Roman Legion Tattoo's

[AzzA]

Hi, i'm very new to all this, but am slowly learning...

Could somebody tell me if the Roman Legions had Tattoo's or markings signifying their allegiance to Rome or the legion?

if so, did they have different marks for different areas, or ranks etc?

Is there anywhere that i can see some examples of these?

 

kind regards

AzzA

[Primus Pilus]

Evidence for legionary tattoos is very limited. We know that some legionaries had tattoos, but we don't know if there wree uniformed policies for these markings.

 

This thread has an excellent post by another forum member...

Tattoos

[AzzA]

ahh, thankyou very much for that, i did try searching but came up with nothing for some reason.

thanks again

[Primus Pilus]

Was reminded of this subject while perusing Vegetius on another matter.

 

From Vegetius, De Re Militari Book I..

"The recruit, however, should not receive the military mark as soon as enlisted. He must first be tried if fit for service; whether he has sufficient activity and strength; if he has capacity to learn his duty; and whether he has the proper degree of military courage. For many, though promising enough in appearance, are found very unfit upon trial. These are to be rejected and replaced by better men; for it is not numbers, but bravery which carries the day.

 

After their examination, the recruits should then receive the military mark, and be taught the use of their arms by constant and daily exercise. But this essential custom has been abolished by the relaxation introduced by a long peace. We cannot now expect to find a man to teach what he never learned himself. The only method, therefore, that remains of recovering the ancient customs is by books, and by consulting the old historians. But they are of little service to us in this respect, as they only relate the exploits and events of wars, and take no notice of the objects of our present enquiries, which they considered as universally known."

 

 

The mark itself has been considered to be a branded iron or some other permanent possibility (perhaps tattoo). It was not removable. The chance of the mark being SPQR seems completely implausible to me though.. The Legions of the imperial age swore an oath the Emperor. Marking them in some way as property of the Senate and people of Rome just doesnt make sense.

[Jimbow]

Marking them in some way as property of the Senate and people of Rome just doesnt make sense.

 

 

Bearing in mind 'SPQR' was displayed on some standards, I don't see why it's that unfeasible. What else could it be? The mark of an Emperor makes less sense to me, especially as the only real option prior to Augustus would have surely been 'SPQR' or the Legion? As the legions were subservient to Rome, and their loyalty jealously watched, I'd go for 'SPQR' just to make sure the soldiers knew who was the real boss.

 

Jim.

[Primus Pilus]

True enough. Generally though, the 'evidence' Vegetius gives relates to later imperial practices. I'm not personally aware of any such evidence for legionary marks prior to his writings. It would certainly stand to reason that such marks would be different in the two periods (Republican and Imperial), but perhaps they weren't specific to any slogan at all.

 

Couldn't the mark just be a simple + or a / or a ]? Perhaps it might be a legionary mark, like II if one was recruited into Legio II Augusta, or some combination of symbols for that particular unit.