08-19-2014, 12:30 AM
Renatus wrote:
I don't remember that. Can you give a reference?
The reference is (2 1)(2 2)
Renatus wrote:
Is this hypothetical or actual? If actual, again can you give a reference?
My first and second part of the book which you have details how this works. However, for 300 cavalry attached see Livy (7 25 8), (21 17 5), (26 28 7), (29 24 14), (32 28 10), (29 28 10), (40 1 5), (41 9 2), (42 52 8), For 200 cavalry: Livy (40 18 6), (44 21 8), For 400 cavalry: Livy (23 24 13), (44 21 8)
Renatus wrote:
I'm sorry; you've lost me. Can you explain more fully, please?
You divide the 300 cavalry by the six tribunes to arrive at each tribune has under his command 50 cavalry.
Renatus wrote:
Hang on! Aren't you in danger of rejecting the very hard evidence that you were calling for earlier on?
Definitely not. I don’t consider unit return records or pay details as hard evidence. Unit sizes given in the primary sources are my focus.
I don't remember that. Can you give a reference?
The reference is (2 1)(2 2)
Renatus wrote:
Is this hypothetical or actual? If actual, again can you give a reference?
My first and second part of the book which you have details how this works. However, for 300 cavalry attached see Livy (7 25 8), (21 17 5), (26 28 7), (29 24 14), (32 28 10), (29 28 10), (40 1 5), (41 9 2), (42 52 8), For 200 cavalry: Livy (40 18 6), (44 21 8), For 400 cavalry: Livy (23 24 13), (44 21 8)
Renatus wrote:
I'm sorry; you've lost me. Can you explain more fully, please?
You divide the 300 cavalry by the six tribunes to arrive at each tribune has under his command 50 cavalry.
Renatus wrote:
Hang on! Aren't you in danger of rejecting the very hard evidence that you were calling for earlier on?
Definitely not. I don’t consider unit return records or pay details as hard evidence. Unit sizes given in the primary sources are my focus.
