Unit of 550 at Severus\' siege of Hatra

[D B Campbell]

But it seems from Edwell that Speidel only places XX at Hatra, which seems plausible, without specifically linking them to the 550 men under discussion. Then there's the bit about them being 'European troops' - is that actually in the original text?

Speidel's argument was that Cassius Dio would never have referred to "European" troops, but would have specified Moesian, or Pannonian, or German, or whatever provincial army, claiming that the Romans had no concept of a "European" army. (I admit that I misunderstood this point when I replied in 1986.) That is, of course, an unprovable argument. However, Speidel goes on to assert that the garrison of Dura-Europos referred to themselves as "Europeans" (meaning "men from Europos"). Hence, his argument that the Twentieth Palmyrene Cohort must have been "elite" if Severus was specifically calling upon them (and, in particular, 550 of them). However, this reading of Dio's text means that the entire army before Hatra was a Syrian army, which I have always found hard to believe.

[Nathan Ross]

Speidel goes on to assert that the garrison of Dura-Europos referred to themselves as "Europeans" (meaning "men from Europos").

An ingenious (and quite typically Speidelian, from what I'm learning of him) explanation!

But do we know that XX were at Dura at that date? We could almost, in a more tenuous lightning-bolt leap of interpretation, imagine that Dura was the depot or mustering point for the troops from Europe, who therefore called themselves... Europeans! :-D

However, this reading of Dio's text means that the entire army before Hatra was a Syrian army, which I have always found hard to believe.

Yes. Besides, the text specifically contrasts these 'Europeans' ("who alone of his army had the ability to do anything") with the Syrians ("who were compelled to make the assault in their place" and were destroyed). Sounds very much like the old east v west trope again. The muster lists I mentioned earlier imply that, at least by c.233, XX Palmyrenorum was made up largely of 'ethnic' Syrians and Palmyrenes (names like Aurelius Iarhabolus, Aurelius Mambogeus, Barhathes, Vabalathus etc, alongside the usual generic Roman names, would suggest this, I'd say...)

Anyway, it still doesn't tell us why Dio specifies 550 men, rather than just 'a cohort' (of whatever name)... :?

[D B Campbell]

Besides, the text specifically contrasts these 'Europeans' ("who alone of his army had the ability to do anything") with the Syrians ("who were compelled to make the assault in their place" and were destroyed).

The Greek actually says, "the Europeans ... but the others, Syrians, ...". Speidel claims that it could equally be rendered "the Europeans ... but the other Syrians ..." It's a fine distinction.

Anyway, it still doesn't tell us why Dio specifies 550 men, rather than just 'a cohort' (of whatever name)... :?

You are not the first person to find this curious! :wink:

[Mark Hygate]

Thank you to those who answered.

I can happily understand that the 'earlier' 10-room centuriae-blocks (also normally paired) get replaced by paired 5-room blocks for reduced garrisons but the same space available, but I remain fairly content that it is entirely possible that Vegetius' '555' cohorts (of 5 centuria) are a misinterpretation on his part and not part of any real reorganisation.

On the subject of why 550 were specified; perhaps the simplest reason is the most likely - that that is the number whomever suggested the proposed plan needed - 11 (most likely mathematically) sub-units of 50-men to complete the mission; or any other permutation thereof.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Michael Speidel has suggested that the 550 were the "elite" Twentieth Palmyrene Cohort from Dura-Europos

Whyever does he think that XX Palmyrenorum were 'elite'? :?

.

Perhaps because there was 'norum else like em? :mrgreen: (Sorry, it's Friday afternnon....)