An Overview of the Pythagorean Legions

[Monad]

Now Justin thinks his research is radical, well get a lot of this. I have done condensed version of my findings.

The organisational terms most commonly used by the ancient historians relating to the Roman legion are century, maniple and cohort. (1) The number of infantry in a cohort represented the number of zodiacs that had past the apex for a given period of time. In the Pythagorean system, with a zodiac having 30 degrees, a century of 60 infantry represented two zodiacs (60 degrees), and a maniple of 120 infantry, four zodiacs (120 degrees). Therefore, a cohort of 240 infantry represented eight Pythagorean zodiacs. With the size of a cohort aligned to the Pythagorean zodiac, this meant that a cohort was increased in size to maintain synchronicity with the orbit of the Pythagorean zodiac. When four Pythagorean zodiacs had past the apex, each cohort in a legion would be increased by 120 infantry, which represented the 120 degrees of the four zodiacs. In this manner, a 240-infantry cohort would be increased to 360 infantry. With a zodiac taking 52 years and six months to pass the apex, four zodiacs required 210 years (two saeculum each of 105 years). Hence, every 210 years the size of the legion would increase by 1,200 infantry and 120 cavalry until a legion reached it maximum of 6,000 infantry and 600 cavalry, which symbolised the end of the Pythagorean system.

Legion
Size   Number of
Centuries   Century
Size   Cohort
Size   Maniples   Zodiacs   Year
2400   40   60   240   2   8   438 BC
3600   60   60   360   3   12   228 BC
4800   80   60   480   4   16   18 BC
6000   100   60   600   5   20   192 AD

During the period from 513 BC to 387 BC, the Romans did not strictly adhere to the 200 juniors that could be levied, being organised into five legions each of 40 centuries. On many occasions the 200 centuries of juniors in the 20 tribes or the 210 juniors in the 21 tribes were organised into the following:

  5 legions each of 40 centuries
  4 legions each of 50 centuries
  7 legions each of 30 centuries
10 legions each of 20 centuries

The increase in the size of the Roman legion according to the movements of the Pythagorean zodiac during the period of Rome's republic did not always go according to the Pythagorean saecula calendar due to the Roman priest over a period of time making miscalculations on the correct calibration year. A major miscalculation occurred in 387 BC, when the Romans introduced the 60-century legion some 159 years earlier due to the Roman priests basing their calculations on the Pythagorean tonal system, and not the Pythagorean zodiac system. Also to compound their mistake, instead of taking 501 BC as their calibration point, which represented the end of the second Pythagorean tone, the Roman priests used 513 BC, which is when the Pythagorean system was created. With a Pythagorean tone representing 126 years, when deducted from 513 BC, this gives the year of 387 BC. Also in 387 BC, a new troop type termed the hastati was created from property classes II, III and IV. In 387 BC, the 60-century legion would have amounted to 4,200 infantry, consisting of:

1800 hastati
1800 princeps
  600 triarii
4200 infantry

Also in 387 BC, a major reform of the Pythagorean cosmos was undertaken, which involved the removal of the counter-earth. As Class I in the Pythagorean cosmos were aligned with the Pythagorean zodiac and the counter-earth, the removal of the counter-earth reduced the number of princeps from 1,800 to 1,200 princeps, thereby reducing 60-century legion from 4,200 heavy infantry to 3,600 heavy infantry.

In 13 BC, rather than having the 4,800 infantry in a legion organised into 80 centuries each of 60 infantry, as per the Pythagorean system, the Roman legion was organised into 60 centuries each of 80 infantry. In 192 AD, following the organisation of the 4,800-infantry legion of 13 BC legion, the 6,000-infantry legion was organised into 60 centuries each of 100 infantry instead of the 100 centuries each of 60 infantry as per the Pythagorean system.

Legion
Size   Number of
Centuries   Century
Size   Cohort
Size   Maniples   Zodiacs
2400   40   60   240   2   8
3600   60   60   360   3   12
4800   60   80   480   3   16
6000   60   100   600   3   20

In 293 AD, the emperor Diocletian, reorganised the legion from 6,000 infantry to 2,400 infantry, organised into 40 centuries each of 60 infantry. This mistake was due to the Roman priests confusing Rome's Life of a Man time frame by accidentally including Rome's period of conception. This resulted in the belief the Pythagorean system had ended, and therefore, the Roman priest returned to the beginning of the Pythagorean system created in 513 BC.

As the cavalry belonged to the same tribal century as the infantry, a legion was allocated a ratio of one cavalryman to 10 infantry.

Number of
Cavalry   Zodiacs   Number of
Squadrons   Squadron
Size   Legion
Size
240   8   10   24   2400
360   12   10   36   3600
480   16   10   48   4800
600   20   10   60   6000

The first alteration to the cavalry occurred in 13 BC when the 480-legionary cavalry should have been organised into 10 squadrons each of 48 cavalry, but was altered to 16 squadrons each of 30 cavalry and with the inclusion of the two officers, increased to 32 cavalrymen. The second alteration occurred in 192 BC, when the cavalry was organised into 20 squadrons each of 33 cavalry (30 cavalrymen and three officers), instead of 10 squadrons each of 60 cavalry (50 cavalrymen and 10 officers).

Endnote
1 Diodorus of Sicily (23 2), Dionysius (8 85), Isidore (Orig 22 3), (9 3), (18 3), Livy (1 52), (2 11), (2 20), (2 53), (4 37), Lydus (Magistracies 1 9), Ovid, (Fasti 3 115), Plutarch (Romulus Servius (ad Aeneas 11 870), Varro (The Latin Language 5 88)

[Ian61]

Why did I think the Romans were anti-Pythagorean?

[Monad]

Why did I think the Romans were anti-Pythagorean?

According to Pliny (Natural History 34 12 26), "in the third century, when fighting the Samnites, as part of a religious command, the Romans had to erect one statue to the wisest of the Greeks and one to the bravest. (26) In response, the Romans erected a statue to Pythagoras and one to Alcibiades, a testament to the high veneration the Romans held for Pythagoras."

[Ian61]

Why did I think the Romans were anti-Pythagorean?

I have found why - It's a bit in Livy XXXX.29 where some buried chests are found associated with the king Numa Pompilius and contained books on philosophy in Greek and thought to be Pythagorean and that

After perusing the most important passages he perceived that most of them would lead to the break-up of the national religion.

so

The books were burnt in the comitium in the sight of the people

but reading this again after many years it doesn't say they are burning them because they were Pythagorean but that ideas therein were not in line with the 'national religion'. I dislike the idea of ever burning texts so the story stuck in my mind, however I had also misremembered where and relegated it to the Early history (ie. books I to V) probably because of the connection with Rome's kings so it took a while to find.

[Monad]

it doesn't say they are burning them because they were Pythagorean but that ideas therein were not in line with the 'national religion'.

Livy 40.29: "During this year (181 BC) while labourers were digging at some depth on land belonging to L. Petilius, a scrivener who lived at the foot of the Janiculum, two stone chests were discovered about eight feet long and four wide, the lids being fastened down with lead. Each bore an inscription in Latin and Greek; one stating that Numa Pompilius, son of Pompo and king of the Romans, was buried there, and the other saying that it contained his books. When the owner at the suggestion of his friends had opened them, the one which bore the inscription of the buried king was found to be empty, with no vestige of a human body or of anything else, so completely had everything disappeared after such a lapse of time. In the other there were two bundles tied round with cords steeped in wax, each containing seven books, not only intact but to all appearance new. There were seven in Latin on pontifical law, and seven in Greek dealing with the study of philosophy so far as was possible in that age. Valerius Antias says further that they were Pythagorean books, thus shaping his belief to the common opinion that Numa was a disciple of Pythagoras, and trying to give probability to a fiction. The books were first examined by the friends who were present. As the number of those who read them grew, and they became widely known, Q. Petilius, the City praetor, was anxious to read them and took them from Lucius. They were on very friendly terms; when Q. Petilius was quaestor he had given Lucius Petilius a place on the decury. After perusing the most important passages he perceived that most of them would lead to the break-up of the national religion. Lucius promised that he would throw the books into the fire, but before doing so said that he should like to find out, if allowed to do so, whether he could reclaim them either by the right of possession or by the authority of the tribunes of the plebs, without, however, disturbing his friendly relations with the praetor. The scrivener approached the tribunes, and the tribunes left the matter for the senate to deal with. The praetor stated that he was ready to declare on oath that the books ought not to be preserved. The senate held the praetor's asseveration to be sufficient, and that the books ought to be burnt as soon as possible in the comitium."

Depending on the ancient historian consulted (Livy, Valerius Maximus, Pliny, Plutarch or Saint Augustine), in 181 BC, after a heavy deluge of rain or due to the diggings of some labourers; seven or twelve Pythagorean books were discovered in a stone chest. Cicero (De Legg. 2 15), Livy (40 29 3), Valerius Maximus, Pliny (Natural History 27-29), Plutarch (Numa 22 2), Saint Augustine (The City of God 7 34-35)

Pliny wrote that the Pythagorean books had been preserved against worms and decay by being covered in citrus leaves. According to Livy, Petilius, the city praetor, after reading them, "perceived that most of them would lead to the break-up of the national religion." All ancient historians are in agreement, that because the books were a threat to the local religion and were burnt at the behest of the senate. The fact the Pythagorean books lasted for some 300 years indicates they were a recently planted forgery.

My theory is the perpetrators could have been followers of the Bacchanalia sect banned in 186 BC by the Roman senate. In Livy's (40 29 3) words:

"members of the Bacchanalia indulged in the coarsest excesses and the most unnatural vices. Young girls and youths were seduced, and all modesty was set aside; every kind of vice found here its full satisfaction. But crimes did not remain confined to these meetings; for false witnesses, forgeries, false wills, and denunciations proceeded from this focus of crime. Poison and assassination were carried on under the cover of the society; and the voices of those who had been fraudulently drawn into these orgies."

Livy further adds that a major principle of the Bacchic society was "to hold every ordinance of god and nature in contempt." Alarmed by the Bacchic sect, and their large numbers (a state within a state), the senate had the Bacchanalia banned and its followers arrested for conspiracy. Many of the Bacchic sect committed suicide, while others were imprisoned or executed by the senate. Therefore, it could be that surviving members of the Bacchanalia, who had access to the priesthood and with it the Pythagorean knowledge that the reign of the gods would end, in retaliation against the suppression of their sect, planted the Pythagorean knowledge concerning the demise of the gods in the hope of creating widespread anarchy.

In 405 AD, to the anguish of both Christians and pagans, the Roman general Stilicho ordered the destruction of the Sibylline Books. Of interest, the origin of the Sibylline books dates back to the reign of Tarquinius Superbus (534 BC to 509 BC).

[Ian61]

Very Interesting, thankyou.