Talk:Decumanus Maximus

Urban studies and planning Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Fortifications / Roman & Byzantine / Classical

This redirect is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Fortifications task force
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

The article now says, "this name comes from the fact that the via decumana or decimana (the tenth) separated the Tenth Cohort from the Ninth in the legionary encampment, in the same way as the via quintana separated the Fifth Cohort from the Sixth."

But that's not "the same way." In the first instance, the boundary is described as preceding the namesake unit (before the Tenth); in the second instance it is described as succeeding (after the Fifth).

I suspect that the truth is that the decumana separates the Tenth from the Eleventh, so that the whole falls into equal sectors of five. As presently written, there would be a sector of five (First through Fifth), then a sector of four (Sixth through Ninth).

But that is only my supposition. Possibly the correction goes the other way, or possibly the system really doesn't make sense, but it bears explaining. Spark240 (talk) 16:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Decumanus Maximus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140311193058/http://www.fondazionegbvico.org/ita/pagina.asp?cod=13&area=2&cat=9 to http://www.fondazionegbvico.org/ita/pagina.asp?cod=13&area=2&cat=9

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic