Late Roman ranks

[D B Campbell]

Dionysius of Hallicarnasus, Philo Judaeus, Lucianus, Josephus, Onasander, Themistius, Libanius etc also mention the lochagoi closely linked with the taxiarchs when writing about the Roman army ...

Really? Perhaps you could cite some passages? In my experience, Josephus calls a centurion a ἑκατοντάρχης (hekatontarchês; e.g. BJud. 6.81, one of my favourite centurions) -- this is logical, as he knows that a centurion is the leader of a centuria, which -- etymologically, if perhaps not in practice -- is a unit of 100 men. Also, in my experience, Onasander is far more vague, and talks about his General delegating authority to ἡγεμόνες (hêgemones, "leaders"; eg. Strat. 25). Does he mention centurions?

[Macedon]

I did not mean that these writers equate the office of the lochagoi to that of the centurions, I just meant that their mentioning them often means that there was an office (most possibly lower in rank than that of a centurion) which was deemed very significant, while we nowadays usually think of the centurion as the lowest rank of importance. This is the office I am looking for. Appian also differentiates between the lochagoi and the taxiarxchoi after all.

[D B Campbell]

I just meant that their mentioning them often means that there was an office (most possibly lower in rank than that of a centurion) which was deemed very significant

Apologies, George. However, I cannot remember ever seeing the lochagos mentioned by Josephus or Onasander. I would be interested in knowing the relevant passages.

Appian also differentiates between the lochagoi and the taxiarxchoi after all.

Appian's usage struck me as rather odd, as -- at first sight -- he may actually mean the centurions (which I don't think is the case with the other writers). I would be interested in investigating this further.

[Macedon]

Of course Duncan, here you are :

"λοχαγοῖς καὶ ταξιάρχοις", Flavius Josephus Hist., De bello Judaico libri vii. Book 3 section 83 line 2.

"λοχαγοὺς δὲ καθιστάτω καὶ ταξιάρχους καὶ χιλιάρχους, καὶ εἴ τινων ἄλλων ἡγεμόνων προσδεῖν αὐτῷ δόξαι", Onasander Tact., Strategicus. Chapter 2 section 3 line 1.

"καὶ λοχαγῶν καὶ ταξιαρχῶν πλῆθος.", Onasander Tact., Strategicus. Chapter 2 section 4 line 4.

"πεντηκονταρχίαι, ἑκατονταρχίαι, λοχαγίαι, τάξεων ἀφηγήσεις, καὶ αἱ ἄλλαι αἱ κατὰ νόμους παρ’ ἑκάστοις ἡγεμονίαι", Onasander Tact., Strategicus. Chapter 34 section 2 line 5.

I found one more instance of "lochagos" in Josephus but he was clearly talking about the army of Archelaus. I haven't diligently checked the context of the rest of the quotes, I think they are all about the Roman army. The thing with Appian and others is that this lochagos office is not really defined... They all the time write about "the taxiarchoi and the lochagoi" and then for some reason they write something that mixes things up, like these salary lists (and there are more I found with the centurions omitted and the lochagoi mentioned). Taking into account that all manuals define them as file-leaders, makes me all the more certain that the centurions of any name can also be called thus because they fought in the first rank. Yet, of course the average lochagos would be an officer of lesser rank. The more I look into it, the more I tend to side with this explanation.

[D B Campbell]

Of course Duncan, here you are

Many thanks, George.

"λοχαγοῖς καὶ ταξιάρχοις", Flavius Josephus Hist., De bello Judaico libri vii. Book 3 section 83 line 2.

I am surprised to see the word lochagos here. It must be the only time that Josephus uses it in BJud. It's probably worth noting -- for the purposes of this thread -- that it cannot mean centurion, as Josephus uses a different word for that officer. (The context is a vague picture of Roman justice being dispensed by these officers in the centre of the camp.) If you read on to BJud. III.87, you'll see the usual hierarchy of ἑκατοντάρχαι (hekatontarchai = centurions), χιλίαρχοι (chiliarchoi = tribunes), and ἡγεμών (hêgemôn = army commander). But -- there is never an easy solution -- Josephus throws in ταξίαρχοι for good measure (perhaps as a word to encompass the previously mentioned centurions and tribunes, or perhaps as the next officer in line, which would be the individual legionary legates).

"λοχαγοὺς δὲ καθιστάτω καὶ ταξιάρχους καὶ χιλιάρχους, καὶ εἴ τινων ἄλλων ἡγεμόνων προσδεῖν αὐτῷ δόξαι", Onasander Tact., Strategicus. Chapter 2 section 3 line 1. Cf. Chapter 2 section 4 line 4; Chapter 34 section 2 line 5.

"[The General] must appoint as lochagoi and taxiarchoi and chiliarchoi and other hêgemones, if it seems necessary, ..." He then goes on to say that it's harder to choose the lochagoi and taxiarchoi than it is to choose the stratêgoi, because there are many of the former, but few of the latter. (Where did the stratêgoi suddenly come from? And why have the chiliarchoi disappeared?!)

I know it probably sounds as if I'm picking and choosing to suit myself, but the Onasander examples don't sound (to me) as if he knows what he's talking about! It sounds more like he's selecting various words for stylistic variation. I had higher hopes of Josephus, but the above example has disappointed me. What do other people think?