04-24-2019, 02:01 PM
Mark wrote:
I would certainly suggest that men who have fought under a centurion (whether elected or selected; and under the earlier pre-professional system) who has then returned to his farm nearby; would naturally seek them out to discuss issues and perhaps seek their help in addressing them. That subsequent representation could well lead to more influence in local politics is then quite reasonable.
Seems quite reasonable, especially if the centurions were equally selected from the tribes being levied. So if four legions are levied, requiring 240 centurions, and 24 tribes were selected for the levy, each tribe contributed 10 experienced centurions. A centurions standing in the tribe would permit him as you say "more influence in local politics."
Mark wrote:
Lastly, the concept of 3 cavalry turma/troops (on the assumption that one man in 3 holds the others horses and they are not abandoned) dismounting 60 men who then form a 'fighting century' similar to hastati/principes or even a whole triarii maniple...
If the Romans considered 60 men as making a century for the hastati and princeps, as opposed to a 100 men making a century, could it be the Romans might consider a cavalry century to be even smaller than an infantry century? Therefore, in the Roman military, when is a century a century?
I would certainly suggest that men who have fought under a centurion (whether elected or selected; and under the earlier pre-professional system) who has then returned to his farm nearby; would naturally seek them out to discuss issues and perhaps seek their help in addressing them. That subsequent representation could well lead to more influence in local politics is then quite reasonable.
Seems quite reasonable, especially if the centurions were equally selected from the tribes being levied. So if four legions are levied, requiring 240 centurions, and 24 tribes were selected for the levy, each tribe contributed 10 experienced centurions. A centurions standing in the tribe would permit him as you say "more influence in local politics."
Mark wrote:
Lastly, the concept of 3 cavalry turma/troops (on the assumption that one man in 3 holds the others horses and they are not abandoned) dismounting 60 men who then form a 'fighting century' similar to hastati/principes or even a whole triarii maniple...
If the Romans considered 60 men as making a century for the hastati and princeps, as opposed to a 100 men making a century, could it be the Romans might consider a cavalry century to be even smaller than an infantry century? Therefore, in the Roman military, when is a century a century?
