A couple of questions regarding Late Roman standards

[Richard in Sachsen]

Greetings,

I have a couple of questions regarding late Roman standards that I can't seem to find any definitive answers on, which is probably par for the course for this period. If any one can't offer any suggestions or guidance, I would greatly appreciate the assistance.

1. When was the Aquila eagle standard phased out? I was thinking of using them on my Legio Palatina command stands or even in the first Ordine. Did that change to dracos and vellixium after the 2nd century?

2. Similarly, I have some A&A "4th Century Romans" standard bearers wearing animal skins. Again, thinking of using them for Palatina and Comes Brittanica command stands. Are they anachronistic for this time period (4-5th century?)

3. Lastly, Vexillationes Comitatenses, specifically Equites Honoriani seniores: would this cavalry unit (in Britain) be carrying a draco like most cavalry units or would a banner be more appropriate as the name implies? If a banner, what would normally be emblazoned on it? My own idea would be a red field and abbreviations, such as: VEX HON SEN as the long title may be a bit challenging to paint on unless it is a larger banner but I think the smaller Gripping Beast banner would be more appropriate, i.e. easier to carry on a charging horse, than a larger banner. Obviously, however, I have no idea, which is why I'm pleading for help from those of you who may be knowledgeable on the matter.

Any assistance that anyone can offer is very much greatly appreciated.

Thanks

[Jericho]

1. When was the Aquila eagle standard phased out? I was thinking of using them on my Legio Palatina command stands or even in the first Ordine. Did that change to dracos and vellixium after the 2nd century?

From what I understand the Eagle standard was carried by the first cohort of the legion. So I assume that by the time the legions were dissolved in favour of the smaller late Roman units these standards became obsolete.
Seeing of the importance of the standards and their Genio (its spirit) I think they were maybe collected and kept in a sacred place in Rome; or ritually disposed of; or stayed with those Prima Cohors that became Limitanei units (For example the Cohortis Primae Gallicae under the Comes Hispenias).
As each new unit or temporary vexillation received its own personal standard, why would they hang on to obsolete ones from legions no longer in service?

Greetings,
2. Similarly, I have some A&A "4th Century Romans" standard bearers wearing animal skins. Again, thinking of using them for Palatina and Comes Brittanica command stands. Are they anachronistic for this time period (4-5th century?)

My google fu didn't find anything on late Roman standar bearers wearing animal skins so I have two guesses.
1. When the legions were dissolved, under Diocletian and Constantine, so were many of the old traditions, like the wearing of animal skins.
2. As more and more Germanics entered military service slowly the Roman elements were supplanted by Germanic customs.

3. Lastly, Vexillationes Comitatenses, specifically Equites Honoriani seniores: would this cavalry unit (in Britain) be carrying a draco like most cavalry units or would a banner be more appropriate as the name implies? If a banner, what would normally be emblazoned on it? My own idea would be a red field and abbreviations, such as: VEX HON SEN as the long title may be a bit challenging to paint on unless it is a larger banner but I think the smaller Gripping Beast banner would be more appropriate, i.e. easier to carry on a charging horse, than a larger banner. Obviously, however, I have no idea, which is why I'm pleading for help from those of you who may be knowledgeable on the matter.

The only surviving vexillum, found in Egypt, doesn't have any writing at all.



And seeing it's named after the emperor Honorius it might have carried his portrait instead of text. Or mixed, or text only... This really is up to your own taste, I think.

And to make it even more difficult:
There is a "Equites Honoriani Taifali Iuniores" under the Magister Equitum's Gallic Command.
And next to the "Equites Honoriani Seniores" are also the "Equites Taifali" under the Comes Britanniae.
So this leads some to assume these two are one and the same, making them the "Equites Honoriani Taifali Seniores".
The shield patterns of these Seniores and Iuniores are even next to one another in the Notitia Dignitatum:



The circle on the Iuniores' shield is supposed to resemble the Imago (portrait) of the emperor, thus Honorius.
If the supposed link above is correct between the "Equites Taifali" and the "Equites Honoriani Seniores" then I think an Imago isn't that out of place on their vexillum.

These are all guesses, of course, as I'm no certified specialist 

[Richard in Sachsen]

Thank you Jericho, that helps greatly.

Here's the 4th century command pack with the animal skins and aquila: http://www.aandaminiatures.co.uk/view_product/?p=38

So, that's good to know and I think that I'll stick with the regular standard bearers.

The vexillum question is difficult. Ugh! So what I have is an armoured cavalry unit as Honoriani and a cataphract unit that just this week arrived as Taifali (that is, one with the shield design with the two blue bears and the other with the blue dragon & pearl imago circle, respectively) - so if they're the same unit it really complicates things.

Both of those are listed as Vex. Comentatenses so I was trying to figure out whether to give the units a vexillum or a draco.

Sounds like a vexillum with an imago of Honorius from what you're saying.

Thank you again, very much, for the detailed and informative answer. That helps!

[Jericho]

Thank you Jericho, that helps greatly.

You're welcome 

The vexillum question is difficult. Ugh! So what I have is an armoured cavalry unit as Honoriani and a cataphract unit that just this week arrived as Taifali (that is, one with the shield design with the two blue bears and the other with the blue dragon & pearl imago circle, respectively) - so if they're the same unit it really complicates things.

No no, there is no problem about that. For they are the "Equites Honoriani Taifali Iuniores" (white shield with blue animal and Imago) and the "Equites Honoriani Seniores" (red shield with blue animals). These are two distinct and seperate units.

If you look at the troops under the Comes Britanniae in the Notitia Dignitatum (here) you findthe following cavalry units:
    102/5.251 Equites catafractarii iuniores
    102/5.252 Equites scutarii Aureliaci
    102/5.253 Equites Honoriani seniores
    102/5.254 Equites stablesiani
    102/5.255 Equites Syri
    102/5.256 Equites Taifali

Now seeing as there is no further mention of these "Equites Taifali" in the Notitia (there's not even a shield design); and that where there is a Iuniores unit there's supposed to be a Seniores unit, some believe that the writer made a mistake. And there a a couple in there, like mismatched shield patterns for units and wrong unit names.
So the "Equites Honoriani Seniores" might have been called the "Equites Honoriani Taifali Seniores" instead.

What makes sense as it solves the fact of why there's no further mention anywhere of that "Equites Taifali" unit, why there's no shield design for it, and it gives the explanation for the otherwise missing Seniores unit.

There is also the town of Tealby in England, formerly called Teflesbi, which might have been named after these Taifali.

Both of those are listed as Vex. Comentatenses so I was trying to figure out whether to give the units a vexillum or a draco.

Sounds like a vexillum with an imago of Honorius from what you're saying.

The Taifali were either Germanic or Sarmatian so a Draco wouldn't be that farfetched though.
Perhaps you can give the "Equites Honoriani Taifali Iuniores" a Draco standard as they already had the Imago of Honorius on their shields.
And for the "Equites Honoriani (Taifali) Seniores" a Vexillum standard with the Imago of Honorius.
But that's all up to you, of course.

[Richard in Sachsen]

No no, there is no problem about that. For they are the "Equites Honoriani Taifali Iuniores" (white shield with blue animal and Imago) and the "Equites Honoriani Seniores" (red shield with blue animals). These are two distinct and seperate units.

Whew, I thought as much but confirmation makes life easier

102/5.252 Equites scutarii Aureliaci
    102/5.253 Equites Honoriani seniores
    102/5.255 Equites Syri
    102/5.256 Equites Taifali

Those are the four cavalry units I built for the British field army... waiting for the painting. Two of them are not listed in the ND with their shield designs. For Equites Syri (I have them as horse archers) I propose to find another syrian unit in the eastern part of the ND and just reverse the colours since so many shield designs are similar. I thought that to be an acceptable solution.

scutarii Aureliaci - I'm taking a gamble and making them light horse (since I already have the medium Honoriani and heavy Taifali.) Many of the figures are unarmored GB models which come with large cast-on shields, so I'm hoping the "scutarii" in their name is not just a title.

The Taifali were either Germanic or Sarmatian so a Draco wouldn't be that farfetched though.
Perhaps you can give the "Equites Honoriani Taifali Iuniores" a Draco standard as they already had the Imago of Honorius on their shields.
And for the "Equites Honoriani (Taifali) Seniores" a Vexillum standard with the Imago of Honorius.
But that's all up to you, of course

.

Good! That's what I'll do. I'm using GB cataphracts for Taifali, they also have cast on shields and the one who do not get the small Byzantine bucklers on their arm. I have to tell you, painting some semblance of the imago on those small cataphract shields is going to be a real challenge! 

And... just finished Schola scutariorum clibanariorum yesterday , hope to have a post up sometime this week

[Mad Doc Morris]

Just a few additional thoughts…

1. When was the Aquila eagle standard phased out? I was thinking of using them on my Legio Palatina command stands or even in the first Ordine. Did that change to dracos and vellixium after the 2nd century?

Perhaps the eagle standard was "phased out" when the old legions were effectively disbanded, i.e. with their detachments (vexillationes) becoming officially separate units. That development took place somewhen between the late 2nd and late 3rd century. Nothing definite, though.

2. Similarly, I have some A&A "4th Century Romans" standard bearers wearing animal skins. Again, thinking of using them for Palatina and Comes Brittanica command stands. Are they anachronistic for this time period (4-5th century?)

No more or less appropriate than for any other Roman period. In fact, the evidence for standard bearers (and musicians) wearing animal skins is generally scarce, and so the general practice is conjectural at best.

3. Lastly, Vexillationes Comitatenses, specifically Equites Honoriani seniores: would this cavalry unit (in Britain) be carrying a draco like most cavalry units or would a banner be more appropriate as the name implies? If a banner, what would normally be emblazoned on it? My own idea would be a red field and abbreviations, such as: VEX HON SEN as the long title may be a bit challenging to paint on unless it is a larger banner but I think the smaller Gripping Beast banner would be more appropriate, i.e. easier to carry on a charging horse, than a larger banner.

Again, no norms here. Like said above, vexillatio is the traditional denomination for a detachment of any kind, form and size. (The same might apply to the various numeri appearing during the 2nd century, but that's another discussion.) These detachments might well have carried a vexillum as a distinguishing feature, and hence their title. In the context of the Notitia Dignitatum the 'Vexillationes' are exclusively cavalry units, so naturally 'Comitatenses'. If and what special standards they carried, is unknown.

By the way, the same goes for various titles, such as "scutarii", "balistarii", or "exculcatores". If these units were distinguished by their use of shields, artillery, or heavy boots, is rather doubtful.

Final note: While Phil Barker's 'The Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome' is quite dated, its section on the ND units provides some sound ideas how to design the units mentioned in there.

[Jericho]

Those are the four cavalry units I built for the British field army... waiting for the painting. Two of them are not listed in the ND with their shield designs.

You really do pick the easiest units from the Notitia, don't you  

For Equites Syri (I have them as horse archers) I propose to find another syrian unit in the eastern part of the ND and just reverse the colours since so many shield designs are similar. I thought that to be an acceptable solution.

Horse archer units in Britannia   For one person it's pure fantasy and for another a definite possibility. As there is no tangible proof of them ever being there. (And of course no evidence that denies the possibility)

And the "Equites Syri" are a strange lot. But Luke Uedasarson's site says:

The Equites Syri are somewhat of an enigma, as again no such unit is listed as being under the Magister Equitum's cavalry roster; they might well be one of the units listed under the Dux Britanniarum. A now lost alter (RIB 764) from Kirkby Thore (Barboniaco in the Notitia, where the Praefectus numeri defensorum is stationed under the Dux Britanniarum) might attest (according to one reconstruction of the text) to a N[umerus] M[ilitum] S[yorum] S[agittariorum]; horse archers seem likely enough for a Syrian unit, although it is hard to see a unit of sagittarii in the cavalry units listed under the two British limitanei commanders and described as equites; accordingly they could well be one of the alae, but again, which one is hard to make out. Perhaps they are instead the men under the Praefectus numeri barcariorum Tigrisiensium. The origin of this unit (meaning the "Tigris bargemen") is clearly from the Tigris river, which was not normally accounted as being part of Roman Syria, but this was usually because the Roman border stopped at the Euphrates, and did not normally extend as far as the Tigris. However, it is difficult to see a unit of boatmen being equated with horse archers (any kind of or cavalrymen for that matter), and it may be that the Equites Syri have nothing to do with horse archers, as the enigmatic "NMSS" can easily be expanded in many other ways that do not mention either Syria or sagittarii, in which case they could easily be any of a number of the equites or alae units mentioned under the Dux. A 3rd century inscription (RIB 780, image here) from Brovacum (Brougham) records a N(umerus) EQQ [St]RATONICIANORUM which might well refer to what is the Equites Syri in the Notitia, since Stratonice is a common location name in ancient Syria (the most famous Stratonice being Antiochus Soter's wife, but the name was given to many women of the Seleucid dynasty, for whom places were subsequently named after).

+ If I might speculate; maybe the text of the lost altar might have been "Numerus Militum Syorum Stratonicianorum", making it two referneces to the "Equites Syri". And it could be then that their name was longer, for example: "Equites Syri Stratoniciani".
+ Or another (wild) speculation; maybe the mistake of the "Equites Taifali" and "Equites Honoriani Seniores" being one and the same could be repeated here. Perhaps the Equites Syri might be the same as the "Equites Stablesiani" under the Comes Britanniae. So they might have been called "Equites Stablesiani Syri". Farfetched and I might be looking for links that aren't there, but there is a unit under the Dux Scythiae called "Cuneus Equitum Stablesianorum" stationed at Cius. Perhaps the writer mistook the Scythian Cius (Ciri?) as being from Syria.
+ One last uneducated guess; seeing as the Taifali were in Britannia and came from beyond the Danubian Limes, perhaps the Syri might be another Germano/Sarmatian tribe. And they could have been the Scirii. Not the bigest or well-known tribe and the only really famous member was Odoacer.

A lot if's and maybe's and no hard proof to back anything up. So it's a free pass to do as you like  

scutarii Aureliaci - I'm taking a gamble and making them light horse (since I already have the medium Honoriani and heavy Taifali.) Many of the figures are unarmored GB models which come with large cast-on shields, so I'm hoping the "scutarii" in their name is not just a title.

Like MDM said, in late Roman times Scutarii wasn't really a reference of their shield type anymore. It might have meant something like guardsmen.
And this unit as another were you can speculate all you want. As they might have been the same as a Limitanei unit called "numeri Maurorum Aurelianorum", a Moorish unit created by Aurelian, and attested as being in Britannia. Or they might have been an unrelated but similarly unit coming from Gallic Aurelianum (modern day Orlèans).
This one depends on how you want to interpret their name as they were either North-Africans or Gauls.
And maybe choose between two types of skincoloured paint  
EDIT: further reading on the Maurorum units indicates that the name doesn't mean an ethnicity but a type of unit, meaning a cavalry unit armed in the Mauretanian style. Although even that is speculation at best.

Good! That's what I'll do. I'm using GB cataphracts for Taifali, they also have cast on shields and the one who do not get the small Byzantine bucklers on their arm. I have to tell you, painting some semblance of the imago on those small cataphract shields is going to be a real challenge!  

Well, you could paint the imago like the artist of the Notitia did; a small blue circle  

And... just finished Schola scutariorum clibanariorum yesterday , hope to have a post up sometime this week

I wait with baited breath!

By the way, the same goes for various titles, such as "scutarii", "balistarii", or "exculcatores". If these units were distinguished by their use of shields, artillery, or heavy boots, is rather doubtful.

I've also read somewhere the idea that names like Cornuti (the horned ones), Brachiati (wearers of upper arm bracelets), Petulantes (headstrong, bold), etc are meant to be a figurative name of an attribute of these units.
(My English is failing me here, I hope that was readable)
For example of the Cornuti; their horns might be an attribute of the bull. As in that the Cornuti might have had an impressive charge akin to the bull.
Or Brachiati; the focus on the upper arm might mean something like they had good throwing arms.
The name of the Petulantes sound rather self explanatory under this theory  

[Richard in Sachsen]

@ Mad Doc.

Thanks for the input, that is also very, very helpful. I have Barker's book and actually, that's what led me to ask here for clarification as he is a bit ambiguous on late Roman standard bearers. That is, he writes something to the effect of they looked like prior standard bearers but he does offer an illustration of a regularly dressed late Roman with a draco.

I think I'm just going to play it safer on this one and use regular figures with either vexillum or dracos depending on the rank of the commander, for my infantry commanders.

The cavalry was giving me the most headache as I was under the impression that they all carried dracos but ran across something of certain units carrying vexillum. In this case, I'll follow Jericho's suggestion.

By the way, the same goes for various titles, such as "scutarii", "balistarii", or "exculcatores". If these units were distinguished by their use of shields, artillery, or heavy boots, is rather doubtful.

I kinda figured that but there is this unarmored cavalry unit with large cast-on shields that I have and wanted to use them as light horse. I thought that they might be a good fit for the Scutarii unit, which seems to be either a limitanei or numeri unit as the shield design is not listed, so I need to think of something anyway.

Thanks for the very useful input.

@Jericho

Uh oh, well, I suppose the unit of horse archers will be reassigned to the continental field army once I get around to painting it, I'm working on the British one first as it's smaller and I need that sense of getting something done to keep the motivation going enough to keep hacking away at the lead pile

See, you just saved me from another major faux pas with the horse archers in Britain - the last one was making Stilicho's guard Schola infantry until I found out Scola were all cavalry - saved that one by adding some cavalry and using the already painted infantry as dismounted cavalry troops

This was the key quote from Luke that led me to designate them as horse archers:

horse archers seem likely enough for a Syrian unit, although it is hard to see a unit of sagittarii in the cavalry units listed under the two British limitanei commanders and described as equites; accordingly they could well be one of the alae, but again, which one is hard to make out.

When I read that I was thinking a small unit of horse archers or an alae of horse archers, either way I read that as horse archers.

Well, I just need to assign unarmored light cavalry with big shields to something under the Comes. It seems from what you are saying that it should reasonably pass as scutarii Aureliaci. And besides, my four-year-old daughter whose name is Aurelia, definitely wants daddy to name some Romans after her after I told her the horses that I was filing belong to a group of Romans with her name

[olicana]

A very interesting thread.

I'm now so glad I did late Republicans. Some history goes a long way. A little history confuses everything.