Valerie Hope, Trophies and Tombstones

Trophies and Tombstones: Commemorating the Roman Soldier
Author(s): Valerie M. Hope

Source: World Archaeology, Vol. 35, No. 1, The Social Commemoration of Warfare (Jun.,
2003), pp. 79-97
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3560213 .
Accessed: 11/08/2013 07:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to World
Archaeology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 147.143.2.5 on Sun, 11 Aug 2013 07:32:11 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Trophies
a n d tombston es:
commemora tin g
the R oma n sol d ier
Va l erie M.
Hope
Abstra ct
This
pa per expl ores
the commemora tion of the R oma n sol d ier both in
pea cetime
a n d in wa r.
Hun d red s of tombston es a n d
fun era ry
mon umen ts record the l ife a n d d ea th of R oma n
mil ita ry
person n el ,
but the va st
ma jority
of these mon umen ts
a ppea r
to commemora te sol d iers who d ied in
ca mp
ra ther tha n on the ba ttl efiel d . How were the victims of wa rfa re
d isposed
of a n d in wha t
wa ys
were the
gra ves
ma rked a n d the l oss of l ife record ed ? In
compa rison
with the Greek worl d there
seems to ha ve been l ittl e d esire to record the in d ivid ua l sa crifices ma d e in R oma n wa rfa re.
Triumphs
a n d
trophy
mon umen ts were method s of
record in g
victories but n ot the true
ca rn a ge
of ba ttl e. Here
this
publ ic, cl ea n ed -up ima ge
of wa rfa re is
pl a ced a l on gsid e
the
pra ctica l ities
of
d isposin g
of the
d ea d a n d the sen se of
publ ic
l oss. The
pa per
a l so eva l ua tes the exten t to which in d ivid ua l
id en tity
(a s
cel ebra ted
by pea cetime mil ita ry tombston es)
wa s subsumed to the sta te in times of con fl ict a n d
then
expl ores
the few
exception a l
occa sion s when 'wa r memoria l s' tha t commemora ted a n d n a med
the d ea d were con structed .
Keyword s
R oma n ; sol d iers; tombston es; triumphs; trophies;
wa r.
In trod uction
R oma n wa rfa re wa s
gruesome
a n d the d ea th tol l
high.
Bod ies l ittered the ba ttl efiel d
-
offen d in g
the
eye
a n d the sen sibil ities
(Pol ybius XV, 14; Livy XXII, 51, 5-8; Ta citus Histories
II,
70;
Ammia n us Ma rcel l in us XVIII, 8, 12).
In
l itera ry
a ccoun ts the a fterma th of a
bl ood y
ba ttl e coul d be
empl oyed
for d ra ma ticeffect: the horrors of the scen e
empha sized
the
d estructive forces of wa r in con tra st to the ben efits of
pea ce (Pa ga in 2000:446).
In this
pa per
I wa n t to move
beyon d
such
pol itica l l y
motiva ted rhetorica n d to con sid er the a ctua l fa te of
the victims of wa r. How were the
corpses d isposed
of a n d to wha t exten t were these men
commemora ted a n d remembered ? The in ten tion of this
pa per
is to un ite the d iverse rel eva n t
evid en ce for the first time a n d to
a rgue tha t, a l though d ispl a ys
of
publ ic
l oss a n d
mourn in g
were often muted , the sa crifices of some sol d iers d id receive
publ ica ckn owl ed gemen t.
R outl ed ge
Worl d
Archa eol ogy
Vol .
35(1):
79-97 The Socia l Commemora tion
of Wa rfa re
Ta yl or&Fra n c sGroup
? 2003
Ta yl or
& Fra n cis Ltd ISSN 0043-8243
prin t/1470-1375
on l in e
DOI: 10.1080/0043824032000078090
80 Va l erie M.
Hope
At the outset it is worth
reca l l in g
tha t wa r cemeteries, with
in d ivid ua l l y
ma rked
gra ves,
a re a
fa irl y
recen t in trod uction to Western
Europe
(La queur
1994; Kin g
1998:
184-7).
The
ul tima te fa te of a sol d ier kil l ed a t Wa terl oo in 1815 wa s l ittl e d ifferen t fromtha t of a
R oma n sol d ier: both sha red
a n on ymous
in termen t in a ma ss
gra ve. Simil a rl y,
the
ten d en cy
to n a me the d ea d
in d ivid ua l l y
on commun a l wa r memoria l s a t ba ttl e sites or in the
hometown is a fea ture of the mod ern
a ge (McIn tyre 1990; Kin g1998).
Such mon umen ts
seek to hon our the victims of con fl ict a n d to
a ckn owl ed ge
the sa crifices of both the d ea d
a n d the berea ved .
Ma n y
of these memoria l s d ra w on a n cien t
prototypes,
such a s a rches
a n d col umn s a d orn ed with cl a ssica l
ima gery (Borg
1991:
59-67),
a n d thus
a ppea r
to un ite
the a n cien t a n d mod ern worl d . In d eed , R ome a n d its
empire
were l ittered with remin d ers
of ba ttl es, but it n eed s to be
empha sized
tha t these 'wa r memoria l s' cel ebra ted
con quest,
victory,
a n d
power,
ra ther tha n d ea th, grief,
a n d
in d ivid ua l ity.
In
gen era l ,
commun a l
expression s
of
mil ita ry l oss, sa crifice, a n d
mourn in g
were n ot a fea ture of the R oma n
l a n d sca pe.
So a cen tra l
question
here is: in a
society
tha t focused on the successes of the
R epubl ica n gen era l s,
a n d l a ter the
emperors,
wa s there
a n y a ckn owl ed gemen t
of the
d ea ths of
ord in a ry
sol d iers?
R econ structin g
R oma n a ttitud es to wa r a n d commemora tion is a
compl ex process.
Much of the
survivin g
l itera ture refl ects a n el ite ma l e
perspective
a n d we
ga in
few
in sights
in to the
impa ct
of
mil ita ry
d ea th
upon
the ra n k-a n d -fil e sol d ier a n d his
fa mil y.
Archa eo-
l ogica l evid en ce, whether
mortua ry, mon umen ta l , or
epigra phic,
is often
in compl ete
a n d
frequen tl y
d e-con textua l ized . In a d d ition the
geogra phic
a n d
chron ol ogica l
brea d th of the
empire
crea te
probl ems
of
in terpreta tion .
Wha t
might
ha ve been the n ormin R ome of the
secon d
cen tury
BC
might
n ot ha ve been cha ra cteristicof R oma n Brita in in the secon d
cen tury
AD. Neverthel ess, a l l owin g
for these d ifficul ties, it stil l rema in s
possibl e
to
expl ore
wa ys
in which wa r, victory,
a n d l oss were ma rked . I ha ve tried to a void
crea tin g
a
composite picture by focusin g
on evid en ce from the l a te
R epubl ic
a n d the first two
cen turies AD a n d
pl a cin g
this in con text a s fa r a s is
possibl e.
I
stop
short of the Christia n
era for such a fun d a men ta l
cha n ge
in
rel igious
bel ief
en compa ssed d ifferin g
a ttitud es to
both the
bod y
a n d the soul
(Giorcel l i
1995:
242).
The
pa per begin s by expl orin g
the
publ ic
sid e of ba ttl e a n d
victory
commemora tion before
movin g
on to con sid er how in d ivid ua l
sol d iers were buried a n d commemora ted .
Fin a l l y,
I sha l l l ook a t the few
exception a l
ca ses
where the two forms of commemora tion met, where the sa crifices of wa r
were,
a t l ea st in
pa rt, publ icl y a ckn owl ed ged .
Trophies
a n d
triumphs
The use of
physica l
structures to commemora te ba ttl e sites, specifica l l y
victorious ba ttl es,
wa s a
l on g-hel d
R oma n tra d ition , in fl uen ced
by
Greek
prototypes.
In its
origin a l form,
a
trophy
wa s a
l opped
tree a d orn ed with
ca ptured wea pon s
a n d to which
prison ers
were
cha in ed
(Pica rd
1957).
With time such structures took on a more mon umen ta l a n d
perma n en t
form. Moun d s of ea rth
might provid e
a l ocus for the
d ispl a y
of the
trophy.
In
AD 16 the
troops
of
Germa n icus,
the
emperor's n ephew,
erected a moun d on which
they
set
up
a rms with the n a mes of d efea ted Germa n tribes
(Ta citus
An n a l s II, 18). Shortl y
a fterwa rd s, fol l owin g
a secon d
victory,
Germa n icus
pil ed up
a
hea p
of a rms a n d d ed ica ted
Trophies
a n d tombston es 81
themto both Ma rs a n d the
emperor (Ta citus
An n a l s II, 20).
Such structures were sta te-
men ts of
victory
in the fa ce of
en emy d efea t, but
they
were a l so tha n k
offerin gs
to the
god s.
It wa s this
rel igious
el emen t which
hel ped
to
justify
some of the more
gra n d iose
trophies
tha t were set
up
fromthe
Augusta n period on wa rd s, a n d which
imprin ted
the
R oma n
presen ce
in to the
l a n d sca pe
of d efea ted territories.
Fol l owin g
the
d efin in g
n a va l
victory
a t Actium in 31 BC Octa via n d ed ica ted a
rel igious
en cl osure on the site of his
mil ita ry ca mp.
This wa s d ecora ted with n a va l
spoil s, in cl ud in gl a rge ships' prows (Murra y
a n d Petsa s
1989). High
on a moun ta in sid e this wa s a n
eye-ca tchin g
a n d
en d urin g
sta te-
men t of the first
emperor's right
to rul e
through mil ita ry might.
The
trophy
a t La Turbie
(n ea r
Mon te
Ca rl o),
set
up
to cel ebra te the
subjuga tion
of the
Al pin e
tribes
(7-6
BC),
a n d
the
trophy
a t Ad a mkl issi
(R oma n ia ),
buil t
by Tra ja n fol l owin g
the Da cia n
ca mpa ign s (AD
107-8),
a re the other most
strikin gsurvivin gexa mpl es (Formige 1949; Fl orescu 1965;
Da vies 2000:
51-66).
These mon umen ta l ston e structures, buil t a
cen tury a pa rt,
cel ebra ted
the
reign in gemperor's mil ita ry power
a n d
symbol ized
R oma n d omin a n ce
(Pl a te 1).
However, it wa s in urba n cen tres, especia l l y R ome, tha t remin d ers of
mil ita ry
suprema cy
a ttra cted the
grea test
a ud ien ce. R ome wa s the cen tre of the
empire,
a n d
Pl a te 1 Mod el
showin gproposed
recon struction of the trophy
mon umen t a t La Turbie
(n ea r
Mon te
Ca rl o) set up
d urin gthe
reign
of the emperor Augustus
to
cel ebra te the subjuga tion
of the
Al pin e
tribes
(7-6 BC). The mod el
is hel d a t Museo d el l a Civil tf
R oma n a , R ome.
82 Va l erie M.
Hope
ben efited fromthe victories a n d
con quests
tha t
expa n d ed
a n d
protected
tha t
empire.
Therefore successful
gen era l s brought
their victories to the urba n
popul a ce. Triumpha l
procession s
were
opportun ities
to
d ispl a y booty,
d efea ted en emies, a n d
mil ita ry might.
A
triumph
wa s on e of the few occa sion s when sol d iers ma rched
through
the streets of R ome
en ma sse;
gen era l l y they
were
expected
to rema in outsid e the
pomerium
or sa cred
boun d a ry
of the
city.
For the
gen era l s
of the
R epubl ic,
a
triumph
wa s a
vote-ca tchin g
exercise a n d a show of
fa mil y power;
for the
troops,
it wa s a
d ispl a y
of
prowess
a n d
l oya l ty; a n d , for the
peopl e,
it
provid ed specta cl e
a n d en terta in men t
(Versn el 1970;
R icha rd son 1975; Fa vro
1994).
The el a bora te
pa ra d e pl a ced
the sol d iers before the
ga ze
of civil ia n s, empha sizin g
the d ifferen ces between a n d the
in terd epen d en ce
of the
two,
but
a l so, by ma rkin g
the en d of
mil ita ry con fl ict, the
re-in tegra tion
of the sol d iers in to the
civil ia n citizen
bod y.
A
triumph
wa s a cel ebra tion of a n d for the
l ivin g
ra ther tha n the
d ea d . The themes of
cel ebra tion , power,
a n d
victory
con tin ued in to the
Imperia l period
when a
triumph
beca me the
preroga tive
of the
emperor.
The
a rmy
wa s n ow a more
profession a l bod y a n d , a l though
the
presen ce
of the
l egion s
in R ome wa s stil l restricted ,
a rmed men who
protected
both
emperor
a n d
city
were a common
presen ce
on the streets
Pl a te 2 R el iefs
showin g
scen es
from
Tra ja n 's
Da cia n ca mpa ign s,
Tra ja n 's
Col umn , R ome.
Trophies
(Coul ston
2000).
Neverthel ess these
procession s
con tin ued to
promote
the ben efits of
mil ita ry l ife, a n d its
corol l a ry wa r, a n d were n ot con cern ed with d ea th, l oss, sa crifice, a n d
mourn in g.
Simil a r themes cha ra cterize the
triumpha l
mon umen ts tha t were erected a s more
l a stin g
remin d ers of both the
victory
a n d the
triumph,
a n d which were often
position ed
a l on g
the
triumpha l
route. The ea rl iest
exa mpl es
of such mon umen ts were
templ es,
tha n k
offerin gs
to the
god s,
which a l so
provid ed
a l ocus for the
d ispl a y
of
booty (Pietil a -Ca stren
1987),
but
in crea sin gl y
purpose-d esign ed
a rches a n d col umn s were set
up,
a n d these were
a d orn ed with rel iefs of d efea ted
en emies, spoil s, win ged victories,
a n d
ca mpa ign
scen es.
The col umn of
Tra ja n ,
for
exa mpl e,
wa s d ecora ted with
spira l l in g
rel iefs
d epictin g
scen es
fromthe Da cia n
ca mpa ign (Pl a te 2).
It wa s ra ised on a ba se
scul pted
with
ima ges
of
ca ptured wea pon s
a n d a rms in a
d esign
remin iscen t of the tra d ition a l ba ttl efiel d
trophy
(Pl a te 3),
a n d
a top
the col umn wa s a sta tue of the
emperor
tha t
ga zed
over R ome a n d the
Tra ja n ic
improvemen ts
to the
city (R ossi 1971; Lepper
a n d Frere 1988; Cl a rid ge 1993;
Pa cker
1994). Overa l l , this mon umen t
empha sized
tha t
mil ita ry might,
a n d its fin a n cia l
rewa rd s, un d erpin n ed
both
Tra ja n 's
position
a n d the embel l ishmen t of the
city. In d eed ,
Pl a te 3 Deta il of the ba se of
Tra ja n 's
Col umn , R ome.
84 Va l erie M.
Hope
a n y
sen se of the rea l ismof ba ttl e in such mon umen ts wa s muted
by
the in ten tion to
cel ebra te the
mil ita ry prowess
of the comma n d er.
Triumpha l
mon umen ts were n ot
in ten d ed to
ca pture
the l ife, times, a n d d ea ths of the ra n k a n d fil e but the fortun es of on e
ma n . The mon umen t summa rized the a chievemen ts of the in d ivid ua l , verba l l y
a n d
pictoria l l y, a n d , in the ca se of
Tra ja n 's col umn , even con ta in ed his fin a l rema in s; trophy
a n d tomb were thus combin ed in on e structure
(Da vies
2000:
61-74).
Triumphs
a n d
trophy
mon umen ts were a bout
cel ebra tin g victories, a n d , in R ome,
pl a cin g
these victories before the urba n
popul a ce.
The d ea d sol d iers were n ot
brought
home, either
physica l l y
or
emotion a l l y,
a n d the berea ved were n ot re-con n ected with
those
they
ha d l ost. If
triumphs
were a bout
ma rkin gd ea th,
it wa s the d ea th of the
en emy,
sin ce a
triumph
coul d be cel ebra ted
on l y
if 5,000 foes ha d been kil l ed
(Aul us
Gel l ius
Noctes Attica e 5, 6, 21; Va l erius Ma ximus 2, 8, 1),
whil e
presuma bl y
the n umber of d ea d
R oma n sol d iers wa s
compa ra tivel y
sma l l . Besid es, by
the first
cen tury AD, few sol d iers
woul d ha ve been recruited fromR ome or
Ita l y,
a n d victories were
rega rd ed
a s a l l the
grea ter
if
on l y
the bl ood of a few n on -citizen a uxil ia ries wa s
spil l ed
(Ta citus
Agricol a 35).
This is n ot to
sa y
tha t d efea ts a n d
mil ita ry
d isa sters were
compl etel y
obl itera ted from
publ ic memory.
Some of the bl a ck or
in a uspicious d a ys (d ies n efa sti)
of the R oma n
ca l en d a r in cl ud ed the a n n iversa ries of
mil ita ry ca l a mities, most
n ota bl y
17
Jul y,
which
ma rked a d efea t
by
the Ga ul s in 391 BC a n d the
subsequen t sa ckin g
of R ome
(Livy VI, 1,
11; Scul l a rd 1981:
46).
Defea ts
by
R ome's tra d ition a l en emies a n d fea r of the in va sion of
Ita l y
coul d
pl a y hea vil y
on the R oma n min d
(Wil l ia ms
2001).
Fol l owin g
the Va ria n
d isa ster which sa w the l oss of three
l egion s (see bel ow),
the
emperor Augustus
wa s sa id to
be a broken ma n , keepin g
the
a n n iversa ry
of the d efea t a s a
person a l d a y
of
mourn in g
a n d
gen uin el y fea rin g
the in va sion of
Ita l y (Sueton ius Augustus 23; Ca ssius Dio LVI,
23-4).
Whether those
d irectl y
berea ved
kept
such a n n iversa ries a n d how
they squa red person a l
l oss with
publ ic a n xiety
is l ess cl ea r. But it rema in s
a ppa ren t tha t,
in terms of visua l
specta cl e
a n d the mon umen ta l , victories a n d
gl ories
were
brought
to the streets of R ome
n ot l oss, d efea t, a n d berea vemen t.
Trophies
a n d
triumphs
were a bout
forgettin g
the d ea d
ra ther tha n
rememberin g
them.
Mil ita ry
tombston es
Some R oma n sol d iers were commemora ted . Tombston es,
which record the service a n d
the d ea ths of
mil ita ry person n el ,
a re
common pl a ce
d iscoveries a cross most of wha t wa s
the R oma n
Empire
(Pl a tes
4 a n d
5).
These
fun era ry
memoria l s were set
up
outsid e the
forts where the sol d iers served a n d were
pa rticul a rl y
cha ra cteristicof the
ea rl y empire.
Few foot sol d iers of the
R epubl ic
ha d their
gra ves
ma rked in this fa shion sin ce,
in
gen era l ,
these men were recruited for
specificca mpa ign s a n d ,
if n ot kil l ed in a ction , hoped
to
return to civil ia n l ife. Besid es,
a t this time, few
peopl e beyon d
the el ite received
l a stin g
fun era ry memoria l s,
sin ce these beca me
popul a r on l y d urin g
the
ea rl y empire (von
Hesberg 1992).
On e estima te
suggests
tha t a t l ea st
250,000 epita phs
survive fromthe
R oma n worl d a n d most of these
proba bl y
d a te to the first a n d secon d cen turies AD
(Sa l l er
a n d Sha w 1984: 124;
Ma cMul l en
1982).
Substa n tia l con cen tra tion s of
epita phs
a n d tomb-
ston es a re foun d a t
mil ita ry ba ses, especia l l y
in the western
provin ces.
In short, d urin g
the
Trophies
ea rl y empire fun era ry
mon umen ts beca me more
wid el y
used a n d often ha d a
specia l
sign ifica n ce
to members of the
a rmy.
The
mil ita ry
wa s n ow
popul a ted by profession a l
sol d iers,
men who were
frequen tl y
recruited fromd iverse
region s
a n d who often d ied fa r
removed fromtheir n a ta l homes. However, by
the mid -secon d
cen tury AD, when
ma n y
mil ita ry
ba ses ha d become
perma n en t
a n d the sol d iers were often
l oca l l y recruited , the
rel eva n ce of
mil ita ry
tombston es
a ppea rs
to ha ve d ecl in ed
(Hope 2000, 2001:
70-1).
Tha t
is to
sa y,
such mon umen ts were
d ispl a y items, the use a n d va l ue of which fl uctua ted a cross
time
(Pa rker-Pea rson 1982; Ca n n on 1989; Meyer 1990;
Wool f 1996; Coul ston 2000:
94-5).
Tombston es were on e method of
expressin gmil ita ry id en tity, sta tus, person a l success, a n d
a l so a sen se of
d ifferen ce,
or
perceived superiority
to others.
But,
a s circumsta n ces
cha n ged ,
so d id the rel eva n ce of these
messa ges
a n d thus the rel eva n ce of the commun i-
ca tive med ium.
It a l so n eed s to be
empha sized
tha t the thousa n d s of
survivin gmil ita ry
tombston es d id
n ot ma rk the
gra ves
of sol d iers who d ied in ba ttl e.
Puttin gup
a tombston e wa s a
ca mp-ba sed a ctivity,
cha ra cteristicof
pea cetime.
Ca uses of d ea th a re
ra rel y specified
a n d
some of these men
ma y
ha ve d ied fromba ttl e woun d s or the a rd uous effects of
service,
but
ma n y
others woul d ha ve succumbed to n a tura l ca uses. The men commemora ted
proba bl y
ha d
rel a tivel y pea ceful
d ea ths a n d were buried in in d ivid ua l
gra ves.
This
Pl a te 4 Tombston e of
Da n n icus,
Ciren cester, first
cen tury
AD.
The rel ief
d epicts
a
ca va l ryma n
:
a bout to
spea r
a fa l l en
en emy.
i\ ?
The
epita ph
rea d s: 'Da n n icus
ca va l ryma n
of the a l a In d ia n a ,
from the
troop
of Al ba n us,
served 16 yea rs,
a tribesma n of
the R a urici
[fromAugst
in Swit-
zerl a n d ].
Ful vius Na ta l is a n d
Fl a vius Bitucus set this
up
a ccord in g
to the wil l '
(Coil in g-
wood a n d
Wright 1995 [1965]:
n .
108).
86 Va l erie M.
Hope
Pl a te 5 Tombston e of
Ca ius
Don ius
Sua vis, Ma in z, first
cen tury
AD. The
tombston e is d ecora t ed with a
sin gl e rosette, a n d il l ustra tes th a t
n ot a l l sol d iers' memoria l s were
a d orn ed with
time to cel ebra te bol s. The
epita ph
rea d s:'Ca ius Don ius Sua vis,
of the Cl a ud ia n votin g tribe fro m
Virun um, a ge
d 40 , of the l egio XIV
Gemin a , served 15
yea rs. Lucius
Don ius Al ba n us his brother set
this
up' (CIL XIII 6892).
trea tmen t con tra sts sha rpl y with tha t received by
those cut d own in ba ttl e (see
bel ow).
Tombston es represen ted
a certa in l evel of sta bil ity a n d perma n en cy,
the sol d iers were
settl ed a n d ha d time to cel ebra te both
mil ita ry id en tity
a n d a sen se of mil ita ry commun ity.
Compa red with other el em en t s in th e popul a tion ,
the sol d ier wa s proba bl y wel l pl a ced
socia l l y
a n d
fin a n cia l l y to receive co mmemora tion
(Hope
2001:
39).
The sol d ier w a s
surroun d ed
by
a
supportive
n etwork of
mil ita ry
comra d es who a cted a s
pseud o-fa mil y
(Ma cMul l en 1984; Lee
1996);
in a d d ition , he wa s in
receipt
of a
regul a r
in come a n d wa s
en coura ged
to ma ke
pa ymen ts
in to a buria l fun d
(Vegetius II, 20; for buria l cl ubs, see
Pa tterson 1992; Va n
Nijf 1997).
Buria l a n d commemora tion of
servin g
sol d iers rema in ed
a
priva te
a ffa ir a n d wa s n ot
pa id
for or
orga n ized by
the
mil ita ry
a uthorities. The sol d ier
sa ved
mon ey
to cover his buria l
expen ses
a n d
ma y
ha ve l eft d irection s in his wil l
d icta tin g
his wishes, in cl ud in g
the con struction of a
fun era ry
memoria l
(for
sol d iers' wil l s, see
Cha mpl in
1991:
56-8).
If the sol d ier fa il ed to sa ve sufficien t
mon ey
his fin a l rites were
presuma bl y orga n ized
a n d fun d ed
by
his comra d es.
Ma n y
tombston es
suggest
tha t fel l ow
sol d iers, men who ha d often been
d esign a ted
a s heirs in the
wil l ,
commemora ted the d ea d .
However, a l though ma rria ge
wa s forbid d en to ra n k-a n d -fil e sol d iers before the en d of the
Trophies
secon d
cen tury AD, some men formed un officia l l ia ison s with l oca l women a n d crea ted
fa mil y
con n ection s a n d these coul d a l so ha ve
pl a yed
a rol e in buria l a n d commemora tion .
Whoever oversa w the sol d ier's buria l , the
a rmy
ben efited sin ce the men were en cour-
a ged
to sa ve
mon ey,
to foster l in ks with comra d es
(a n d others),
a n d thus
spa red
the
a rmy
the
respon sibil ity
of
d isposin g
of their bod ies, even when
they
were
servin g
mil es from
home a n d n a ta l
fa mil y.
Sol d iers who d ied in
pea cetime
stood a
good
cha n ce of
receivin g
a
d ecen t buria l a n d , d urin g
the
ea rl y empire,
these
gra ves
were often ma rked
by
ston e
mon umen ts. These tombston es were sta n d a rd ized in
d esign
a n d con ten t a n d
promoted
mil ita ry symbol ism, verba l l y
a s wel l a s
pictoria l l y
(Pl a tes
4 a n d
5). Ma n y d epicted mil ita ry
d ress,
wea pon s,
a n d
equipmen t
(Pl a te
4)
a n d the
epita phs
were fil l ed with
mil ita ry
titl es
a n d a bbrevia ted in forma tion on the ca reer of the d ecea sed
(Fra n zon i
1987; Hope
2001:
37-49).
This in forma tion wa s
perha ps on l y ful l y d eciphered
a n d un d erstood
by
fel l ow
members of the
mil ita ry commun ity,
but the
impa ct
of such memoria l s both
in d ivid ua l l y
a n d
col l ectivel y
on the wid er
in d igen ous
a ud ien ce shoul d n ot be un d erestima ted . The
mil ita ry cemetery,
l ike the
trophy mon umen t, coul d serve a s a
symbol
of R oma n
power,
d omin a n ce, a n d
perma n en ce. Neverthel ess, simul ta n eousl y
ea ch tombston e stood a s a n
expression
of in d ivid ua l
id en tity,
socia l
mobil ity,
a n d
person a l
success.
Wa r
gra ves
The fa te of the ba ttl efiel d d ea d wa s
very
d ifferen t. The
d ign ity
of a n in d ivid ua l
gra ve
a ccompa n ied by a n y
form of commemora tion wa s n ot the
d estin y
of those kil l ed in
wa rfa re. The bod ies woul d ha ve been
stripped , crema ted , a n d then in terred in ma ss
gra ves
(Giorcel l i
1995:
237-8). Disposa l
wa s
proba bl y ra pid
a n d un ceremon ious. For
pra ctica l
rea son s this ha d to be the ca se.
R ottin g
bod ies were
un hygien ic
a n d
un sightl y,
in d ivid ua l
id en tifica tion of bod ies woul d ha ve been d ifficul t, a n d , if l eft, exposed corpses
coul d be
l ooted a n d in terfered with
by
en emies. Bod ies were
gen era l l y crema ted , a ccord in g
to
Pl in y,
beca use this removed the risk of rema in s
bein gd ugup
in the future a n d the
gra ves
d esecra ted
(Pl in y
Na tura l is historia VII, 54).
For simil a r rea son s, the
gra ves
were
proba bl y
l eft un ma rked . Moun d s of ea rth a n d
hea ps
of
spoil s ma y
ha ve in d ica ted some ma ss
gra ves
(Virgil
Aen eid XI, 210; Ta citus An n a l s I,
62).
But there wa s l ittl e sen se of
perma n en cy
a n d
certa in l y
n o
in d ivid ua l ity
in such ma rkers. An
a rmy
on the ma rch n eed ed to l ook forwa rd
ra ther tha n ba ckwa rd s; it moved on a n d l eft n o on e to ten d or
protect gra ves.
Wa r coul d l ea d to the a ba n d on men t of the rul es tha t
usua l l y govern ed
the buria l of the
d ea d . R oma n l a w, rel igion ,
a n d sen timen t d icta ted
proper
a n d d ecen t buria l . The most
ba sic
requiremen t
wa s tha t the
corpse
shoul d be covered with ea rth or, in the ca se of
crema tion , tha t a fra ction of it wa s removed , prior
to in cin era tion , for l a ter buria l
(Cicero
d e
Legibus II,
22,57).
Non -buria l con d emn ed the d ecea sed to a l ife in l imbo; the
spirits
of
the un buried wa n d ered the ea rth un a bl e to rest
pea ceful l y (Virgil
Aen eid VI, 320-85;
Pl in y Epistl es VII, 27; Sueton ius
Ca l igul a 59; Fel ton 1999:
9-12).
It is d ifficul t to
ga uge
if
peopl e a ctivel y
bel ieved in this a n d views on the a fterl ife a n d the soul were va ried . In
essen ce,
R oma n
rel igious
bel iefs a n d
pra ctices
were often d erived from those of the
Greeks. However, in the Greek worl d , there wa s in
gen era l
a
grea ter empha sis
on
provid in g
the wa r d ea d with a d ecen t buria l a n d a l so some formof
commemora tion ,
88 Va l erie M.
Hope
a l though
this
proba bl y
ha d more to d o with issues of
id en tity
tha n with
rel igious
sen ti-
men t. In Athen s, throughout
the Cl a ssica l
period ,
those kil l ed in ba ttl e were return ed to
the
city, given
a
publ icfun era l , a n d their
gra ves
ma rked a n d n a mes record ed
(Thucyd id es
II, 34, 1-8; Pa usa n ius I, 29, 4-15; Lora ux 1986:
17-23).
Wa rfa re crea ted a
grea ter
sen se of
pra gma tism
in the R oma n worl d . The d ea d were n ot return ed home.
Appia n suggests
tha t
d urin g
the Socia l Wa r
(90 BC)
the Sen a te rul ed tha t the d ea d , in cl ud in ggen era l s
a n d the
el ite, shoul d be in terred on the ba ttl efiel d to
spa re
the civil ia n s of R ome fromd istress.
There wa s a fea r tha t the
gruesome sight
of so
ma n y
d ea d bod ies woul d d eter
peopl e
from
future service
(Appia n
Bel l a civil ia I, 43; Va l vo 1990:
153-5). In d eed , a s the
a rmy
beca me
more
wid el y
recruited a n d served in va rious
region s
of the
empire,
such a
repa tria tion
of
rema in s woul d ha ve been
impra ctica l
a n d
impossibl e.
The
poten tia l d emora l izin g
effect of excessive
mourn in gma y
a l so ha ve in fl uen ced the
ba sictrea tmen t received
by
the wa r d ea d .
Durin g
the wa r
a ga in st Ca rtha ge,
civil ia n s were
urged
to restra in their l a men ta tion s a n d
mourn in g
wa s l imited to
thirty d a ys (Livy XXII,
55, 3-8).
In
publ ic,
a t l ea st, the
empha sis
fel l on
victory
a n d success
(or
the
d own -pl a yin g
of
d efea t)
n ot on
el eva tin g
the victims of tha t success
(or fa il ure).
As in d ivid ua l s, sol d iers
were n ot remembered or
pra ised ,
un l ess
they
were members of the a ristocra ticel ite a n d
then the
empha sis
fel l on the a chievemen ts of their l ife n ot
just
on the
tra ged y
of their
d ea th
(Pol ybius VI, 53-4; Dion ysius
of Ha l ica rn a ssus
An tiquita tes
R oma n a e V, 17, 5-6;
Lora ux 1986:
98-9).
For the
ma jority, mourn in g
wa s a
priva te fa mil y
a ffa ir
(Giorcel l i
1995:
240-1; Sord i 1990: 178-9; a l though
n ote d ies
n efa sti
a s rema rked
a bove). However, to
a ckn owl ed ge
this is n ot to cl a imtha t the R oma n wa r d ea d were
compl etel y d isrega rd ed
a n d n ot a fford ed the essen tia l rites. Where
pra ctica l ,
bod ies were col l ected a n d buried ,
a l beit in a ba sicfa shion . The ba ttl efiel d wa s n ot the
pl a ce
for
in d ivid ua l ity
or el a bora te
commemora tion , but the
requiremen ts
of common
d ecen cy
were
gen era l l y
met.
However, there were times when the retrieva l a n d buria l of bod ies wa s n ot
possibl e.
Cicero n otes tha t the n on -buria l of sol d iers wa s 'd eemed n o
piteous
l ot when met for the
sa ke of the fa therl a n d '
(Cicero Phil ippics XV, 13, 34). R ottin g
bod ies were a
poign a n t
sight, especia l l y d urin g
times of civil con fl ict when d istin ction s between 'R oma n ' a n d
'en emy'
beca me bl urred
(Propertius I, 21, 22; Ta citus Histories II, 45, II, 70; Sueton ius
Vitel l ius 10;
see a l so Hen d erson
1998).
The id ea l , a n d this wa s
compromised
in civil wa r
whether bod ies were buried or n ot,
wa s tha t d ea th in ba ttl e
brought gl ory
to R ome a n d to
the
a n on ymous
in d ivid ua l . This
gl ory
to some
d egree exempted
the sol d ier fromthe ful l
spiritua l , pra ctica l ,
a n d fa mil ia l
requiremen ts usua l l y
a ssocia ted with buria l
(Pol ybius VI,
54; Cicero
Phil ippics XV, 13, 34; Josephus,
Bel l umJud a icumVI, 46-9; Ha rris 1992
[1979]:
9-53).
The sol d ier l ost n ot
on l y
his l ife, but a l so
a n y gua ra n tee
of a
d ign ified buria l ; a t best
his rema in s were l ightl y covered with ea rth, a t worst his bon es were l eft to whiten
upon
the
groun d .
Cen ota phs
a n d
exception s
Between the
a n on ymity
of the ba ttl efiel d
gra ves,
on the on e ha n d , a n d the
in d ivid ua l ity
of
the fortress cemeteries, on the other, compromises
were sometimes foun d . In some civil
a n d
mil ita ry
cemeteries
cen ota phs
were erected . These often resembl e the
surroun d in g
Trophies
hea d ston es in
d esign
a n d d ecor, but ma rk the
empty gra ves
of those who d ied el sewhere.
A fa mous
exa mpl e,
n ow hel d in Bon n , record s a cen turion who wa s kil l ed in the Va ria n
d isa ster
(Pl a te
6).
The stel e
in corpora ted
his
portra it,
a n d those of two freed sl a ves, a n d
wa s set
up by
the cen turion 's brother
(Lehn er
1918: n . 622; CIL XIII
8648).
Presuma bl y
the bod ies of these men were n ever foun d . An other
exa mpl e
fromCa erl eon in south
Wa l es record s a sol d ier kil l ed in a Germa n
exped ition d urin g
the secon d or third
cen tury
AD. His n a me wa s
given
with those of other members of his
fa mil y;
he wa s the
boy
who
d id n ot come home but ha d n ot been
forgotten
(Col l in gwood
a n d
Wright
1995
[1965]:
n .
369).
Cen ota phs
in vol ve heirs a n d
fa mil y hon ourin g
their commitmen t to commemora te
the d ea d a n d
d oin g
so a s if the
bod y
ha d been recovered a n d buried
in d ivid ua l l y. But,
for
the
ma jority
of the wa r d ea d , those who woul d ha ve commemora ted themwere kil l ed
a l on gsid e
themor the ta sk of
commemora tin g
a l l
in d ivid ua l l y
wa s
just
too
grea t
for the
survivors. Wha t
ha ppen ed
to
a n y mon ey
tha t these sol d iers
ma y
ha ve sa ved in the buria l
fun d is un certa in , but it wa s most
proba bl y
swa l l owed
up
in the
mil ita ry
coffers.
There is l ittl e evid en ce tha t sol d iers' rema in s were return ed to their l oved on es,
a l though
in the ca se of men of ra n k this
ma y
ha ve sometimes been
possibl e. Drusus, the
stepson
of the
emperor Augustus,
wa s kil l ed in 9 BC whil e
servin g
on the Germa n fron tier
a n d , a fter crema tion , his a shes were return ed to R ome for buria l in the
Imperia l
ma uso-
l eum, a l though
a commemora tive memoria l wa s a l so erected in Ma in z
(Ta citus
An n a l s III,
5; Sueton ius Tiberius 7; Ca ssius Dio
LV, 52).
This trea tmen t wa s
proba bl y exception a l a n d ,
Ca el us, Bon n , first cen tury AD..
This ston e foun d a t Xa n ten X: -. :f-;
commemora tes a
l egion a ry?
?: :;?:' i;?;!-O; :;
";
cen turion who met his d ea th in
.. S.
'
. .
the Va ria n d isa ster of AD 9. The . . . ..
?
.
.
cen ota ph
wa s erected
by
his i : -i
brother Publ ius Ca el ius. The two
busts to either sid e of the ma in
figure were the d ea d ma n 's ,:?
freed men who
presuma bl y
d ied
with him
(CIL
XIII
8684).
90 Va l erie M.
Hope
if rema in s were
repa tria ted regul a rl y,
this
ma y
ha ve been restricted to men who d ied in
pea cetime
service ra ther tha n in ful l -sca l e ba ttl e. In other word s, pea cetime
buria l a n d
commemora tion were a
priva te
ma tter
a n d ,
if a
fa mil y
wished to
tra n sport
the rema in s
home a n d coul d a fford to d o so,
it wa s their choice. After ba ttl e, it wa s
proba bl y
more
a ppropria te
for d ea d
gen era l s
a n d officers to rema in with their d ea d men , a l though
their
rema in s
ma y
ha ve received
specia l
trea tmen t a n d
sepa ra te
buria l
(Appia n
Bel l a civil ia I,
43; Livy X, 29, 19-20; Ta citus Histories
II,
45).
After a l l , these bod ies were
proba bl y
more
ea sil y
id en tified a n d fel l ow officers a n d men ha d the resources to ma ke themthe
excep-
tion . Such a buria l
might
be ea rn ed
through exception a l
con d uct
rega rd l ess
of ra n k.
Appia n
tel l s us tha t a fter the Ba ttl e of Pha rsa l us in 43 BC Ca esa r hon oured a
coura geous
cen turion with in d ivid ua l buria l a n d a
specia l
tomb
(Appia n
Bel l a civil ia II,
82).
Wa r memoria l s
The commemora tion of d ea d
sol d iers, whether
they
were kil l ed in comba t or d ied a t
pea ce,
wa s in
gen era l
a
priva te
ma tter. The
a rmy might
oversee the
d isposa l
of
corpses
a fter a
ba ttl e, a n d
trophies
a n d
triumphs might
cel ebra te the
victory,
but a s in d ivid ua l s the
d ea d men were l ittl e
remembered , publ icl y
a t l ea st. For the va st
ma jority
of R oma n
sol d iers kil l ed in a ction there wa s n o rol l of hon our or
specia l
memoria l where their n a mes
a n d
in d ivid ua l ity
were
preserved . However,
this is n ot to
suggest
tha t wa r memoria l s tha t
coul d ful fil this fun ction were
compl etel y
un kn own in the R oma n worl d . Three
strikin g
exa mpl es
il l ustra te tha t
forgettin g
those kil l ed in ba ttl e wa s n ot
a l wa ys
so a utoma tic.
In 43 BC R ome wa s
gripped by
civil wa r. The con sul Pa n sa ha d been kil l ed in
d efea tin g
Ma rk
An ton y
a t ForumGa l l orum
(Mod en a ).
To ma rk this
victory,
Cicero d el ivered a
speech
in R ome
proposin g
hon ours for the
gen era l s, in cl ud in g
a
publ ic
fun era l a n d buria l ,
a n d even more
un usua l l y
hon ours for the d ea d sol d iers
(Cicero
Phil ippics
XI-XIV).
Cicero
suggested
the con struction of a
publ ic
a n d col l ective tomb for the d ea d men . This
woul d be a n 'immorta l
mon umen t',
a n hon our n ot
previousl y
bestowed
upon
a R oma n
a rmy,
tha t woul d bea r witn ess to their va l our a n d the
gra titud e
of the
R epubl ic(Cicero
Phil ippics XIV, 12, 33).
Cicero d id n ot d escribe his
pl a n s
in
d eta il ;
the mon umen t wa s to
be
ma gn ificen t
a n d cut with a n
in scription ,
but he d oes n ot
specify sca l e, d esign , d ecor,
or
the
epita ph
con ten t. There is some
un certa in ty
a s to whether he
en visa ged
a ba ttl efiel d
tomb or a n
hon ora ry
memoria l in R ome itsel f
(Frischer
1983:
69).
But, wha tever the
d eta il s,
his
pl a n
wa s n ever rea l ized . The d ea d
gen era l s
were buried on the
Ca mpus
Ma rtius a t R ome where evid en ce of their tombs ha s been foun d
(R icha rd son
1992: 356,
358;
Coa rel l i 1999: 290; Ma cciocca 1999:
302),
but there is n o tra ce of the mon umen t to the
ra n k-a n d -fil e sol d iers.
Dio, writin g
much l a ter, sa ys
tha t the d ea d sol d iers were hon oured
with a
publ icfun era l , a l though
the l oca tion a n d exa ct formof this rema in un kn own . Dio
ma kes n o men tion of a mon umen t
(Ca ssius
Dio
XLVI,
38).
In the vol a til e
pol itica l
times
Cicero's
pl a n s
were
a l wa ys un l ikel y
to be
a ccepted
or a cted
upon .
In
ma n y wa ys
the
mon umen t wa s a rhetorica l ra ther tha n a
physica l
con struct. It served a s a vehicl e within
the
speech
tha t a l l owed Cicero to hon our a n d
pra ise
the d ea d whil e
powerful l y
con d emn in g
the
en emy.
The
proposa l spra n g
from the con text of civil
con fl ict, when
l oya l ty
to either sid e wa s rewa rd ed a n d hon oured a s if to
compen sa te
for the horror of
Trophies
kil l in g
fel l ow citizen s
(Sord i
1990:
172).
Cicero wa s
un d oubted l y d ra win g
on Greek
preced en ts
with which he woul d ha ve been fa mil ia r
(Sord i 1990:173-4),
but the
preced en t
he set for the R oma n worl d wa s n ot
wid el y a d opted a n d , in
l itera ture, is n ot d iscussed in
these terms
a ga in . R ememberin g
the wa r d ea d rema in ed
exception a l .
More tha n
sixty yea rs l a ter, in AD
15, Germa n icus, the
n ephew
of the
emperor Tiberius,
wa s in the
Teutoburgia n Forest, the site of the Va ria n d isa ster which ha d seen the
d estruction of three R oma n
l egion s
six
yea rs
ea rl ier. Germa n icus visited the site of the
d efea t a n d
ga thered up
a n d buried the rema in s of the R oma n sol d iers
(Ta citus
An n a l s I,
61-2; Sueton ius Ga ius 3, 1-3; Ca ssius Dio LVII,
18).
R ecen t exca va tion s ha ve esta bl ished
the
gen era l
l oca tion of the d isa ster a n d
a mon g
the fin d s were severa l
pits con ta in in g
huma n a n d a n ima l skel eta l rema in s. The huma n bon es were ma l e a n d exhibited n ot
on l y
sign s
of
in juries
from
sha rp wea pon s,
but a l so tha t
they
ha d l a in on the
groun d
surfa ce for
some time before in termen t
(Schl titer
1999:
135-6).
However, it is
impossibl e
to be certa in
whether these rema in s were
a mon g
those in terred
by
Germa n icus a n d thus we a re stil l
l a rgel y d epen d en t
on the
l itera ry
a ccoun ts of the buria l of these wa r d ea d . The historia n
Ta citus d escribes Germa n icus' a ction s in
grea test
d eta il a n d
highl ights
the
pa thos
of the
scen e a n d the n a tura l emotion a l
respon se
of Germa n icus to the
ca rn a ge.
Ta citus con tra sts
this with the rea ction of the
emperor Tiberius, who wa s
a ppa ren tl y d ispl ea sed
with his
n ephew's
beha viour. Tiberius is ma d e to
a ppea r l a ckin g
in
compa ssion ,
even if his
d isa p-
poin tmen t
in Germa n icus wa s
justified ;
a s a sen ior
priest
Germa n icus shoul d n ot ha ve
ha n d l ed the rema in s of the d ea d . Ta citus
in terprets
the in cid en t for his own
l itera ry
en d s
sin ce he wishes to
pa in t
a
d a mn in gpicture
of Tiberius. In
rea l ity,
Germa n icus' beha viour
ma y
n ot ha ve been so con troversia l . Like Cicero before him, he wa s
proba bl y
in fl uen ced
both
by
Greek cul ture a n d
by
the
publ ic
sen sibil ities to the
shed d in g
of R oma n bl ood
(Cl emen ton i
1990:
204-5).
In
a ssocia tin g
himsel f with these d ea d sol d iers,
in
hon ourin g
their sa crifice, he wa s
ma n ipul a tin g
the d ea d to
ga in popul a rity
with the
a rmy
a n d the
gen era l publ ic.
But we
ma y question
the exten t to which the trea tmen t of these d ea d
sol d iers wa s
a ctua l l y
tha t un usua l . If this ha d been a
victory
ra ther tha n a
d efea t, or even
if the terra in ha d been l ess hostil e, the d ea d R oma n sol d iers woul d ha ve been buried in a
simil a r ba sicfa shion
(see
a bove).
It wa s the
l a pse
of time sin ce the ma ssa cre a n d the d irect
in vol vemen t in the buria l of a sen ior officia l tha t a d d ed
sign ifica n ce
to the scen e. Ta citus
d escribes Germa n icus a s
ra isin g
a moun d over the rema in s a n d this ha s been
in terpreted
a s a wa r memoria l to the d ea d
(Cl emen ton i
1990).
The con struction of such a moun d to
ma rk a commun a l wa r
gra ve ma y
ha ve been un usua l a n d moun d s ha d a ssocia tion s with
victory trophies
n ot wel l suited to this con text
(see a bove).
But this moun d wa s n ot a
perma n en t
wa r memoria l . It wa s n ot a d orn ed a n d bore n o
in scription ;
it
ga ve
n o in d ivid -
ua l ity
to the d ea d . In d eed , it wa s soon
d estroyed by
the
en emy
a n d n ot
restored , empha -
sizin gperha ps
the
futil ity
of its con struction
(Ta citus
An n a l s II, 7,
3-4).
Germa n icus
sought
to
bury
on e
group
of d ea d sol d iers a n d ma rk their
gra ve;
Cicero
sought
to commemora te a n other in mon umen ta l
styl e;
but n either of their in ten tion s
en d ured .
On l y
on ce in the R oma n worl d d o we fin d a wa r memoria l tha t
mon umen ta l l y
a n d
perma n en tl y expressed
the
in d ivid ua l ity
of sol d iers kil l ed in wa r. At the en d of the
n in eteen th
cen tury
the rema in s of a n a l ta r were foun d a t Ad a mkl issi in R oma n ia . It ha d
origin a l l y
been ra ised on
steps
a n d ea ch wa l l ha d a
l en gth
of 11.67 metres a n d a
height
of
6 metres. These wa l l s were in scribed with the n a mes of
l egion a ry
a n d
a uxil ia ry
sol d iers
92 Va l erie M.
Hope
who, a ccord in g
to the ma in
in scription ,
were kil l ed
fightin g
for the
R epubl ic
un d er a n
emperor
whose n a me is n ow l ost. The a l ta r wa s buil t to the hon our a n d
memory
of these
men a n d it ha s been estima ted tha t it
ma y origin a l l y
ha ve l isted
3,800 n a mes
(Dorutju
1961: 345-6; Amiotti 1990: 207-8; Borg
1991:
56-7).
The l oca tion of the memoria l in d i-
ca tes tha t these sol d iers were kil l ed in
en ga gemen ts
with the
Da cia n s, but whether these
en coun ters occurred un d er the
emperor
Domitia n or the
emperor Tra ja n
is d eba ted . The
a l ta r's l oca tion cl ose to the
Tra ja n ictrophy
(see
a bove) suggests
tha t a d a te un d er
Tra ja n
is most
l ikel y
(Amiotti 1990)
a n d a summa rized section of the
history
of Ca ssius Dio
supports
the id ea tha t
Tra ja n
buil t such a n a l ta r: 'In hon our of the sol d iers who ha d d ied
in ba ttl e he ord ered a n a l ta r to be erected a n d fun era l rites to be
performed a n n ua l l y'
(Ca ssius
Dio
Epitome LXVIII, 8,
2).
However,
the
possibil ity
tha t the a l ta r
pred a tes
the
trophy
a n d
ma y
commemora te those kil l ed in a n ea rl ier
ca mpa ign
un d er Domitia n ha s
been
cha mpion ed by
some
(Dorutju
1961).
The a l ta r
ma y
ha ve in fl uen ced the
position
of
the
trophy
a n d the l a tter's d ed ica tion to Ma rs Ul tor
(Ma rs
the
Aven ger),
but more
proba bl y
the two mon umen ts were con ceived
together
a s
compl emen ta ry
structures. But,
wha tever its exa ct d a te, a n d
a l l owin g
for the
va ga ries
of
surviva l ,
this a l ta r is a
un ique
fin d
-
a wa r memoria l tha t focused on a n d n a med the d ea d . The mon umen t d oes n ot
a ppea r
to
ha ve ful fil l ed a
fun era ry
fun ction
by housin g
the rema in s of the d ea d
(Dorutju
1961:
346),
but it d id seek to
give
them
in d ivid ua l ity
sin ce it in scribed their
memory
in to the l a n d -
sca pe where, or cl ose to where, they
ha d been kil l ed .
However, its a ssocia tion with the
more
physica l l y
d omin a n t
trophy
d oes mea n tha t the a l ta r is a l so a sta temen t of
victory;
overa l l , the
compl ex
of
buil d in gs
cel ebra tes
triumph
more tha n sa crifice.
Why
wa s the a l ta r of Ad a mkl issi con structed ?
Why
in this
con text, a n d
a ppa ren tl y on l y
in this con text, wa s such a memoria l seen a s
a ppropria te?
It wil l
proba bl y a l wa ys
rema in
impossibl e
to recon struct the ful l circumsta n ces
surroun d in g
its
crea tion , but it is worth
n otin g
tha t this a rea of the
empire
wa s on e of
repea ted
con fl ict a n d un rest a n d its
subjuga tion ,
a l beit
tempora ril y,
wa s a
ma jor
a chievemen t of
Tra ja n 's
reign .
The scen es
ca rved on
Tra ja n 's
col umn in R ome
empha size
the n a ture of the con fl ict, the exten t of the
in vol vemen t of the men on the
groun d
a s wel l a s the ul tima te
triumph
of 'the sol d ier
emperor'
(Pl a te 2).
It
ma y
a l so be rel eva n t to l in k the three memoria l s
-
a ctua l a n d n ot
-
fromAd a mkl issi,
the
Teutoburgia n forest, a n d Mod en a . Al l a rose in troubl ed times a n d
pl a ces:
Da cia a n d the Germa n fron tier were
probl ema tic
a rea s of the
empire
over which
much R oma n bl ood wa s
spil l ed
with
a mbiguous outcome; simil a rl y
the civil wa r
brought
R oma n bl ood l oss to the hea rt of
Ita l y.
These
un ha ppy
times a n d
un ha ppy
circumsta n ces
ca l l ed
perha ps
for un usua l sol ution s a n d a ction s to bol ster the mora l e of both sol d iers a n d
civil ia n s
(Sord i
1990:
176).
For Cicero, Germa n icus
(Ta citus),
a n d
Tra ja n
there wa s a
certa in
symbol ism
a n d
pol itica l
rhetoricin
a ckn owl ed gin g
the
spil l in g
of R oma n bl ood in
these con texts a n d
cl a imin g
both to
justify
a n d to
a ven ge
these l oses.
Con cl usion
How the R oma n victims of wa r shoul d be trea ted wa s n ot a n
object
of exa ct cod ifica tion
(Giorcel l i
1995:
241-2).
Whether the d ea d were buried or l eft
un buried , the
ra pid ity
of
d isposa l
a n d the
ma rkin g(or
n ot)
of
gra ves
were a l l in
pa rt
d icta ted
by
the circumsta n ces
Trophies
surroun d in g
the in d ivid ua l ba ttl es in which the sol d iers were kil l ed . Poten tia l d ifferen ces
crea ted
by
time a n d
spa ce ma y
a l so ha ve been
sign ifica n t
a n d
certa in l y
hin d er
a n y simpl e
or un iversa l a ssertion s a bout how the wa r d ea d of R ome were
d isposed
of. Neverthel ess,
we d o
ga in in sights
in to wha t wa s both
a ccepta bl e
a n d
n on -a ccepta bl e
a fter ba ttl e a n d the
pra ctica l
d icta tes tha t coul d l ea d to the
compromisin g
of
pea cetime
ritua l s a n d
expecta -
tion s. For the sol d ier, ba sic, a n on ymous,
a n d commun a l buria l must ha ve been the
common
expecta tion d urin g
wa r. Pea cetime coul d
presen t
a
very d ifferin gscen a rio, with
the sol d ier
receivin g
in d ivid ua l buria l , often in a ma rked
gra ve.
There wa s then a
d ichotomy
between
rememberin g
a n d
forgettin g
in d ivid ua l sol d iers
a ccord in g
to the
circumsta n ces of their d ea th.
Mil ita ry
tombston es were a bout
cel ebra tin g
in d ivid ua l
id en tity, success, a n d socia l
mobil ity,
wherea s the ba ttl efiel d a l l owed l ittl e
a ckn owl ed ge-
men t of such
thin gs. In d ivid ua l ity
wa s subsumed to the n eed s of the Sta te a n d sa crifice wa s
in
gen era l
n ot cel ebra ted or hel d
up
to be remembered for a l l time. The
grief
of the
survivors wa s a l so n ot
a ckn owl ed ged
in
publ ic.
Most in d ivid ua l sol d iers kil l ed in a ction
were
simpl y forgotten .
This sa id , the
a ppa ren tl y perfun ctory
trea tmen t received
by
d ea d sol d iers n eed s to be
viewed in the broa d er con text of d ea th a n d buria l in the R oma n worl d . At certa in
period s,
a s the fortress tombston es a ttest, in d ivid ua l buria l in a ma rked
gra ve ma y
ha ve been the
id ea l , but we ca n
question
how
ma n y peopl e a ctua l l y
a chieved this.
Morta l ity
ra tes were
high
a n d
poverty wid esprea d . Ma n y
of the urba n
poor ma y
ha ve been buried in ma ss
gra ves
a n d
d isposed
of with l ittl e
ceremon y.
Even those who received more tha n the ba sic
rites
ma y
n ot ha ve received
a n y l a stin g
in d ica tion of their
gra ve
(Hopkin s
1983: 208-9;
Bod el 1994
[1986], 2000).
In these circumsta n ces, the trea tmen t of sol d iers kil l ed in ba ttl e
ma y
ha ve seemed n orma l ra ther tha n
shockin g.
This is n ot to
d ispute
tha t how
peopl e
were buried a n d commemora ted in the civil
popul a tion
coul d be d icta ted
by ma n y fa ctors,
such a s wea l th, sta tus, rel igion ,
a n d the
grief
of the survivors, n ot to men tion the chron o-
l ogica l period
in which the
person
d ied . But
d isposin g
of the d ea d wa s a l so a
pra ctica l
probl em
tha t n eed ed
pra ctica l sol ution s, a n d in times of con fl ict the l a tter beca me
pa ra -
moun t.
The
pra gma tic
n a ture of the buria l of the wa r d ea d d ista n ces us fromthe survivors. How
peopl e coped
with the l oss of a l oved on e in wa r is d ifficul t to recon struct a n d
l a rgel y
beyon d
the
scope
of this
pa per (for
some of the socia l a n d econ omic
impa cts
of wa r on
women a n d chil d ren , see Eva n s
1991).
An cien t a uthors
highl ight
for d ra ma ticeffect the
grief
of survivors; for
exa mpl e,
in
d escribin g
the
ma jor
d efea ts of the wa r
a ga in st
Ca rtha ge, Livy
ha s the women of R ome
wa itin ga n xiousl y
for
n ews, wa il in gd espon d en tl y,
a n d in some ca ses even
d yin g
fromshock
(Livy XXII, 7, 11-13, XXII, 54,
8).
But
beyon d
such rhetoricthere is in sufficien t evid en ce to con sid er whether the a ctua l
physica l
trea t-
men t of the wa r d ea d hin d ered or
hel ped
or wa s even rel eva n t to the
grievin gprocess.
Neverthel ess, the few
exception a l
ca ses where victims of wa r were hon oured a n d
commemora ted
provid e some, a l beit l imited , in sights. Cen ota phs ga ve
some a n
opportu-
n ity
to feel tha t
they
ha d
performed
their l a st d uties for the a bsen t d ea d . These were
empty gra ves
tha t
kept
n a mes a n d
rel a tion ships
a l ive a n d coul d
provid e
a focus for
remembra n ce a n d
grief.
We ca n a l so
expl ore
the rel eva n ce to the survivors of the three
id en tified wa r memoria l s. At Ad a mkl issi we ca n
pose on l y
un a n swera bl e
question s
a bout
the memoria l : woul d
a n y
of the survivors of the
ca mpa ign s,
or the fa mil ies of the
d ea d ,
94 Va l erie M.
Hope
ha ve seen it? Wha t forma n d
purpose
d id the a n n ua l
fun era ry ritua l s, men tion ed
by Dio,
ta ke? An d for whom were
they
in ten d ed ? The rhetorica l
d escription s
of Cicero a n d
Ta citus ma ke more of the emotion a l
impa ct
of the mon umen ts in vol ved . Cicero, in
d escribin g
his
pl a n n ed
memoria l to the d ea d of Mod en a , spea ks expl icitl y
of
a l l evia tin g
the
grief
of the survivors
(Cicero
Phil ippics XIV, 11, 31)
a n d sta tes tha t the mon umen t, in
record in g
the va l our of the d ea d ,
wil l be a con sol a tion to the fa mil ies
(Cicero Phil ippics
XIV, 13,
35).
Ta citus ma kes n o
expl icit
referen ce to the fa mil ies of those kil l ed in the
Va ria n d isa ster a n d
ma n y,
if
they
ha d fol l owed the
l egion ,
woul d ha ve
perished a l on gsid e
the sol d iers
(Ca ssius
Dio LVI, 20, 2-5); a l though
n ote tha t skel eta l rema in s fromthe
ba ttl e site a re ma l e
on l y (Schl titer
1999:
136).
But Ta citus d oes evoke a sen se of
mil ita ry
commun ity
a n d
fa mil y. Every
sol d ier who wa s in vol ved in the buria l
con templ a ted
the
ha za rd s of wa r a n d his own
fa mil y (Ta citus
An n a l s I,
61)
a n d , a s
they
buried the rema in s,
the sol d iers
thought
of a l l the d ea d a s 'frien d s a n d bl ood -brothers'
(I,
62).
The a ccoun ts of
Cicero a n d Ta citus were
pol itica l l y
motiva ted a n d the mon umen ts
they
d escribe evoke
issues of
power
cen tred on the
rul in gperson a l ities
more tha n
gen uin e grief
for the
n a mel ess sol d iers. Yet
un d erpin n in g
the rhetoric,
in fa ct wha t ma kes it so
powerful ,
is the
impa ct
of d ea th in ba ttl e a n d a
gen era l
sen se of l oss.
How
peopl e
rea cted to R oma n wa r memoria l s,
whether the
trophies
of R ome, a
mil ita ry tombston e,
or the a l ta r of Ad a mkl issi, is d ifficul t to recon struct a n d besid es woul d
n ot ha ve been sta n d a rd . The rea ction of a
servin gsol d ier,
a berea ved
fa mil y member, or a
d efea ted foe
ma y
ha ve d iffered
d ra ma tica l l y,
a s woul d the
sign ifica n ce
of these memoria l s
a
gen era tion
l a ter. In essen ce,
R oma n wa r memoria l s
ma y
ha ve d iffered
substa n tia l l y
fromtheir mod ern
equiva l en ts
in the stress
pl a ced
on the in d ivid ua l , but both
ma y
ha ve
sha red the mixed
respon se
of their a ud ien ce.
Ma n y
memoria l s set
up fol l owin g
the worl d
wa rs of l a st
cen tury
were rea d ,
a n d con tin ue to be rea d , d ifferen tl y by d ifferin g
viewers
(Win ter
1995: 93-8; Kin g
1998:
7-8).
Are these memoria l s
symbol s
of
victory, grief,
or
sa crifice? Do
they
cel ebra te wa r or
pea ce?
Were
they
in ten d ed
origin a l l y
for the d ea d , the
berea ved , or
mil ita ry
comra d es
(compa re Gregory (1994)
on the va ried
publ ic
rea ction s
to a n d
in terpreta tion s
of Armistice
Da y)?
To be
sure,
ea ch memoria l n eed s to be rea d
within its own con text, but how in d ivid ua l
peopl e perceived
thema n d rea cted to themwa s
a n d coul d n ot be
strictl y prescribed .
Wa r memoria l s often
represen t
a
process
of
n egotia -
tion a n d ha ve a
pl ura l ity
of
mea n in gs (Kin g
1998).
The sa me
ma y
ha ve
a ppl ied
in the
R oma n worl d , a n en viron men t where, on the surfa ce a t l ea st, on l y victory
wa s mon umen -
ta l ized whil e the d ea d were
l a rgel y ign ored .
Depa rtmen t of
Cl a ssica l Stud ies,
The
Open Un iversity,
Wa l ton
Ha l l ,
Mil ton
Keyn es,
MK7
6AA,
UK
(E-ma il : VM.Hope@open .
a c.
uk)
R eferen ces
Amiotti,
G. 1990. I1 'mon umen to a i ca d uti' d i Ad a mkl issi. In 'Dul ce et DecorumEst': La Morte in
Comba ttimen to n el l 'An tichitd
(ed .
M.
Sord i),
Con tributi d el l ' Istituto d i storia a n tica ,
16:207-13.
Trophies
Bod el , J. 1994
[1986]. Gra veya rd s
a n d
groves:
a
stud y
of the l ex l ucerin a . America n Journ a l
of
An cien t
History,
11: 1-133.
Bod el , J. 2000.
Dea l in g
with the d ea d : un d erta kers, execution ers a n d
potter's
fiel d s in a n cien t R ome.
In Dea th a n d Disea se in the An cien t
City (ed s
V. M.
Hope
a n d E.
Ma rsha l l ).
Lon d on :
R outl ed ge,
pp.
128-51.
Borg,
A. 1991. Wa r Memoria l s, fromAn tiquity
to the Presen t. Lon d on : Leo
Cooper.
Ca n n on , A. 1989. The historica l d imen sion in
mortua ry expression s
of sta tus a n d sen timen t. Curren t
An thropol ogy,
30:437-57.
Cha mpl in ,
E. 1991. Fin a l
Jud gemen ts: Duty
a n d Emotion in R oma n Wil l s, 200 BC-AD 250.
Berkel ey:
Un iversity
of Ca l iforn ia Press.
Cl a rid ge,
A. 1993. Ha d ria n 's Col umn of Tra ja n . Journ a l
of
R oma n
Archa eol ogy,
6: 5-22.
Cl emen ton i, G. 1990. Germa n ico e i ca d uti d i
Teutoburgo.
In 'Dul ce et DecorumEst': La Morte in
(ed .
M.
Sord i),
Con tributi d el l ' Istituto d i storia a n tica , 16:197-206.
Coa rel l i, F. 1999.
Sepul crum:
A Hirtius. Lexicon
Topogra phicum
Urbis R oma e, Vol . 4. R ome:
Qua sa r, p.
290.
Col l in gwood ,
R a n d
Wright
R . 1995
[1965].
The R oma n
In scription s of Brita in , Vol . 1. Stroud : Al a n
Sutton .
Coul ston , J. 2000. 'Armed a n d bel ted men ': the
sol d iery
in
imperia l
R ome. In An cien t R ome: The
Archa eol ogy of
the Etern a l
City (ed s
J. Coul ston a n d H.
Dod ge).
Oxford : Al d en Press, pp.
76-118.
Da vies, P. 2000. Dea th a n d the
Emperor:
R oma n
Imperia l Fun era ry
Mon umen ts
fromAugustus
to
Ma rcus Aurel ius.
Ca mbrid ge: Ca mbrid ge Un iversity
Press.
Dorutju,
E. 1961. Some observa tion s on the
mil ita ry
fun era l a l ta r of Ad a mcl isi, Da cia . R evue
d 'Archeol ogie
et d 'Histoire An cien n e, 5: 345-63.
Eva n s, E. 1991. Wa r, Women a n d Chil d ren in An cien t R ome. Lon d on :
R outl ed ge.
Fa vro, D. 1994. The street
triumpha n t:
the urba n
impa ct
of R oma n
triumpha l pa ra d es.
In Streets
of
the Worl d : Critica l
Perspectives
on Publ ic
Spa ce (ed s
Z.
Cel ik,
D.
Fa vro, a n d R .
In gersol l ). Berkel ey:
Un iversity
of Ca l iforn ia Press, pp.
151-64.
Fel ton , D. 1999. Ha un ted Greece a n d R ome: Ghost Stories
from
Cl a ssica l
An tiquity.
Austin : Un iver-
sity
of Texa s Press.
Fl orescu, F. B. 1965. Da s
Siegesd en kma l
von Ad a mkl issi:
Tropa eum
Tra ia n i. Bon n : R ud ol f Ha bel t.
Formige,
J. 1949. Le
Trophee d es
Al ps (La Turbie), Suppl emen t
a Ga l l ia . Pa ris.
Fra n zon i, C. 1987. Ha bitus
a tque
Ha bitud o Mil itis: Mon umen ti Fun era ri d i Mil ita ri n el l a
Cisa l pin a
R oma n a . R ome: Bretschn eid er.
Frischer, B. 1983. Mon umen ta etAra e Hon oris
Virtutisque
Ca usa : evid en ce of memoria l s for R oma n
civicheroes. Bul l etin o d el l a Commission e
Archeol ogica
Comul a e d i R oma , 88: 51-86.
Giorcel l i, S. 1995. Il fun us mil ita re. In La mort a u
quotid ien
d a n s l e mon d e R oma in
(ed . F. Hin a rd ).
Pa ris: d e Bocca rd , pp.
235-42.
Gregory,
A. 1994. The Sil en ce
of Memory:
Armistice
Da y
1919-1946. Oxford a n d Provid en ce, R I:
Berg.
Ha rris,
W. 1992
[1979].
Wa r a n d
Imperia l ism
in
R epubl ica n R ome, 327-70 BC. Oxford : Cl a ren d on
Press.
Hen d erson . J. 1998.
Fightin gfor
R ome: Poets a n d Ca esa rs, History
a n d Civil Wa r.
Ca mbrid ge:
Ca mbrid ge Un iversity
Press.
Von
Hesberg,
H. 1992. R omische Gra bba uten . Da rmsta d t: Wissen scha ftl iche
Buchgesel l sca ft.
96 Va l erie M.
Hope
Hope,
V. M. 2000.
In scription
a n d
scul pture:
the con struction of
id en tity
in the
mil ita ry
tombston es
of R oma n Ma in z. In The
Epigra phy of
Dea th: Stud ies in the
History
a n d
Society
of
Greece a n d R ome.
Liverpool : Liverpool Un iversity Press, pp.
155-86.
Hope,
V. M. 2001. Con structin gId en tity:
The
Fun era ry
Mon umen ts
of
Aquil eia ,
Ma in z a n d Nimes.
BAR In tern a tion a l Series, No. 960.
Hopkin s,
K. 1983. Dea th a n d R en ewa l :
Sociol ogica l
Stud ies in R oma n
History
2.
Ca mbrid ge:
Ca mbrid ge Un iversity
Press.
Kin g,
A. 1998. Memoria l s
of
the Grea t Wa r in Brita in : The
Symbol ism
a n d Pol itics
of
R emembra n ce.
Oxford :
Berg.
La queur,
T. 1994.
Memory
a n d
n a min g
in the Grea t Wa r. In Commemora tion s: The Pol itics
of
Na tion a l Id en tity (ed .
J.
Gil l is). Prin ceton , NJ: Prin ceton
Un iversity Press, pp.
150-67.
Lee, A. D. 1996. Mora l e a n d the R oma n
experien ce
of ba ttl e. In Ba ttl e in
An tiquity (ed .
A. B.
Ll oyd ).
Lon d on : Duckworth, pp.
199-218.
Lehn er, H. 1918. Die a n tiken stein d en kmiil er d es
provin zia l museums
in Bon n . Bon n : F Cohen .
Lepper,
F a n d Frere, S. 1988.
Tra ja n 's
Col umn : A New Ed ition
of
the Cichorius Pl a tes. Stroud : Al a n
Sutton .
Lora ux, N. 1986. The In ven tion
of
Athen s: The Fun era l Ora tion in the Cl a ssica l
City (tra n s.
Al a n
Sherid a n ). Ca mbrid ge,
MA: Ha rva rd
Un iversity
Press.
Ma cciocca , M. 1999.
Sepul crum:
C. Vibius Pa n sa . Lexicon
Topogra phicum
Urbis R oma e, Vol . 4.
R ome: Qua sa r, p.
302.
McIn tyre,
C. 1990. Mon umen ts
of
Wa r: How to R ea d a Wa r Memoria l . Lon d on : R obert Ha l e.
Ma cMul l en , R . 1982. The
epigra phic
ha bit in the R oma n
empire.
America n Journ a l
of Phil ol ogy,
103: 234-46.
Ma cMul l en ,
R . 1984. The
l egion
a s a
society. Historia ,
33: 440-56.
Meyer,
E. 1990.
Expl a in in g
the
epigra phic
ha bit in the R oma n
Empire:
the evid en ce of
epita phs.
Journ a l
of
R oma n Stud ies, 80:74-96.
Murra y,
W. a n d Petsa s,
P 1989. Octa via n 's
Ca mpsite
Memoria l
for
the Actia n Wa r, Tra n sa ction s
of
the
America n
Phil osophica l Society, 79(4).
Pa cker, J. 1994.
Tra ja n 's
Forum
a ga in :
the col umn a n d the
Templ e
of
Tra ja n
in the ma ster
pl a n
a ttributed to
Apol l od orus (?).
Journ a l
of
R oma n
Archa eol ogy,
7: 163-82.
Pa ga n ,
V. 2000. The
mourn in g
a fter: Sta tius Theba id 12. America n Journ a l
of Phil ol ogy, 121(3):
423-52.
Pa rker-Pea rson , M. 1982.
Mortua ry pra ctices, society
a n d
id eol ogy:
a n
ethn oa rcha eol ogica l stud y.
In
The Presen t Pa st: An In trod uction to
An thropol ogy for Archa eol ogists (ed .
I.
Hod d er).
Lon d on :
Ba tsford , pp.
99-113.
Pa tterson , J. 1992.
Pa tron a ge,
col l egia
a n d buria l in
Imperia l
R ome. In Dea th in Town s: Urba n
R espon ses
to the
Dyin g
a n d the Dea d 100-1600. Leicester: Leicester
Un iversity Press, pp.
15-27.
Pica rd , G. C. 1957. Les
Trophees
R oma in s: Con tribution a l 'histoire d e l a
rel igion
et d e l 'a rt
triompha l
d e R ome. Pa ris: E. De Bocca rd .
Pietil a -Ca strd n , L. 1987.
Ma gn ificen tia publ ica :
the
victory
mon umen ts of the R oma n
gen era l s
in
the era of the Pun icWa rs. Commen ta tion es Huma n orumLittera rum, 84.
R icha rd son , J. 1975. The
triumph,
the Pra etors a n d the Sen a te in the
ea rl y
secon d
cen tury
BC.
Journ a l
of
R oma n Stud ies, 65: 50-63.
R icha rd son ,
L. 1992. A New
Topogra phica l Diction a ry of
An cien t R ome. Ba l timore, MD, a n d
Lon d on : John s
Hopkin s Un iversity
Press.
Trophies
R ossi, L. 1971.
Tra ja n 's
Col umn a n d the Da cia n Wa rs. Lon d on : Tha mes & Hud son .
Sa l l er, R . a n d Sha w, B. 1984. Tombston es a n d R oma n
fa mil y
rel a tion s in the Prin cipa te: civil ia n s,
sol d iers a n d sl a ves. Journ a l
of
R oma n Stud ies, 84: 124-56.
Schl titer, W. 1999. The ba ttl e of the
Teutoburg
Forest:
a rcha eol ogica l
resea rch a t Ka l kriese n ea r
Osn a brtick. In R oma n
Germa n y:
Stud ies in Cul tura l In tera ction (ed s J. Creighton
a n d R .
Wil son ).
Journ a l
of
R oma n
Archa eol ogy Suppl emen t,
32: 125-59.
Scul l a rd , H. 1981. Festiva l s a n d Ceremon ies of
the R oma n
R epubl ic.
Lon d on : Tha mes & Hud son .
Sord i, M. 1990. Ciceron e e il
primo epita fio
roma n o. In 'Dul ce et Decorum Est': La Morte in
(ed .
M.
Sord i),
Con tributi d el l ' Istituto d i storia a n tica , 16: 171-9.
Va l vo, A. 1990.
'Legibus
sol uti virtutis ca usa ' n el l a
d isposizion i
d el l a X Ta bul a . In 'Dul ce et Decorum
Est': La Morte in Comba ttimen to n el l 'An tichitd
(ed .
M.
Sord i),
Con tributi d el l ' Istituto d i storia
a n tica , 16: 145-55.
Va n Nijf, 0. 1997. The CivicWorl d of
the
Profession a l
Associa tion s in the R oma n Ea st. Amsterd a m:
J. C. Gieben .
Versn el , H. S. 1970. Triumphus:An In quiry
in to the
Origin , Devel opmen t
a n d Mea n in gof
the R oma n
Triumph.
Leid en : E. J. Bril l .
Wil l ia ms, J. 2001.
Beyon d
the R ubicon : R oma n s a n d Ga ul s in
R epubl ica n Ita l y.
Oxford : Oxford
Un iversity
Press.
Win ter, J. 1995. Sites
of Memory,
Sites
of Mourn in g:
The Grea t Wa r in
Europea n
Cul tura l
History.
Ca mbrid ge: Ca mbrid ge Un iversity
Press.
Wool f, G. 1996. Mon umen ta l
writin g
a n d the
expa n sion
of R oma n
society
in the
ea rl y
R oma n
empire.
Journ a l
of
R oma n Stud ies, 86:22-39.

Valerie Hope, Trophies and Tombstones

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Valerie Hope, Trophies and Tombstones

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Trophies and Tombstones: Commemorating the Roman Soldier

Author(s): Valerie M. Hope

Anda mungkin juga menyukai