Pteruges

Author: Geddes, P., (2020), “Meditations on Pteruges”, first published in The Imperial Courier, Volume 15, Issue 8, THE RMRS, pp. 3-5, revised July 2021.

Pteruges, those strips of material or leather which often emerge from beneath armour and add a certain style to the Roman soldier look, what are they for? How do they contribute, in a practical way, to the soldier’s panoply? Why do so many recreated subarmali (“under-armour”) incorporate these “feathers” or “wings”, and by extension, why do so many of the ancient depictions show them?

Firstly, are they practical? We all know that not every item a soldier might wear had a utilitarian practicality. Did the fashionable changes to belt plates, for example, make said belt more effective? Did decorative plates of any sort actually improve the utility of a belt? Possibly, if they are grouped at the front of the body and thereby protect the leather from cuts. The continually changing nature of belt plate styles cannot be shown to have any practical value, however. Equally, what is the practicality of a set of weighted straps that could potentially strike the soldier between the legs just when he needs to be at his most potent? Could it be that they were simply there to look good? The idea is not so far-fetched as surviving artefacts and contemporary imagery reveal soldiers seemingly carried decorated equipment. They might well have added further decoration of little practical value to that equipment, as the Herculaneum soldier had done to his sword scabbard. From experience, the jingling sound of decorative belt aprons helps keep men in step, but other items of equipment, such as sword pommels and shields, knock rhythmically as well.

So, might pteruges have been purely decorative? We have seen that other items might be decorated for no practical reason which can be connected to battle readiness. Could subarmali have been the same, with pteruges added simply for decorative effect? Certainly, if we look at a statue like the Prima Porta Augustus (Fig. A right), we can see pteruges that are narrow, overly short (at the shoulders, at least), appear very flexible, possibly even slightly floppy, and may have served little real protective function.

Origins As their ancient Greek derived name suggests, they were originally the flexible extensions to the lower edge of the Greek “linothorax” [1] (Fig. B below), which allowed for a degree of flexible protection to the upper legs, which would not be possible by simply extending the rigid linothorax down over the thighs. These pteruges were made of the same heavily layered and glued linen as the rest of the cuirass [2]. It makes sense therefore to think that their adoption by Roman soldiers must have been for the practical reason of flexible protection for the upper legs. Pteruges added to the shoulders potentially provide the same protection to the upper arms. Indeed, when we see depictions of pteruges worn by regular frontline soldiers they are not the narrow, floppy strips shown on the Prima Porta statue but wider, stiffer looking strips, often in two overlapping layers (Fig. C below). This form of pteruges, seen on such reliefs as those of M. Favonius Facilis (Fig. D below) and C. Castricius Victor (Fig. E below) [3], are clearly not meant to be overly flexible and look as though they are intended to be tough. They are variously interpreted as being made of thick leather, layered and stiffened linen, or rawhide; all tough materials that could potentially protect the legs from glancing cuts.

Construction Accepting that the frontline soldier’s pteruges were intended to be tough, flexible protection from glancing blows to the legs, how were they constructed? To any degree of accuracy this is almost an impossible question to answer, but there are certain things we can observe. Firstly, pteruges are often arranged in two layers, with the inner layer longer than the outer layer. Secondly, they are often (although not always) defined with raised edges, and, thirdly, the lower edges of the inner (or single) layer are often divided into narrower strips.

The raised edges suggest bindings to prevent the edges of layered strips splitting (or perhaps from causing wear to other pteruges if they were constructed of rawhide). It is equally possible that the edging might be moulding on thick leather, although this seems less likely.

The double layering might suggest two possible interpretations. Firstly, the function might well be the same as the assumed function of the double layered pteruges on the earlier linothorax: as the leg is moved, the pteruges are forced to divide to allow this movement. By having an inner layer of pteruges overlapped by a second outer layer, then any exposed gaps in the inner pteruges during movement can, at least, be partially filled. Thus, a level of protection to the leg (or upper arm in the case of shoulder pteruges) is maintained. The other possibility is that the inner layer might be padded and possibly softer to provide some protection from any blunt force trauma transferred though the stiffer outer layer. The latter could be made of layered and glued linen, rawhide (possibly within tough fabric sleeves and with a tough edge binding), or thick, wax impregnated leather [4]. This last observation focuses on the divided terminal ends. These might be decoratively divided leather, or alternatively they may be intended to represent, in stone, tasselled ends similar to those seen on the Prima Porta statue.

However the pteruges were actually constructed, it is generally assumed that they were attached to the subarmalis. There are several sculptures which appear to show subarmali draped over other objects and these appear to have pteruges attached to them.

There remains one final observation rarely discussed. There are several depictions of pteruges at the shoulder that seem to surround the upper arm but do not obey Newtonian principles and hang down. It seems reasonable to ask whether such details (as seen on the cavalryman Vonatorix (Fig. F above), several of the Adamklissi metopes (cf. Fig. C) and probably on a group of Augustan legionaries on a sculpture in Lyon (Fig. G above), as well as on the well known, much later statues of the Tetrarchs, now in Venice) are genuinely pteruges. It remains a possibility that the sculptor was attempting to represent the short, quilted sleeves of subarmali. If so, then the quilting may have been mistaken for similar looking pteruges. All of which raises the interesting prospect that quilted sleeves of Roman soldier’s subarmalis protected his upper arms, while pteruges attached at the waist performed the same function for the upper thighs.

---

Endnotes:

1. The term “linothorax” is a modern term based on the Greek λινοθώραξ, which means "wearing a breastplate of linen": Liddell, H.G., Scott, R., Jones, H.S., and McKenzie, R., (1843), A Greek–English Lexicon, Oxford University Press. ▲

2. Being constructed of biodegradable materials, few, if any, remains have been positively identified. Attempts to reconstruct linothorax armour have been based on ancient depictions and descriptions. Most modern reconstructions comprise layers of glued linen, some around a leather core forming the distinctive style of tube protecting the thorax, shoulder doubling, and pteruges protecting the upper thighs. ▲

3. Castricius Victor’s pteruges are partially obscured by his apron straps, but appear to continue round his body. ▲

4. In the first interpretation, the inner layer could be constructed in the same way. ▲