Centurion Rank

[Bryan]

After reading a few different translations of Caesar's Commentaries I am a little confused with the following line:

"ex primo hastato legionis XIIII", De Bello Civili 1.46

It refers to the Centurion Quintus Fulginius of Caesar's 14th Legion during the Civil War. Some of the translations have him as the senior centurion of the second line of the 14th while others as the senior centurion of the 1st maniple of the hastati of the 14th. Which is it or are they both wrong? What was this man's rank in relation to the command structure of his Legion?

Thanks,
Bryan

[Vindex]

It's Friday and I'm feeling brave...

I would say senior centurion of the hastati...suggesting, perhaps,the third maniple of the cohort.

Hopefully this will at least start the debate.

<finds a sofa to hide behind>

[D B Campbell]

I would say senior centurion of the hastati...suggesting, perhaps,the third maniple of the cohort.

I would only add that I think Caesar's use of primus here implies the First Cohort, to which Fulginius had been promoted ex inferioribus ordinibus ("from the centuries below it") -- ordo is another word for centuria. As hastatus prior (presumably), Fulginius is effectively third-highest centurion of the Fourteenth legion.

[Vindex]

Aha!

So by your translation, Duncan, we have Fulginus' seniority in the cohort but not what he commanded?

I have made the assumption that third place was necessarily third maniple. But I suppose if the Senior Centurion did not actually command a unit of men, the third in seniority could, therefore, command the second maniple or line which is in Bryan's original query.

[Domitia]

1st Maniple of the Hastati of the 14th is what translation I've gotten off a member of the group.

[D B Campbell]

Caesar's legions seem to have been organised into cohorts rather than maniples, so there wasn't a "first maniple of hastati". However, we know that the centurions retained their ancestral titles, so each cohort had two "centurions of the hastati" (although there weren't any hastati any longer), differentiated as a prior and a posterior.

I took Caesar's language here to suggest that Fulginius was the "chief" (primus = first) hastatus of the Fourteenth Legion. That means that he was hastatus prior of the First Cohort; one of the primi ordines.

Another way of interpreting it is to assume that Caesar is explicitly indicating the First Cohort by using the term primus. In this case, he is calling Fulginius the hastatus of the prima cohors (First Cohort), which must mean that he was hastatus prior.

Same difference. :wink:

[Renatus]

Another way of interpreting it is to assume that Caesar is explicitly indicating the First Cohort by using the term primus. In this case, he is calling Fulginius the hastatus of the prima cohors (First Cohort), which must mean that he was hastatus prior.

That is how I interpreted it, following M.P.Speidel, 'The Centurions' Titles', Epigr. Studien 13 (1983), 43-61. If this is correct, Caesar's description of Fulginius as 'ex primo hastato' would seem to mean 'from the hastatus of the First Cohort', where hastatus signifies the century or maniple (if we can still speak of maniples), rather than the centurion himself. This slightly puzzles me. Is this a customary way of describing a senior centurion or might it suggest that, at the time of writing, Caesar did not recall whether Fulginius was hastatus prior or hastatus posterior?

[D B Campbell]

Caesar's description of Fulginius as 'ex primo hastato' would seem to mean 'from the hastatus of the First Cohort', where hastatus signifies the century or maniple (if we can still speak of maniples), rather than the centurion himself. This slightly puzzles me.

I confess that I was concentrating on explaining the primus hastatus bit, and didn't notice Caesar's peculiar wording.

You are quite correct that "ex whatever" ought to indicate the unit that Fulginius came from, rather than his rank per se. The difficulty is that, as far as we know, by Caesar's day, maniples were out and cohorts were in. So there was no "unit" called a "hastatus". (As you probably know, each cohort had six centuries, two of which formerly made up the maniple of hastati.)

I guess this phrase serves to underline how little we know about the Caesarian army in general.

[Vindex]

I fear I may be getting into a circular argument here but if Caesar wrote "from the first hastatus" the inference is that there is a further or second hastatus. Does this not, therefore, suggest that even if we are talking about cohorts and not maniples as a unit "each cohort had six centuries, two of which formerly made up the maniple of hastati", Caesar's reference is still to a sub formation within the cohort known to him as a hastatus. (Albeit a possibly inherited term from a previous army formation)

So Fulginus was a centurion within the first hastatus...whatever that was... making him one of the two senior centurions of the First Cohort (and not the third as I stated earlier!!)

Yes?

[D B Campbell]

... Caesar's reference is still to a sub formation within the cohort known to him as a hastatus.

It's entirely possible that Caesar thought of the two rear centuries of the cohort as "the hastatus". I don't have a Commentary to hand, so I don't know if anyone has suggested this. He certainly doesn't (afaik) use the term ever again, which makes it difficult to decipher.

So Fulginus was a centurion within the first hastatus...whatever that was... making him one of the two senior centurions of the First Cohort (and not the third as I stated earlier!!)

I see what you're thinking.

But, by the time we get some firm evidence for the ranking of centurions within a cohort, either the pili and principes all "outrank" the hastati (in which case, Fulginius would be last or second-last in the cohort), or the three priores outrank the posteriores (in which case, Fulginius, as the third of the priores, would be third-highest in the cohort).

In none of these scenarios is he the second in seniority. But -- as I said -- we don't really know if that was the case in Caesar's army.

[Mark Hygate]

Oh, I'm being brave.....

Extrapolating an evolution (if that's even legal around here?) from the classic Polybian organisation where the maniple commanders are picked first into the Cohort-based larger legion around Marius and thence to Caesar....

The lines of seniority from the old consular days would imply that Pilus (Triarii) was senior to Principes and then to Hastati, with each maniple being formed of a Prior and Posterior century, which seems a given....

Then there is an argument of whether this particular officer is the 3rd or 5th in seniority.

Given the apparent rank structure of the later Imperial First Cohort (my quick reference was to Connolly to check), then I'd go with 3rd. This would be consistent with the Polybian order of selection and you know how hidebound those/us military types are!

[Bryan]

So the general concensus is that Fulginius was the senior of the two Hastatus Centurions in the 1st cohort of the 14th Legion but deciding whether that meant 3rd most senior versus 5th is still debatable, correct?

What are the feelings that maniples still existed as an administrative unit whereby the two centuries of the pili, principes, and hastati were each effectively autonomous within a cohort with the senior centurion of each maniple commanding the whole with the other centurion assisting him? Similar to the Polybian description except one more command structure (the cohort) was added to make recruitment, detailing subunits, transmitting orders in battle, etc. easier.

[Renatus]

Then there is an argument of whether this particular officer is the 3rd or 5th in seniority.

Given the apparent rank structure of the later Imperial First Cohort (my quick reference was to Connolly to check), then I'd go with 3rd. This would be consistent with the Polybian order of selection and you know how hidebound those/us military types are!

Michael Speidel, in the article that I cited, ranks centurions in the following order: pilus prior, princeps prior, hastatus prior, pilus posterior, princeps posterior, hastatus posterior.

[D B Campbell]

Speidel ... ranks centurions in the following order: pilus prior, princeps prior, hastatus prior, pilus posterior, princeps posterior, hastatus posterior.

I forgot about ILS 2446 (CIL 8, 18072):
[attachment=2728]ILS2446.jpg[/attachment]
[Ta]bularium princi[pis cum im]ag(inibus) | d[om]us divinae option[es coh(ortis) pri]mae | de suo feceru[nt] | Q(uintus) [Semp]ronius Felix p(rimi) p(ili) P(ublius) Aeli[us Macrinus] princ(ipis) | L(ucius) [Vale]rius Ianuarius has(tati) C(aius) Iu[l(ius) Longinian(us) p]r(incipis) pos(terioris) | C(aius) [Ant]onius Silvanus has(tati) pos(terioris) ...

This (fragmentary) inscription, set up by the optiones of the primi ordines of the Third Augusta legion at Lambaesis around AD 250 shows that the third in seniority (L. Valerius Ianuarius' centurion) was simply known as the hastatus (not hastatus prior).

[Macedon]

I wish I knew Latin... anyways, maybe these extracts from Caesar's work can be used as further food for thought?

"Hoc casu aquila conservatur omnibus primae cohortis centurionibus interfectis praeter principem priorem." De Bello Civili 3.64

"Quos ille postea magno in honore habuit; centuriones in priores ordines, equites Romanos in tribunicium restituit honorem." De Bello Civili 1.77

"Deinde reliquae legiones cum tribunis militum et primorum ordinum centurionibus egerunt uti Caesari satis facerent" De Bello Gallico 1.41

"Lucius Aurunculeius compluresque tribuni militum et primorum ordinum centuriones nihil temere agendum neque ex hibernis iniussu Caesaris discedendum existimabant:" De Bello Gallico 5.28

"Sabinus quos in praesentia tribunos militum circum se habebat et primorum ordinum centuriones se sequi iubet et" DBG 5.37

"Erant in ea legione fortissimi viri, centuriones, qui primis ordinibus appropinquarent, Titus Pullo et Lucius Vorenus." DBG, 5.44

"Ex eis centurio legionis xiv 'pro tuo' inquit 'summo beneficio Scipio, tibi gratias ago" De Bello Africo, ch.45

I just singled out certain quotes that included words I thought were interesting. As for the word "ordo", in Byzantine works, as an "ordinos" we can often see it mean "rank". I give here two examples :

(Anonyma Tactica Byzantina, Sylloge tacticorum, ch.32, p.1 l.3 “εἶχε δὲ ὀρδίνους τὸ τάγμα δεκαέξ• ὁ δὲ ὄρδινος ἐξ ἀνδρῶν ἦν διακοσίων πεντηκονταέξ.“

- each tagma had 16 ranks, each rank 256 men -

Nicephorus Uranus Tact., Rhet. et Hagiogr., Tactica (capita 56–65), ch.56, p.5, l.5 “ἐχέτω δὲ μία ἑκάστη ἑπτὰ ὀρδίνους εἰς μῆκος ἀπὸ ἑκατὸν ἀνδρῶν.”)

- Each one had seven ranks, 100 men in length -

I have, nevertheless also encountered it as "file" too, although I would call this an exception :

Nicephorus Uranus Tact,. Rhet. et Hagiogr., Tactica (capita 56-65), ch.56, p.10, l.1 “τότε δὲ ἁρμόζει μίσγειν καὶ τοὺς δύο ὀρδίνους τῶν πεζῶν καὶ ποιεῖν αὐτοὺς ἕνα, οἷον εἷς ὄρδινος ἵνα ἐμβῇ εἰς τὸν ἄλλον καὶ οἱ ἑπτὰ ἄνδρες ἵνα γένωνται δεκατέσσαρες”

- then it is proper to bring the two files of the infantry together and make one out of them, so that one file marches into the other and the 7 men become 14. -

I can see from the Latin quotes above that the "ordinus" was a very important word in Roman military nomenclature and with regard to the office of the cenurion. What does it exactly mean? Can it be a centuria as Duncan has suggested? A whole line? A rank? Would a centuria fight in single rank (with the other centurias of a cohort arrayed behind it), so that it would be synonymous to "rank"? What are your thoughts guys?