What the description of Sphacteria has to tell us

[Paralus]

Yes,I understand this,and to be honest,i've found myself many times using the english plural,like "aspises" and "porpaxes". My original comment was about the opposite happenning,which is yet more strange,the plural form "hippeis" being used as singular, for example "a hippeis". I wonder if Roman re-enactors are used to saying "gladiuses" and "lorica segmentatas". Or even more, "a caligae".
But those comments are very off topic.

Fun though.

English, even to a native speaker, is a bastard of a language. The incessant borrowings - that should be impostions from conquerors in the main - lead to a language that is as much a stickler for its rules as a politician is for rectitude and honesty at election time. Really, I haven't the faintest idea how individuals such as yourself cope with feminine nature (in terms of changing its mind in the classic cliche ... oops, borrowed word) of this language. I began life as a teacher of English (and history) and was forever attempting to explain to students when to ignore each and every rule.

Perhaps the plural of "gladius" is "Gladii"? And the Hippies were also homoiois!

Back to Paulluse's (!) point about the "300", I agree that it is unlikely that, even though performing the funtion, these were not the hippies. These were chosen particularly for the task on the basis of leaving at least a single son to the state. I'd think they were all from the year classes over thirty. I take that view based on ancient infant mortality and the fact that these sons, who surely were to survive their fathers to guarantee no loss of manpower, would need to have either passed through the agoge or near enough to it. The ten youngest year classes are likely to have had infant or near infant sons - for the most part - with no guarantee of survival.