10-10-2013, 10:47 AM
Macedon wrote:
So, according to you guys, is an ordinos only some kind of unit (a centuria or a cohort) and certainly not (maybe also) a more generic term for line or rank? IF my Latin quotes were from Byzantine texts in Greek, I would translate them as "centurions of the first line (or rank of the line)" rather than centurions of the first centuria or cohort.
I also would support an ordo as relating to ranks, or lines of men, and not to a century or cohort. In order to better understand the centurion, I’ve compared the centurion command structure in the legion from the Servian army to the legion of Vegetius I have been painstakingly researching for what seems most of my life. In the Servian army, a centurion commanded a century, which would better be described as a voting century, which is based on property class and age division, and modelled on the Century Assembly. Because of this, I believe the centurions are selected from Class I. I’ve based this on the classis outnumbering the infra classem in the legion by 2:1. The maniple legion introduced a more democratic legion, which is based on the Tribal Assembly, and power rested with Class II, a point Cicero mentions. The number of classis to infra classem in the maniple legion is 1:1. However, as Polybius tells us the centurions were chosen from only three of the four classes that define the maniple legion, a centurion can no longer command a voting century, but a centurion now commands ordines, or ranks of men.
Livy’s (42 34 5) account of the promotion of Spurius Ligustinus, being promoted from the tenth ‘ordo’ of the hastati to the first century of the hastati (primum hastatum prioris centuriae), then first leader of the principes prior centuries (primus princeps prioris centuriae) to the position of first centurion (primus pilus) of the triarii,” relates to the voting century structure, and not to the structure a centurion commanded in the legion. What I am trying to say, is the voting century structure is engaged when promoting a centurion.
It looks like in 102 BC, a year infamous in the Pythagorean system the Romans adhere to, the property class for entry into the legion is abolished. Therefore, there is no voting century (century assembly or tribal assembly) present in the organisation of the Roman legion. It seems the term century now only applies to the number of men a centurion commanded, which is still determined by rank.
Steven
So, according to you guys, is an ordinos only some kind of unit (a centuria or a cohort) and certainly not (maybe also) a more generic term for line or rank? IF my Latin quotes were from Byzantine texts in Greek, I would translate them as "centurions of the first line (or rank of the line)" rather than centurions of the first centuria or cohort.
I also would support an ordo as relating to ranks, or lines of men, and not to a century or cohort. In order to better understand the centurion, I’ve compared the centurion command structure in the legion from the Servian army to the legion of Vegetius I have been painstakingly researching for what seems most of my life. In the Servian army, a centurion commanded a century, which would better be described as a voting century, which is based on property class and age division, and modelled on the Century Assembly. Because of this, I believe the centurions are selected from Class I. I’ve based this on the classis outnumbering the infra classem in the legion by 2:1. The maniple legion introduced a more democratic legion, which is based on the Tribal Assembly, and power rested with Class II, a point Cicero mentions. The number of classis to infra classem in the maniple legion is 1:1. However, as Polybius tells us the centurions were chosen from only three of the four classes that define the maniple legion, a centurion can no longer command a voting century, but a centurion now commands ordines, or ranks of men.
Livy’s (42 34 5) account of the promotion of Spurius Ligustinus, being promoted from the tenth ‘ordo’ of the hastati to the first century of the hastati (primum hastatum prioris centuriae), then first leader of the principes prior centuries (primus princeps prioris centuriae) to the position of first centurion (primus pilus) of the triarii,” relates to the voting century structure, and not to the structure a centurion commanded in the legion. What I am trying to say, is the voting century structure is engaged when promoting a centurion.
It looks like in 102 BC, a year infamous in the Pythagorean system the Romans adhere to, the property class for entry into the legion is abolished. Therefore, there is no voting century (century assembly or tribal assembly) present in the organisation of the Roman legion. It seems the term century now only applies to the number of men a centurion commanded, which is still determined by rank.
Steven
