h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Ranks - A33518171
Author: Bob Stafford. ACE ; - Keeper of The Treacle Shadow - Support the Beeblecasters @ A29805636 - U3151547

Please look at this there might be lots wrong, or many opinions the subject of Roman ranks is confusing and hard to sort out.
Comments please and please check the latin.

Remember this is just a rough outline

Any comments please on this rough outline if I get the frame work right it can have more detail added.

Although I can read it through. I'm afraid I can't help you with the latin. I only know very basic latin like 'rex' and the poem 'odi et amo ... ' and my knowledge of roman ranks is non-existent.

Thanks Opti its nice to know people are about

I've subscribed to this thread so that's how come I am about. I do spend more time looking at the threads in Peer Review though as more entries seem to be put straight there instead of here.

Anyway a few pointers on how to improve your entry before Peer Review.

<> - First, I think this sentence should be divided into two. I’m also unsure of the word 'ennobled'.

Be careful with your use of commas, I was taught that they didn't precede joining words and there are places in this entry which look like they could benefit from using them. Read it through again (maybe even aloud) and you'll see where I mean.

Plebs – I would consider removing this as it doesn't add to the word 'commoner', except for the fact it is a colloquial term these days for describing the same class. I'm assuming most people who read your entry would know what a commoner was.

<> – is there a better way of saying this?

Tribnes should be Tribunes

Verity should be variety

Finally, I would structure the entry differently. Forget subheaders and Headers for a second and write it so that you have just paragraphs that flow like one big essay. Then work in the latin and its English equivalent alongside each other. With the english word first followed by the latin in brackets. This would make the whole thing flow much easier and for those who love language they can see how latin has come to shape the English language.

Bob

Hi Bob
I found this a most interesting article. I’ll offer a few comments made from a position of pure ignorance on the subject. Please feel free to ignore as required.

>The Equestrians (equites) were the next highest class…<
This suggests to me that there is some connection here with horses. IF that’s correct perhaps there could be some explanation and why we now use the word in that connection.

>All other Roman freeborn citizens were the Commoners (plebs)<
‘Plebs‘, these days used as a slightly derogatory term. Is this not derived from the word Plebeian (?sp). IF so perhaps that should be the word used.

Aquilifer (The eagle bearer).
I assume this is a standard bearer. Probably an Eagle? Was this not a very significant emblem to the Romans. If so, does it differ from Signifer?

I think that it would help to be consistent with your Latin rank and (its interpretation in brackets). eg:
Aquilifer (The eagle bearer). While in others it is
Newly recruited Legionary in training (Tiro).

I think that it should be the Latin name, then (interpretation in brackets). You should also provide a bit more information as a short paragraph to each of those ranks.

The ‘Rarely Used Ranks’ don’t have an interpretation at all, so there is no indication why they were so rare. Did not most Roman soldiers sign up as a career move? Surely there would be a considerable core of experienced soldiers? How much service would they have to put in to get that rank and the extra pay?

Best of luck with this one. I like it a lot,

DK

Thank you both I will sort out the suggestions as soon as I can. PLease keep the ideas comeing.

"The Nobles the highest class in Roman society. All the elite family’s were also in this class to be ennobled a family member at some time had to have held the rank of Consul of Rome." Was this the patrician class?

"The Senatorial class (senatores) were the next highest class in Roman society. Although not the highest in rank they were arguably the most powerful social group." Presumable plenty of the noble class also served in the senate.

"Recognition of status was important and men belonging to this class wore a tunic with broad vertical stripes2 from shoulders to the hem known as the (tunica laticlavia)." My understanding was that it wasn't stripes as such, but one thick purple line around the hem. Is that wrong?

"The Nobles the highest class in Roman society. All the elite family’s were also in this class to be ennobled a family member at some time had to have held the rank of Consul of Rome." Was this the patrician class?

Yes good point I will add the ammendment

"The Senatorial class (senatores) were the next highest class in Roman society. Although not the highest in rank they were arguably the most powerful social group." Presumable plenty of the noble class also served in the senate.

Yet anoter good point I will add the ammendment


"Recognition of status was important and men belonging to this class wore a tunic with broad vertical stripes2 from shoulders to the hem known as the (tunica laticlavia)." My understanding was that it wasn't stripes as such, but one thick purple line around the hem. Is that wrong?

It looks as though it depended on the period. I will check it out rhanks for the pointer

Good luck with this.

Thenks Elentari

Ok opti I have compleated your suggestions The headers I have just done the class systen to see if that what you ment

Thanks for the comments


Bob...

Hi Deke AT LAST
I have sorted your comments
I think that it should be the Latin name, then (interpretation in brackets). You should also provide a bit more information as a short paragraph to each of those ranks. will do as I write the entry these comments are helping build the entry


The ‘Rarely Used Ranks’ don’t have an interpretation at all, so there is no indication why they were so rare. Did not most Roman soldiers sign up as a career move? Surely there would be a considerable core of experienced soldiers? How much service would they have to put in to get that rank and the extra pay? It was a reward mainly for experiance and ability

Please comment on your suggestions as implimaented so far

Hi Bob.

That looks good, and it seems a bit more orderly as befitting an entry about 'Ranks'

Two other things:
In the explanation in the sections I think that the whole thing would scan a bit better if you were to bring the sentences together instead of having single sentence paragraphs. eg:
>>>This is an example of the class system in action, only men of the Senatorial or Noble class could command a legion. The commanders of the legions were of two types.

Legatus Propraetor a senator or ex-consul given command of a legion or legions on provincial service. The Legatus Propraetor was also the provincial governor of the region.

Legatus Legionis an experienced commander given command of one of the city of Rome’s Legions.<<<

Could be:

This is an example of the class system in action as only men of the Senatorial or Noble class could command a legion. The commanders of the legions were of two types: Legatus Propraetor, a senator or ex-consul given command of a legion or legions on provincial service who was also the provincial governor of the region, and Legatus Legionis, an experienced commander given command of one of the city of Rome’s Legions.

..And Two,
Could you perhaps introduce some of the better known names as given examples? I think that would put this on a more personal level if the reader could identify with some historical name. I'm on shaky ground here but 'frinstance Julius Caesar? what rank did he hold when he was in the army? What battles did he fight?

The name of Pliny also springs to mind because he happens to be figuring in some research I'm doing at the moment. What was the name of the general(?) that lost to Spartacus, and the name of the one that beat him. I'm sure you could work in better examples that I feel would personalise this piece more.

Feel free to disregard this as rubbish if you don't think it fits in. As I said before I'm making suggestions from a position of complete ignorance on the subject.

All the best

DK

Ok have a look at that

I think I will pull the Auxillary forces and the Navy sections and put them in another entry.


Any comments

I'm still unsure of the flow and the Headers. You've still got words that are set apart from the rest of the text and why have you got bold headers instead of big orange ones? just giving my opinion.

Ok Opti I will have a look

It's just my opinion. You can question it or take it as you like.

A looksee cant hurt