05-27-2011, 11:51 PM
In English, and especially for people who occupy themselves with military history like us, a pikeman is someone who is armed with a pike, in those days a sarissa. It is only logical for anyone to assume, after reading that specific translation, that the Greek word used was a sarissa, but it was not. I guess that if detail did not matter anything could pass, but this is why this thread was opened in the first place as I see it. What is more, the text does not specify if these men were infantry or cavalry. Both terms could be used for both. A pikeman can only be a footsoldier. Lucian's kontophoros could as well be a horseman.
So, I do not think that such a translation would be enough for people like us and maintain that it can be very misleading. I would prefer a translation that would keep the Greek terminology like "a soldier armed with a loghe and another with a kontos". I agree that such a translation whose target group is the general public would be awkward and difficult to follow, but this exact lack of such translations led me to never voice an opinion on a translation alone without first having read the original.
So, I do not think that such a translation would be enough for people like us and maintain that it can be very misleading. I would prefer a translation that would keep the Greek terminology like "a soldier armed with a loghe and another with a kontos". I agree that such a translation whose target group is the general public would be awkward and difficult to follow, but this exact lack of such translations led me to never voice an opinion on a translation alone without first having read the original.
