Rome versus Pyrrhus

[antiochus]

D B Campbell wrote:
I don't have the references to hand, but (from memory) there aren't many, and (again from memory) they're fairly vague. The kind of thing that an Augustan author might've used to embroider an otherwise dull account of a siege.

Which means, without conclusive evidence, we cannot pass judgement on an Augustan author, or any ancient author.

D B Campbell wrote:
So you think there was artillery at Veii?

I have no idea. Artillery is not my field of research. I rely on the expertise of those who are interested in this subject. This means I place a certain amount of trust they have carefully researched their subject matter.

D B Campbell wrote:
This is the cut and thrust of academic debate that I mentioned before. This is what is expected of a PhD candidate.

Yes I am aware of the cut and thrust of academic debate. However, Mr Campbell, so far the cut and thrust method has not produced a consensus among academics regarding the various legion organisations. Maybe it’s time to introduce new methodologies….like working with the primary sources instead of against them.

My bugbear with some academics is they make claims but offer no proof to support them. If an academic cannot know how a legion is organised for a certain period, then that academic is not in a position to declare an ancient author’s legion numbers as worthless. Taking an example from a previous post of mine on this lists, if I make the statement in my book the hastati are aged from 18 to 27, the principes from 28 to 36, and the triarii from 37 to 45 years of age, then I better be able to prove it. To prove my case I introduce ALL those authors in the primary sources who give the ages of the iuniores and seniores, then I show how I have come to my conclusion. I point out that the ages from 18 to 45, when subtracted equates to 27 years (45 minus 18 = 27). Then when 27 is divided by the three age divisions the answer is 9 (27 divided by 3 = 9). Therefore the age divisions are in increments of 9 years, so 18 years old for the hastati plus 9 =27. The hastati are aged from 18 to 27 years of age. Then I would introduce Livy’s comment during the Second Punic war the age was lowered to 17 years old, which gives the age of the hastati from 17 to 27 years old. I have provided evidence to support my claim, and most importantly I only employ information found in the primary sources. I have no need to discredit any ancient author’s empirical data in order to comply with my analyst.

D B Campbell wrote:
As you are studying the Republican army, I wondered if you had a view on why Caesar and Plutarch might come up with different evidence for the size of a legion. (This seems to be fundamental to your thesis.) You stated before that you "trusted" Plutarch. But surely you also "trust" Caesar?

I trust both Caesar and Plutarch. I do have a mathematical explanation on why Caesar and Hyginus come up with different views. Same with Appian, Lydus, Festus, Suetonius, Isidore, Josephus and Hyginus. I’m sure I missed some here. My methodology is to use all empirical data within the same period to show the organisation of a legion. The late republican army is easy to fathom. It is the Servian army that provides the most challenges.

D B Campbell wrote:
Hyginus, De mun. castr. 1 states that the century numbered 80 men, as every good Roman scholar knows.

I am aware of Hyginus states a century numbered 80 men. I am aware Hyginus states a cohort numbered 600 men. So how are they reconciled if Ross Cowan tells us a legion is 4800 men strong made up of 60 centuries of 80 men per century. No ancient author states a legion numbered 4800 men. Not one! The fact of the matter is Ross Cowan cannot reconcile Caesar, Plutarch and Hyginus with Hyginus. In doing so, Ross Cowan has not informed his readers of all the facts that contradict his claim, expressed in a manner of certainty, that a legion for the time of Caesar had 80 man centuries. If an academic publishes such statements, he should be prepared to defend them when challenged. That Mr Campbell is the bottom line of my debate.