11-14-2010, 11:58 PM
Hello Nick, how’s the thesis coming along?
You need to know what you are looking for in order to find it.
In 44 BC, during the funeral games of Julius Caesar a comet was visible for seven days in the northern part of the sky. The common people believed that this star signified the soul of Caesar received among the spirits of the immortal gods. According to Servius, (Vergil Eclogues 9 46) a haruspex by the name of Vulcatius went before the popular assembly proclaiming the new comet indicated the end of the ninth saeculum, and the beginning of the tenth saeculum. Censorinus cites a saeculum is an age or cycle. To many the above means nothing. However, the Roman saeculum is the cosmic calendar, and it ties in with Florus’ remark of Rome’s period of infancy, youth and manhood.
The three tribes of Romulus is also the army, being one and the same. Livy cites the century assembly was designed for both war and peace.
The Romans also added more tribes to accommodate more citizens. So what are they doing differently from the Athenians? If the Athenians based their tribes on the four seasons, months and year, then I am inclined to accept it until someone can prove otherwise.
But who is Boethius’ work deprived from? For one, he mentions many of the ancient mathematicians dating back to 5th century BC. To determine if Boethius is just mathematical coincidence first requires taking a scientific approach…that is to test it first, then make a judgement. This is my methodology, of which I have chosen in preference to dogma. We no longer burn heretics so there is nothing to fear by taking the scientific approach. The ancient applied numbers to mostly everything. Aristotle applies mathematical values to each of the four seasons. Some gods are associated with the triangle, others the square. These geometric shapes are numbers. You find this in so many of the primary sources dealing with astronomy and mathematics that you quickly gain an understanding the cosmos system of the ancients is about numbers. All you have to do to confirm this is read the primary sources. Any modern day historian specialising in ancient astronomy will tell you the same thing. Recently I came upon an article on ancient mathematics, and in it the author was displaying the standard ancient mathematical ratios and how the intervals of the ratios work. The numbers he produced like 435, 565 etc, if you multiply by 100, you have the number of men available in the tribes as the tribes progress. Now if this academic was interested in Roman military history, my bet is I wouldn’t be writing this book.
Seriously, if a person knows nothing about ancient mathematics, then how can they dismiss the possibility the Romans are not basing their social systems on their interpretation of the cosmos? Because such a theory conflicts with a person’s sensibilities is not proof such a thing did not occur. Also it is a fact that no one has bothered to explore whether a link exists between ancient mathematics and the Roman military systems, so until that exploration is undertaken, the possibility does exist.
Censorinus, Cleomedes and Pliny (and I think Strabo) cite Eratosthenes calculated the circumference at 252,000 stades. It is generally accepted, Eratosthenes himself corrected 250,000 to 252,000 stades in order to get a figure divisible by 60 and, give a round number of 700 stades for one degree.
Figures varying 500 to 750 stades to the degree are given by various sources.
I have found the Roman cosmos system does not involve knowing the length of the stade (625 feet, 580 feet etc). What is relevant is its value as a single degree (600, 700, 840 stades etc), and the time frame of a single degree.
Why would it not be published? What has your crystal ball revealed that I should know?
Quote:Nick wrote:
Why is there not even a hint of this in the major texts such as Polybius, Livy, Appian, Tacitus, etc?
You need to know what you are looking for in order to find it.
In 44 BC, during the funeral games of Julius Caesar a comet was visible for seven days in the northern part of the sky. The common people believed that this star signified the soul of Caesar received among the spirits of the immortal gods. According to Servius, (Vergil Eclogues 9 46) a haruspex by the name of Vulcatius went before the popular assembly proclaiming the new comet indicated the end of the ninth saeculum, and the beginning of the tenth saeculum. Censorinus cites a saeculum is an age or cycle. To many the above means nothing. However, the Roman saeculum is the cosmic calendar, and it ties in with Florus’ remark of Rome’s period of infancy, youth and manhood.
Quote:Nick wrote:
Organising tribes is a little different to organising armies.
The three tribes of Romulus is also the army, being one and the same. Livy cites the century assembly was designed for both war and peace.
Quote:Nick wrote:
And the Athenians later were able to add more tribes to honour major powers and allies.
The Romans also added more tribes to accommodate more citizens. So what are they doing differently from the Athenians? If the Athenians based their tribes on the four seasons, months and year, then I am inclined to accept it until someone can prove otherwise.
Quote:Nick wrote:
Seems rather coincidental, especially given Boethius was writing a millenium later.
But who is Boethius’ work deprived from? For one, he mentions many of the ancient mathematicians dating back to 5th century BC. To determine if Boethius is just mathematical coincidence first requires taking a scientific approach…that is to test it first, then make a judgement. This is my methodology, of which I have chosen in preference to dogma. We no longer burn heretics so there is nothing to fear by taking the scientific approach. The ancient applied numbers to mostly everything. Aristotle applies mathematical values to each of the four seasons. Some gods are associated with the triangle, others the square. These geometric shapes are numbers. You find this in so many of the primary sources dealing with astronomy and mathematics that you quickly gain an understanding the cosmos system of the ancients is about numbers. All you have to do to confirm this is read the primary sources. Any modern day historian specialising in ancient astronomy will tell you the same thing. Recently I came upon an article on ancient mathematics, and in it the author was displaying the standard ancient mathematical ratios and how the intervals of the ratios work. The numbers he produced like 435, 565 etc, if you multiply by 100, you have the number of men available in the tribes as the tribes progress. Now if this academic was interested in Roman military history, my bet is I wouldn’t be writing this book.
Seriously, if a person knows nothing about ancient mathematics, then how can they dismiss the possibility the Romans are not basing their social systems on their interpretation of the cosmos? Because such a theory conflicts with a person’s sensibilities is not proof such a thing did not occur. Also it is a fact that no one has bothered to explore whether a link exists between ancient mathematics and the Roman military systems, so until that exploration is undertaken, the possibility does exist.
Quote:Nick wrote:
Eratosthenes actually measured it to be 250,000.
Censorinus, Cleomedes and Pliny (and I think Strabo) cite Eratosthenes calculated the circumference at 252,000 stades. It is generally accepted, Eratosthenes himself corrected 250,000 to 252,000 stades in order to get a figure divisible by 60 and, give a round number of 700 stades for one degree.
Quote:Nick wrote:
Also, doesn't Ptolemy say 500 stades to a degree? I've also seen a number of other amounts.
Figures varying 500 to 750 stades to the degree are given by various sources.
Quote:Nick wrote:
In fact, per an article by S. Pothecary in Phoenix, "The length of the stade, the longest unit of Greek linear measurement, is one of the vexed issues of classical metrology, with stades of various lengths being attributed to geographical writers such as Eratosthenes, Polybios, Artemidoros, Poseidonios and Strabo respectively."
I have found the Roman cosmos system does not involve knowing the length of the stade (625 feet, 580 feet etc). What is relevant is its value as a single degree (600, 700, 840 stades etc), and the time frame of a single degree.
Quote:Nick wrote:
I look forward to reading the full book if it is ever published.
Why would it not be published? What has your crystal ball revealed that I should know?
