EUREKA - Roman army troops

[Paullus Scipio]

As ever, Steven, very interesting and original work !! You obviously have access, ( I assume indirect via Bingham?) to Sudias and I for one would be interested to hear more......

[D B Campbell]

I also find it disappointing that Sudius’ name is now missing from the bibliographies of so many academics.

I confess that I've never heard of Sudius.
Are you perhaps thinking of the Byzantine encyclopedia known as the Suda? (Some older writers erroneously refer to this as "Suidas".)

[Sean Manning]

The possibility Livy’s description of the maniple legion has been corrupted I believe needs further investigation, and I am in the process of tracking down the works of those other half a dozen Renaissance historians who opposed Lipsius’ views. I think I will find a story that needs telling. I also find it disappointing that Sudius’ name is now missing from the bibliographies of so many academics.

Although modern editions of ancient books in the original language go right back to the MSS, right? So unless they have a note mentioning a correction by some modern scholar, and that scholar follows Lipsius, the text is safe from any changes he made to an early printed edition.

Regardless, it sounds like an interesting side-topic that might enliven your book.

[Thersites]

Quote:
"There was this saying of Crassus that man should not deem himself rich if he could not raise and equip a legion. "

Could any of ypu provide the relevant source for that? Can't find it in the obvious choice, Plutarch.

Also, I remember that Caesar equipped one of his legions at his own expense. A reference for that?

Thank you in advance

[Tarbicus]

I thought you weren't a truly influential Roman citizen unless you financed great projects at your own expense, military or civil, for the "common good" of the state?

Look at Bill Gates.... :wink:

But fame also brought and bought you favours and clients, who would also owe you favours, and payoffs further down the line. If you had the right friends then they could help finance a "campaign", as long as they sent in their business clients to reap the rewards as quickly as the army went in. It seems to be a common factor of the Romans that where every conquest went, there were concessions to travelling entrepeneurs just as quick.

[Paullus Scipio]

Hi Fernando!
I keep meaning to send you a report on my Spanish trip, but my time has been eaten up by having a family crisis or two....not to mention other matters... but I will get around to it !
Thersites wrote:

Also, I remember that Caesar equipped one of his legions at his own expense. A reference for that?

I think the references for those earlier remarks are:

Crassus' comment: Plut:'Crassus 7
"He was not right, however, in thinking, and in saying too, that no one was rich who could not support an army out of his substance; for "war has no fixed rations," as King Archidamus said, and therefore the wealth requisite for war cannot be determined"

For Caesar, possibly Plut: Caesar 28"They also voted him (Caesar)additional time in which to hold his provinces; and he had two, Spain, and all Africa, which he managed by sending legates thither and maintaining armies there, for which he received from the public treasury a thousand talents annually..."

and perhaps :

Plut Pompey 55
"....It was also decreed that he should retain his provinces for another four years, and receive a thousand talents yearly, out of which he was to feed and maintain his soldiers.
56 He also sent and asked back the troops which he had lent him, making the Parthian war his pretext for doing so. And although Caesar knew the real reasons for asking back the soldiers, he sent them home with generous gifts."

Cicero too in his letters ( ad Fam. V.20.9 and ad Atticus V.11.5 ) and elsewhere (Pis.86) gives the interesting information that a single 4,500 man legion cost 4 million sesterces to pay and maintain, and that when he was governor of Cilicia, 2 understrength legions cost 3 million sesterces to pay and maintain, some 60% of the province's revenue.

These sort of sums were well within the means of Crassus, Caesar and Pompey

The Legion paid for by Caesar is most likely V 'Alaudae' which he raised in Transalpine Gaul ( i.e. outside Italy, within his province) 'unofficially' and without authority. It only became 'official' much later and was then presumably taken on the State payroll.....
Hope this assists..... D

[Thersites]

Hi Paul!

Yes, I'd love to hear about your Spanish experience...

And yes, thanks, I had overlooked Plutarch's quote... although it is not Crassus 7, but 2.9 according to standard editions :wink:

As for Caesar, the texts you mention seem to specify that the Senate was paying for the legions, not Caesar himself pecunia suaIf it was V Alaudae, or perhaps Legio X, what i'd need is a explicit quote, not an inference... but I can't find it

[Paullus Scipio]

Sorry, the precise answer you are looking for may be found here on 'Roman Army.com', in the article by Etterling....

"(Caesar) ad legiones, quas a republica acceperat, alias privato sumptu addidit, unam etiam ex Transalpinis conscriptam vocabulo quoque Gallico (Alauda[e] enim appellabatur), quam disciplina cultuque romano institutam et ornatam postea universam civitate donavit (Suet. Caes. 24)

"... with legions at his own expense: one even recruited in Transalpine Gaul and called Alaudae (Gallic for 'crested lark'), which he trained and equipped in Roman style. Later he gave them all full citizenship..."(Seutonius: Caesar 24 )

From the plural it would appear that V 'Alaudae' was but one of several Legions raised at Caesar's own expense....

[Robert Vermaat]

Sorry, the precise answer you are looking for may be found here on 'Roman Army.com', in the article by Etterling.... .

Ritterling? :wink:

[Lothia]

Hi Steven,

Congratulations. It sounds like a must have book. Not just for reenactors and fellow historians, but even for writers.

Post something from time to time on your progress toward publishing.

Tom

[antiochus]

Hi Steven,

Congratulations. It sounds like a must have book. Not just for reenactors and fellow historians, but even for writers.

Post something from time to time on your progress toward publishing.

Tom

I've broken the book into three volumes. This has been due to the amount of detail being covered. The publishing aspect has gotten me down in the last month as the publishing companies I am in communication with are specifying periods of up to three years after completion of the writing before publishing. Now all I can think of is they want to clear old stock, but I can't confirm this.

My research has been hailed as the most monumental work on the Roman army in the last 500 years and it gets the "go slow" treatment by the publishing world. This is beyond my comprehension. All is hopefully not lost though, there are other publishing houses I am talking to.

As stated before on this forum, I use every piece of mathematics found in the primary sources. For example, my tribal levy numbers for the period before the sack of Rome is just under 40,000 men registered in the tribes. And what does Plutarch give the Roman army at the Allia as---just under 40,000 men. Now I can prove without a doubt that Plutarch has incorrectly used the tribal levy for the Roman army at the Allia.

Other example is Livy during the Second Punic War gives the number of men levied and then goes on to explain how Rome's manpower reserves was precarious. Livy is correct as my numbers show with over 20 legions levied, there is a reserve of only 15,000 men left in the tribal levy system.

[antiochus]

In regard to the introduction of the maniple legion, Livy (VIII eight) states:

“At first the Romans used the large round shield called the clipeus, afterwards, when the soldiers received pay, the smaller oblong shield called the scutum was adopted. The phalanx formation, similar to the Macedonian of the earlier days, was abandoned in favour of the distribution into companies (manipuli); the rear portion being broken up into smaller divisions.â€

[D B Campbell]

The publishing aspect has gotten me down in the last month as the publishing companies I am in communication with are specifying periods of up to three years after completion of the writing before publishing.

Hmmm, that's disappointing. Australian publishers? Have they even read your work?

[Sean Manning]

That is disappointing! We all want to read your work and see your full argument. Then we can get down to debating it in earnest

The idea that Livy means that the old phalanx was organized similarly to the Macedonian phalanx, not just that it fought in a phalanx, is one I haven't heard before.

[antiochus]

Hmmm, that's disappointing. Australian publishers? Have they even read your work?

Yes my work has been read. Routledge Australia pasted it on, and some three months later I received a reply from Routledge France saying how exciting and momumental the work is but then they declined to publish as it does not align with their marketing strategies for the coming years. Same story with Oxford publishing.

Other publishers have been sent a book proposal. I'm still waiting to here from some of these. One other publisher wanted a publishing date set at three years after I finished the writing.

About another half a dozen publishers who have only received the book proposal have declined to publish. I don't think many of these believe what is written in the book proposal. Oh well, it will come back to haunt them one day.