RomanArmyTalk

Thanks Jasper, Caratacus and Kate,

This is what comes from relying soley on memory for far too much of the time. C.R. Alcock is the author of a different book on my shelves.

I agree with Kate. Speidel's paper was very convincing until I read the article by Alston two years later. Richard Alston casts doubt on a number of Speidel's (both the elder and the younger's) conclusions and at the same time advances the case for equality of legionary and auxiliary pay. I think that Alston's paper is the more important to read but I would still read Speidel's first, both for the clarity of the presentation of the evidence and the display of very clever thinking. Alston then comes in to present less information than Speidel but a much better case (it occurs to me here that it is a good six years since I last read either of these articles and perhaps I should take my own advice and read them again before I say anything more).

Crispvs

Quote:a roman soldier may not have saved much at all, remember, in many cases these were virile young men, they would have needed to spend some on...

Good point. Most young military members today seem to spend the bulk of their paycheck rather quickly as well. Typically, it's not until those retirement years are approaching--and you suspect that you'll actually be living long enough to have a retirement--that people begin to reflect on the value of savings.

IIRC there's a Speidel rebuttal of the Alston article in the 'Gedenkschrift für Eric Birley' edited by Dobson & Eck. If I remember I'll have a look in the library tomorrow.

M.A.Speidel "Sold und Wirtschaftslage der romischen Soldaten" - it is in the Birley festschrift, pp.65-96.

Save you the trip to the library, Jasper - I have most of our library's Roman military bibliography piled up on my study floor at home!

Not that I won't be in the library anyways tomorrow, but thanks! :wink: