Roman Officers

[Taelactin]

Just trying to understand how the Roman Ranking works... 'cuz I'm getting a lotta contrasting views from different places... But here are my questions ordered out:

 

1) What's the difference between a Decurion and a Decanus? They seem to both be in charge of a Contubernium... but are they a member of the ten party group...?

 

2) Does the contubernium consist of ten or EIGHT legionnaires? I know this differs because then a century (consisting of 10 contubernium) would be either 100 legionnaires... or 80... so which on is it?

 

3) Miles Gregarius = Legionnaire... yes?

 

4) Does a legion NEVER gain new recruits? I read somewhere that the legion's size would keep shrinking and would never generally be the full 6000... which is why Julius Caeser's legions were generally in the 3000's... etc. Does a legion's size just keep shrinking until there's nobody left???

 

5) I have heard that centurions are given rank by the cohort that they are in... so basically first cohort first century is the primus pilus... and the last rank would be the Decimus Hastatus Posterior of the 10th cohort 6th century... but what confuses me is that the cohorts are all mixed up, so... as I read from unrv.com (this is just an example of what confuses me):

 

the 4th cohort would have the weakest units,

the 10th cohort would have "the good troops"

 

So now, does that mean the centurion of the WORST ranks would be leading 'the good troops' and the 4th cohort... containing WEAK troops would be lead with centurions of decent ranking??? I don't get it... but is that how it seriously worked?

 

Thanks for the help!

[Primus Pilus]

1) What's the difference between a Decurion and a Decanus? They seem to both be in charge of a Contubernium... but are they a member of the ten party group...?

 

Decanus was indeed the head of a tent group. Considering that this was an 8 man group his command rank was obviously quite low.

 

Decurion was the cavalry equivelant of Centurion. Although he only commanded a 32 man turmae, as opposed to a full century, rank structure appears to be equivelant.

 

2) Does the contubernium consist of ten or EIGHT legionnaires? I know this differs because then a century (consisting of 10 contubernium) would be either 100 legionnaires... or 80... so which on is it?

 

 

A full century appears to have actually been 80 men, not 100. However, this is purely theory. Actual numbers seem to have fluctuated anywhere between 30 and 200 men. However, 80 men per normal century is generally accepted among military scholars. If you use 80, your book won't be beaten up as inaccurate.

 

3) Miles Gregarius = Legionnaire... yes?

 

 

Yes

 

4) Does a legion NEVER gain new recruits? I read somewhere that the legion's size would keep shrinking and would never generally be the full 6000... which is why Julius Caeser's legions were generally in the 3000's... etc. Does a legion's size just keep shrinking until there's nobody left???

 

 

Republican legions were never intended to be continual standing armies, even after the Marian reforms and during the imperatorial period. They were generally not reinforced and would continue to shrink until retirement, when the entire force would be retired at the same time. This made it far easier in the Republican era to properly track length of service, etc. When more men were needed, rather than reinforce the old, standard practice was to recruit new legions.

 

In the imperial era, when the legions remained as standing armies, they were regularly reinforced to keep them at least close to optimum strength.

 

5) I have heard that centurions are given rank by the cohort that they are in... so basically first cohort first century is the primus pilus... and the last rank would be the Decimus Hastatus Posterior of the 10th cohort 6th century... but what confuses me is that the cohorts are all mixed up, so... as I read from unrv.com (this is just an example of what confuses me):

 

 

Don't confuse the ability of the soldiers with the ability of the officers. On the field of battle cohorts were just arranged in such a manner so veterans compliment raw recruits, etc. The ability of the legionaries did not represent the rank of the commander (with the exception of the first cohort). Consider it this way... should the weakest troops also have the weakest commander? That might help clear it up.

 

Good luck with your writing!

[Taelactin]

Thanks a lot for the quick reply! Been searching forever on the internet for answers to these questions-- Guess I should have came here first!

 

-Taelactin

[longbow]

A full century appears to have actually been 80 men, not 100

 

I thought there was 100 men in each Century but only 80 were fighting troops,the others were Roman citizens(not slaves)who received the same pay but only a small proportion of the Loot, Some of them were horseback messengers, cooks or clerks and usually they did not fight.I think this is correct but i cant remember where i got it from

L

[Incitatus]

These citizens that longbow talks about are called ' IMMUNES'.

 

Hope this helps!

[Legate of XVPrimigenia]

2) Does the contubernium consist of ten or EIGHT legionnaires? I know this differs because then a century (consisting of 10 contubernium) would be either 100 legionnaires... or 80... so which on is it?

2) Does the contubernium consist of ten or EIGHT legionnaires? I know this differs because then a century (consisting of 10 contubernium) would be either 100 legionnaires... or 80... so which on is it?

 

You must never forget the officers, they add up a fair few of the leigion