11-18-2011, 08:40 AM
Caballo wrote: I'd recommend Nicasie's book, Twilight of the Empire. An excellent analysis of the Late Roman Army. I have to confess, I don't follow your theory though.
Thanks for the recommendation. Sorry about not clarifying my theory. I’m still trying to work it out. However, I have put this together since my last posting. Ammianus gives units of 300 men or 500 men, as does Lydus (300 man cohort and 500 vexillations). For this exercise, I have split the 6000 men into two bodies of 3000 men. To have both 300 and 500 man units, a 3000 man unit consists of three lines (A B and C) of 1000 men amounting to 10 centuries per line.
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 A10
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10
Each line is divided into two vexilliationes of 500 men. For example centuries A1 to A5 make up one vexillation numbering 500 men and centuries A6 to A10 make up another 500 man vexilliation. In this manner the 3000 men are organised into six vexillationes of 500 men. Now if you add the six vexillations from the another 3000 men, the total is 12 vexillations of 500 men. Isidore claims a legion consisting of 12 cohorts numbering 500 men. Many academics have considered Isidore to be in error but he is dead right. So a 500 man vexillation is also referred to as a 500 man cohort. To form cohorts of 300 men, the 3000 men are vertically organised into 10 cohorts of 300 men with a cohort consisting of one century from each line. For example, a cohort would consist of centuries A1, B1 and C1. Ammianus has references to 800 men to man the fleets, so this could possibly work out to one 500 man vexillation and one 300 man cohort: example a vexillation consisting of centuries A1 to A5 plus cohort six (centuries A6, B6 and C6).
Ok I did that by using the primary sources and in the process I hope I have successfully vindicated Isidore’s good name.
Nathan Ross wrote: Anyway, as mentioned on the thread above, if there was some grand mathematical plan for troop numbers within army organisation, we don't have any record of it and it certainly isn't supported by the evidence we do possess.
Actually there is evidence of the existence of a grand mathematical plan and it is discussed in snippets by the Romans in various primary sources. Some say things like the changing of the intervals, or if the republic doesn’t change. There is also one reference explaining why the Romans do not talk about the system. They are embarrassed it does not belong to them and it should. To understand the grand mathematical plan as you call it requires the reader to investigate more disciplines than just the military. The size of a cohort can tell a lot if you know how to use the information. Many ancient authorities tell us a zodiac amounts to 30 degrees and Strabo remarks that one degree equals 700 stadia. Therefore, one zodiac equals 21,000 stadia. By taking the 480 man cohort as our example, when divided by 30 degrees the result is 16 zodiacs. In this manner one man in a cohort equals one degree, so a 480 man cohort when multiplied by 700 stadia per degree equals 336,000 stadia. This number means nothing to most readers at this point, but it is the number of men in the 35 tribes. So 336,000 men divided by 35 tribes equals 9600 men per tribe. Now by following Livy claiming the number of iuniores to seniores is 50/50, the 9600 men divides into 4800 iuniores and 4800 seniores. In short, the tribe dictates the size of the legion! Next rule is the number of cavalry squadrons must represent the number of zodiacs for that time period, so an alae of 512 men divided by 16 zodiacs equals 32 men. Therefore, a 512 alae contains 16 squadrons. The number 16 represents the Etruscan system of dividing the heavens into 16 parts. At this point in their history, which is during the reign of Augustus, the Romans have theoretically run out of heaven. However, I have found two references to how they extend it.
Mr Campbell wrote: Why are your units of 1,200 men gathered into sixes, then?
The number six is based on the six property classes cited by Dionysius.
Mr Campbell wrote: What is the point of the 7,200-man unit? And why have you decided that the units should comprise 1,200 men, in any case?
The number 7200 comes from the tribal system made up of six classes of 1200 men. This is based on my research following the Roman cosmos system. I am not asking anyone to believe it, nor accept it, but from Augustus the tribal system produces the number 4800 men, then 6000 men and in 400 AD, 7200 men. The tribes advance by 2400 men (1200 iuniores and 1200 seniores. The 2400 men when multiplied by 35 tribes equals 84,000 stadia which when divided by 21,000 stadia per zodiac, equates to four zodiacs or 120 degrees. So every time the fourth zodiac passes the zenith the Romans increase the 35 tribes by a total of 84,000 men, which equates to 2400 men per tribe. However, this system only started with Augustus. Before that they used a similar but awkward system (one of three).
Robert Vermaat wrote: I have never, EVER, come across a structure such as this hypothesis, in any Late Roman unit. IF this would have been the case, we would at some point have found a description of a soldier being either this or that, serving in the same unit. We haven’t.
Do you mean we have no idea of what troop types the units in the Late Roman army are composed of?
Steven
Thanks for the recommendation. Sorry about not clarifying my theory. I’m still trying to work it out. However, I have put this together since my last posting. Ammianus gives units of 300 men or 500 men, as does Lydus (300 man cohort and 500 vexillations). For this exercise, I have split the 6000 men into two bodies of 3000 men. To have both 300 and 500 man units, a 3000 man unit consists of three lines (A B and C) of 1000 men amounting to 10 centuries per line.
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 A10
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10
Each line is divided into two vexilliationes of 500 men. For example centuries A1 to A5 make up one vexillation numbering 500 men and centuries A6 to A10 make up another 500 man vexilliation. In this manner the 3000 men are organised into six vexillationes of 500 men. Now if you add the six vexillations from the another 3000 men, the total is 12 vexillations of 500 men. Isidore claims a legion consisting of 12 cohorts numbering 500 men. Many academics have considered Isidore to be in error but he is dead right. So a 500 man vexillation is also referred to as a 500 man cohort. To form cohorts of 300 men, the 3000 men are vertically organised into 10 cohorts of 300 men with a cohort consisting of one century from each line. For example, a cohort would consist of centuries A1, B1 and C1. Ammianus has references to 800 men to man the fleets, so this could possibly work out to one 500 man vexillation and one 300 man cohort: example a vexillation consisting of centuries A1 to A5 plus cohort six (centuries A6, B6 and C6).
Ok I did that by using the primary sources and in the process I hope I have successfully vindicated Isidore’s good name.
Nathan Ross wrote: Anyway, as mentioned on the thread above, if there was some grand mathematical plan for troop numbers within army organisation, we don't have any record of it and it certainly isn't supported by the evidence we do possess.
Actually there is evidence of the existence of a grand mathematical plan and it is discussed in snippets by the Romans in various primary sources. Some say things like the changing of the intervals, or if the republic doesn’t change. There is also one reference explaining why the Romans do not talk about the system. They are embarrassed it does not belong to them and it should. To understand the grand mathematical plan as you call it requires the reader to investigate more disciplines than just the military. The size of a cohort can tell a lot if you know how to use the information. Many ancient authorities tell us a zodiac amounts to 30 degrees and Strabo remarks that one degree equals 700 stadia. Therefore, one zodiac equals 21,000 stadia. By taking the 480 man cohort as our example, when divided by 30 degrees the result is 16 zodiacs. In this manner one man in a cohort equals one degree, so a 480 man cohort when multiplied by 700 stadia per degree equals 336,000 stadia. This number means nothing to most readers at this point, but it is the number of men in the 35 tribes. So 336,000 men divided by 35 tribes equals 9600 men per tribe. Now by following Livy claiming the number of iuniores to seniores is 50/50, the 9600 men divides into 4800 iuniores and 4800 seniores. In short, the tribe dictates the size of the legion! Next rule is the number of cavalry squadrons must represent the number of zodiacs for that time period, so an alae of 512 men divided by 16 zodiacs equals 32 men. Therefore, a 512 alae contains 16 squadrons. The number 16 represents the Etruscan system of dividing the heavens into 16 parts. At this point in their history, which is during the reign of Augustus, the Romans have theoretically run out of heaven. However, I have found two references to how they extend it.
Mr Campbell wrote: Why are your units of 1,200 men gathered into sixes, then?
The number six is based on the six property classes cited by Dionysius.
Mr Campbell wrote: What is the point of the 7,200-man unit? And why have you decided that the units should comprise 1,200 men, in any case?
The number 7200 comes from the tribal system made up of six classes of 1200 men. This is based on my research following the Roman cosmos system. I am not asking anyone to believe it, nor accept it, but from Augustus the tribal system produces the number 4800 men, then 6000 men and in 400 AD, 7200 men. The tribes advance by 2400 men (1200 iuniores and 1200 seniores. The 2400 men when multiplied by 35 tribes equals 84,000 stadia which when divided by 21,000 stadia per zodiac, equates to four zodiacs or 120 degrees. So every time the fourth zodiac passes the zenith the Romans increase the 35 tribes by a total of 84,000 men, which equates to 2400 men per tribe. However, this system only started with Augustus. Before that they used a similar but awkward system (one of three).
Robert Vermaat wrote: I have never, EVER, come across a structure such as this hypothesis, in any Late Roman unit. IF this would have been the case, we would at some point have found a description of a soldier being either this or that, serving in the same unit. We haven’t.
Do you mean we have no idea of what troop types the units in the Late Roman army are composed of?
Steven
