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

I think thats it please confirm

Thanks for all the help

Entry: A Roman Legion - A87864871
Author: bobstafford - U3151547

Pageturner

Still a few things I requested which have not been done. I'll ask for them again. I've also come up with a couple of new things I didn't spot before. I'm not bothering to mention all the spelling and grammar mistakes which can be fixed by the sub-editor.

The only way out of the Roman army was death or severe injury. -- this says that once you joined the army you were in it until you died. But you've already said that there was another way out - by serving your 25 years. Please change this to:

The only way out of the Roman army before retirement age was death or severe injury.

Body armour - Lorica Segmentata plate armour or mail, protecting back, front and shoulders. Lorica Segmentata replaced the earlier legionaries chain mail armour around the time of the invasion of Britain. It took some years to re equip all the legions, and it became the standard issue for the auxiliary units and the marines, the soldiers of the Roman navy.

So according to this the auxiliaries had plate armour. But later on in the section "The Auxiliary forces", you say they were only given chain mail. Which of these is true?

"This has sometimes caused confusion regarding the number of fighting men in a Century."

-- you're saying that the number of fighting men in a Century has sometimes caused confusion regarding the number of fighting men in a Century. Please reword this sentence to:

This has sometimes caused confusion.

"Regardless of the Centuries ranking within the legion the command structure remained the same" -- please remove this sentence as you have already said it at the start of this section.

"Each century had a standard in addition the Legions standard, this was the most important standard as it was the spirit of the legion. 12 of the Century - equivalent to a Lance corporal." -- the bit after the 12 footnote seems to be left over from an earlier version. Please remove it.

In the section "The Order of Ranks in a Century", please remove the descriptions of Legates, Quaestor and Tribune, as well as the paragraph after them, because these are not part of the order of ranks in a century.

The officers of a cohort were. -- this is a sentence fragment. Please remove it.

"The 6 Optios and a Signifier was appointed as the standard bearer of the Cohort." -- the phrase "The 6 optios" doesn't refer to anything. Please remove it.

You say that cohorts 1, 3, 5 and 10 were experienced while cohorts 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 were in training. Should you not include 9 in this list?

There were 6 Military Tribunes15 was a ran in a legion. -- I don't understand this sentence.

The Xanten - it might be worth a footnote pointing out that this is not the name the Romans used but that of a site where one was found in recent times.

"the preferred option was to recruit leaves from the native population of the provinces." -- I don't understand this. What is a leave or leaf?

a physiological as well as a physical punishment -- I think you mean psychological rather than physiological.

That is done hopefully

You did miss out a couple of changes I requested in post 44, but I wouldn't worry about it - the sub-ed can sort them out. The important thing is that the meaning of the entry is now clear and there are no contradictions.

I'd be happy for this one to be picked, although I'm not a scout so someone else will have to make that decision.

G

Thats good to hear thanks again for the edit it has been good to get your feedback.
If I search I might even have a photo as well

Hello as your assistance has been invaluable, I want to bring some small updates to your attention

I was not content with the first few paragraphs in the early history section.

The transition from republic to imperial
The kit issue a few basic items added
The artillery

At the transition from Republic to Empire, you tell the story of Julius Caesar crossing the Rubicon twice. You should remove one of these. Probably the better place to tell the story is in the Imperial Army section.

Can't see what you changed in the list of kit so it must be OK.

In the Artillery section, you have Scorpion and Manuballista Scorpion. It sounds to me as if this is the same thing described twice.

thanks I will attend to that

This is attended to plaeas confirm it as it should be

I have been out of this for a while (traveling). I will have a read when I get a chance.

Look forward to your opinion

I'm happy.

Many thanks for the excelent review Gnomon

Just need Phoenician Trader, FS and TC to give it the to make that unanimous

Hi bob, I've been following the conversations here and I would say that the structure of the entry is vastly improved now. There are many tweaks which need doing but that is all in the course of a sub-editor's job (commas, formatting, apostrophes, incomplete sentences, other points of punctuation, prepositions, etc.)

It seems far more informative than your first draft, even though I don't think you have actually added any information. That's all been achieved by changing the sections and dividing it up into logical sub-sections.

Don't forget to check the links again before the scouts come and pounce on it.

Thank you for your help TC. Anything missing it is still a basic description of a large subject? Ad it is over 6,500 I hope the ED's will not want it split.

There are two or three companion entries planned. If you have any ideas to add please let me know. The success of roman legions should be judged by their overwhelming successes, and compared to their failures (as they are needed to give a full picture).

J. Caesar's Gallic wars - A success
The battle of Cannae - A failure
The defeat of Boudica - A success
The Battle of the Teutoburg Forest - A failure

Any ideas whilst in the planning stage

This must be one of the most complete summaries on the subject out there. It would break every rule in the Other Place and thus they are the lesser for it.

The main issues I have are:
1) You do not link to the Roman Shield article. This is, of course, one of the best articles ever written about Rome, largely because of bobstafford's input.

but, seriously,

2) The opening paragraphs give two starting dates for the legions - were they started during the age of the kings or in the last days of the republic? The text jars quite badly.
3) The role of the prefects as NCO officers with whole-of-legion command is one I find quite fascinating - and is omitted in your list of ranks. The fact that modern military units have a "sergeant major" whose officers hold a warrant (but have not be commissioned to a post by the government) makes it more intriguing.

I will now read the second half.

Thank you for your comments

All attended to I hope that is what you required "sergeant major" was meant to portray the area of influence of the rank it was the nearest equivalent example in today's army

I look forward to your further comments