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

Today the word 'decimate' is usually defined as:
"dec·i·mate/ˈdesəˌmāt/
Verb: Kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of."

Most people know or have heard that it comes from
the Latin and refers to the Roman army's practice of
killing off every tenth soldier to reduce their ranks
by 10% (deci - as in decimal).

But knowing that and understanding it appear to be two
different kettles of fish.

Several questions have haunted me for a long time. Like,
mostly, how did a word meaning ten percent come to mean
'a large percentage'?

And there are more particular questions.
The answers might make for a comprehensive new Guide Entry.

Why did they do it?
How did they select the victims?
How were they killed?
Was it always done or just in certain periods of Roman history?
Was it a universal policy throughout all the legions?
How often did they do it? Annually, monthly?
And would a scheduled 'decimation' still occur if the army
was about to face an enemy?

I went to wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimation_%28Roman_army%29

And Wiki seems to have answered the 'why' bit. IE: it was
a form of disciplinary punishment and does not appear to
have been used generally on entire armies. It was only
used on selected soldiers deemed guilty of cowardice or
being ineffective in combat. These were divided into groups
of ten and they would draw lots with nine of each ten obliged
to club or stone the tenth to death. The nine would also
then be put on reduced rations.

And Wiki tries to say it was used as early as 471 BC as
a feature of the old Republican Armies but fell out of
favour in the later Imperial Armies. This seems counter-
intuitive. It then goes on to mention later examples and
cites several much later, even modern examples from
other national militaries.

So, Wiki has sorta answered the questions but left some
doubts and I'd be interested to hear more from anyone
who might have a better understanding of the practice.


~jwf~

I have a vague feeling that Roman soldiers were lined up in rows of 10, so you'd just have to mow down one row. I bet there was quite a bit of jostling, though.

From what I remember of horrible histories it was one big long line and then one soldier was chosen and every ten from there...
BCNU - Crescent

Is that why we say "X marks the spot?"

lol there are not enough jokes involving roman numerals You have ended my day on a smile, and I thank you

BCNU - Crescent

I'm sure there's some connection to your head being seen as 10% of your body, and the word commonly came to mean beheading. Obviously, the loss of your head is a bit crucial.

B

bi-heading is chopping it in half with large half-moon axe of course

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimation_%28Roman_army%29

I came across three instances in the 20th Century

An Italian general decimating under performing troops in the First World War

A Soviet Commander walking down lines of Red Army troops who had fallen back at Stalingrad shooting every tenth one

The Lottery of Huruslanti in the Finnish Civil War when every fifth Communist prisoner was shot.

I believe it was threatened against Levelers and Diggers during the English Civil War and Commonwealth, but Cromwell always commuted to killing the leaders and one a few occassions a small number choosen by lot or on one occassion rather cruelly forcing then to choose who would die - their is a play about this incident which occurred in a church shortly after the Putney debates.

>>
Today the word 'decimate' is usually defined as:
"dec·i·mate/ˈdesəˌmāt/
Verb: Kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of."
<<

That's the bit that worried me when younger (and got me laughed at - after the explanation, please note.
'cos 10% didn't seem much at that age.

So maybe my problem then, is a majority problem now.

I always thought that it meant eliminating NINE tenths, i.e. dividing the total by ten. The first I heard about only eliminating ONE tenth was in that first Doctor Who special with John Simm as The Master. I just assumed that the writers had made a mistake.
The Roman Army practice you're describing is completely new to me.

I like decimated coconut.

I managed that with a particularly mean shot at the fair once

"how did a word meaning ten percent come to mean
'a large percentage'?"

Simple, language evolves. Same as 'immolate' now means to kill with fire rather than 'to sacrifice'.

Never mind that, if you want a real language poser, consider the word "cleave".

How on Bod's green earth did a single word come to mean "separate from" AND "attach to"???

Lots of words have two meanings - "hand" can mean the thing on the end of your arm, or the action of giving something to someone. One's a noun, one's a verb, and you could use one to do the other, fair enough.

But the two meanings of "cleave" are OPPOSITES. WTF?

Sanction? Overlook? Outstanding? Fast?

B

The modern word is the same but the ultimate etymology is different: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cleave

Prescribe and Proscribe are odd, too...

Yeah. I had to do sit through an "Information Security" training course the other day. A condition of passing was doing a test at the end.

Question 7 was something about "what would you do if..." blah blah blah.

And the multiple choice options were:
1. do nothing
2. do (thing which is obviously unethical an illegal)
3. do (thing which is would require you to be clinically insane)
4. take an action "proscribed by the company policy and procedures"

So: no correct answer possible.

The worrying thing was, about a dozen people in the room (which is to say everyone except me) dutifully ticked option 4. I'd like to hope that at least half of them realised that there was no correct answer, and ticked (4) for a quiet life, given that the entire exercise was a waste of all our time.

Wow. This thread has so many unraveling split ends
I don't know where to start.

Hmm..
I wanna comment on every post but maybe I should first look
at a few where I can hopefully offer some enlightenment.

Mister D noted that:
>> 'immolate' now means to kill with fire rather than 'to sacrifice'.<<
And I feel a need to add that 'sacrifice' has itself been
diluted and misconstrued. It used to mean 'to make holy' but
today we would say 'to sanctify' if that was the meaning.

And the word sacrifice has been degraded to include the most
trivial of self denying gestures such as when we allow others to
have their way. Like the mere act of giving up a seat or holding
open a door for someone are now considered personal sacrifices.



And I'm not sure if MuBeta was serious in saying:
>>...there's some connection to your head being seen as 10%
of your body, and the word commonly came to mean beheading. <<

No, it doesn't mean that.
Just to edify that a bit, there is either some deliberate or possibly
just misinformed confusion there that needs clarification. The word
'decimate' has never specifically meant beheading - that's decapitate.
To be beheaded is to be decapitated.

My apologies to Mu Beta if I missed an attempt at humour via
obtuse -ness. I am often guilty of making similar jests which
do more to confuse than enlighten and the result is a lowering
of my credibility. Some people still try to correct my spelling
of whirled not appreciating my sense of humour.



Finally, I am wondering why Hoovooloo re-posted without any
comment the same Wiki link I had included in my OP. Perhaps
his copy buffer was meant to give us some other reference and
it wasn't noticed - in which case I would hope it could be posted
again, please. I'm sure others would like to see a different take
than the Wiki entry too. If nothing else this thread has shown that
the word and the details of its origins are much misunderstood.


In spite of the drift into an general etymological discussion
I am pleased that some people have learned a bit about the
history of decimation from this thread.
I did too.


~jwf~