Posts: 21
Threads: 6
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation:
0
My students and I are wondering why an 80-man unit was called a century - a term usually associated with 100. Were they including officers, etc.? Thank you for helping to answer our question.
Ygraine
Victoria
I love the name of honor more than I fear death. Julius Caesar
Posts: 4,318
Threads: 127
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
6
The smallest group of the legion was the conterbinium (don't know if I write it correct) wich was a tent group of 8 men. 10 of these groups are one century. (at least from Marius' reform onwards)
Posts: 21
Threads: 6
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation:
0
Thank you very much!! Mystery solved! Ygraine
Quote:The smallest group of the legion was the conterbinium (don't know if I write it correct) wich was a tent group of 8 men. 10 of these groups are one century. (at least from Marian reform onwards)
Victoria
I love the name of honor more than I fear death. Julius Caesar
Posts: 28
Threads: 4
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation:
0
Don't forget the "calones" : 80 "miles"+ 20 "calones" = 100 men !
Posts: 4,318
Threads: 127
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
6
Where did you find that a century had exactly 20 calones?
Posts: 21
Threads: 6
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation:
0
Please pardon my ignorance. What is a calone?
Quote:Where did you find that a century had exactly 20 calones?
Victoria
I love the name of honor more than I fear death. Julius Caesar
Posts: 8,090
Threads: 505
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
I think it's a bit more complex than that. IIRC, the early Roman army under the kings had units of 100 men known as centuries (original Roman phalanx was one classis of 40 centuries = 4000 men). I might be mistaken, but I think it's more a traditional name?
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Posts: 3,607
Threads: 226
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
5
Yes, Jim, I think this is exactly the case.
Christian K.
No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.
Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Posts: 21
Threads: 6
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation:
0
Thanks to all of you for your answers. Perhaps there are elements of all of the replies that are true? Things could have evolved after the original terminology was in use.
Ygraine
Victoria
I love the name of honor more than I fear death. Julius Caesar
Posts: 8,090
Threads: 505
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
Quote:Things could have evolved after the original terminology was in use.
They seem to have, by the looks of things anyway.
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Posts: 329
Threads: 22
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation:
2
Quote:I think it's a bit more complex than that. IIRC, the early Roman army under the kings had units of 100 men known as centuries (original Roman phalanx was one classis of 40 centuries = 4000 men). I might be mistaken, but I think it's more a traditional name?
The original, 'hoplite', version of the Roman army was probably based on the antique variants of the hoplite phalanx. In these, 48 men (either 6 ranks of 8 or 8 ranks of 6 men - I can't remember which!) and two officers made up a formation known as the
'antique lochos'. Two of these made up a century.
Over time, proportions and numbers changed until we have the 60-80 man century of later times.
This is all from memory, so I could be mistaken!! :lol:
Quote:
Don't forget the "calones" : 80 "miles"+ 20 "calones" = 100 men !
I've never heard of this before and am very intrigued!! What are your sources for the 'calones' and their inclusion in the 'century'?
Ian (Sonic) Hughes
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides, Peloponnesian War
"I have just jazzed mine up a little" - Spike Milligan, World War II
Posts: 122
Threads: 15
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
I too read that in earlier times a century was about 100 men. Later on this was reduced (I thought about 60 men) until it finally was common to have 80 men in a century.
So that's pretty much what Sonic thought
Patrick Van Calck