02-15-2016, 03:36 PM
Frank wrote:
Scheuerbrandt analyzed the roman army extensively in his dissertation "Exercitus".
Where I have a problem with Scheuerbrandt is his investigation of the battle of Mons Graupius. Tacitus tells us there were 8,000 auxiliary infantry, 3,000 cavalry and an unknown number of Roman legionaries. Unless I am mistaken Scheuerbrandt concludes that there were 8,000 auxiliary infantry, 16,000 Romans (4 legions) and 5,000 cavalry for a total of 29,000 men. He has increased Tacitus’ 3,000 cavalry to 5,000 cavalry.
Personally I have found the period of the principate to be the most easily understood of any given period. The principate is the beginning of the bastard legions, because the Romans have deviated slightly from the Pythagorean system. In the original Pythagorean system, the legion should consist of 80 centuries each of 60 men and not 60 centuries each of 80 men.
For me the 8,000 auxiliary infantry at Mons Graupius is rounded but the 3,000 cavalry is correct. This is because, for this period I know what the size of Agricola’s bodyguard cavalry should be and when that is subtracted from the total, I have a perfect mathematical match that conforms to the cavalry organisation for this period. There is no fudging involved. I have the legionaries as consisting of vexillations, and not legions. My rational for this is if the first cohort was present, it is most likely the legion’s identity number would be mentioned, as Arrian has done in his work against the Alani.
As a vexillation consisted of 960 men (480 x 2), the figure of 1,000 men is rounded. Therefore, the figure of 2,000 men amounts to 1,920 men (480 x 4).
Scheuerbrandt analyzed the roman army extensively in his dissertation "Exercitus".
Where I have a problem with Scheuerbrandt is his investigation of the battle of Mons Graupius. Tacitus tells us there were 8,000 auxiliary infantry, 3,000 cavalry and an unknown number of Roman legionaries. Unless I am mistaken Scheuerbrandt concludes that there were 8,000 auxiliary infantry, 16,000 Romans (4 legions) and 5,000 cavalry for a total of 29,000 men. He has increased Tacitus’ 3,000 cavalry to 5,000 cavalry.
Personally I have found the period of the principate to be the most easily understood of any given period. The principate is the beginning of the bastard legions, because the Romans have deviated slightly from the Pythagorean system. In the original Pythagorean system, the legion should consist of 80 centuries each of 60 men and not 60 centuries each of 80 men.
For me the 8,000 auxiliary infantry at Mons Graupius is rounded but the 3,000 cavalry is correct. This is because, for this period I know what the size of Agricola’s bodyguard cavalry should be and when that is subtracted from the total, I have a perfect mathematical match that conforms to the cavalry organisation for this period. There is no fudging involved. I have the legionaries as consisting of vexillations, and not legions. My rational for this is if the first cohort was present, it is most likely the legion’s identity number would be mentioned, as Arrian has done in his work against the Alani.
As a vexillation consisted of 960 men (480 x 2), the figure of 1,000 men is rounded. Therefore, the figure of 2,000 men amounts to 1,920 men (480 x 4).
