“Mummy mask. Egypt, Roman Period, 2nd century A.D. Gilded plaster.
This mask would have covered the upper part of a bandaged mummy. A young woman is represented wearing elaborate jewelry including a ring, earrings, a necklace, and a pair of snake bracelets. A similar ring and earrings are exhibited nearby. Lent by Paul Tripp” Per the description in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, Massachusetts, USA where this object was on a temporary loan from a private collection when I photographed it.

Unlike the Celts, the Romans cannot claim to have conquered the Germanic peoples on anything like the scale of Caesar's conquest of Gaul. They never managed to permanently subjugate most of Germania east of the Rhine, and their most substantial attempt to consolidate control over the region ended in disaster at Teutoburg Forest.

Sure, Germanicus subsequently defeated the coalitions led by Arminius, but these were notoriously unstable alliances between competing tribes. People sometimes act as though Germanicus's victories prove that Rome could have easily conquered Germania, when defeating individual coalitions is not the same as permanently subjugating an entire region. Had Germanicus attempted to push further into Germania and establish permanent Roman control, he could easily have provoked another rebellion on the scale of Teutoburg. The idea that further conquest would have been an easy victory, as some popular historical discussions seem to suggest, is highly questionable.

Modern archaeology has shown, in my view, that Germanic societies were considerably more sophisticated than Roman stereotypes often gave them credit for. In the popular imagination, it's almost as if they went from a prehistoric level of development to fielding heavy cavalry in the 3rd century

I mean, do we really think the sophisticated societies of Anglo-Saxon England and the Carolingian Empire just sprang up out of nowhere after the fall of Rome? The late Roman Empire had already become increasingly reliant on soldiers and commanders of Germanic origin, many of whom served in prominent positions within the Roman military. These peoples already possessed established military traditions, political structures and sophisticated craftsmanship long before the collapse of the Western Roman Empire.

It was far more complicated than barbarians swarming the Roman Imperium.

Firsthand Rome was more of a hegemony with many non-Romans incorporated than a unified cultural empire as most even amongst elites have rejected Romanisation.

Secondhand Germanics haven't done much to destroy the Roman Hegemony as Romans have done that themselves since they couldn't have bothered with finding an commercial system without chattel-based or land-bound serfdom alongside plundering for their empire which has led to their bankruptcy.

In Rome's final days, oligarchic elites often avoided taxation and have shifted almost all burden on common and serf workers.

Many cities and towns have welcomed their Germanic barbarian invaders as liberators and have opened the gates including Rome's serfs itself.

• To quote a Roman writer:

• De Gubernatione Dei by Salvian of Marseilles (On the Governance of God, written around 440 AD).

• Online-Source: https://sourcebooks.web.fordham.edu/source/salvian1.asp

In what respects can our customs be preferred to those of the Goths and Vandals, or even compared with them? And first, to speak of affection and mutual charity (which, our Lord teaches, is the chief virtue, saying, "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another "), almost all barbarians, at least those who are of one race and kin, love each other, while the Romans persecute each other. For what citizen does not envy his fellow citizen ? What citizen shows to his neighbor full charity?

[The Romans oppress each other with exactions] nay, not each other : it would be quite tolerable, if each suffered what he inflicted. It is worse than that ; for the many are oppressed by the few, who regard public exactions as their own peculiar right, who carry on private traffic under tile guise of collecting the taxes. And this is done not only by nobles, but by men of lowest rank; not by judges only, but by judges' subordinates. For where is the city ­ even the town or village ­ which has not as many tyrants as it has curials ? . . . What place is there, therefore, as I have said, where the substance of widows and orphans, nay even of the saints, is not devoured by the chief citizens? . . .

None but the great is secure from the devastations of these plundering brigands, except those who arw themselves robbers.

[Nay, the state has fallen upon such evil days that a man cannot be safe unless he is wicked] Even those in a position to protest against the iniquity which they see about them dare not speak lest they make matters worse than before. So the poor are despoiled, the widows sigh, the orphans are oppressed, until many of them, born of families not obscure, and liberally educated, flee to our enemies that they may no longer suffer the oppression of public persecution. They doubtless seek Roman humanity among the barbarians, because they cannot bear barbarian inhumanity among the Romans. And although they differ from the people to Whom they flee in manner and in language; although they are unlike as regards the fetid odor of the barbarians' bodies and garments, yet they would rather endure a foreign civilization among the barbarians than cruel injustice among the Romans.

So they migrate to the Goths, or to the Bagaudes, or to some other tribe of the barbarians who are ruling everywhere, and do not regret their exile. For they would rather live free under an appearance of slavery than live as captives tinder an appearance of liberty. The name of Roman citi'en, once so highly esteemed and so dearly bought, is now a thing that men repudiate and flee from. . . .

It is urged that if we Romans are wicked and corrupt, that the barbarians commit the same sins, and are not so miserable as we. There is, however, this difference, that the barbarians commit the same crimes as we, yet we more grievously. . . . All the barbarians, as we have already said, are pagans or heretics. The Saxon race is cruel, the Franks are faithless, the Gepidae are inhuman, the Huns are unchaste, ­ in short, there is vice in the life of all the barbarian peoples. But are their offenses as serious as ours? Is the unchastity of the Hun so criminal as ours? Is the faithlessness of the Frank so blameworthy as ours? Is the intemperance of the Alemanni so base as the intemperance of the Christians? Does the greed of the Alani so merit condemnation as the greed of the Christians? If Hun or the Gepid cheat, what is there to wonder at, since he does not know that cheating is a crime? If a Frank perjures himself, does he do anything strange, he who regards perjury as a way of speaking, not as a crime?

Fell down a rabbit hole learning about the post-476 Roman lands in North Africa. Roman North Africa fragmented into a series of Romano-Berber petty kingdoms, mixing Roman and African cultures.

The Kings called themselves “Imperator” or “Rex”, followed Christianity, maintained Roman laws, but spoke Berber/Amazigh and for the most part, were ethnically African.

The kingdoms were eventually all conquered by the Caliphate, though not without some admirable resistance (like from Warrior-Queen Dihya, who herself is deeply fascinating), and a lot of the Roman culture was lost to history.

Interestingly, some remnants of Roman culture (or at least the legacy/memory) survived the centuries.

When the French colonized North Africa, they actually found some communities claiming descent from the Romano-Berbers.

“In his 1903 work L'Algerie dans l’antiquité, French archaeologist Stephane Gsell alleged that Berber peasants in some areas of the and Aires and Greater Kabyle regions claimed to be descendants of the Romans. In 1904 and 1905, other reports was published alleging that the Zkara tribe in Morocco claimed to be Christians and "descendants of the Romans.”

MET collection

This is the only image of Uppåkra In Sweden I can find online from the 6th century+. This site was transformed around 200 A.D. and grew into this from from there. More interesting are the site's origins from around 200 A.D.

It looks like a standard "Germanic" village right? But what If I told you that hall was modelled on a basilica within the principia of a castellum. Next to the Basilica is the Sacellum, a shrine to gods, sacred items, the standards and imperial family. The equivalent is the germanic sacred place that is the tall building in the image next to the hall.

In a camp we would see the via principalis cut through the site as we see the main street in the image. Archaeology suggests an earlier orthogonal street cut across it, but it looks like its not visible in the later site.

The site also has some very interesting environmental archaeology. Uppåkra also displays the first evidence of Roman ingredients found in Scandinavia. They found seeds of dill, parsley, cress, parsnips, turnips cabbage and mustard. These ingredients are found most intensely nearer 200 A.D. and diminish with time. All are common plants found in Roman gardens.

What archeologists think happened is unemployed Auxilia from after the marcomannic wars went up to Scandinavia to settle. They of course continued what they learnt in the Roman Army and brought their culinary tastes and soldiering ways with them.

I find it fascinating that the idea of a germanic warriors who stayed in large halls might have its origins in Auxilia reimagining their time being entertained in a basilica by their roman commander. Even the gifting has roman parallels. Roman commanders and emperors gave donatives to their followers. Often Armillae, torques, phalerae(Armillae are arm rings) as rewards to the brave. In the poem Beowulf, attested are the lords as 'ring givers', both earmbeag (arm ring) and healsbeag (neckring) are attested as gifts just like the dona militaria.

Posted about my WIP a while back. Got the first test print off the printer today.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ancientrome/comments/1wxjygg/roast_my_wip_attempt_to_create_a_3d_printable/

I want to recreate a centurion uniform for Halloween and have my wife be a noble woman. I have a good 3D printer and am already making these:
- omega fibulae for the cloaks
- gold laurel tiara for her
- a couple styles of brooches
- bangle bracelets for her

I have the chain mail, helmet with traverse plume, tunic, and gladius that originally belonged to a college theater department. I could not find a puggia dagger or real caligulae boots so I have to make do with Mexican huaraches. I am going to braid the vines for the staff today or tomorrow. I can dehydrate it in the convection oven if it needs help curing.

What would you add?

I am reading Goldworthy’s Augustus and he dismisses the age-old notion that Centurions were more akin to Sergeant Majors in that they rose through the ranks. Instead he states they were typically minor nobles from provincial towns. I am shook! What is everyone’s thoughts on this?

Source of the pictures here

I've read that they were gathered in the Campus Martius in the run up to Caesar's quadruple triumph, and that they were getting a bit restless. But, what did they do? How did they spend their time? Were they mustered into construction projects? Did they go to theatres or watch games? Did some of them live in Rome, itself?

Thanks!

A Roman fresco depicting theater masks from the Caseggiato dei Lottatori in Ostia, Italy. This dates to the 1st century AD and is on display in the on-site museum.

I'm researching the use of the pileus, or liberty cap, as a symbol in the French and American Revolutions. Right now I'm frying to figure out how it came to be associated with the color red. While all French usage is red there are early American depictions where it is gold or white.

It would make sense to think of the red color as a purely French innovation however Carl Linnaeus named the Pileated Woodpecker, a bird with a bright red Crest, in 1758 before both Revolutions. Was the pileus ever red in a Roman context?

The diagonal lines from this part of the Colosseum, can’t fine anything about it

Bite marks found on the skeleton of a Roman gladiator found in York, UK in 2024 are the first archaeological evidence of combat between a human and a lion.

source

Recreations of 2 Roman gladiator types. "A classic pairing: two swordsmen. Yet their equipment reveals distinct differences. The murmillo—with his distinctive helmet, broad sword, and an 8-kilogram shield—was invulnerable to frontal attacks. The armor of his opponent, the thraex, was inspired by the Thracians, former Roman enemies from the East. He differed from the secutor by virtue of his small shield and curved sword, though he, too, was heavily armored. The thraex had to try to draw the murmillo out of his defensive stance or catch him from behind. The murmillo, in turn, had to prevent this by focusing on his defense and launching sword strikes as surprise attacks from a defensive position." Per a special exhibition on gladiators (using google translator) in the Archäologisches Landesmuseum Baden-Württemberg in Konstanz, Germany.

About a week ago, I went to the Beqaa Valley in Lebanon to see Baalbek. This was the site of the largest Roman temple built in the empire, to Jupiter, and there were two other temples there to Venus and Bacchus.

If you're ever in Lebanon, these are a must see. However, it's two hours away from Beirut by car.

Of all the Roman stuff I've seen, this was second only to the forum in Rome.

Source of the pictures here, here, here, here and here. Reconstruction of the city made by Jean-Claude Golvin