11-21-2011, 09:30 AM
George wrote: Could you make a clear, brief description of the system you propose and the evidence you base it on?
It’s about 367 A4 pages with 80 diagrams so I need to post the whole thing on the net to fully explain it. So truthfully I have no idea what is the best way of compressing it. In its basic form the orbit of the fixed stars governs the size of the tribes and therefore the legion.
George wrote: What eras of the Roman history do you try to encompass in it?
500 BC to 200 AD, plus some appendices. I would love to start the book with “once upon a time” but was not a good idea.
George wrote: I read the posts thus far, but I would appreciate a complete formulation of the main points of your proposal, if one is possible, before I can say anything about it.
Are you that confident that you can make a judgement from a proposal?
Robert wrote: Sadly, no. The publishing date of Zosimus is somewhere in the 5th century, but we don't know exactly when. He may have lived under Anastasios but his work does not continue beyond the year 410.
My mistake, I meant to ask what was the campaign year Zosimus refers to when he mentions the 6000 men organised into five regiments. I hope we do know this information.
Sean wrote: Humh, then I don't understand. You just claimed that one man in a cohort equaled one degree of a spherical, geocentric cosmos, and that the number of men in a cohort times the length of one degree of the earth's circumference equals the number of men in the tribes. That certainly sounds like relating the number of men in the tribes to the circumference of the earth to me!
One more time. :grin: The Roman cosmos system is a straight line in a circle. The circle is the zodiac, the straight line is the planets. However, I have been discussing the zodiac which is a 360 degrees circle containing 12 zodiacs of 30 degrees. Under Augustus 16 zodiacs have past the zenith, which means one orbit of the zodiac has been completed (360 degrees) and four zodiacs (120 degrees) of the new or second orbit have passed the zenith. So how does 16 zodiacs equating to 336,000 stadia or 480 degrees have anything to do with the circumference of the earth which is 252,000 stadia? I cannot fathom your conclusions?
If I add to my statement a tribe numbered during the reign of Augustus 9600 men (4800 iuniores and 4800 seniores) and include Livy’s (1 43) statement:
“Nor need it occasion any surprise, that the arrangement which now exists since the completion of the thirty-five tribes, their number being doubled by the centuries of juniors and seniors, does not agree with the total as instituted by Servius Tullius.”
What Livy is saying is that during his days, which coincides with the reign of Augustus the number of centuries in the tribes had doubled. Is this true or is Livy living up to his unfounded reputation of being unreliable? By halving 9600 men (4800 iuniores and 4800 seniores) the result is 4800 men (2400 iuniores and 2400 seniores). For the campaign of 462 BC, Dionysius (9 69-71) has four cohorts of 600 men deployed before the gates of Rome. Now 600 men multiplied by four equals 2400 men. If people want to indulge themselves in the fact this is all mathematical coincidence they have my blessing. I am not interested in convincing them otherwise, or persuading them to change their religion. But in my defence, there has been no investigation into whether there is a relation between the Roman military and their cosmos, so therefore, no one is in a position to rule it out until such an investigation has been conducted. That is why my critics amuse me.
Sean wrote: The figure of 700 stadia is Eratosthenes' estimate of the length of 1/360th of the earth's circumference (cited by Strabo, Geography, 2.34); one degree of the circumference of the orbit of the fixed stars would be much longer.
Is it? Can you prove it? A circle is 360 degrees and that is what the zodiac is…a circle. Sean if you think its all about the circumference of the earth, I am happy for you. But my work is about the zodiac and the orbit of those planets known to the ancients. I spent last year trying to establish a link between the circumference of the earth and the Roman system and there is none that I could find. The system predates Eratosthene.
Mr Campbell wrote: The point is that his idea has found its way into the mainstream, to such an extent that Steven (in this thread) imagines that the 1,200-man legion is as good as an established fact.
Oh Mr. Campbell, I always give people the benefit of the doubt that they have possibly rehabilitated themselves, but alas our relationship is always the same with you twisting the facts.
In my mind, a 1200 man legion is “not an established fact.” Yes, my numbers do come up with six classes at 1200 men per class but that is not conclusive. I started this thread seeking information on the possibility. I am fast learning that there is a lot of confusion and contradiction.
Mr. Campbell wrote: Anyhow, if you subscribe to Ancient Warfare magazine, you can read my take on the topic there. We probably shouldn't divert attention from Steven's zodiac-based thread any further.
Oh I’m quite happy not to discuss the zodiac. I want to get a better understanding of the problems surrounding the late Roman army. As to your article as I haven’t read it, do you discuss and dissect Isidore’s legion of 60 centuries, 30 maniples and 12 cohorts? Or are you one of the many academics that dismiss Isidore as being highly unreliable. I gave my outline of Isidore’s legion in this thread which shows I have no problem complying with his legion organisation, nor those numbers given by Ammianus in accordance with Isidore’s legion organisation. Maybe you would like to acknowledge my contribution in a positive manner. Stupid of me to ask, so I will refrain the question. What is wrong with my interpretation of Isidore’s legion organisation coupled with Ammainus numbers of 300 men and 500 man units? If you believe it is unfounded, then why? So far not one reply has done that, so I am curious as to why the silence. As I am RAT’s astronomical madman and attract ridicule, no one should have a problem telling me why it does not stand up to scrutiny.
Steven
It’s about 367 A4 pages with 80 diagrams so I need to post the whole thing on the net to fully explain it. So truthfully I have no idea what is the best way of compressing it. In its basic form the orbit of the fixed stars governs the size of the tribes and therefore the legion.
George wrote: What eras of the Roman history do you try to encompass in it?
500 BC to 200 AD, plus some appendices. I would love to start the book with “once upon a time” but was not a good idea.
George wrote: I read the posts thus far, but I would appreciate a complete formulation of the main points of your proposal, if one is possible, before I can say anything about it.
Are you that confident that you can make a judgement from a proposal?
Robert wrote: Sadly, no. The publishing date of Zosimus is somewhere in the 5th century, but we don't know exactly when. He may have lived under Anastasios but his work does not continue beyond the year 410.
My mistake, I meant to ask what was the campaign year Zosimus refers to when he mentions the 6000 men organised into five regiments. I hope we do know this information.
Sean wrote: Humh, then I don't understand. You just claimed that one man in a cohort equaled one degree of a spherical, geocentric cosmos, and that the number of men in a cohort times the length of one degree of the earth's circumference equals the number of men in the tribes. That certainly sounds like relating the number of men in the tribes to the circumference of the earth to me!
One more time. :grin: The Roman cosmos system is a straight line in a circle. The circle is the zodiac, the straight line is the planets. However, I have been discussing the zodiac which is a 360 degrees circle containing 12 zodiacs of 30 degrees. Under Augustus 16 zodiacs have past the zenith, which means one orbit of the zodiac has been completed (360 degrees) and four zodiacs (120 degrees) of the new or second orbit have passed the zenith. So how does 16 zodiacs equating to 336,000 stadia or 480 degrees have anything to do with the circumference of the earth which is 252,000 stadia? I cannot fathom your conclusions?
If I add to my statement a tribe numbered during the reign of Augustus 9600 men (4800 iuniores and 4800 seniores) and include Livy’s (1 43) statement:
“Nor need it occasion any surprise, that the arrangement which now exists since the completion of the thirty-five tribes, their number being doubled by the centuries of juniors and seniors, does not agree with the total as instituted by Servius Tullius.”
What Livy is saying is that during his days, which coincides with the reign of Augustus the number of centuries in the tribes had doubled. Is this true or is Livy living up to his unfounded reputation of being unreliable? By halving 9600 men (4800 iuniores and 4800 seniores) the result is 4800 men (2400 iuniores and 2400 seniores). For the campaign of 462 BC, Dionysius (9 69-71) has four cohorts of 600 men deployed before the gates of Rome. Now 600 men multiplied by four equals 2400 men. If people want to indulge themselves in the fact this is all mathematical coincidence they have my blessing. I am not interested in convincing them otherwise, or persuading them to change their religion. But in my defence, there has been no investigation into whether there is a relation between the Roman military and their cosmos, so therefore, no one is in a position to rule it out until such an investigation has been conducted. That is why my critics amuse me.
Sean wrote: The figure of 700 stadia is Eratosthenes' estimate of the length of 1/360th of the earth's circumference (cited by Strabo, Geography, 2.34); one degree of the circumference of the orbit of the fixed stars would be much longer.
Is it? Can you prove it? A circle is 360 degrees and that is what the zodiac is…a circle. Sean if you think its all about the circumference of the earth, I am happy for you. But my work is about the zodiac and the orbit of those planets known to the ancients. I spent last year trying to establish a link between the circumference of the earth and the Roman system and there is none that I could find. The system predates Eratosthene.
Mr Campbell wrote: The point is that his idea has found its way into the mainstream, to such an extent that Steven (in this thread) imagines that the 1,200-man legion is as good as an established fact.
Oh Mr. Campbell, I always give people the benefit of the doubt that they have possibly rehabilitated themselves, but alas our relationship is always the same with you twisting the facts.
In my mind, a 1200 man legion is “not an established fact.” Yes, my numbers do come up with six classes at 1200 men per class but that is not conclusive. I started this thread seeking information on the possibility. I am fast learning that there is a lot of confusion and contradiction.Mr. Campbell wrote: Anyhow, if you subscribe to Ancient Warfare magazine, you can read my take on the topic there. We probably shouldn't divert attention from Steven's zodiac-based thread any further.
Oh I’m quite happy not to discuss the zodiac. I want to get a better understanding of the problems surrounding the late Roman army. As to your article as I haven’t read it, do you discuss and dissect Isidore’s legion of 60 centuries, 30 maniples and 12 cohorts? Or are you one of the many academics that dismiss Isidore as being highly unreliable. I gave my outline of Isidore’s legion in this thread which shows I have no problem complying with his legion organisation, nor those numbers given by Ammianus in accordance with Isidore’s legion organisation. Maybe you would like to acknowledge my contribution in a positive manner. Stupid of me to ask, so I will refrain the question. What is wrong with my interpretation of Isidore’s legion organisation coupled with Ammainus numbers of 300 men and 500 man units? If you believe it is unfounded, then why? So far not one reply has done that, so I am curious as to why the silence. As I am RAT’s astronomical madman and attract ridicule, no one should have a problem telling me why it does not stand up to scrutiny.
Steven
