10-27-2012, 03:02 AM
Given certain interpretations, both are believable totals, and both might be based on reliable sources, but one datum isn't much data. And there is a lot that can go wrong between sources. A good estimate of the numbers might be off. A good estimate of the number who can bear arms might be confused with an estimate of the number in the main field army. And so on.
And Strabo might be using rhetorical numbers, since he's contrasting two strengths to illustrate a decline since Burebista's time: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...ction%3D13
So stated strengths are useful, but they are more useful if multiple lines of evidence yield comparable strengths. Some possible examples:
1. So do certain population figures tend to imply certain army size figures? Unfortunately, there are many uncertainties surrounding the population figures. I prefer 5-15/km2 in central Europe, but others prefer lower estimates. And there are almost as many uncertainties surrounding army size figures given population figures. Mogens Herman Hansen estimates a maximum of 17% of the citizen population for Greek city-states. But this falls to less than 2% of the total population for the Roman Empire.
2. So can the strengths of Roman armies give some clue to the strengths of their opponents' armies? In principle yes. But what is the relationship? Is the Roman field army in Gaul comparable to that of the Franks and the Alamanni individually, or in combination? What about with Frankish mercenaries in Alamannic armies? Where do the garrison armies fit in? So we would need to calibrate these numbers before we can use them to calibrate other numbers.
And Strabo might be using rhetorical numbers, since he's contrasting two strengths to illustrate a decline since Burebista's time: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...ction%3D13
So stated strengths are useful, but they are more useful if multiple lines of evidence yield comparable strengths. Some possible examples:
1. So do certain population figures tend to imply certain army size figures? Unfortunately, there are many uncertainties surrounding the population figures. I prefer 5-15/km2 in central Europe, but others prefer lower estimates. And there are almost as many uncertainties surrounding army size figures given population figures. Mogens Herman Hansen estimates a maximum of 17% of the citizen population for Greek city-states. But this falls to less than 2% of the total population for the Roman Empire.
2. So can the strengths of Roman armies give some clue to the strengths of their opponents' armies? In principle yes. But what is the relationship? Is the Roman field army in Gaul comparable to that of the Franks and the Alamanni individually, or in combination? What about with Frankish mercenaries in Alamannic armies? Where do the garrison armies fit in? So we would need to calibrate these numbers before we can use them to calibrate other numbers.
