We can attempt to understand the history of the Classical Mediterranean through various forms of art and visual culture, but ‘when we encounter such pieces, we often see them abstracted from their original social and historical contexts, and it is not clear what we can learn from them as classical archaeologists or ancient historians'. With many large-scale works of visual culture, it is essential to remember it was the rich and powerful who could commission such works on a grand and unprecedented scale, and in ancient Rome, it was the emperors themselves who almost always brought forth these great works of public art and architecture. Furthermore, under an emperor, as is often the case throughout ancient Rome’s history, art often took on an aspect of propaganda. We can explore this notion of distortion further with Trajan, born in 53 AD (ruled from 98 to 117 AD), and his infamous Column (Fig 1), which today is the only intact remnant of the original forum (Fig 2-3) he had built to glorify his victories in two wars he fought against the Dacians.

Trajan's architect, named 'Apollodorus' (Kershaw 2013), designed the forum, now gone, and the column which still stands today. The forum was once set in a crowded area in the centre of old Rome, amongst three other forums of previous emperors. It was surely placed there to ensure that the citizens and visitors of the grand city would encounter Trajan's immense success as embodied in the column's design. We can note two forms of Greco-Roman idealism that Apollodorus incorporated into the monument: 'The Column of Trajan represents an appropriation of Greek art—the column was a Greek form, and the figures adorning the monument are firmly rooted in the older classical tradition. The combination of column form and narrative relief sculpture, however, is decidedly Roman, as is the quest for immortality through the commemoration of individual achievement in monumental sculpture and architecture. (Annenberg Learner, 2022)

Viewing the column invokes the idea of a tremendous historical feat filled with ideological importance. At 39-metres/128-foot tall, it is covered by an iconographic frieze in a continuous 190-metre/625-foot narrative band circling up from the base to the top. ‘The lower half of the column corresponds to the first Dacian War (c. 101–102 C.E.), while the top half depicts the second Dacian War (c. 105–106 C.E.).’ (Becker 2022)  This ‘created a space that befitted a more highly articulated monument than the previous ones, with more striking dimensions and greater splendour, which also appeared in the extensive use of polychrome marble’ (Adriano La Regina 2007 p.186) In its time, it was like an invention of a new artistic mode, offering an easily digestible composition and readily comprehensive storyboard for its audience. ‘Art historians have likened the sculptured frieze winding around the column to an illustrated scroll of the type housed in the neighbouring libraries of the Forum of Trajan.’ (Kleiner 2016 p.104)  The column was also originally painted to enhance its visual prominence (although the colours have long since disappeared), and the reliefs, cut shallowly, depict the two Dacian military campaigns in a very meticulous manner. 

As purely a visual narrative, we wonder how accurate this story is to the actual events of the wars. As we see a tale of conquest told in over 150 episodes with over 2500 figures, most of the focus is not on battles but instead on the readying of troops, preparation, moving prisoners or equipment and, of course, on the great emperor himself. We frequently see Trajan overlooking his powerful military, keeping a dutiful watch over his men and ensuring that tasks are carried out from afar. He is depicted in postures and manners that make him easily distinguishable from the rest of the soldiers and scenery. The overall collection of scenes seems to provide a detailed picture of a very civilized army at war while in perfect harmony under their exceptional leader. 'Trajan is portrayed as a strong, stable, and efficient commander of a well-run army, and his barbarian enemies are shown as worthy opponents of Rome.' (Stockard 2017 p.195) From this, we may find the symbolism and imagery is less concerned with the horrors of war, key battle events, or Rome's military prowess and more inclined to be panegyric to the emperor's logistical leadership abilities. Perhaps this was the main message behind Trajan's propaganda. The scenes intend to spotlight the prestige of Roman army life, its dominance, and control as it conducts its operations with hyper-efficiency. Perhaps the column was meant to recruit soldiers as well as show the poise of the emperor. 

The images shown in Trajan's column give us a sense that the military has mastered the logistical elements of war, as troops are engaged with clearing forestry, building forts, taking prisoners, collecting spoils and quickly slaughtering the enemy. However, we cannot be sure that was the case. There are contradictions peppered throughout. For example, some depictions on Trajan’s column ‘shows the spoils heaped up after each battle, including rather sophisticated armour and weapons- yet in the battles themselves the ‘barbarians’ are shown wielding considerably more primitive arrangements.’ (Matyszak 2004 p.214) Thus we should scrutinize the scenes when learning about the Roman and Dacian armies' uniforms, weapons, equipment, and tactics. We may also question the clues regarding how the Dacians may have looked, dressed and fought. The column's narrative seems to say the Dacians were sometimes worthy opponents, and at other points, they were not. It tends to lean toward reiterating that Rome has the skill to conquer formidable opponents at one turn and slaughter barbarians at the next.

In the end, the column has stood for almost 2000 years and continues to do what it was designed to do for the most part, which is to be a universal and visual narrative device to highlight the military skills of Rome while engaged in frontier warfare. Trajan's column remains an extraordinary monument to an important conquest of which we are unsure of many details. It still sends the message that the Roman military was a massive and powerful force to be reckoned with under Trajan's rule. At the same time, it demonstrates the Romans honoured their leaders, idolized them and created ways to keep their accomplishments eternal using art.