Theoretical Discusions?

[Robert Vermaat]

Well, there are some topics which neatly fit into different categories, others not so much.
Organization of the middle Republican Roman army? Class distinctions in Gallic society? I think these fit into their categories.
Alternative theories of how armies fought? Estimates of population density? Estimates of the logistical limits to army size? I don't think these can be handled separately for Greeks, Romans, and everyone else. And although I have my doubts about the claims about the Polish winged hussars, they were relevant to understanding cavalry vs. infantry fights.

Marja, I see no problem. As long as any discussion still focuses on the Roman or Ancient original topic, you can range outside Roman history. We discussed cavalry by comparing 19th c. and modern literature about cavalry. As Macedon and others already wrote before, it's the topic that matters. I mean, it's not even inconceivable that winged hussars are mentioned in a discussion about Roman cavalry, but (as recently happened) the discussion became about hussars and no longer about the original topic.

Theoretical discussions per se are quite normal here, because lots of what we discuss is per definition (at least to some degree) only available as theory.

Looking forward to a dozen new topics by your hand. mile: