05-17-2011, 11:03 PM
Vortigern Studies wrote:
I definitely would like to read the article. I will send you my address via PM.
The later date for peri Strategikes is very interesting. This actually strengthens the position taken in the Ludus Militis Tactica, i.e. that the Early Imperial Taktika of Asclepiodotus, Aelian, and Arrian described the dominant tactical theory for infantry in the Roman world, from at least the time of J. Caesar to Maurice.
The only chapters we used from peri Strategikes were the ones dealing with infantry tactics, 21-25, which Denis noted were similar to certain chapters in Asclepiodotus, Aelian, and Arrian. The author formerly known as Anonymus Byzantinus even admits at one point that he is merely transmitting the terminology and descriptions of the "ancients."
The edits required to correct the LM Tactica will be minor. Nothing is set in stone; we had planned on making continual improvements and corrections as more evidence came to our attention.
I appreciate you pointing out Rance's findings; I have read some of his other articles lately but I missed this one.
Quote:The only point you'd have to address is the material from Syrianus magister (formerly the Anonymus Byzantinus). Last time I read your Tactica it was still dated to the 6th century, but Philip Rance has (once more) conclusively re-dated it to the Middle Byzantine Period. That may not have to alter any conclusions mind you (Roman military traditions could easily span centuries), but still.
P. Rance, 'The Date of the Military Compendium of Syrianus Magister (formerly the Sixth-Century Anonymus Byzantinus)', Byzantinische Zeitschrift 100.2 (2007) 701-737
I'd be happy to send you the pdf of the article if you want to read it.
I definitely would like to read the article. I will send you my address via PM.
The later date for peri Strategikes is very interesting. This actually strengthens the position taken in the Ludus Militis Tactica, i.e. that the Early Imperial Taktika of Asclepiodotus, Aelian, and Arrian described the dominant tactical theory for infantry in the Roman world, from at least the time of J. Caesar to Maurice.
The only chapters we used from peri Strategikes were the ones dealing with infantry tactics, 21-25, which Denis noted were similar to certain chapters in Asclepiodotus, Aelian, and Arrian. The author formerly known as Anonymus Byzantinus even admits at one point that he is merely transmitting the terminology and descriptions of the "ancients."
The edits required to correct the LM Tactica will be minor. Nothing is set in stone; we had planned on making continual improvements and corrections as more evidence came to our attention.
I appreciate you pointing out Rance's findings; I have read some of his other articles lately but I missed this one.
