Ancient Armies YouTube video on Zama

[Hanny]

Now I followed the link to the TMP and well, I see I have been drawn into the debate on that forum.

Plutarch also claims that Pythagoras was enrolled as a citizen of Rome.
If you examined the personality traits of Pythagoras and Numa (which has not been done before), you will find Numa and Pythagoras are one and the same person.

Plutarch does eactly that comparision.
http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Plutarch/numapomp.html

How can two people not alive at the same time be the same person.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Numa-Pompilius
His supposed relationship with Pythagoras was known even in the Roman Republic to be chronologically impossible, and the 14 books relating to philosophy and religious (pontifical) law that were uncovered in 181 BCE and attributed to him were clearly forgeries.

Numa 753-673 BC
Pythagoras 570 - to 495 BC

Therefore, it was Pythagoras and not Numa that altered the Roman calendar from 10 months to 12 months, introduced intercalation, instigated the hearth of Vesta and the Vestal Virgins, and established the office of Pontifex Maximus.

 

Rome changed to a 12 month calender around 713 B.C, well before Pythagoras was alive, intercalation at the same time, a function of the Pontifices political authority to add them in, https://www.livescience.com/45650-calendar-history.html Numa apponted 4 vestals in Rome at the same time, Post of Pontifex Maximus did not exist in Numas day as he introdiced 5 pontifices and no high priest. lex Ogulnia, 4 in 300BC added more, and when the Empire came, it was he who was the first Pontifex Maximus and could have as many pontifices as he wanted.

---

The Pythagorean zodiac determines the size of a cohort. For example, a 480 man cohort in the time of Augustus represents 16 zodiacs have past the apex, with each zodiac amounting to 30 degrees. You can work out the number of men in the 35 tribes by multiplying the 480 men by Strabo's claim each degree represents 700 stadia. So 480 men per cohort multiplied by 700 stadia equals 336,000 stadia, which is then converted to 336,000 men. The 336,000 men when divided by the 35 tribes, allocates each tribe 9,600 men. As everything in the Pythagorean system is in pairs, 9,600 divided by two equals 4,800 men. Therefore, the size a legion without officers and supernumeraries is 4,800 men (rounded to 5,000 men in the primary sources) organised into 10 cohorts each of 480 men.

Ism hard to keep being so wrong.
Romulas 753 – 716 BC began with 3 tribes.
Servius Tullius 578–535 BC replaced them with 30 tribes.
Reduced down to 20 Tribes.
495 BC 1 tribe added,  4 more in 387 BC, 2 more in 358 BC, 2 more in 332, 1 more in 318 and another in 299, and by  241 BC there were 35. At the end of the social, 87 BC war 8 more were added, and then removed. There were still 35 by 3rd cent AD.

Every expansion in the number of tribes was from an increase in population banumbers under Roman control and not related to a cult

When Dionysius remarks that in 462 BC, four cohorts each of 600 men were stationed in front of Rome, here Dionysius is mentioning the four tribune cohorts.

Except military tribunes dont exist yet, they are established in 445BC with 3 Military tribunes,  the number increased to four in 426 and to six in 406.

All academics when discussing the carrying capacity of a Roman quinquereme will cite Polybius that they carried 120 soldiers. As a reader you get the impression that is the only source, and there is nothing to collaborate it. But I have found the opposite to be true. Because I examine all the mathematical data in the primary sources, when researching the Roman fleet, I found that the ancient historian Orosius mentions that at the battle of Hermanaeum in 255 BC, the Romans lost 9 ships and 1,100 soldiers. Taking a calculator, and applying Polybius' claim 120 soldiers to a ship, the 9 ships lost would amount to 1,080 soldiers, which Orosius has rounded to 1,100 men. So now I had further proof that 120 soldiers were transported on Roman vessels.
I found that the ancient historian Orosius mentions that at the battle of Hermanaeum in 255 BC, the Romans lost 9 ships and 1,100 soldiers.

Correct, but thats not the only example he gives, in this one there are now 11111 men to a ship acording to you.

http://attalus.org/translate/orosius3A.html
but nine of the Roman ships were sunk, and one hundred thousand soldiers perished.[/quote]

The number of lives lost in a battle tells you nothing about how many were on each ship your utter fool.

Academics confess to having no idea of how many soldiers the Carthaginians put on their ships, yet I have found two sources that when I divided the number of ships by the number of soldiers mentioned, a number without fractions showed up. When I took this number and divided it by the mathematical data in the primary sources relating to the number of Carthaginian ships captured with their full crew of rowers and soldiers, after deducting the rowers, I got the same number of Carthaginian soldiers per ship. Livy tells us the Carthaginians did not have many soldiers and he was right, and this explains why Livy states the Carthaginians would surrender when the Romans got aboard.
When I took this number and divided it by the mathematical data in the primary sources relating to the number of Carthaginian ships captured with their full crew of rowers and soldiers, after deducting the rowers, I got the same number of Carthaginian soldiers per ship.

Except of course academics are far better at looking at sources and doing math than you, so you say the following means there are 120 carthaginian soldiers per ship, so that leaves teh number of rowers ( no ship has a captain sailors, orator, carpemter etc, just rowers) example 1-4, 110 rowers, 140 rowers, 113 rowers,153 rowers. No wonder they lost, they had a fraction of their rowers and were packed with marines instead.

http://attalus.org/translate/orosius3A.html
After the naval battle had begun, Hannibal, having lost the ship in which he spared, fled in a skiff. Thirty and one of his ships were captured, thirteen sunk, three thousand men slain, and seven thousand captured.
7000/31 =225 and 3000/13=230.

The naval battle could not be postponed. 6 One hundred and four ships of the Carthaginians were sunk, thirty with the fighting men were captured, and thirty-five thousand of the soldiers besides themselves were slain;
35000/134=261

After these, the consul Claudius, with a fleet of one hundred and twenty ships, set out against the enemy at the harbor of Drepani, where he was soon received by the fleet of the Carthaginians, and defeated. and he himself, indeed, with thirty ships, fled into the camp of Lilybaeum; all the rest, that is, ninety, were either captured or sunk; Eight thousand soldiers are reported to have been slain and twenty thousand captured
28000/120=233

Hanno turned his ship away, and was the first general of flight. a considerable part of his army went to Africa with him; others fled to Lilybaeum; sixty-three Carthaginian ships were captured, one hundred twenty-five sunk, thirty-two thousand captured, and fourteen thousand slain
46000/168=273

4 examples and not one shows that carthage had a full number of rowers let alone anything else, nor are the same number per ship.

As to someone's comment that academia does not take me seriously...

[removed]