Number of legions at Zama

[Steven James]

Mark wrote:

Thanks Steven - that's a nicely crafted and gentle insult and I'll happily take it!

 

Chuckle, chuckle, you didn’t think I was going to let you off with the “numeric- mystical linkage” comment did you? Surely not.

 

Mark wrote:

When it comes to simple numbers quoted all over the place, then I am not trying to fit each one at all; I am too aware of numbers changing over the course of any campaign, and even some numbers not fitting the model due to circumstance (cf not achieving the desired cavalry numbers during stages of the Punic Wars due to over-straining the available supply of horses.

 

If you are referring to the change of ratio from one Roman horse and three allied horses to one Roman horse and two allied horses, you are mistaken. This has nothing to do whatsoever with over-straining the supply of horses.

 

Mark wrote:

I am very sceptical of those who rely on the work of others and are simply measured by which 'acedemics' they quote and reference and agree with.

 

We do agree about a lot. Too many academic papers are riddled with some academics point of view. It is a cop out by the author of the paper. For example, when they discuss line relief, they simply repeat Connelly’s theory. In the end, you have a paper or book just ranting on about everyone else’s theories, and have nothing new to offer.

 

Mark wrote:

PS - My apologies; I don't know enough about Pythagoras' other interests to use that as a descriptor with confidence; beyond the trigonometry I learned at school those many years ago.

 

You are and have already been using the Pythagorean system. Cohorts, maniples, centuries are all part of the Pythagorean system. You cannot divorce yourself from it; they are one and the same.

 

If you want to see the Pythagorean system designed for the Romans in all its glory, read the book of revelations. How the book of revelations is connected to the Servian constitution is, as they said in the 60’s…..just mind blowing man, like far out man and can you dig it.

 

Mark wrote:

PPS - I will try to answer the 5th-10 'Can you's' at the weekend as part of a new post.

 

Surely you have better things to do with your time on the weekend. Hmm, if you do try and answer them, for me to claim you are wrong means I have to expose more of my research. Oh you are a tricky one Mark. Well played, and bravo to you.