Talk:Legio X Equestris

message: *Whether the legion was refashioned as Gemina or Fretensis is still being debated. Since it has not been resolved yet, this article needs to conform to a neutral point of view, something you (Panairjdde) did not keep in your edits of the page. In my version I point out that the mainstream view is that it was refashioned as Gemina, you fail to even mention the possibility of it becoming Fretensis. Unless you are willing to write a nonbiased article, please refrain from editing this page. --YankeeDoodle14 18:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the consensus is about X Gemina lineage. The only source supporting Fretensis is Dando-Collins. Since YD14 seems to like this author, we can add the citation for his "work", but a reference for his "source" must be provided if an ampler support for his thesis is to be added to the article.--Panairjdde 20:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about? All you have done is repeat that there's an issue over the lineage, something we already know. You fail to address ONE point that I made above. Why are you so insistant that only YOUR view be excepted? I offered an article in which both theories were given credence, you did not. Care to explain why? --YankeeDoodle14 03:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gemina or Fretensis 

message: Look, I think that we can agree that the whole place/time/birth issue is rather unclear. 
First of all, Dando wrote a book which speculates alot. Proof? I read the book "Gallic Wars" and couldn't find anywhere which legion begins in Transalpine Gaul. Dando clearly writes it was the 10th, but he doesn't tell us from where reaches that conclusion. He provides a great list of sources at the end of the book, that is true, but does not link them to the several statements! how are we supposed to know where he read what? 
The "Bull" seems to me also one fo these unclear issues. Dando writes that it is a symbol of Spain, but go to :Taurus (astrology), and you will read that it is a symbol of :Venus, ancestor of the Julians (Caesar). It is possible that both things were true but...quite unclear.
 
As for the Equestris title, I have read that the paragraph of the Gallic war book is thought to be the reason for it. But that is no real evidence, and it is regarded more of a suggestion by scholars, than a real proof. In the fashion of: "It has been suggested that the passage of [Bla Bla Bla] is the reason for the title of this legion. However the issue is still unclear."
I propose that all these unclear issues have to be confirmed by two sources = two books of two scholars at the very least. Flamarande 19:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "wrong" is that one is a scholar-backed position, another is a novelist-backed one. They have not the same importance and authority.--Panairjdde 18:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look, I'm not going to bother debating this anymore. Clearly we can't reach a consensus, so this is just a waste of my time. --YankeeDoodle14 21:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What was your way to find a consensus? Claiming SDC as your only source, which the world should accept without questioning its reliability?--Panairjdde 21:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear, simply unclear 

message: I don't know what this means:
"It chose the bull as its emblem, because of the month the Tenth was mustered."
This may be true, but it makes no sense in context. It assumes the reader will say, "Oh, yes, of course"; but I don't know why I am supposed to associate a bull with a month. A bull is associated with the astrological sign of Taurus, which is obviously connected to a particular time in the calendar, but that should be stated.
Also, I can't take the time (apologies) to read the lengthy discussion here, but it cannot possibly be true that 'Equestris' refers to the Ariovistus incident and the joke the legionary made — in fact Equestris was consistently used to designate this legion, in the manner of the famous 'Alaudae', which seems debatable.
Glancing over this, it seems the main problem is the use of sources. Although a few good sources are listed, and citations given, some of these controversial points are not cited and not supported carefully. Scholarly method is lacking. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  bull and Equestris 

message: The article says the legion was disbanded in 45, but then:
"The Tenth later followed Mark Antony in Armenia, during his Parthian campaign."
Which was after the death of Caesar. So the continuity of a legion's identity is problematic; was this a new legion organized as X, or were veterans of Caesar's 10th serving under Antony? Again, poor methods of argumentation. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  chronology problem 

message: Hello,
I've never edited for Wikipedia (just signed up today), but I may be able to help here.  
My understanding of Legio X is that they chose the bull as a symbol since it was a popular symbol in Hispania who's inhabitants comprised the vast majority of the legion.  In addition, as the legion was raised in March, it either had the zodiac sign of ram or fish on it's standard as well.  
As a source, please see Caesar's Legion by Stephen Dando-Collins.  I believe specific reference is made in Chapter 2.  
Thank you!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:Rescue14 (talk) 14:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 3 different theories as to when and where the 10th legion was levied, in any case it was made up mostly of Roman Italians and the bull was not a symbol of Spain, but a symbol of several legions.2A01:E11:17:40B0:989A:8880:3E7D:F3B (talk) 19:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Founding