Ad Triarios Redisse - Source

[rocktupac]

I'm looking for the source of the phrase ad triarios redisse. Once again, I've found a bunch of articles online that use this phrase when referring to the Roman maniple style of fighting, and the soldiers having to defer to using the triarii in battle as a last ditch effort, but the source this comes from is not listed.

Supposedly it was a pretty common saying among the Romans. I was wondering if anyone knows where this comes from?

[Xenophon]

Not sure why you are posing a question about the ROMAN army on a forum dedicated to the study of Alexander and Macedon, hence some hesitation in answering, especially as a GOOGLE search would have given you the answer in seconds.

The correct latin phrase is "inde rem ad triarios redisse"/to have come to the triarii, and it is a small digression explaining the origin of this phrase as a Roman adage. It is found in Livy's explanation of the Roman Army of 340 B.C., [Livy VIII.8.11] a very well known but oft misinterpreted passage of Livy.................

[amyntoros]

Not sure why you are posing a question about the ROMAN army on a forum dedicated to the study of Alexander and Macedon, hence some hesitation in answering, especially as a GOOGLE search would have given you the answer in seconds.

That's the thing about having an Off Topic Forum, Xenophon - it's okay to diversify. Actually, I've always been impressed by our members' use of this sub-forum. Even when going off-topic they keep the threads within certain parameters. i.e., ancient times. Realistically, "off-topic" could mean anything goes. We could be talking about something such as "guilty pleasures in the movies" and there would be no reason for a moderator to intervene. Starship Troopers anyone?

Best Regards,

[agesilaos]

Naff sci-fi but high production values; Xenophon, one should never admonish people's Ltin or greek without a firm grasp of the language and even then some encouragement would serve better than the contempt I read here. Since you clearly are to fully Latinate I will follow my principals and not bash you And I do have to admit I have not come accross the phrase in anything other than constructted texts, but the phrase was correctly queried, 'ad triarios redisse' is the phrase Livy means, 'inde rem' can be understood in Latin, ie it need not be said, it is an embellishment meaning 'in the end the matter' what matters is that 'it had come down to the triarii', ...

Why do you say it is 'oft-misinterpreted'?

[Xenophon]

The movie version ( and its sequels) were an absolute travesty of Heinlein's original classic novel. Doubtless the Director was faced with the problem of 'updating' a fifties piece, but in my view missed the mark completely. If Verhoeven intended it as satire, then it's all too obvious clumsy attempts at lampooning fall flat, especially compared to Heinlein's more subtle satire in the original novel.

I'd agree with you that full discussion of the nuances of Latin or Greek are best left to linguists, but you have misinterpreted what I was trying to say - there was no 'contempt' intended and I find it hard to see how you could construe what I wrote in such a way.Nor was I 'admonishing' anyone's use of Latin. Rather, I was referring to 'correct latin phrase' in the sense of the correct quotation - the first two words of the adage as explicitly referred to by Livy were missing.[ see reference I gave]

The passage refers to the structure of the Roman Army circa 340 BC, and I say 'oft misinterpreted' because few appreciate that this was a 'one-off' army, and that Livy is describing a trick by which the Romans supposedly gained the advantage over their identically organised Latin foes. The standard Roman army of this period was organised in 'triplex acies', just as Livy describes. Theories that 'rorarii' and 'accensi' represented fourth and fifth lines, or that they were light troops are false, as a careful reading of Livy reveals, but modern interpreters are sometimes led astray by strained etymologies. 'Rorarii' were in fact the younger men of the third line ( and hence heavy infantry), whilst 'accensi' were camp-servants and attendants tricked out as heavy infantry so as to fool the Latins into thinking the Romans had a 'fourth line' reserve. The trick was apparently only used at this battle, but much about Livy's account seems apochryphal.

[agesilaos]

Sorry, obviously misinterpreted your tone; blame a long day's train journey. However, the Latin (VIII 8 xi) is

11] si apud principes quoque haud satis prospere esset pugnatum, gradun a prima acie ad triarios sensim referebant. inde rem ad triarios redisse, cum laboratur, proverbio increbruit.

Which translates as 'If the fight has not been sucessful enough among the principes either, they gradually fall back from the front rank through the triarii. Hence, the proverbial, 'ad triarios redisse' (to come down to the triarii) when things proceed with difficulty.'

Thus, the proverbial phrase is 'ad triarios redisse' - inde is a conjunction (litterally 'thence' but in English we would say 'hence') and the 'rem' looks forward to 'cum laboratur' rather than being part of the proverbial phrase.

I agree on the value of Livy's testimony and see what you mean by the 'misinterpreted' now.

[rocktupac]

Not sure why you are posing a question about the ROMAN army on a forum dedicated to the study of Alexander and Macedon, hence some hesitation in answering, especially as a GOOGLE search would have given you the answer in seconds.

I attempted a Google search and found nothing. Did I check the entire internet before posting here? No. But I guess I thought I could rely on the kindness of others.

And as Amyntoros said, this is an off-topic forum. I didn't realize you were so sensitive about the subject matter.

Thank you for those that helped.

[Xenophon]

By my first sentence that you have quoted, I was simply pointing to the quirkiness of posting such a query on a site about Alexander........one might have expected that the obvious place to go would be one or more of the Roman Army forums ( such as RAT). But I guess you probably did.

I don't have any 'sensitivity' about any subject, and am a great believer in sharing knowledge, something now made infinitely easier by the internet.

Certainly if I had some specialist question on the subject of, say, Norman Castles, it would not have occurred to me previously to post the question here, off-topic or not...

But in future, I will take a leaf from your book, and appreciate that just because a forum is limited to one subject, doesn't mean that its members might not have specialist knowledge about others.......