I was rather favoring the laurel design simply because its easier to paint on...

Why paint when you can get transfers?

vivsavage wrote:Any idea why the thunderbolt design seems so popular?

As Nik mentioned, the eagle wings and thunderbolts are both associated with Jupiter, the chief Roman god. On legionary scuta, they would have served as protective talismans, much like the gorgon faces seen on many earlier Greek hoplite shields.

Cheers,
Scott

vivsavage wrote:Phil, thanks for the info. Any idea why the thunderbolt design seems so popular?

my guess? extremely easy to paint.

nikgaukroger wrote:

vivsavage wrote: I was rather favoring the laurel design simply because its easier to paint on...

Why paint when you can get transfers?

Because I'd have to wait for them. And I like to paint.

ars_belli wrote:

vivsavage wrote:Any idea why the thunderbolt design seems so popular?

As Nik mentioned, the eagle wings and thunderbolts are both associated with Jupiter, the chief Roman god. On legionary scuta, they would have served as protective talismans, much like the gorgon faces seen on many earlier Greek hoplite shields.

Cheers,
Scott

I'm not an expert of Romani army in this period, but I'm pretty sure that armament of legionari was supplied by the State. Legions were raised by enlisting people who became professional soldiers. Not sure about when this happened, but anyway I think in Caius Julius Caesar era Romani armies were already professionals. This leads to think that symbols on shields were tied to the legion.

marioslaz wrote:I'm not an expert of Romani army in this period, but I'm pretty sure that armament of legionari was supplied by the State. Legions were raised by enlisting people who became professional soldiers. Not sure about when this happened, but anyway I think in Caius Julius Caesar era Romani armies were already professionals. This leads to think that symbols on shields were tied to the legion.

The 'professionalizing' of the Roman army during the Late Republic is usually attributed to Gaius Marius, circa 105 BC. Beginning with Marius, the legions were increasingly armed and paid by their generals, which meant that the loyalty of the legionaries often tended to go to the general first, and to the Roman state second. My comments on legionary scuta above were intended as an example of the protective function of shield devices - getting the power of the god on your army's side, as it were - and I did not mean to imply that each legionary would have chosen his own shield emblem individually during the LRR or Principate.

Cheers,
Scott

marioslaz wrote: I'm not an expert of Romani army in this period, but I'm pretty sure that armament of legionari was supplied by the State. Legions were raised by enlisting people who became professional soldiers. Not sure about when this happened, but anyway I think in Caius Julius Caesar era Romani armies were already professionals. This leads to think that symbols on shields were tied to the legion.

So would all legionari of the same era have had the same symbol on their shields? Or would there have been variance?

As Phil mentioned earlier, the surviving evidence suggests that all of the legionaries in a single cohort, or even all of those in a single legion, would have had similar shield decoration. However, the evidence is fragmentary and ambiguous, which means that you are free to choose whichever option you think looks best for your tabletop army.

This web site features some examples of how other gamers have chosen to paint their own Principate Roman armies: http://www.miniatures4wargamers.com/dat ... _roman.php

Salve,
Scott

vivsavage wrote:

marioslaz wrote: I'm not an expert of Romani army in this period, but I'm pretty sure that armament of legionari was supplied by the State. Legions were raised by enlisting people who became professional soldiers. Not sure about when this happened, but anyway I think in Caius Julius Caesar era Romani armies were already professionals. This leads to think that symbols on shields were tied to the legion.

So would all legionari of the same era have had the same symbol on their shields? Or would there have been variance?

personally? i like to use artistic licence and paint each BG with a slightly different shield pattern. adds something to the effect.

philbagnall wrote:Truth is, nobody really knows the answer to this... So in a way you're not tied by historical evidence.

Which is in part why I always say 'don't let the truth get in the way of a good paint job'.

If you paint your army up after getting in your time machine and doing an exact replica of a particular legion, even THEN you would get some wanker at the club say 'that's the wrong tone of red, it should be a shade darker'.

I always think its good to get things as right as you can, but don't get hung up about it, particularly with ancient historicals. We have MORE information with things like Napoleonics etc, but even THEN it's a bit open to interpretation.

Ian

Those ancients/Romans did NOT have just one or two uniform makers. The same would be true of armor, shields, shield designs, weapons. IMHO, changes could not, would not have of occured over not much less throughout the Empire within one week, much less a month.

IHMO, there was more than one type/set/etc of shield designs in use in different areas of the Empire at/in any given time period. Changes were not too likely to have been supplied with the latest of whatevers on a staggered startup date etc.

"THROW that shield away soldier, the design on it is not correct as of today!!" "The new one comes next week. Now go fight that barbarian".

"As Nik mentioned, the eagle wings and thunderbolts are both associated with Jupiter."


The eagle wings mention early in the post are really the wings of geese.
From what I read, an enemy was trying to breach the walls of Rome and the alarm was giving by a bunch of geese.
After that the Romans for centuries had a group of sacred geese that they took care of.

lreissin wrote:"After that the Romans for centuries had a group of sacred geese that they took care of.

Not the same geese presumably