4. The Roman miliTaRy BelT Stefanie Hoss how do you recognize a Roman soldier for what he is – when he’s on the street, alone and without his weapons and armour? he written sources attest that the soldiers were indeed identiiable: he narrator of apuleius’ satirical novel ‘he Golden ass’ describes a man as being recognisably “miles e legione” (a soldier and legionary) and he also tells us how he recognized this: hrough his “habitus atque habitude” (dress and manner). his 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 this article, i will not speculate on the ‘manner’ of the soldiers setting them apart from the average Roman man on the street, but instead concentrate on the dress. 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.4 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, ixed on the right shoulder with a ibula. neither the tunica nor the cloak seem to have difered much from average well-of civilian clothing. he truly distinguishing factor of the military dress were the sandals (caligae) and the military belt. WRiTTen souRces legally, the wearing of arms – especially a sword – at all times in public deined the soldier as such. in extension, the belt to which the sword was fastened became a distinguishing feature of soldierly dress. it became invested with meaning to such an extend that taking away the military belt of a . apul., Met. iX, 9. . With ‘Roman soldier’, i would like to indicate all ranks from centurion downwards here. . For the manner of the soldiers, see James 00 and James 00, . 4. edmonson 00. he female counterpart of the toga was the stola, to which only married (female) Roman citizens were entitled. . he tunica was fairly short and had short sleeves, the soldiers having exposed arms and legs. his dress can be observed on most military gravestones. it is likely that soldiers wore this sort of dress most of the time when not on campaign. in Roman military archaeology, it is usually called ‘camp dress’. speidel 9, 4; Bishop and coulston 00, . . coulston 004, 4. see also the article of a. Paetz gen. schieck in this volume. . Brunt 9. civilians were allowed weapons to defend themselves in dangerous situations, for instance while travelling. . his also had a practical reason: the scabbard was ixed to the belt in a way that was durable (but not completely permanent). if one wanted to take of the sword – and not wear the belt with the empty scabbard – one had to take of the belt (or later on the baldric). his practicality has remained more or less the same until today (for dress swords). it is 0 Stefanie Hoss soldier in public for hours or days was a humiliation used as a disciplinary measure by their superiors.9 Taking away the military belt permanently after a capitulation or during a dishonourable discharge from the army seems also to have been practised.0 he signiicance 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 of their military belt in public. he military belt of the Roman soldier can therefore be deined 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. he term cingulum for this belt has become customary in Roman archaeology, but it is unlikely that this was the name of the waist-belt before the third century. most ancient sources seem to use the noun balteus when speaking of the military belt, a term which in Roman archaeology has been used to indicate a diferent kind of sword belt that was in use from the nd century aD onwards. his leather band ran from the right shoulder across the body to the left hip with the sword hanging from the lowest point at the hip (see Fig. 4.). he use of the term balteus for this shoulder belt (or baldric) is undisputed, as is the use of cingulum militare for the waist-belt from the rd century onwards.4 it seems likely that the term balteus switched from the waist-belt to the shoulder-belt when the sword was carried on the latter instead of the former. his could indicate that balteus was the word for a sword-belt while cingulum indicated just a regular belt interestingly, the waist-belt kept its symbolic meaning even after the sword was carried on the baldric. it is used even more frequently as a ‘marker’ piece of equipment on funerary monuments of soldiers in the third century than in the previous two. his is conirmed by the name of the belt at that time, cingulum militare. he military 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. in addition to that, experimental archaeology has shown the heaviness of the military belt favours a peculiar manner of standing and walking. his was reinforced by the heavy cloak and the sword (either on the waist-belt or later on the baldric). all of the above is commented upon as compelling the wearer to stand upright and move in a characteristic way, as well as hindering violent movement (especially running). From both these modern indings as well as ancient comments on the posture conirmed by the so-called herculaneum soldier, who carried a sword with a belt wrapped around it while trying to lee the city. Bishop and coulston 00, 0. 9. livius, XXVii, , 9; Frontinus, Stratagemata iV, i, –, 4; Valerius Maximus ii, , 9; Plutarch Luc. ; suet. Octavian 4. 0. herodotus, Hist. ii, , –0; Festus 04, Codex heodosianus Xii, ,  §. . Woods 99, –0. . While the term balteus is more common as a noun, the verb-forms derived from the term cingulum (cingere, accingere, discingere) are used with regularity by the ancient writers. hoss, (forthcoming); müller , . . Bishop 99, 0–0; Bishop/coulston 00, 0. 4. Bishop/coulston 00, 0. . Bishop/coulston 00, 0. . Petronius, satyricon, ; Bishop/coulston 00, 4; James 00, . . James concedes that this posture would “go out of the window in combat”, but that it was highly inluential for the manner of standing and walking afected by Roman soldiers when not wearing arms (James 00, ). his stance was also an integral part of the soldier’s identity (see James 999). 4. he Roman Military Belt  and deportment of soldiers, it seems that Roman soldiers were prone to a somewhat swaggering, wide-legged manner of standing and walking. as to the question of ownership of the belts, papyri and literary sources prove that, at joining the army, one set of standard equipment was given to the soldiers out of a unit stock depot (armamentarium). hey had to pay for it by deductions from their pay, which probably helped to ensure they took good care of it.9 a similar system seems viable for the military belts, especially considering that they were made in the camps themselves (see below). as with the other equipment, it was possible to add to this stock and buy your own, perhaps reselling your old equipment to the unit.0 Tacitus writes about some soldiers who gave their belts in lieu of money, which proves that they must have been both valuable and the personal property of the soldiers in question. he inds of buckles and plates of military belts in graves further proves this point. as the military belts probably were taken away at a dishonourable discharge, having your belt as a veteran might have been one of the outer signs of a honourable discharge. DePicTions oF Roman solDieR’s BelTs one of the main problems posed by the Roman military belt is the reconstruction of the precise form and location of the metal parts on the leather of the belt and of the manner it was worn by the men. Finds of complete sets of military belts from graves are quite rare. most inds of metal belt pieces were made individually, the pieces having been lost or broken and either thrown away or put aside for recycling in antiquity.4 consequently, the reconstruction of the appearance of the belt relies to a great extend on the evidence of representations of military belts. soldiers and their belts are depicted regularly on oicial Roman triumphal ‘propaganda’ reliefs and on the private funerary monuments of the soldiers. he latter group is the largest by far, including at least some 0 monuments. While the problems around the accuracy of those depictions of equipment are manifold, it can be said in general that the depictions on the oicial ‘propaganda’ reliefs are better executed from an qualitative point of view, but tend to have more stylized depictions of soldier’s equipment, even using outdated forms of equipment in a sort of visual conservatism. equipment was also often depicted smaller than in reality in order to be able to place more emphasis on the body, an important . Breeze et al. 9, 9. 9. Tact., Ann., ,. 0. Reselling certainly happened on death or retirement. see Breeze et al. 9, 94. . Tact., Hist., i, . . contrary to weapons, belts are sometimes found in graves (see Breeze et al. 9). on belt inds in graves as a sign for veterans see mackensen 9, –9. . a military diploma in bronze was one of the possible oicial proofs of a soldier’s honourable discharge, but there must also have been records held by his former unit (see van Driel-murray 00, ). 4. While re-melting old artefacts for their metal was common practice in antiquity (and later), some large military waste dumps prove that the Roman army was not always so thrifty. examples of such waste dumps are the river dump of alphen aan de Rijn (nl) and the ‘schutthügel’ of Vidonissa (ch). in the latter, almost 00 belt pieces were found. . Bishop/coulston 00, . . his is a minimum number, as many are unpublished yet and more are found every year. coulston 00, 4, note . . Bishop/coulston 00, –9.  Stefanie Hoss principle in hellenistic artistic tradition. he private monuments on the other hand place a greater emphasis on the accuracy of the depiction of the equipment while often being of a lesser quality in workmanship. here, some symbolic pieces of equipment (sword, decorations, etc.) were sometimes enlarged to make them stand out more.9 in addition to that, ‘shorthand’ decorations seem to have been used sometimes. one example is the common depiction of rosettes on belt plates. hese are unlikely to be a correct representation of reality, as such belt plates have not been found yet among the ample archaeological inds of st century belt plates. it seems viable that these rosettes were a ‘shorthand’ decoration chosen for the double merits of being fairly simple in execution while conveying an appearance of lavish decoration on the belt plates. Both ‘propaganda’ reliefs and funerary monuments have in common that at irst glace they impress with the apparent realism of their depiction, but that the viewer is disappointed after a more thorough examination: almost always, the exact construction of a piece of equipment cannot be reconstructed from the relief. apart from non-iconic monuments, the gravestones of the soldiers could depict the deceased either in a relief with a civilian subject (e.g. in the so-called Totenmahlszene) or as a soldier. When a military setting was chosen, cavalrymen usually were depicted in proile on their horses, riding down an enemy.0 Both the position in proile as well as the proportionality of the composition (requiring a fairly small representation of the person) severely limit the information that can be gained on the belt from these monuments. infantrymen and marines on the other hand were shown standing frontally, usually unarmoured, but with the belt and sidearms prominently displayed (see Figs 4. and 4.). his motive irst appears in italy and is transferred with the troops to the Rhineland, where it was very popular in the Tiberian period. From there it spread to Britain and in other provinces, but became rare during the nd century aD, when anionic monuments and those with civilian subjects were preferred. From the severan period onwards, funerary monuments depicting the deceased as a soldier again became more common, ultimately even resulting in the fact that the number of funerary monuments depicting soldiers dating from the rd century is much larger than the number from both the st and nd centuries together (see Fig. 4.4).4 From the late rd century onwards, these funerary monuments again became rare. contemporary triumphal reliefs are even less informative, due to the re-use of older relief pieces, and the depiction of outdated forms of equipment. in both groups of monuments from that period, the quality of workmanship and/or conservation is often too poor to allow any conclusions on the belt beyond it’s mere existence. exceptions are the cuirassed Tetrachs form Venice and two cloaked (chlamys) statues from Ravenna and Vienna. on the other hand, mosaics and wall-paintings from this period do give some important . coulston 9, 4–, 4. 9. coulston 00, –. 0. hoss, (in print). . his changed in the third century, when cavalrymen also preferred stelae with full-length depictions of frontally standing men. see hoss 00. . see for instance the catalogue numbers , , 4, , , 9, 0 in Boppert 99 and the catalogue numbers , , ,  in Bauchhenss 9. . Boppert 99, 4–0; coulston 00, 44. 4. coulston 00, –44; 49. . Bishop and coulston 00, –9; coulston 00, 4–4. . Bishop and coulston 00, 9, ig. 4. 4. he Roman Military Belt Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2  4 Stefanie Hoss information on the military belt, especially on the possible colours, demonstrating that the belts were often dyed red. he most important of those are the so-called Terentius painting from Dura europos – a wall-painting depicting an act of sacriice of a tribune surrounded by his men – and the mosaics of the Villa del casale at Piazza amerina, which show soldiers catching and loading/ unloading wild beasts. The meTal BelT Pieces metal belt plates have two general uses: he irst is to stifen the belt and prevent curling of the leather, especially with heavy loads worn on the belt. he second is the same as with other decorative items worn on prominent areas of the body and involves a complex set of messages to the viewers which include enhancing the wearer’s status and conirming his ailiation to certain groups – both important parts of identity. in ancient societies (as in modern ones), artefacts are not purely functional, but rather “active elements in the very construction of […] identity, it’s physical experience, and it’s visual signiication”. 9 he notion that identity is constructed and negotiated through the use and experience of objects has been widely accepted now in theoretical archaeology.40 most of the metal parts of the belt were made from copper alloys.4 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 st century, 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 diferent techniques, casting (lost mould or two-part mould) or embossing, or a combination of both. ivory or bone would be simply cut. he surface of the metal plates could then be further decorated by engraving and cutting or by using niello or enamel decorations.4 While many early belts seems to have had metal plates on the entire front side of the soldier, it is thought that there were no plates on the soldier’s back.4 he military belt of the ‘typical’ infantryman during the pre-Flavian st century consisted of two rather narrow belts worn crossing at mid-body, ‘cowboy-fashion’ (see Fig. 4.).44 he leather was completely covered with metal plates on the front at least. hese plates were rectangular and either silvered or both decorated with niello and silvered. a third type had large round boss-like protrusions and a forth was decorated with embossed igurative decorations (see n. ). he belt plates were ixed to the leather of the belt by rivets driven through pre-drilled holes. except for centurions and standard-bearers, the soldier wore one sidearm on each belt: his short . While most belts pictured in colour in either mosaics or wall-paintings are brown, some are red (hoss, forthcoming). he Terentius painting shows belts that seem to be dyed on one side only, see James 00, . . Terentius painting: James 00, 9, ig. ; mosaics: caradini et al 9, igs , 9, , , , , 0. 9. James 00, . 40. see for instance the section on the identities of Romano-British artefacts in G. Davies, a. Gardner and K. lockyear (eds) (00). TRac 000: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual heoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, University College London, April 2000, oxford. 4. either called bronze or brass according to the various alloying agents, such as zinc, tin, lead, etc. (see Brown 9, –). hey were used fairly indiscriminately and are all referred to as ´bronze´ in Roman archaeology. 4. hoss, (forthcoming). 4. his is conirmed by the ind from Velsen (morel/Bosman 99) and contradicted by the ind from herculaneum (Bishop/coulston 00, 0). 44. Bishop/coulston 00, 0; hoss, forthcoming. 4. he Roman Military Belt  sword on the right hip and a dagger on the left.4 While the sword was ixed to the belt in a durable fashion, the dagger was easier to take of the belt, being ixed with leather straps to special attachment plates with protruding buttons, so-called ‘frogs’, which were ixed with hinges to the belt plates (see Figs 4. and 4., Velsen belt). he belts were closed with D-shaped belt buckles, decorated with volutes and also ixed to the irst belt plate with a hinge. he belt buckles were usually worn in the area of the belly button or to the right or left of the apron (see below). he strap-ends issuing from the buckle were sometimes decorated with hangers. But the most intriguing detail of this belt was the so-called ‘apron’, a set of four to eight leather straps decorated with narrow plates and disc-shaped studs and terminating in leaf-, heart- or moonshaped hangers.4 as far as can be seen on the monuments, the straps were ixed (riveted or sewed) to the inside of the lower of the two belts (see Fig. 4.).4 his ‘apron’ has often been argued to have been used as a real or psychological protection of the wearer’s lower abdomen and groin area. experimental archaeology has proven the contrary, namely that during violent movement (e.g. running), the weighted straps swinging between the wearer’s legs are apt to form a risk to the groin area.4 it seems more likely that the apron had no practical use, but has to be interpreted as a mark of status for the soldiers, maximising the characteristic jingling.49 a simpliication of this set is worn from the Flavian period onwards: a single belt with both the sword and the dagger hanging from it. he apron is wrapped around the belt from behind to the fore, perhaps to shorten it.0 his manner of wearing the belt continues into the irst decades of the second century, the visually most important change being the introduction of enamel decorations, which made the belt quite colourful. During the antonine period (– aD), a complete change of the metal decoration of the belt takes place. he carriage of the sword changes from the waist-belt to the shoulder-belt. his may have been occasioned by the change from two belts to one. another possibility is for the baldric to have become necessary because of the introduction of a longer sword and/or a change of tactics, making it possible to draw the sword across the soldier’s front. he latter would indicate, that the soldiers did not ight in as tightly massed ranks as they had before. 4. centurions and standard-bearers wore their sword on the left hip. 4. With two exceptions, the metal apron plates, rivets and hangers have been found as individual inds (resulting in a lot of discussion as to which types were used on the ‘apron’ and which on horse harness). one exception is a ind from a grave in Tekije (sRB), the other a 9th century ind from the Rhine at mainz, a single apron leather strap (c. 0 cm), decorated with  studs with round, lat heads and a leaf-shaped terminal hanging from a rectangular piece of metal encasing the whole strap (see Bishop 99, 94–9). 4. according to the depictions, the apron was ixed to the lower of the two belts, which at the same time usually was the inner belt and the belt on which the dagger was worn. it seems possible that this was done on purpose to be able to minimize the jingling by simply removing the dagger belt. Because the dagger sheath was ixed to the belt with frogs, it could fairly easily be removed. (hoss, forthcoming). 4. Bihsop/coulston 00, 0. 49. Bishop/coulston speak of the “impossibility of stealth” while wearing an apron, but stress that a whole legion marching past must have made quite an impressive sound (Bishop and coulston 00, 0). 0. see for instance two funerary monuments from Greece (von moock 99, no. , 4) and the signiier on the left side of the Great Trajanic Frieze on constantine’s arch (Koeppel 9, cat no. 9, ig. ). . Bishop and coulston 00, . . he shorter st century sword was probably drawn with the right hand by dipping the mouth of the sheath forward with the thumb and then extracting the sword with the right hand (hoss, forthcoming). his was necessary in the tightly massed formations of the st century, minimising the danger of the soldier’s inadvertently wounding their fellow-soldiers  Figure 4.3 Stefanie Hoss 4. he Roman Military Belt  he fact that the waist-belt – which no longer gets it’s signiicance from the fact that the sword is carried on it – continues to characterize the soldier (as proven by the fact that it still features quite prominently on the funerary monuments of soldiers that date from this and later periods) is a testimony to the conservatism of soldiers as a group. During the same period, the apron vanished and the attachment of the belt buckles to the belt changed: he new buckle type has a key-hole form; with a c-shaped buckle and a roughly triangular, open loop at one end. he buckles were fasted to the belt by passing a metal tongue through this loop and then ixing the tongue on the backside of the belt through the leather to the irst belt plate. in a simpler and cheaper version of this method, the leather of the belt itself probably passed through the loop and was then ixed by sewing or riveting it on the belt (in efect forming a leather loop). he dagger fastenings also changed from hinges to a loop. in addition to that, the belt plates were no longer fasted by individual rivets put through pre-drilled holes. instead, short studs with little round ‘feet’ were cast onto the belt plate. he belt plates could then be ‘buttoned’ on to the belt by sliding the ‘feet’ through little slits in the leather. his also ensured that the plates could be retrieved easily.4 he whole ‘look’ of the belt changed as well. he belt decorations up to then had been solid metal plates, mostly tinned or silvered, completely covering the leather of the belt on the front side of the soldier, giving the belt a shiny, silver look. now, the design changed to an interaction between ‘golden’ openwork plates with the tanned (and perhaps coloured) leather visible through them, the whole accented in some types by colourful email.  in addition to that, more valuable materials like silver seem to be used more often. But this impression could also be falsely created by the increase of belt inds from inhumation burials from this period  Because of the material value, silver belt pieces usually were more carefully recycled than cheaper metals and thus hardly ever turn up from refuse dumps. in general, it can be said that the styles of this period show great variation, with many diferent types of belt plates being in fashion at roughly the same time (see Fig. 4.): some types of openwork belt plates were still rectangular, but others had more open forms – rounded and inspired by a revival of so-called ‘celtic’ motives, which have been indicated to have been inspired by forms common in the Danubian provinces (see the examples from Kristein and Faimingen, ig. ). another remarkable style of the period is the fashion for belt plates spelling out mottos (see the examples from lyon, Fig. 4.). hese were usually fairly simple wishes, the most common being “utere felix” (use in happiness). hey were either spelled out on the belt in single letters or worked in openwork into a rectangular belt plate. From the archaeological inds, it seems that belts with standing in front of them. Drawing the sword with the right hand from the left hip needs more space in front. . see hoss 00, 9, ig. . 4. oldenstein 9, 0. . he plates were no longer tinned or silvered as a rule and they were most likely polished to make the bronze shine golden (hoss, forthcoming). . he funerary habit slowly changed from cremation to inhumation during the nd century (Toynbee 9, 40). in an inhumation grave, a belt would stay preserved, while it would usually be burned on the pyre as part of the deceased’s dress during cremation. oldenstein 9, 04, anm. ; James, 00, 4. he most famous of these designs is the so. called ‘trumpet’-design. he open forms make it even more diicult to distinguish between belt plates and plates used on other leather items, e.g. bags. . hoss, 00, 44. Stefanie Hoss  mottos are more concentrated in the region of the middle and lower Danube and Dacia.9 But mottos were a fashion not conined to waistbelts, as the shoulder-belts or baldrics of the same period also had metal plates often bearing mottos in openwork, both belts being most likely conceived as a set. in addition to that, similar mottos were also common on other objects of daily use such as rings, ibulae, spoons and drinking vessels, to name a few.0 on most types of belt plates sets of this period, rings pointing downwards were attached to one or two plates, to facilitate hanging a leather pouch, a knife or other utensils on the belt. another common marker was the long strap-end of the belt, tucked into the belt on the wearer’s right side and hanging to the knee. he ends were slit into two long strips and decorated with intricate hangers with hinges in many diferent forms. hese would jangle together when the soldier moved, making a noise comparable to a bunch of keys – less impressive, but analogous to the ‘sound’ of the st century Figure 4.4 apron. audible signs of the soldier’s approach which had their best efect in large groups – but were also recognizable when a single soldier passed – were thus still very much in favour. While the precise dating of these types generally is diicult, most of them seem to have been in use until the mid-rd century.4 as mentioned above, the number of funerary monuments with depictions of soldiers in military dress (‘camp dress’) increases enormously at the beginning of the rd century (see Fig. 4.4). he depictions are quite stereotypical in content, with infantry and cavalry soldiers dressing the same, even though there are of course many variations in quality. a substantial increase in body-coverage from the st century is noticeable: instead of a short-sleeved and fairly short tunica with naked arms and legs, the soldiers wear a long-sleeved, belted tunica falling to the knees and long tight trousers under it. a cloak is ixed with a ibula on the right shoulder and folded back over the left shoulder, 9. 0. . . . 4. hoss, 00, 4–49. hoss, 00,  (footnote  and 4), 44; Bishop/coulston 00, –, ig. 00, 0 see letter e on the lyon set, ig . Bishop/coulston 00, . James 00, . he exact dating of these belt types is hindered by the fact that the border situation of the Roman empire had consolidated in the second part of the nd century. most forts remained intact until the mid-rd century, which leaves a large group of types of military equipment dating ‘between the mid-nd and the midrd century’ (hoss, forthcoming). . James 00, 4, 49. 4. he Roman Military Belt 9 it falls to the knees and is sometimes decorated with a fringe along the lower edge. not all depictions show the soldier with the sword, but in those that do, the sword is worn on a broad baldric on the left hip. Very often the baldric is Figure 4.5 covered by the fall of the cloak, but in some rare cases, the baldric decoration of round and square decorative plates can be distinguished (see Fig. 4.4). contrary to the baldric, the waist-belt always igures on the depictions and both this and the fact that it is sometimes enlarged demonstrate that it was still a distinctive piece of equipment, distinguishing the soldier from his civilian counterparts. he fairly wide belt (between ,  and 4 cm) of the rd century was closed with a ring-buckle, consisting of a simple ring, worn at the area of the belly button. Rectangular openwork frame ‘buckles’ with a curvilinear, so-called “celtic” design in the middle fulilled the same function as the ring-buckles (see Fig. 4.). hese are depicted on just a few funerary monuments, while ringbuckles are depicted on at least 0 monuments.  interestingly, the archaeological evidence is quite the opposite: only roughly a dozen ring-buckles have been identiied so far, while almost 0 frame buckles from austria, Britain, Germany, hungary, morocco, Romania and switzerland have been published. it seems very likely that this disproportion is due to the fact that the simple bronze or iron rings were not recognized as ring-buckles. he leather strap of the belt was passed through the ring or frame from the back on both sides and back along the front. he strap was ixed by sliding fungiform studs ixed to the front of the belt (roughly equidistant between hip and belly button) through slits in the leather strap. While the strap was often (but not always) fairly short on the wearer’s left side, almost ending at the stud, the strap was longer and thinner on the right side. it could either fall to the knee from the stud, or – more often – was brought back in a long crescent loop to the belt and tucked behind the broad belt (sometimes this loop can be observed on both sides, see Fig. 4.4). as with the earlier types, the strap-end was often split into two and always decorated with hangers, dangling around the area of the knee. on some rd century depictions, the soldiers hold this end in their right hand and seem to play with it; thus directing the viewer’s attention to the belt as a distinctive piece of equipment. 9 his gesture may also be the shadow of a familiar sight in that period: soldiers twirling their beltstraps on the streets.0 he origin of this belt has been previously assumed to have been Danubian or sarmatian; a relatively new suggestion points to the eastern provinces of the empire. hese were almost constant theatres of war during the rd century, with many troops gathering and coming into contact with the enemy, facilitating the transfer and exchange of belt fashions from the latter . hoss, forthcoming. . hoss, forthcoming. . such rings are common in Roman period inds and were used for a variety of purposes. it is thus quite understandable that buckle rings were missed in loose inds. as rings of a similar size were often used on small caskets, rings found in graves were probably also often missed. 9. see for instance the monument of an unknown soldier from herakleia Pontica (coulston 9, pl. 4) and the monuments of two unknown soldiers from Perinthos (sayar 99, cat. no , , p. , ig. , 4). 0. oral communication Jon coulston and simon James. Stefanie Hoss 40 and among each other. During the late rd century, a larger and more elaborate version of the frame buckle evolved, made from silver with intricate openwork decoration set of with niello. in the 4th century, the carriage of the sword seems to have reverted to the waist-belt. unfortunately, not many depictions are known from this period (see above) and most of the information we have about the belts of that time comes from graves, which are very often insecurely dated. in the irst half of the century, the belts were closed with belt buckles often decorated with dolphins head-to-head and connected to an openwork belt plate with hinges (see Fig. 4.). next to this, so-called ‘belt stifeners’ in the form of a propeller were worn and along the lower edge of the belt, small round plates decorated with a rosette were ixed, holding a ring for hanging utensils or a leather pouch. he leather strap-end of the belt usually was decorated with an amphora- or lancet-shaped Figure 4.6 strap-end hanger.4 During the second half of the 4th century, the belts became even broader (–0 cm) and were closed with buckles which were let into large, rectangular or pentagonal belt plates by hinges (see Fig. 4.). he buckles were often decorated with two animals, but facing towards the hinge rather than towards each other. he actual leather strap passing through the buckle from behind the plate was much less wide than the belt itself. it was often quite long, though, wrapped around the belt several times and decorated with a strap-end hanger. Belts could have several of the large plates alternating with propeller belt stifeners and rosette-ring plates. all plates and the hanger were decorated in the geometric, so-called ‘chip-carving’ style (often enhanced with niello inlay).  his type has long been thought to have been brought into the Roman army by German soldiers, who were either serving in the Roman army itself or serving as allied soldier-farmers (laeti). some of the chip-carved belt plates also feature classical motives which neither occur in the home regions of these German soldiers nor in their graves on Roman territory. consequently, it seems likely that these must have been in use by the regular Roman army itself. James has lately pointed out that buckles with paired, confronted animals are known from the iranian region, and that it might be possible that this style also emerged from the east rather than the north, as the east was a regular theatre of war for the Roman army at that time. another possibility for the origin of this style of belt may have been a combination of Germanic and iranian inluences, by which the Germans in the Roman army inluenced the form and the contact with both the classical world and the Parthian and sassanid armies had an inluence on the decoration of the belt. he type stayed in use until well into the th century. . . . 4. . . . James 00, 49–0. Fischer 9; hoss, forthcoming. Bishop and coulston 00, . Bishop and coulston 00, –0. Bishop and coulston 00, 0–4. Bishop and coulston 00, 4. James 00, . 4. he Roman Military Belt 4 PRoDucTion anD DisTRiBuTion in the mediterranean area, the production of the belt pieces was most likely in the hands of private workshops in the cities. When the Roman army conquered areas to the north of the alps, it moved into a region that did not have an advanced enough bronze production to satisfy the enormous demand. Belt pieces were then produced by the army itself, a side-product along weapons and amour. Finds of moulds, embossing stamps and half-inished products as well as literary, sub-literary and epigraphic evidence prove that the production was done in the army camps by the soldiers themselves – sometimes in large workshops turning out great quantities (fabricae), sometimes in a more haphazardly fashion. While most evidence for military production comes from the nd and rd century, evidence for production in the towns and cities (vici and canabae) that developed around the forts and camps also starts in the nd century.9 it is still a matter of speculation if the latter was military or civil. it seems likely that the veterans settling near their old comrades in the direct environs of the forts and camps continued to work in the trades they had learned in the army.0 But if their workshops were really private or just moved outside the camp because of the ire hazard is still a matter of dispute. it might also well be that the artisans worked on contract for the army, but could also be approached by private individuals. another suggestion has been that the essentials of weapons and armour were produced by the army itself, while the decorative elements of the belt and horse’s harness were left to private workshops. contrary to this, some exceptional pieces were most likely made centrally, in state owned workshops. he prime example is a Flavian type of rivet, decorated with igurative relief, which according to the huge numbers found there (00 rivets), seems to have been made in one workshop in Besançon and – considering the motives used for the decoration – given to the soldiers as a sort of propaganda. hese state-issued decorations probably were not pressed on the soldiers, but on the contrary could have been marks of honour much coveted by them.4 Diferences in the military belts between the diferent parts of the Roman army (legions, auxiliary infantry and cavalry and the navy), are diicult to prove, as most camps were occupied by diferent unit types throughout their history, with vexillations of legions and ancillary cavalry or other auxiliary units being deployed as needed and thus ‘muddling’ the archaeological record. in addition to that, inds from graves are rare and sometimes also confusing: he famous grave of chassenard (Dept. alliers), dating from the Tiberian period, is interpreted as the grave of a local nobleman, buried with his helmet mask (identifying him as cavalryman) and belt with an ornate gilded buckle with decorations of hunting scenes and three gilded belt plates with an embossed decoration depicting the head of Tiberius between cornucopiae. at irst, this seemed a conirmation of cavalrymen wearing belts decorated with metal plates. another possible explanation is, that the chassenard soldier had . 9. 0. . . . . 4. . Bishop and coulston 00, –40, ig. 49. Gschwind 99, 9–. Van Driel-murray 00, –. Van Driel-murray 00, . nicolay 00, . his arrangement seems sensible, but has not been proven. he four main motives are: Victoria navalis, Victoria on a chariot, eagle, male head with wreath. Feugère 9, , Bishop/coulston 00, . see Beck and chew 1992. 4 Stefanie Hoss been an infantryman at some point in his life, a career move that is known from other soldiers. it seems more likely though, that he received the belt as a mark of distinction and/or imperial gift. he latter explanation would it with the interpretation of this grave as belonging to a high-ranking member of the tribal elite who had personally led an auxiliary cavalry unit of his tribesmen in the Roman army. he best evidence for diferences in the belts of diferent parts of the army come from depictions on funerary monuments announcing the deceased’s career and thus ailiation to a certain unit type. hese show legionary and auxiliary infantrymen as well as marines with the same type of belts. his is remarkable, because the types of units otherwise difered in many aspects. it seems likely that practical matters were more important here, since the only diference in belt design that can be inferred from the funerary monuments is the one between infantry and navy on the one side and cavalry on the other. as a cavalryman had to sit on a horse, a belt decorated with inlexible metal plates was most likely simply impractical. in addition to that, the belt could not fulil its secondary function of enhancing the status and conirming the ailiation of the wearer if it was not seen and heard.9 it seems that – at least until the introduction of the ring buckle belt in the rd century – the Roman cavalryman wore a diferent military belt from the infantryman, namely a belt without metal belt plates and just a simple belt buckle, perhaps with a single belt plate.90 indicators for fashions in units or larger regional groups (e.g. the ‘Rhine army’) have been identiied only cautiously up to now, as much of the work to be done is still at an initial stage.9 one of the strong contenders is a type of belt piece with embossed igurative decoration.9 he majority of these belt plates were found in upper Germany, with some coming from along the Rhine in lower Germany and from the south coast of england (see Fig. 4.).9 heir dating and distribution pattern points to their (mainly) being used by the units of upper Germany, who were part of the army invading Britain.94 Fashions in belt decoration probably developed in the lower ranks of the army (that is, from . an example of this career move from a generation later is the famous Tiberius claudius maximus, captor of Decebalus. see speidel 94. . Beck and chew 1992. . he legionaries were Roman citizens, while the auxiliaries and marines were not, an important diference in legal status (Vittinghof 9). in addition to that, the legionaries received more pay and had a diferent social status (speidel 000). here is some evidence that these unit types also had diferent weapons and/or armour (Bishop and coulston 00, 4–). if the military equipment found round the bay of naples indeed belonged to marines from the naval base at misenum, their equipment – including the belt – seems not to have difered from the infantry (ortisi 00). he same can be postulated for the Rhine leet’s headquarters at Köln-alteburg, where an assembly of military equipment was found that is familiar from contemporary infantry camps (cahn et al. 00). 9. But the cavalryman could – and did – use the horse’s harness for a display of his wealth, status and group ailiation by itting it out with decorative plates and hangers, blinking and jingling even more. see Junkelmann 99, –. 90. see hoss 00. he ind of a early nd century belt with a spatha (cavalry sword) and a belt buckle with only one belt plate in Koblenz-niederberg proves that the belt was still largely without metal plates at that time (Jost 00, 49–, hoss 00, 0). of course this does not imply that the cavalrymen’s belt had to be completely undecorated. he baldrics from Vimose moor in Denmark (although of a later date) are decorated with embroidery (see Gräf 00, ). Decoration by colouring or branding and cutting the leather are also possible. 9. Bishop and coulston 00, 0. 9. Four main types of decoration are known for this belt plate: a lotus lower, a hunting scene, the Lupa Romana and the portrait of the emperor between conurcopiae. he motives of the latter two make it very likely that they were given to soldiers on special occasions as part of imperial propaganda. Künzl 994, 4; hoss, forthcoming. 9. Bishop/coulston 00, 0; hoss, forthcoming. 94. oldenstein 9, ; hoss, forthcoming. 4. he Roman Military Belt 4 Figure 4.7 centurion downwards) without conscious organisation. as both the waist-belt and the shoulderbelt had to conirm only to minimum standards of functionality, their decoration probably ofered the best opportunity for any individual soldier to express personal symbolism and individualism. his would argue for a wide variety of vastly diferent belt decorations in use at the same time. in contrast to this, belt fashions exhibit a high amount of homogeneity across the whole Roman empire from hadrian’s Wall to Dura europos and from morocco to Romania. his was most likely caused by an abstract idea of the Roman soldiers identity and worth, which also controlled the choices of belt design.9 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 beit the occupants of that position”.9 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 9. James 00, . 9. Bourdieu 94, 4. 44 Stefanie Hoss to a group of younger men. his 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.9 he 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. in a rare interaction between internal pressures to conform to tradition and custom and a desire for novel styles, belt fashions evolved to express the common identity and solidarity of the Roman soldiers.9 he immense ighting success of the Roman army lay not in the ferocity of its ighters outdoing each other in feats of daring, but in the co-ordinated co-operation of many individuals, making that success – and thus the survival of each individual – dependant on their solidarity and their feelings of communality. he Roman military belt was the outward manifestation of this and a central part of the Roman soldier’s identity. he author wishes to thank the organizers of the conference for the inclusion of this article in the conference proceedings despite the fact that she was unable to attend the conference 9. James 00, . 9. James 00, .