Museums can be wrong too

Hi friends,

First of all: felix novus annus to all of you!

Last week I went to a exposition about Julius Caesar in the h’art museum in Amsterdam, and although the main storyline was pretty straight-forward and not very noteworthy, there were a couple of things that stood out to me which I thought I’d share here.

The most impressive item on display to me, was also the most mundane. It was a small earthenware drinking cup or bowl, which had written on it: “vote for Cato as tribune”*. It is believed to have been a sort of promotional give-away item at a dinner party of Cato the Younger; one of Julius Caesar’s most fierce political opponents, who was elected tribune of the plebs in 63 BC (the old ever-grumpy senator from HBO’s Rome series). Other than that there was an amazingly beautiful sarcophagus, as well as an altar depicting a large eagle (the symbol for power, courage and victory et cetera, and generally associated with Jupiter) and the suckling wolf with remus and romulus underneath it – very cool. Then there was a copy of the famous Capitoline Wolf statue as well, which was long thought to have been of Etruscan origin, but nowadays most historians believe it to be of medieval times – still an iconic piece.

Lastly, the last photo is of an information panel with a text about the Roman army around the time of Caesar. And unfortunately, perhaps this is the most memorable item of the entire exposition, as it has to be the most incorrect text I’ve ever seen in a museum! Take a look at it yourself, and see what you think about it, before I give away the answers below.

Alright, so what’s wrong with it?

1. It says a legion consisted of 10 cohorts of 520 men, while in reality it’s 9 cohorts of 480 and the tenth (first) cohort of double strength, so 960 men. Not a big deal, sure, but in for a penny, in for a pound …
2. It goes on to say each cohort consists of six centuries of 100 men each. No way back now; this is wrong, it is 80 men each.
3. Then it says these 10 cohorts made up “the set of three maniples”. A maniple is a term from before the ‘Marian reforms’ around 100 BC, and very out of place during the time of Caesar as a military commander. There were no more maniples, just cohorts and centuries.
4. The commander-in-chief is called a dux here. Again, this is a term which is completely out of place, even moreso than the maniple, because the term dux is only introduced in the late third and fourth century. There was no dux around the time of Caesar, and the commanders of the legion were the legati, with military tribunes as second-in-command.
5. It is true the centurions led the centuries, they got this right. Job well done.
6. Up next is the equipment: they were not equipped with “a range of projectiles” as the information panel says, but just throwing spears (pila). Again, this seems to refer to the legionary of the fourth century, which did have multiple different options when it came to ranged attacks (see the video below for example: “Plumbata throwing” (august 16th 2022)).
7. “They were protected by helmets, shields, breastplates and shin guards.” If by breastplates they mean the Roman plate armour (‘loricate segmentata’) then no; those came into use roughly 50 years later. If they refer to the typical (hastati) single bronze breastplate of old, then no; this was a time long gone as well by the mid first century BC. They simply wore chain armor by this time. And shin guards would have also been an oddity in this period.
8. Then lastly there’s the picture of a supposed republican legionary, which is just horrific … this is clearly an image of a (auxilia) cavalrymen (of the first century), with his typical oval (auxilia or cavalry) shield and a face mask (!). The face mask especially is not an item ever associated with any type of infantry,  certainly not a regular infantryman (either legionary or auxilia).

So yeah, quite astounding to see this all portrayed right in the first hall of the exposition, with hundreds of people reading this every day and believing it to be accurate. Of course you could call this information all details in the bigger picture of Caesar’s life, but then why do it all; either be accurate or don’t. It’s just very odd and inaccurate, whatever way you look at it. Everyone makes mistakes, we sure do as well from time to time, but this is extreme. So, stay critical at all times, even when visiting a museum!

Thanks all for your continued support, we really really appreciate it and couldn’t do this without you. Also, we’ve got a video coming up shortly again!

Floris

* since for the name only “Cato” was inscribed, it could have also referred to a family member of Cato the Younger, who ran for tribune seven years later. The museum didn’t add this nuance, so I wonder if they somehow know for sure it didn’t, or just chose to keep it simple. The photo I added is not the actual item itself, as I forgot to take a photo of it, but the item on this photo is practically the same.