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

Entry: Roman Military Ranks HARD HAT AREA WORK IN PROGRESS - A33518171
Author: Bob Stafford. ACE ; - Keeper of The Treacle Shadow - Support the Beeblecasters @ A29805636 - U3151547

Please comment this may need some additions

Hi Bob

I believe you forgot to paste this F9624984?thread=5231127&skip=0&show=20

I'll be back soon.

Yes opti you are right any more comments http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/F9624984?thread=5231127&skip=0&show=20

Some typos Bob:

>>All classes of free bourn citizens<< All classes of freeborn citizens (there is also an extra space before <free&gt

>>roman society<< Roman society

inexperiance >> inexperience

>>often uesd to back his orders<< often *used* to back his orders

visable >> visible

slowley >> slowly

equivelent >> equivalent

assastant >> assistant

english langauge >> English lang*ua*ge

Refered to >> Referred to (twice)

spys >> spies

Dctor >> Doctor

un cluttered >> uncluttered

Why did a century only have 80 men in it? If there is a reason for this, you need to explain it

Hi h5ringer

All done please comment

Bob you missed free bourn >> freeborn

Regarding the ranks. Most of the time you capitalise the first word and lower-case the second: Tribunus laticlavius, but you also have some instances where both words are capitalised: Legatus Propraetor and Legatus Legionis.

Which is correct? If either is acceptable, could you be consistent and use one or the other, but not both.

I don't want to labour the point, but your footnote 10 still doesn't explain why they called a group of 120 men a century.

Good stuff though Bob

Ranks in Detail, 4th paragraph "had served" in place of "had experience" avoids a cyclothymic redundancy and improves the sense.

[General information of no especial immediate relevance: Many of the Roman forms were survivals of an earlier age of the world before the epoch of the classical pantheon of the Greeks. In the Greek system, before the age of the Titans, was the age of "Chierohecantes", the "Hundred-Handed", basically anyone who could muster a hundred troops (more or less) for war.

The Etruscan culture was little impacted by the classical culture of the Greeks until the rise of the Roman Republic and many of its forms survived even the collapse of the Roman empire.

The "plebeian" usage was also a survival from this period. Prior to the rise of the classical pantheon, there was an ancient order of priesthood called the "Phlebeians". The Phlebeians had a monopoly on fire making. If one wanted a fire, one had to pay a Phlebeian priest to light it. This was among the issues of the Promethian revolution. Upshot, the Phlebeian priesthood was abolished and its provenance given over to the cult of Hestia, (Vesta of the Romans).

There is a remembrance of this in one of the tales of the Satyricon having to do with an evil wizard, (Phlebeian priest) who went on strike in order to force his will on an unwilling young woman.

The term "plebeian" continues in pejorative usage to this day for the rote-minded unthinking... especially when consumed of hierarchial glee they start getting careless about the rote.]

Thanks h5ringe

I have had another go is that better

Hi ITIWBS

Are you saying that i should not use the word Plebeians

If both words are upper case, could you change in the first paragraph to

In the same sentence, it should be not

Hi Bob

I've had a look at your previous entries that have been put in the Guide and I can see that there is a consistency between them that I've not seen before, regarding your formatting. So I'm going to stop worrying about it.

I think this entry is just as good as your others. I look forward to seeing even more.

On the term "Plebeians", you're absolutely correct on your usage in context of your treatment of Roman social rank. My bracketed discursion is of no more than peripheral and contextual relevance on that.

The only item in that I'd seriously suggest for implementation is substitution of "served" for "experience".

Excellent article and well detailed.

More notes on post #6, h5ringer's question on the size of the the Roman "century". I strongly doubt that irrespective of the prevailing regulation, a Roman century any more often was exactly at regulation strength than a modern army company is. They're usually a little short, occasionally a little over the mark on regulation strength.

One had survivals of the form (if not the titles) into the 1800s in the United States with State militia companies, the post of " Company Commander" ("Captain", or once, "Centurion") still an elective office.

Hi Bob. It's all looking pretty good.

One other comment though. I think the whole thing would scan better with a a little less reliance on the footnotes. A lot of the information contained within them would be better served up in the main text without having to refer to them so often.

Either way, one or two of them are rather long. Particularly 1, 8, 10 and 11. I think you should try to include those in the main body if nothing else.

DK

Deke...

I will work on it

ITIWBS....

The only item in that I'd seriously suggest for implementation is substitution of "served" for "experience". Please point it out I am being a bit thick as I cant spot it


Thank you all for your comments annd support

Ranks in Detail, fourth paragraph, "Junior Tribunes", ninth to last word. Its already in as of this posting.

Thank you for your help and interest ITIWBS

Any more ideas and suggestions please

Hi Bob

Your Header: The Roman Class System should be followed by the SUBheaders "The Upper Class" and " Lower Classes" because the Header section is about them.

Likewise Header
Ranks7 Of The Roman Copiae - The Legions
should be followed by SUBheader Senior Officers (capitalise "Officers")

You can put the titles in bold tags to differentiate, if you like:
Legate (Legatus)
Tribunes (Tribunus)
Praefectus Castrorum

(Camp 0refect) should be (Camp Prefect)

Bob

Hi Galaxy Babe.


Happy Birthday again

All done thank you for that please comment.