Perfect situations must go wrong

[venta]

From The Calendar today:

Chess as we know it was first played in the 1400s, though the names and movements of the pieces have changed. The king, or "rex", originally had a "trailing minister", later known as the "dame", which eventually became the powerfully mobile queen. The bishop was once the "fool" and was depicted accordingly. The word pawn derives from the Latin pedo (foot soldier), related to the Old French words peon and pioneer. The rook's name was not affiliated with the ravenlike bird but came from Perisan rukh (warrior), while another Persian word, shag-mat, was corrupted into "checkmate". According to W. C. Hazlitt's Faith and Folklore of the British Isles (1870): "Chess-boards were made of wood, bone or even ivory, the last being valued at three cows or six pence."

On a completely different note, I have a question about Roman Legions:

Can anyone tell me/point me at a reliable website about the structure of a Roman Legion ? I know they consisted of Centuries, under Centurions, but I have half an idea that a Century wasn't 100 men, it was 110 or something unexpected. Did a Decurion have charge of ten men ? If so, why do I have this idea that a Decurion was more important than a Centurion ? How to the cohorts/auxiliary cohorts fit in ? Did it depend which legion ? What rank was a Legate ? Etc.

purple_pen, werelobster, anyone else ?

Comments

[al-fruitbat.livejournal.com]

Wikipedia says that there could have been less than 100 men in a century, but then again - doubts are being levied at Wikipedie's reliability ;-)

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

while another Persian word, shag-mat, was corrupted into "checkmate"

Ho ho.

That's Shah Mat - literally: the king is dead.

What a "shag mat" might be, I don't care to speculate.

[venta.livejournal.com]

I'd just like to point out that if shag-mat is wrong, it was wrong on The Calendar and not just a typo of mine :)

On the other hand, since Persian is written in squiggle, I could quite happily believe that the words can be transliterated in both ways. You can see why shag-mat is the less common one, mind.

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

I'm happy to go with that. Anything's better than "shag mat" !

[beckyc.livejournal.com]

(As per your subject line) I do prefer the explanation given in the musical. Although inventing a game to explain why you killed your brother and why it was in fact his own fault seems a bit, well, pathetic. And I now have that song ("The Story of Chess", rather than "I know him so well") as an earworm.

"shag-mat" is an excellent term.

[waistcoatmark.livejournal.com]

Shag-mat would be my word of the week, if I had such an institution.

[venta.livejournal.com]

Would you believe, I copied the text off The Calendar without ever noticing that shag-mat might be funny ? Must be very early in the morning.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_corpse_/]

It's a marvelous term, if somewhat misogynistic.

[wechsler.livejournal.com]

And why isn't the King actually taken? Chess (AFAIK) stops at the point where this is possible - but the act is never perpetrated. Was this somehow seditious?

[mooism.livejournal.com]

My recollection is that before the rules were changed in the 1400s, you won the game when you took your opponent’s king; and yes, that it was changed so you won on the preceeding turn because capturing or killing a king was seen as seditious.

[venta.livejournal.com]

S'ok, no rush... I'm only idly curious, rather than requiring this information urgently :)

[http://users.livejournal.com/_corpse_/]

I have a question about Roman Legions

Well, the structure evolved over time, so there's no easy answer to your question.

The very earliest Roman army was based on the 3 tribes, each of which provided 1000 men and 100 horsemen. The infantry were divided into centuries.

Early Republican armies numbered 5000 to a legione with an additional 300 cavalry. During this period, they sub-divided their legions into 120 men maniples for tactical purposes. The principes in the front rows had two pila and a sword, the hastati in the middle had thrusting spears (though later they were equiped as the principes and, confusingly, moved forward of the principes in the formation) as did the triarii at the back. This was the point where they ditched round shields in favour of the four cornered scutum.

You're probably thinking of the Imperial legions though, post the reforms of Marius. He's the lad who changed the concript militia into a standing army, and really standardised the legions, doing away with different equipment for (and the divisions of) the principes, hastati and triarii. All were now armed with pilum and sword. He also ditched the maniple in favour of the cohort, of which there were ten to a legion. The legions were now standardised to 6000 men. There were centuries of 100 men, each commanded by a centurion.

Later still a few other changes were made that complicate the matter further. One cohort (first on the left as they form up on parade - assuming you're facing them) was increased in size to 800 men organised in five centuries. By that stage, the terms century and cohort were no longer numerical references so much as divisional ones.

The legion also had about 120 cavalry to act as scouts and dispatch riders.

The Imperial legion was commanded by a legate, who was appointed by the Emperor. He had six tribunes, and then his centurions.

Auxiliaries as a term is often used to describe two kinds of troops. There are the specialists, engineers and siege craft specialists and so forth who would be were assigned to legions on a pretty much ad hoc basis depending on the demands of the terrain or campaign, and there would be the non-citizen auxiliaries.

The legions (all Roman citizens) were used for offensive actions, revolts and countering invasions. The auxiliary regiments (of non-Roman citizens) were commonly used for frontier patrols and garrison work - often in the region from which they had been recruited. The auxiliary regiments were usually organised in a similar set of divisions to the legions, but there's less detail on them. Also I think they weren't called legione, but I can't find out what they were called.

Dunno about decent websites... this is mostly from my memory and a decent book or two. All right, very little is from my memory.

No idea about a Decurion. It would only make sense for a decurion to be a commander of 10 men, so where your idea comes from I have no notion.

[venta.livejournal.com]

You're probably thinking of the Imperial legions though

Yes, I am. Sorry, should have specified.

Thanks for that.

[smorgasbord.livejournal.com]

A decurion would have ten men under his command and a centurion would have 10 decurions under his comman giving one-hundred and ten men if you include all of the officers. I believe that this lofty organizational goal was seldom achieved and that it only existed under some systems of legion organization.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_corpse_/]

It's a fair point. Your shiny bright legion sets out in numerical splendour from Wome (it's how they actually pronounced it), and after thirty steps, Legionnaire Smitherington ffinch-Smythe stubs his toe and has to go home.

What's a legate to do? Call the whole thing off? Have a few lads shuffle round in an attempt to mask the discrepancy? Or just live with the burning shame of there being a man shaped hole in his legion?

[onebyone.livejournal.com]

thirty steps

triginti passum, or an actus and a bit.

[sciolist.livejournal.com]

I have no idea. aldric and katebush are keen romanophiles though.