11-17-2007, 03:13 PM
Quote:Without knowing his sources and their reliabilty, as well as not knowing whether what Vegetius is stating is a reality or his assumption, it is extremely difficult to use one line of Vegetius as the prop for a whole proposal.That's a novel approach. Assumed guilty until proven innocent?!
Remember that Vegetius does actually cite his sources, so we do know that his work derives in some measure from Frontinus (fl. c. AD 90) and Tarrutienus Paternus (fl. c. AD 175). As two eminent military writers, I'd say they're pretty reliable. So, I'd rather use Vegetius carefully and in tandem with other evidence than write him off completely.
* He tells us that new recruits were carefully vetted to ensure good health and free birth. Sure enough, Pliny (amongst others) confirms this.
* He says that recruits had to be of a certain height. Sure enough, the Theodosian Code confirms this.
* He says that recruits should be "sponsored" by referees. Sure enough, the papyri (especially the archive of Claudius Terentianus) confirm this.
* He says that recruits should use special training weapons. Sure enough, Onasander (and others) confirms that such items were used.
* He says that enlistment was a two-stage process, with stage 1 recruits-in-training (tirones) becoming stage 2 members of a military unit (milites). Sure enough, this 2-stage process is confirmed by (amongst others) Trajan's jurist Ulpian.
The only point that remains unclear is Vegetius' statement that 4 months' basic training was given during stage 1. Kate (I think) prefers to place this training in stage 2, when the men have been assigned to their units. That's the part where we agree to disagree -- phew! :roll:
