Rome's Greatest Defeat

by Adrian Murdoch

  Several other missile finds point to the wide variety of soldiers in Varus’ army. A three-winged arrowhead found in 1993 attests to the presence of archers; and it was the discovery of three slingshots in 1988 that identified Kalkriese as a military site. Although no individual unit is known in the Roman army, slingers are depicted on Trajan’s Column and it is presumed that they made up an element of the auxiliary units. Certainly it was generally believed that the best-known slingers came from the Balearic Islands and Crete – Virgil refers to the ‘whirl of hempen-thonged Balearic sling’.6 Slingshot was made of tin, stone or lead; three lead ones have been found at Kalkriese, each one of them 3.7cm long. Finally, one of the more curious discoveries is several iron bolts with massive square heads. As these have also been discovered in greater numbers in camps, it is generally presumed that they are bolts from a light catapult, though no trace of one has yet been found.

  ARMOUR

  Evidence of two types of armour that were worn by Roman soldiers has been found at Kalkriese. Two S-shaped hook fasteners indicate that some of the soldiers were wearing chain-mail, what the Romans called lorica hamata. Made from small rings – as many as 30,000 – chain-mail was standard issue for legionaries throughout the Republican era and into the early principate. The metal rings could be as small as 3mm, each one linked through four others, two in the row above it and two below. Few examples have survived, and those only in fragmentary form. The best representation is from a statue of a Gallic officer dating to the late first century BC, now in the Musée Calvet in Avignon. From the surviving inscription on the fasteners that were found in Kalkriese, we know that this was the type of armour worn by Marcus Aius. One fastener says, ‘M Aius [cohorte] I [centuria] Fabrici[i]’; its partner, ‘M Aii [cohorte] I [centuria] Fab[ricii]’. The first inscription translates as, ‘Marcus Aius of cohort I, of Fabricius’ century’, while the second is, ‘Belongs to Marcus Aius of cohort I, Fabricius’ century’.

  Until the excavations at Kalkriese, it had been presumed that the shift from mail to plate armour did not appear in earnest until the reign of the Emperor Claudius. Evidence of widespread usage does not appear until the Roman invasion of Britain, some thirty-three years after the events discussed here. But in 1994 came the discovery of an 18.8cm iron plate with a bronze buckle, and a number of buckles and hinges of the armour, some silver-plated but for the most part tin-plated; this has pushed back the dating of its introduction to the reign of Augustus.

  Possibly entering Roman military usage via the gladiatorial arena, general use of plate armour, what is called lorica segmenta (the term was not used until the Renaissance), was a significant innovation. Considerably lighter than chain-mail (9kg, compared to 16kg) it afforded much greater protection against missile attacks.

  The earliest form of lorica segmenta, which would have been worn by legionaries under Varus, is now known as Corbridge A. From the discovery in 1964 of two complete sets of armour in a wooden chest buried below the floor of a timber building in the camp of Corbridge, just south of Hadrian’s Wall, we know that this armour consisted of forty plates. The collar and shoulder units were made up of twenty-four plates, and the torso was protected by sixteen semicircular iron strips, which were positioned horizontally and riveted on to straps.

  In the dying days of the Republic, there had been a gradual shift in shield shape; away from a curved oval shape towards the familiar curved rectangular shield. It is known from the only surviving example of this type of shield (from Dura Europos in Syria) that they were just over 1m long and more than 80cm wide. They were constructed from what was effectively a type of plywood, normally three layers of thinly planed wood, glued together with the grain of each sheet at right angles to its neighbour, for added strength. This would make them 5cm thick. The wood could be protected by a removable leather cover. The remains of one of these from this period, for example, have been found at Vindonissa. One major improvement from Republic times was that shields were much lighter, down from 10kg to 5.5kg. To strengthen the shields they were often edged with metal, and to make them more effective as an offensive weapon they typically had a hemispherical boss in the centre. It is these two elements that were found at Kalkriese in 1992, together with an iron reinforcing bar that was often placed on the inside, to stop the wood from splitting. Gilt sheet-silver elements decorated the front of the shield, both patterns and a unit’s insignia, and fragments of these, too, have been found, though not in a state that they can be reconstructed.

  Helmet

  From fragments that have been found, it is apparent that the style of helmet used by soldiers in Varus’ army is the Imperial Gallic or Wiesenau-type. The former name is used by English-speaking scholars, the latter by those in mainland Europe. A particularly fine example was found in Oberaden, and is now on display in the Westfälisches Museum für Archäeologie in Münster. Lined with felt for comfort, this helmet is characterised by a broad neck-guard, ribbed and angled to deflect blows, and a brow peak, both of which provided significant defence against downward sword blows. The protection came at a cost. First of all, they were not light, weighing over 2kg. The second downside is that peripheral vision for soldiers wearing the helmets was not great. Archaeologists at Kalkriese uncovered a complete iron plume-holder (a well-preserved example, some 7.5cm tall) in 1991, and have also found crest knobs and a bronze helmet handle, 8.1cm long.

  Military belt

  A Roman soldier’s leather belt, called the cingulum, identified him as much as his sword. Augustus was known to punish centurions by making them stand outside his tent without their belts, while Juvenal describes soldiers simply as ‘armed and belted men’.7 Belts were often richly adorned and used to carry a dagger (the sword was normally carried over the shoulder on a separate leather strap). At Kalkriese, numerous buckles of bronze have been found, one measuring 2.4cm across and displaying evidence of silver-plating being worthy of note. As well as attaching their dagger to their belt, soldiers could hang an apron of between three and eight leather straps from it, reinforced with small bronze plates and acting as protection for the groin and lower abdomen. Although the leather itself had corroded away, a complete set of sixteen plates was found in 1990, each of them 1.5cm wide, together with a belt end.

  The Iron Mask

  Found in the winter of 1989 in front of one of the Cheruscan walls where it had been buried, the 16.9cm-tall iron cavalry face mask is justifiably one of the most reproduced Roman artefacts ever found; 16.2cm wide at the top, narrowing to 8.2–8.4cm at the chin, it has become the symbol of the museum and site at Kalkriese. Originally covered in silver leaf – presumably removed by a plundering Cheruscan – it is the oldest such mask ever found, compared with other impressive examples found in Vechten and Nijmegen in Holland and Emesa in Syria. This is just the frontispiece of a face helmet that covered the whole head and face and in all likelihood was connected to the helmet at the top with a hinge and straps at the side. Its owner was probably a senior commander in an auxiliary Gallic or Thracian cavalry troop serving with the Romans.

  OTHER PIECES OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT

  To keep their cloaks together, crucial for some degree of comfort in the damp German autumn, Roman soldiers clipped them on the left shoulder. Given the size of the clips that they used, it is not surprising that a number have been found on the battlefield. These are all bronze and iron, in three different styles. Some are safety-pin types and omega types, the latter styled in the shape of the Greek letter. The majority that have been uncovered, however, are Aucissa brooches, a distinct style with a highly arched bow. These have been found all over the Roman Empire and their name comes from the fact that many are inscribed with the word ‘AVCISSA’, presumed to be the name of the manufacturer. Although none of the Aucissa brooches that have been found in Kalkriese have this name, the best one in this style is 6.2cm long and is decorated with a pine tree motif.

  Remarkably, three hob-nailed boots, called caligae, were found in 1990. Although the leather had r
otted away, the nails retained their pattern in the sand. From evidence in other parts of the empire, it is clear that there was an element of standardisation in nailing patterns, which broadly conform to patterns in sports shoes now. Each shoe in Kalkriese had around ninety nails. Even though no upper leather has survived, it is clear that these were the classic military boot, providing support for the ankle and foot and allowing ventilation. Although marching in cold, wet Germany would have been miserable, as has been pointed out, ‘at least the Roman soldier was spared the horrors of trench foot’.8

  Several fragments of phalerae have been found. These were typically regimental honours, medals worn on a harness. Representative examples can be seen on Marcus Caelius’ gravestone, though they were not issued just to officers. At Kalkriese, a small number of bronze and lead phalerae have been found. By far the best example discovered is 4cm across and shows the profile of a man, typically held to be Augustus. What makes it especially worthy of note is that it has the distinct air of the mass market about it.

  HORSES AND MULES

  Numerous small elements of horse tack point to the significant presence of cavalry at Kalkriese. As Georgia Franzius has cautiously pointed out, ‘horse tack does not necessarily derive from the military, but it does appear naturally in a military context’.9 Noteworthy are two pieces of an iron hackamore bit, as well as small, round bronze decorations from the bridle and protective amulets such as a bronze phallus pendant found in 1989.

  Two mules have also been found, one in 1992 and the other in 2000, two of the many hundreds of animals which will have borne the burden of legionaries’ kit. Around the bones of the first were found the remains of its harness: ring snaffle and iron reins some 60cm long, bronze pendants and decorative glass pearls that had fallen off their mountings. The iron clapper on the 16.6cm-long bronze bell round its neck had been muffled with a handful of oats that its owner had grabbed from a field while passing, to keep them moving as silently as possible. It is the analysis of that vegetation that has allowed the battle at Kalkriese to be dated to September of AD 9.

  BUILDING EQUIPMENT

  A large number of other objects have been found on the battlefield, though for the most part these can be ascribed either to non-military units of the army or were part and parcel of what a legionary carried on his back on campaign. Even if the various innovations that lightened the load, like the lorica segmenta, are taken into account, a legionary was still carrying roughly 23kg of weight, on top of which must be counted his pack, which came in at roughly 14kg. As well as their weaponry, as Josephus writes, legionaries carried ‘a saw and a basket, a pickaxe and an axe, a thong of leather and a hook, with provisions for three days’. With the air of a man who has never served in the ranks, he concludes brightly, ‘so the legionary has no great need of a mule to carry his burdens’.10

  By far the most significant number of finds fall into this category. For example, a dolabra, was found in 1989. This cross between an axe and a pickaxe, 53cm long, was primarily used in the construction of forts and in clearing routes. Numerous examples have been found in early Roman forts and their use is illustrated on Trajan’s Column. Other tools found include an ascia, a mason’s hammer, 13.4cm long; the iron blade of a sickle, 25.7cm long; and two types of chisel. Surveying equipment has also been uncovered in the form of a number of lead plumb-bobs. These were part of the groma, the tool Roman surveyors used to keep their roads straight and to plot right angles in the field. The first professional surveyor mentioned was Decidius Saxa, ‘a skilful and experienced surveyor’ who had worked for Julius Caesar before deserting him for Mark Antony. Cicero writes that ‘he used to be a measurer of ground for camps; now he hopes to measure out and value the city’.11 The bobs found at Kalkriese are of note, as one boasts the inscription ‘CHO1’, identifying it as belonging to the first cohort of an unknown legion.

  MEDICAL EQUIPMENT

  It is perhaps not that surprising that medicine was taken extremely seriously. Under Augustus’ reforms to the army, every legion had its own doctors, surgeons and eye doctors. From gravestones we know the names of numerous medical personnel stationed in Germany. Even auxiliary units had their own medical staff, and hospitals are a common feature of forts. Most of the ones excavated in Germany so far – at Xanten, Bonn and Neuss – date to a later period, but that is because they were made of stone, presumably on earlier wooden structures. Certainly the excavation of Haltern has revealed the remains of an 80m by 40m hospital in the centre of the camp, and numerous medical instruments have been found. At Kalkriese, two instruments point to the presence of doctors in Varus’ army: a partly silver-plated bone elevator, 14.3cm long, and the bronze handle of a surgical knife, decorated with a bronze rhomboid pattern.

  PERSONAL ARTICLES

  The personal objects found at Kalkriese have perhaps the greatest resonance. While few people today have direct experience of war, these pieces provide more of a direct link to the ancient world. In 1993, for example, an iron ring was found, its orange-brown carnelian gem (1.5cm by 1.2cm) engraved with two full cornucopiae crossed over a caduceus, the staff of Mercury, and surrounded by ears of corn; it would not look completely out of place if worn today. The same is true of a number of counters made of coloured opaque glass that legionaries used for board games.

  Even if the design is unfamiliar or if the object is no longer used in the modern world, they provide a useful touchstone for those who fell at Kalkriese: four 2cm-tall seal-boxes made of bronze, their lead lids decorated with images; unfamiliar looking iron keys, clearly carried by officers; and toiletries, like a pair of iron scissors, 16.4cm long, the handle of a razor; a bronze carrying ring for strigils, and small curved metal tools that were used by bathers to scrape off dirt and oil after bathing.

  A significant number of parts of objects that relate to eating and drinking have been found, such as fragments of bronze cooking pots and pottery objects like oil lamps and large jugs. Three pieces in particular stand out: a silver spoon, 11.3cm long; a simply decorated wine sieve of bronze, 12.4cm across; and the beautiful flat handle of a skyphos drinking cup, 3.6cm long. The handle, made of silver and decorated with crudely stylised birds, was found in 1996.

  Notes

  INTRODUCTION

  1. While this is obviously a reconstruction, it is hopefully a plausible one. For broad events see Tacitus, Annals, 1.61–2, 2.7, 2.45 and Germania, 6. See also Susanne Wilbers-Rost, ‘Kalkriese und die Varusschlacht – Archäologische Nachweise einer militärischen Auseinandersetzung zwischen Römern und Germanen’ in Philip Freeman (ed.) et al., Limes XVIII: Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies held in Amman, Jordan, September 2000 (Oxford, 2002), pp. 515–26; Claus von Carnap-Bornheim, ‘Archäologisch-historische Überlegungen zum Fundplatz Kalkrieser-Niewedder Senke in den Jahren zwischen 9 n. Chr. und 15 n. Chr.’ in Wolfgang Schlüter (ed.), Rom, Germanien und die Ausgrabungen von Kalkriese (Osnabrück, 1999), pp. 495–508.

  2. Velleius Paterculus, Roman History, 2.119.1; Florus, Epitome of Roman History, 2.30.

  3. Suetonius, Augustus, 28.

  4. Virgil, Aeneid, 6.792–3; Eclogues, 4.9; Horace, Odes, 1.35.29–30.

  5. Tacitus, Germania, 37.

  6. A.A. Gill, AA Gill is Away (London, 2002), p. 179.

  7. Deuteronomy, 12.3. See also 7.5 and 16.21.

  8. The British view of forests is divided between those, like Rowling and Kenneth Grahame, who preserve the southern European tradition, and others, like A.A. Milne, whose Hundred Acre Wood is a sanctuary.

  9. There have been two accounts of the battle specifically since the discoveries of the 1990s. Tony Clunn’s In Quest of the Lost Legions: The Varusschlacht (Minerva, 1999), updated as Quest for the Lost Roman Legions (Spellmount, 2005), and Peter Wells’ The Battle That Stopped Rome: Emperor Augustus, Armenius, and the Slaughter of the Legions in the Teutoburg Forest (Norton, 2003). The former is a thrilling account of the discovery of the site, much of it based on the author�
�s own diaries, while the latter is particularly strong on the archaeological evidence.

  10. Dieter Timpe, Der Triumph des Germanicus: Untersuchungen zu den Feldzügen der Jahre 14–16 n. Chr. in Germanien (Bonn, 1968), p. 2.

  11. Velleius Paterculus, Roman History, tr. Frederick Shipley (London, 1924), p. viii.

  12. Velleius Paterculus, Roman History, 2.118.1, 2.117.3, 2.120.5.

  13. Pliny the Younger, Letters, 7.20. For the plausible suggestion that Tacitus commanded a legion in Germany, see Herbert Benario, ‘Tacitus, Trier and the Treveri’, Classical Journal 83 (1987/8), 233–9, specifically 238–9.

  14. Herbert Benario, ‘Arminius into Hermann: History into Legend’, Greece & Rome 51 (2004), 84.

  15. Cassius Dio, Roman History, 56.18.2, 56.22.2a, 78.21.2.

  16. Florus, Epitome of Roman History, 2.30.

  17. Reinhard Wolters, ‘Hermeneutik des Hinterhalts: die antiken Berichte zur Varuskatastrophe und der Fundplatz von Kalkriese’, Klio 85 (2003), 132.

  18. Colin Wells, ‘What’s new along the Lippe: recent work in North Germany’, Britannia 29 (1998), 458.

  19. Tacitus, Annals, 1.60.

  20. Vincent Goulding, ‘Back to the future with asymmetric warfare’, Parameters (winter 2001/2), 21–30.

  CHAPTER ONE

  1. Tacitus, Annals, 3.48; Velleius Paterculus, Roman History, 2.97.1 and 2.102.1; Robin Seager, Tiberius (London, 1972), p. 269.

  2. Pliny, Natural History, 9.58.

  3. Cassius Dio, Roman History, 54.20.4–6. A date of late summer is assumed, as Lollius was in Rome to celebrate the Ludi Saeculares from 1–3 June. CIL 6.32323 in Kitty Chisholm and John Ferguson (eds), Rome, the Augustan Age: A Sourcebook (Oxford, 1981), D2b, p. 150.

  4. Suetonius, Augustus, 21.

  5. Crinagoras, Greek Anthology, 7.741; Suetonius, Augustus, 23; Tacitus, Annals, 1.10.3.