06-30-2014, 05:15 PM
The subject of equating modern military systems, particularly ranks (centurion = captain/company commander and optio = NCO, for example), with Roman systems always seems to set everyone's teeth on edge. For what it's worth, here's my take:
We are constrained by whatever our current language is. We cannot always accurately translate words from one language to another, even between modern languages. As an example, there is no comparable word in English for the German word "kummerspeck." Certainly you can explain the concept of overeating due to grief or overwrought emotion in English, but we don't have a handy one-word term for it. Even more so when we are talking about languages in use 2000 years ago. With the difficulties that arise with simple translations, it is only human that we seek to explain what we can't adequately express by equating or correlating it with something that we can express. This causes us to use all sorts of neologisms, like lorica segmentata, which no one seems to mind using.
This leads us to the example of correlating centurions with company commanders or platoon leaders. Both were in charge of bodies of military personnel, both were part of an organized military rank structure as long-service professionals, etc. This is fine as far as it goes, but it does not capture the subtle differences, such as the fact that centurions could also have duties as provincial administrators.
For my part, I do not have a problem with someone referring to centurions as platoon leaders or company commanders in this informal forum, unless the reference is made to substantiate a claim regarding specific duties of a centurion. Essentially, if it helps someone keep the information straight in their head to refer to optios as NCOs that's fine, unless they then make the claim that "since optios are NCOs they would necessarily be conducting pre-combat inspections on their legionaries." Optios may very well have conducted such inspections, but that conclusion cannot be reached based solely on the fact that modern NCOs bear some resemblance to ancient Roman optios.
I think it is far more correct to use the terms that we have from the period, but for those who like to draw parallels (as long as they are supported by facts and reasonable inference) I don't really object to it. And I'm not really qualified to talk about evolution or devolution, so I'll leave those particular topics untouched.
We are constrained by whatever our current language is. We cannot always accurately translate words from one language to another, even between modern languages. As an example, there is no comparable word in English for the German word "kummerspeck." Certainly you can explain the concept of overeating due to grief or overwrought emotion in English, but we don't have a handy one-word term for it. Even more so when we are talking about languages in use 2000 years ago. With the difficulties that arise with simple translations, it is only human that we seek to explain what we can't adequately express by equating or correlating it with something that we can express. This causes us to use all sorts of neologisms, like lorica segmentata, which no one seems to mind using.
This leads us to the example of correlating centurions with company commanders or platoon leaders. Both were in charge of bodies of military personnel, both were part of an organized military rank structure as long-service professionals, etc. This is fine as far as it goes, but it does not capture the subtle differences, such as the fact that centurions could also have duties as provincial administrators.
For my part, I do not have a problem with someone referring to centurions as platoon leaders or company commanders in this informal forum, unless the reference is made to substantiate a claim regarding specific duties of a centurion. Essentially, if it helps someone keep the information straight in their head to refer to optios as NCOs that's fine, unless they then make the claim that "since optios are NCOs they would necessarily be conducting pre-combat inspections on their legionaries." Optios may very well have conducted such inspections, but that conclusion cannot be reached based solely on the fact that modern NCOs bear some resemblance to ancient Roman optios.
I think it is far more correct to use the terms that we have from the period, but for those who like to draw parallels (as long as they are supported by facts and reasonable inference) I don't really object to it. And I'm not really qualified to talk about evolution or devolution, so I'll leave those particular topics untouched.
Nate Hanawalt
"Bonum commune communitatis"
"Bonum commune communitatis"
