Onasander

Current Status as of Friday, December 13th, 2013, is Unproven. However, points for improvement in exposition and effort.

Your getting better at presentation, the color coded tables in the first half was useful in trying to focus in on what your saying. You should provide a color coded key at the very beginning, delineating the class of sociological phenomena your focusing on, with a introductoryvexplanation to each color key's range of meaning. This is indeed the best attempt you've made yet. It's almost to the point of peer review. Since this is a passion of yours, you should provide links to multiple new testament translations, given presenting only one translation in ENGLISH, and not the original language isn't going to cut it, people are going to be instictually suspicious, best to present variant public domain translations yourself. Same with Flavius' work, given I've seen more than one public domain translation of him out there, he didn't originally write in English, have the variation side by side. Clean it up..... This concludes the Aesthetic oriented Epistemoloical Aspect of my critic.... it doesn't take the facts persay into account, but the presentation. I didn't bother to proof check them to see if they are valid, one of the stricklers here can do that for us if they suspect falsification. As to my thinking are they by chance? Yes, but due to circumstance specific to this Jewish Era. 1) The Ptolemies actively courted the Jewish intelligences for state service, they were used as a intermediary caste for dealing with their Egyptian subjects. Hence why the old testament was translated into Greek by the elders of Jerusalem for Philadelphius, and the Alexandrian Jewish community, which had a well educated Jewish Elite. Rome inherited this system to a certain extent, it takes time for a well educated population to loose its intellectual identity. It was still going on during the Roman era. This means ideological influences on narrative and poetic descriptions are going to overlap for the two not so distant eras, given a shared literary corpus. 2) Flavius and Jesus both 'campaigned' in the sense of operating in a messiah prone era... Jesus wasn't the only spiritual or militant messiah. Jesus covered ALOT of ground. Had a lot of experiences. 3) Neither operated in a void of the other. Jesus chronologically came first, but Christians were already intellectually active in this era, and it has been dated..... we're talking pre written gospels. Christians most likely influenced Alexandria, and vice versa, in the same way the Baha'i are under the sway of New York. It's a world cultural capital, some cultural influences started hitting them day one, and intellectuals from the Baha'i moved to NYC affecting the intellectual scene. If in 100 years some big theological revolution occurs in NYC, it would be coincidence and not conspiracy.... even if you could chronologically track shared linguistic concepts or supposed first genesis of ideas. It's the weakness of Nietzsche 's emphasis of genealogical research of ideas (he surely didn't invent it, but did abuse it the best of all). The other fault, purely on a logical and epistemological scale, is your whole emphasis rests on a well known Taboo by historians and philosophers known as Parallelomania http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallelomania It still have adherents in certain fields, such as Pre-Thales Philosophy, where every writer, thinker and trinketer is automatically assumed to of carried ideas whole and intact from India, and every writer, thinker in India is assumed to of gotten their ideas similarly from the west. This results in a absurd paradox of non origin, so they invariably point to the Babylonians, Catal Hulak or now even Gobekli Tepe as the one time in history any idea was first thought up, and pot smoking shamans deep on Jung carried civilization ever since, until it suddenly blossomed cryptically as if as new. Similar attempts had been done with Christ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ_in_comparative_mythology It's usually not a Issue of NOT finding suspicious patterns around Christ, or any text for that matter to another, but the contradictory nature of all the parallel theories of Christ's secret origins. I can accept one purely by parallelism, but how do I juggle another similarly well articulated theory pointing out other parallels, one that can contradict my acceptance of your theory? Can I in reason accept the Flavians Invented Christ, that Krishna was Christ, and that Christ was also a Buddhist Monk in Tibet, all the while being a tin trader in his youth in England, and spent time preaching Mormonism in the American South West while abiding by the will of the Islamic Allah, while being a reincarnation of Lao Tzu? No..... hence why textual parallels can't be the primary evidence, but rather secondary supporting evidence. This doesn't inherently invalidate your theory, but does make your data inherently dependant on better data, such a dependable historic texts supporting your views, psychological and sociological analysis, or Archeology backing up your claims. As long as it is of a secondary tier, your parallels remain unproven. Perhaps intriguing, but still, unproven, as the default. You need that silver bullet proof..... something obvious like a text or archeological dig that makes it absolutely obvious. I can't prove George Washington crises the Trenton by comparing Colonial Law to English Parlimentry law..... no amount of clever parallels can indirectly prove this. However, a primary source by Washington or another witness certainly helps, as well as pointing out this country called the USA exists, and it says so. Be easier to dismiss admittedly if the USA didn't exist.

I got tricked into carrying a massive load of old documents and movies from a basement TWO stories down to a giant UHaul, and dropping it off at the museum today....all stuff from the 1945 to the mid nineties..... any other self respecting society would of junked that crap..... but oh no..... we had to save every last archaic roll of film, every file, every giant negative. Apparently all the korean war film not used ended up being used by the mill, cause I just carried a million bagillion roles of it, of every size. I heard once some professor was deeply amazed by some ancient employee bulletin was found a few years ago...... I just carried like..... all of them. Issue is, outside of letting the state archives make copies of the videos (heavy focus on training to deal with drunk employees), I can't see anyone having the slightest interest in most of this crap. I see in the next two hundred years, a total of 3 historians interested in checking this collection out. But that is only if they know it exists. Alot of random bull...... pictures of former CEOs in multiple bad positions, trying to get their look just right. Weird stuff. One of the guys moving the stuff kept puzzling over it. Either he or I (or both) are destined in a few decades to be president of the museum.... we were pretty much moving it in to be ignored till our eventual tenure, where it is likely to be ignored or trashed. What sub branch of history specializes in this sort of stuff? Do they have a official name? I want to advertise we have this stuff to them, but don't want to deal with a bunch of old commies reading weird Gilius Class theories of labor or environmental sexuality or something weird like that.... I'm looking for a mainstream class of specialist historian.... don't know if such a thing exists. Anyone heard of such people?

We have some archaic public right away away laws here in west Virginia, if you can show a path has been used for 25 years, people are allowed to use it no matter your perceived property rights..... I've had to had a showdown with a crazy hillbilly upset kids were ruining his grass, claiming he had the right to shoot us.... more convincing given his shotgun in hand. Had to explain to him the law, our rights, and killing minors who were not violating his property rights was gonna lead to the death penalty for him. He's been nice ever since.

Have they had any luck building on mines, especially coal mines, in England? Here, we have four layers of coal, but most of our flat land is on top of hills..... that top most coal level is 10-20 feet below surface, and instead of just blowing up the surface, they got all inventive and mined it underground instead. The land ends up unsuitable for building that point on. I don't know how high of a premium land is in England, or when the first suburbs popped up.... from my understanding, suburbs was a 19th century Pittsburg PA phenomena first, I don't know how much the English have gotten into it over the traditional Ekistics since.

What police powers does this shameful, laughable court of inbred bastards have? You want a coat of arms, I'll knight you.... I can grow a better beard than that old foggy on that website, and can dress better too. If his sense of honour is offended, he can fight me to get it back. Cold Blue Steel, or a Spork..... Doesn't much matter. My suggestion is Google Translate..... it always comes out with the most interesting translations. If you put your google translate Latin tattoo pics on here, I'll post pictures of me putting this Arch-Duke of Lyon in a headlock, giving him a nuggie. He has no power or authority over anything dressed like that.

Have you called an Orthodox Jewish Synogague? I believe they are more than willing to curse Hadrian over the phone for you. If you ever want to hear a American trash talk Denmark, give me a call. I also know a few Greeks who can talk trash about Turks, and some Han Chinese who hate loudmouth Koreans..... It's usually not hard to get people to curse people they hate, most are delightfully helpful. Only words I know in Bosnian are a horrible rant against your hypothetical sister. People open up to strangers when asked for such details. It's because human nature is essentially good and altruistic, they want you to succeed. So call up a local Orthodox Jewish Synogogue.

Okay, apparently I'm arguing in favor of Analytic Language over Synthetic. I can't ever make out a pronouciation key, period...... I have to hear it, and then mess up pronouncing it 5000 times. Japanese just happens to have similar sounds as American English.

Someone on the net is Samuel Clemmens critique of the German Language, I gotta post that..... so similar to my experience: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Awful_German_Language

The Indian Head Penny means USA.... should of come to me earlier. Betting there are a bunch more around..... some dimes from the 1930s are worth ALOT, I would sweep the area between the outhouse and school with a metal detector, they are quite cheap now.

Japanese is easier, I can atleast pronounce it. I took a semester of it 9th grade. Two alphabets plus kanji complicates it, but its a very friendly language to English speakers. Ive given up on the idea of ever speaking latin... my old boss could speak it and the romance languages, plus Cantonese..... I would ask him...... It just..... no. Just no. I've been staying up till 3am learning a language I cant hope to ever pronounce. Japanese is very easy to pronounce.

It died out because it took ten minutes to figure out how to pronounce something correctly. You gotta look at the chart to get tge first person singular impersonal informal hermaphrodite tense down correctly, and flip through a dictionary with the supposed root, and then thirty minutes of dumb silence as you try to figure out how to connect another word to it in a meaningful manner. The Romans hadnt discovered yet the importance of not fucking around with word structure, just letting a word be a word, whatever the circumstance. They also didnt know how to order the dictionary alphabetically, you gotta guess what the root of a word, sometimes in the middle of it, and look it up that way, instead if just the first letter of the whole word. The Romans died off because they couldnt understand one another. They had to conquer other countries just to find people who could speak properly.... and made them slaves so they wouldnt get lonely. Once all the slaves learned latin, the empire collapsed because no one could talk to one another anymore.

I'm guessing they didn't dig out the old latrine, then concrete it up and then reuse it, more than likely they abandoned the original, and started off with a new one, concerted over. Check with a local historian for the old codes..... they may of required all new courthouses to be converted over if they were effecting the water table. If you have a historian interested in the school's history, you can get a exploratory square dug on your best guess for the original location by a local archeologist. You can live in Nambia for all I know.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McColloch's_Leap It just occured to me I dont know where he is buried. I found Samuel Brady, some British General..... Ill have to hike up Short Creek into Pennslyvania to find out if he is buried out by Meadowcroft. Itll be a few days, my knee is chubby with blood from my last hike. I dont think Im brave enough to take a horse off the cliff. I might do it on my own if my life is on the line, but I never liked jumping off even a small one. I couldnt even bring myself to jumping out the airplanes in the Army, I just sorta walked out and was gone. But sometimes your moving too fast, and the tree ahead snaps or the ground is too shallow, and to keep from slipping you commit. Its no good. But that is how you outmaneuver.... you learn to commit to gravity, and to the hardship of climbing hills that will rapidly break you off. You gain appreciation for natural formations.

Squad Still Squad. As I pointed out, not exactly the same. I know they wouldnt fight as a Unit, and its minus the inherent rank of two team leaders and a squad leader (nine men), but its still a squad. Plus, my gut instict says they would either be on guard rotations together, or one after anothet. Hence the picture I supplied, that is a single team pulling a squad ahkio. Basic tools like ten man tent, pick axes, regular axes, shovels, stove, etc are loaded in it. One team pulls, the other team smiles. Word of the day, Squad.

Yes, that Woodsman was with our unit, I'll remember his name later on tonight, he was trying to reach Fort Henry in Wheeling. We sent the forces from Holiday 's Cove (where I live) down south to another Fort just north of Wheeling.... the rest left by Canoe, and arrived next morning. The Horse survived, because its possible to run off the cliffs, just it's so steep you more fall than run..... the trick is my movement technique. We have a giant mural in the old post office of the men from here moving south to relieve Fort Henry. I am saving up for a 2000 dollar van, then a 400 dollar 3D printer so I can progress on building this Ultraviolet Camera.... after that, I'll by a printer capable of 0.5 polluters so I can make a mural LARGER in our new museum.

Most of JSTOR is, I'm currently maxed out for a few weeks on free picks. It is a big deal, given its a regurgitation of opinion taken as fact. One I heard since I was young enough to even take note of history. I simply wanna know who started this trend, and why it is so easy to accept and not question. I can guess a lot of hypothetical reasons why getting citizenship beyond military access (of course, anyone could enlist under the auxiliary), a larger tax base susceptible to direct taxation, streamlining of the court system (no more roman or subject-national courts, meaning a unification of law, and less need to fund (or allow such non roman courts to collect their own taxes to fund themselves)) Of course, I don't really know, nor do we on this forum apparently offhand, because no one knows which historian it was that dropped the ball for us. We all just kinda matter of factly accepted it. It was the vogue when I was a kid, I have no idea how long the uselessness of this edict was pushed. It seemed to of had a impact..... Belisarius viewed the inhabitants of the west, especially Libya, as Romans, and reigned in his men's behavior, not letting them loot or offend the inhabitants. I like your idea Virgil about the military, and lean towards it..... just the reality is, Romans started dodging military service. It eventually became a system of foreigners brought in, settled as a group to fight as an army. This be like the US bringing in 30,000 people from Hyperbad, families included, to staff the 10th Mountain Division and the 82nd Airborne. Would I question their loyalty? At first, but not second or third generation. However, I would note the lack of regular Americans not joining up as a concern. How long could such a reform last positively for the military? (And I am very much in the right to tear this guy off, this book is low quality, I was already disappointed before even reaching this point. I don't expect much from someone overly pushing their college credentials, but it drives me nuts knowing he had access to a top notch library, as well as to fellow historians who recently wrote on a similar topic, and this is what he produces. I am deeply uninspired. I'd thought Oxford would have some sort of peer review process before publishing, if for nothing else to protect their Brand Name..... someone attending a community college is Nebraska with a associates degree in History could of written that. Compare his book to say, The Nativists Prophets of Early Islamic Iran by Patricia Crone...... a Damn good book by a academic who shows she knows what she is doing. She gives credit to her institution. I would love to talk to her, but this guy? What's the point of Oxford if this is what is produced. I can get similar Quality stuff from Cam Tea, but at least he doesn't have pretentious leanings, doesn't pretend to be a Oxford scholar, just a military engineer with kids.... and when I read him, I learn a lot about the secondary sources he sights in-depth. Both heavily borrow from Secondary Sources, just Cam is more honest and offers his books at a very respectable price for what is available inside. This book, it's 99

Of course I can say it, if you dont believe me, I can say it again as proof. Who are these scholars? Ive only gotten this information packaged like this since I was a child..... and it always sounded a bit suspicious, but you expect to find out about it more indepth, the greater reasoning, in time. I haven't..... I still stumble across this same dodge, in a very recent work by someone who droned in and on about his reachers at Oxford..... so now I am calling it out. I wouldnt long tolerate this kind of thinking in a philosophy debate, its a clear indication of a weakness in argument. There is something fundamentally disturbing about how this assertion has been recycled my whole life. Someone started this, and the way it is phrased, it doesnt sound like the Romans..... so who done it? I got zero data, only enough contextual information from the assertion itself to smell something rotten. We really should probe these assertions. And Virgil...... Im guessing you and Gilius were debating the Vaticans medieval claims to owning the lands of western europe? That was indeed asserted by certain medieval popes, but also disproved by Bishops who smelled something rotten themselves. Its a claim literally no one has backed in hundreds of years. I think you two should separate for a while, meet other people, cause this strange relationship between the two of you isnt going anywhere positive. I didnt see you to debate it out, but I can guess it was silliness and a lot of slamming your head off the wall.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_of_Nero Didnt know it really was called the Flavian Amphitheater.... And the Circus Maximus was built from the plundering from the Jewish Revolt. Right now, Gilius is an old Asian man stroking his Fu Manchu goatee on a hill, laughing at us..... The Flavians were up to something here.

Im reading another absolutely wonderful recent Oxford history by Peter Sarris that among other things, is into the Byzantine vs Rome identity crisis that Caldrail assured me no historian of note has held to in the last thirty years..... The book is 'Empires of Faith: The Fall of Rome to the Rise of Islam 500-700'. At location 278 of 864 of the free kindle sample download, he brings up the Antonine Constitution..... where most Romans got citizenship. He repeats without hesitation what I have been told since elementry school... that it was more symbolic than real and didnt really matter, and just look away, and hey look, do you like shadow puppets..... this is a bird flapping its wings..... Why on earth should I accept such a regurgitation of opinion? Who first came up with this line of reasoning? Was it some thick headed fool in the House of Lords back in the 1600s not wanting those dirty plebians to start getting ideas? Clearly, it meant something to everyone who suddenly lost restrictions, or those who lost advantages. It hsd to of changed the tax structure, a sense to patriotism or nationalism..... something..... something changed, and it was of consequence, for better or worst. Why arent we thinking critically on this one? If you woke up one day, to discover you had Japanese Citizenship.... or 'UN Citizenship', wouldnt you take notice?

I'm not going to buy it for a few years. I was very disappointed with Total War, Napoleon..... graphics were good, but gameplay would fall apart if the computer had 30+ armies in the field..... my defense of the Tyrol is permanently locked out because of this, it took forever to Nurture the Russians to the point they would launch a mass counter attack against me...... I really wanted to fight that out. Shogun 2 was a disappointment. Too cartoonish. Everyone would default break with you if you got too large, but ignored other factions that grew too large..... it reminded me of the Skirmishes on Tiberium Dawn where every AI faction would instantly drop what they were doing if you killed two or three of the enemy completely off..... it becomes a game of reducing bases to low efficiency but still surviving just barely until you break enough bases to be safe...... it gets tiresome to beat the programmers calculas. I'm also upset with the reliance on stream.... I don't have a hardline connection. It's a pain in the butt to head out and constantly get steams approval to play offline with a game I already own. Once Rome is fixed, the mods are worked out, I might consider it. The old Rome wasn't too bad. Not very realistic,not too bad. I don't want to loose a big chunk of time right now playing it.

A Contubernam = a Squad in modern parlance.... not exactly the same, but guys in the military will instantly get what your saying. Mule = Ahkio, carried similar crap. Just in modern times, we pull the Ahkio, Romans had animals to do it. I found a Gerber Saw and a hatchet could remove any parachute from a tree (and we liked to land in trees at Fort Greeley). Trees tend to by just slightly longer than parachute and paratrooper combined, meaning it would snag them, swing them into the truck, and wack them. Once they came to their senses, they would fall three feet to the ground, or the tree would snap. Fun fact..... chainsaws don't like to operate at certain temperatures. Another fun fact..... the strings that hold the parachute to the pact, 550 cord, is mindlessly expensive, and your not allowed to cut it. Guess what that meant for me, the only guy with a saw and hatchet on hand? A small Blade work wonders. I doubt the first time around, they would of had the smarts to get a small saw. But..... much of that stuff could be minimised or rarely carried. If this metaphysical belief in command providing you with a donkey is true.... maybe it is, but I have my doubts until I physically would have such a Donkey under my direct control, then life is easier. Until Donkey gets hungry. Right when you want to set up camp and hide inside, donkey wants to head out into the field with his buddies and munch a few hours, which is a bad idea. so for every Donkey, there is a need to feed them. Or.... you can just pile tools onto a wagon few wagons and feed considerably less donkies. Why buy, stable, and feed costly commies when the guys can carry everything or do without for free? There is ALWAYS going to be flexibility for rations. No law or standard can tame this fact. http://themellowjihadi.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/A-team-of-soldiers-pulls-a-loaded-ahkio-sled-March-21-during-the-Operation-Arctic-Forge-competition-at-Fort-Wainwright-Alaska.-.jpg

I doubt any Christians owned gladiators, the bishop would quickly beat sanity into any such fool, it's a rite of the wrong religion. Christians can shed blood.... turning the other cheek wasn't a prohibition against military service or self defence. Just you get kudos for not killing or shedding blood needlessly. Even then..... there are examples that are unfortunately tolerated by the living, though I doubt by God. Blinding a whole army for example, or impaling a army on stakes..... not good.

No, fastest means of travel was NOT by boat, given the frontier was the river. The creek systems to this day get massively clogged up by trees, most of which are not submerged, but inconveniently floating inches to a foot above water..... meaning it's a web of branches. Not no mention the beaver dam buildup. It's only a fast way to travel if you maintain the creek. It's much, much faster by foot. I can get to Wisconsin MUCH faster on foot than by Canoe. The reason for water transport was the ease (lazy factor) and the need to carry heavy loads. Hence, the historians folly of not actually examining the land, and testing it out themselves. I can reach Pittsburg a day's March, by Canoe..... better grab a stickers. It's only worthwhile if I got crops, or skins to trade. Most our early cattle trade avoided the river as a nuisance, finding overland transport much better. As to convincing historians..... not a Issue..... they will die off in time with their theories. You have to pay attention to how you maintain your endurance. Starting from the top of a hill, most guys lunge to to reward, and bitterly try to run down, burning oxygen, using their muscles, pushing to reward, halting, throwing their weight to the rear. The dodging back and forth while pushing to reward wears them down. Truth is, your not supposed to run. Your supposed to FALL. You do this by stepping far to reward, not bending your knees much, and AIM for a tree ten-fifteen feet ahead of you. If your not bending your knees, stepping to foreword like this causes you to bounce and recoil back up, and you gain a lot of speed hurtling towards the tree below. On approaching the tree, if you seek to maintain momentum, you cup your inner handicrafts, bringing your arm in, when you hit the tree you slap it, choosing your new trajectory before landing (you'll twist your knee or tumble if you choose once landing). Cliffs are a freaken nuisance doing this, unless you know the land, you can't spot them. Here they can be twenty to several hundred feet. Usually just twenty..... scares the living daylights out of you when the valley below opens up, but you don't fall all the way. There always is topsoil piled up below, acts like a cushion. Don't like doing that though, scares me. Taking the steepest route avoids thickets, which can't usually be leaped over. They are one hell of a fortification. You hit the bottom curve, locomotion changes. The flatlanders used up their cardio reserve already. Your just starting yours, overflowing with oxygen from your bouncy bouncy fall down. You are guaranteed to be at the bottom, short of injury, in at least half the time it's taking superstar to run down. The valleys here are not wide..... cross the creek..... water will numb your feet a bit, and cool you down..... but you'll also pick up weight. You'll have to run up a diagonal, but not a straight one the deer take. You will zigzag back and forth, looking for trees with roots sticking out. If you see the roots, it means the curvature of the hill is just right to break off your huff and puff pursuers, giving you rock cliffs nearby to shoot down on them from. Secondly, these curvatures usually step brutally up in a spiral to other steps. It's a cardio nightmare, but less for you and much, much more for them. This cardio nightmare is ironically the best shaded and most direct root up. Try not to climb root systems, take a few steps on unstable ground, next tree, take cover if need be, etc. Running downhill isn't a complete exposure to your back. When running down and cupping your hands, bring your elbow about so instead of recoiling off the tree, you are slapping the outside, and sling yourself 180 degrees, dropping down below it. The lower 70 percent of your body is covered, your head can hide behind the trunk, and you can fire back. Like I said, different movement techniques, not used in modern militaries. Russians and NATO specialized in different movement techniques during the cold war.... Russians even were taught to craw differently. If just traveling on foot without pursuit, this method is fastest, but on the uphill climb, I recommend deer trails. If your not overly pressed, going down the crazy zig zag springs/creeks..... each hill having dozens, is good..... just don't use this if your in pursuit. Review the Indian tactics used in the French and Indian wars...... the Indians tended to appear off hillsides into troop formations VERY FAST..... and still had the stamina to fight hand to hand. The frontiersmen differed in being at least equals in movement techniques, hence why a much, much better kind of soldier, amongst many qualities.

Im not in disagreement with the kits, the reconstructions seem reasonable. Im just strongly cautioning about how much you could regularly expect the guys to carry. Ive been getting some of the cartlidge back in my knee as time goes by..... I cant jump really, nor run for long, but managed to get 4 miles in a hour twenty minutes with considerable elevation two days ago through a snowstorm.... I had to in a emergency..... had six hours of high activity after that before my body begun to shut down..... lack of food and water. Im only 30, with a injury to my knee many older legionaires would of had.... and did it with maybe ten pounds in my ruck. I would exist on the pathetic lower quality end in terms of physical.strength for a historic legionaire. You would only keep someone around like this for leadership or support..... but such guys keep the whole unit moving that pace. This is the speed many platoon sargents move at.... I now feel their pain. Now, go back to my teens, I could hike 70 miles in a weekend, 2 hours of sleep, drinking a few pints of water during the day, a gallon of ice tea at night. That is NOT weighed down. I suspect your average legion, the bulk of the guys could maintain that. The hundred miles a day stuff, oh dear God...... yes, its possible, but...... no, your not wearing armor, the Caterpillar Effect is going to do some truely freaky stuff to the formations, and you gotta do it when the ground is solid and the creeks are flowing, with bridges, and wagons picking up stragglers, and there will be a lot. Especially if your doing this multiple days, 100 miles back to back. Old guys like me with physical issues would be very late arriving, while the young, very fit version of me would be delirious, exhausted and starving. I remember hallucinating from sleep and food deprivation on my pre army hikes. Once I almost toppled backwards into a creek over a guardrail barrier because I thought I almost ran into a man..... who turned around and blew sand into my eyes.... the Mr. Sandman, give me a treat song was playing, it was raining, I had a high body temperature, steaming my ugly malfitted running suit I had on. Musical Ear Syndrome is a occurrence I get right before I hit the point of absolute exhaustion. It hits extreme ultra marathoners sometimes.... its my cue its all over, time to sleep. I am guessing the Roman Legions had these issues. You can rush the young guys foreward, minus the most knowledgeable experienced men, as well as support.... but only uf there was lots of water, no serious obstacles, and no expectation to immediately field a force if your doing a extreme march. With armor and kit, minus the mindless complications of the caterpillar effect, expecting not just to fight but win.... 20-25 miles max without a wagon train, 25-40 miles with a decent wagon train. This us assuming a calvary screen pulling 100 % of security, perfect roads, well rested troops starting off, and dry rations and plenty of water. If you gotta provide infantry security..... much less, like 15-20 max. If your shadowing a army that is moving, and look for your own food, and pray for water like Marius..... Yeah. Well..... yeah. Your splitting your forces, and hoping against hope your not dooming yourself in doing so. Marius and Sulla probably had the worst infantry job period. My ability to estimate collapses, I honestly wouldnt know. And its not from a lack of exposure to the desert on my part. Just it ceases to be a logistics issue and more strategic cunning.