Help support TMP


"Romans vs Celts in Aquileia, Italy" Topic


9 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ancients Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Ancients

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Bronze Age's Ajax, King of Salamis

combatpainter Fezian paints a legend from the Trojan Wars.


640 hits since 13 Jan 2020
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP13 Jan 2020 3:39 p.m. PST

"Aquileia was founded in 181 BC as a Roman colony to prevent Celtic incursions in the Italian interior. Soon the Celtic tribes of N/Eastern Alpine Italy, Pannonia and other neighbouring regions, reacted by force to this colonisation and I suppose that the image depicts a modern reenactment of the battle related to this reaction. I noted an interesting feature in the image, that is the elaborate but somewhat outdated linothorax of the fallen Italian warrior. It seems that he is a Venetian or Etruscan allied warrior of the Roman force (auxilia)…."

picture


Main page
link


Amicalement
Armand

Kenntak16 Jan 2020 5:13 a.m. PST

The linothorax armor on the fallen warrior looks great, but was probably no longer used at that time.

Maxshadow16 Jan 2020 6:22 p.m. PST

Great find Tango!

Damion17 Jan 2020 12:10 a.m. PST

The warrior on the ground is probably a Celt. There are Celtic reenactment groups in Europe that have painted armour like that. The statues of seated warriors from Celtic sites like Entremont, which I think date to the second or first century bc have warriors wearing linothorax type armour.
Here's one from Glanum:

picture

Kenntak18 Jan 2020 12:07 p.m. PST

Thanks for pointing that out Damion. That's very interesting.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP18 Jan 2020 8:57 p.m. PST

A votre service mon ami!. (smile)

Amicalement
Armand

GurKhan22 Jan 2020 4:50 a.m. PST

The statues of seated warriors from Celtic sites like Entremont, which I think date to the second or first century bc have warriors wearing linothorax type armour.

Though the date of those statues is not, I think, very firmly established. Andre Rapin's article in the 1999 "Gladius" (http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/index.php/gladius/issue/view/2 ) suggests that the Glanum and Roquepertuse statues are earlier than the 3rd-century BC date commonly assigned.

Damion28 Jan 2020 9:09 p.m. PST

Do you know what his reasoning is GurKhan? They certainly match well with the Glauberg Warrior which is dated c500 bc.
I assume there is a reason that these seated guys are dated to a later period too but don't know what it is.

GurKhan05 Feb 2020 3:09 a.m. PST

Artistic style, mostly.

La stylistique des sculptures de Provence révèle des tendances communes avec les créations ibériques, italiques, ou centre-européennes, par l'usage de volumes simples et très épurés pour la figuration humaine. Ces normes sont totalement étrangères à celles utilisées par
les grecs de la période hellénistique.

Enfin, les ornements peints sur les sculptures de Roquepertuse comme ceux du sanctuaire de Glanum, relèvent des répertoires géométriques du premier âge du Fer. Ces oeuvres sont certainement moins tardives qu'on le pense (fig. AB).

What I don't really know is the basis for the "standard" later dating. I think it's partly down to general dating considerations for the sites as a whole – see link on Roquepertuse:

Officially, the findings have been dated to the 3rd century BC. This age has been established based on Celtic expansion into the area, which took place around the same time. However, the clothing and gestures of certain statues found at the site suggest that they date from the 5th or 6th century BC, instead.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.