Talk:Centurion

message: In this article the modern equivalents for the centurian are given as between lieutenants and lieutenant colonels. I do not believe this is correct. According to a book called Historical atlas of Ancient Rome by Nick Constable, the centurians came up through the ranks, half of them being elected and the other half being appointed. This article agrees that they came from the ranks. This would make them more like modern NCO's (Non-commissioned officers). They appear then to be equivalent to the ranks of Sergeant First Class to Command Sergeant Major in the modern US Army.
--Rjbahler 19:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern rank equivalent

message: Tales of pre-Marian battles cantain references to "centurions". However, these accounts were written long after the old-style armies had ceased to exist (in Livy's accounts, for instance). So did Centurions exist formally before the reforms of Marius, or were they a later development?
S.agrippa 17:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "After Marius"

message: I'd like to see a source on this, as the only reference to this nickname for any Centurion is a fictional account in the novel I, Claudius of a Centurion during the reign of Tiberius. I've not seen any reference to this man in Suetonius at least...
Tacitus mentions him --MJKent 02:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Give me another"

message: The centuria article gives some explanation as to why a centurion did not command a hundred men as one would expect and indeed a lot of people believe. So shouldn't this be explained here? I know too little about it to do it myself. DirkvdM 13:36, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Not 100

message: the crest of his helmet was turned perpendicular to the front I take it that this means that the crest was parallel to the nose, or orthogonal to an imaginary line running from one ear to the other. This also fits the image. However, the German entry has it that the crest is orthogonal to the alignment described here -- which version is correct? Best, Peter 85.74.150.111 10:48, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Last night I saw the first episode of Rome (TV series), in which what I believe was a centurion had his helmet crest 'sideways' (there must be a better word for this). And I get the impression that in this series they try to get that sort of thing right - showing the Rome we haven't seen before in films. But still, a tv series is not quite a reliable source. DirkvdM 06:48, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't think it really serves any purpose, honestly.--MJKent 02:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Helmet crest

message: The "Modern reenactment" picture seems much more historically accurate then the other picture so I putting above it.--Scott3 17:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rearanging pictures 

message: Probably not necessary to list the individual passages where a centurion is mentioned in the NT – they are very easy to find using a concordance. DFH 13:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centurions in the Bible 

message: I added the Unreferenced template as this article gives no references at all. SaintedLegion 10:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced 

message: ----
Numquam audivi id permittere centurionibus habere equum in itinere. Putavi centuriones ambulare cum militibus. Fortisan non est ita, non cupivi mutare id metuens hoc, sole in animo habui demonstrare vobis qui scribitis.
(just in case any ancient Romans happen to be browsing the page, I like to make them feel more at home)
I've never heard of this (at least among the minor centurions). I didn't want to change it fearing my notable ability to get things wrong but I thought you might want to check your sources on that one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.154.30.104 (talk) 01:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centurions on horse back? 

message: I'm a bit confused about promotions among Centurions.  I understand within a cohort.  One would start out as rear triarii and gradually work his way up to forward hastati, but what about within the Legion itself?  Does the forward hastati of cohort 10 get promoted to rear triarii of cohort 9, or to forward hastati of cohort 9, or was there no promotion between cohorts 2-10, and the next position up would be rear triarii of the first cohort?  In other words, were cohorts 2-10 ranked in seniority between each other, or were they equal? Nik42 22:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotions 

message: Maybe I just missed it, but an interesting addition to this article would be a breakdown of the role of the centurion by era (i.e. Republic, Early Empire, Late Antiquity, Byzantine/Eastern Roman). If someone has information on this, could you add it, or let me know where to find it so I can add it? Hiberniantears 16:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Centurions through the ages

message: This section conflicts with other articles on Wikipedia that state that Hastati were the least experienced soldiers, not the most. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Phbbt107 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe this is correct.  However, while the Hastati were the least experienced soldiers (during the early Republic), they were in the front rank when the legion was drawn up for battle, so I can see how the term might have changed over time. Unhelpfully, I have no references with me at the moment. Anklefear 20:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seniority 

message: Pilus is not the same word as "pilum," which is the latin for the heavy javelin employed by the legionaries.  Pilus translates as "file," as in Soldiers in "rank and file."  Thus, primus pilus means first FILE and not first SPEAR or javelin.
The centurio primus pilus formed ranks at the extreme right of the legio, in it's first FILE, and his title derives from his place in the formation -- the place of highest honor.
No, it doesn´t. Pilus has nothing to do with file. The three ranks was originally Hastati (lowest), Principes and Triarii. Triarii then was changed to Pilus (which actually does have a common origin with pilum = heavy javelin). The most senior or highest ranked centurion was the one commanding the foremost "pilum" centuria (there was also a second pilum centuria) of the first cohort.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 44 Echo (talk • contribs) 22:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primus Pilus 

message: In the intro to this article, it states although by the Imperial period, the establishment of a century in a first cohort — but not others — had grown to 160 men.  but later it states that The very best centurions were then promoted to become centurions in the First Cohort, called Primi Ordines, commanding one of the five centuries of 120 men and also taking on a staff role. So, which is it?  Were the centuries of the first cohort 120 men or 160 men? Nik42 18:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency 

message: move to Centurion. -Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Which are the well known ones on the list on the dab page? Snowman (talk) 12:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: "The precedence during the times of manipular legion commanded sixty men and were organized like this:
Hastati: Ten junior and Ten senior.
Principes: Ten junior and Ten senior.
Triarii: Five junior and Five senior."
::Unless my brains have totally addled from lack of sleep, (10+10)+(10+10)+(5+5)≠60. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 02:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The math is a bit unclear in many ways 

message: The article on Optio states that they were the most likely to be promoted to Centurion on the event of the Centurion's death.  This implies that either you needed all the qualifications for a Centurion to become an Optio... or that a battlefield promotion ignored the requirements.  Can someone with knowledge on this one clarify?  Dean (talk) 14:35, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qualifications for becoming a centurion 

message: I dislike the photo of the reenactor because he lacks a vitis- a centurion's staff and a symbol of authority. I advocate using http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/Centurio_70_aC.jpg instead.Mmuroya (talk) 21:09, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: I believe it is confusing to put fictional centurions in the same list as real centurions. Should there be a seperate list if fictional centurions are going to be included?--RoflAuk (talk) 13:15, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I put Rory in as a separate section, because it seems that the ongoing urge to add Rory means either constantly reverting people, or semi-protecting the article. I'm not comfortable with him being grouped with the genuine centurions, though, as he's not one. :) But if there is any problem with his inclusion,I'm not particularly concerned one way or the other. - Bilby (talk) 12:21, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Consensus says Wikipedia is WP:NOTFUN. We couldn't even get a link to Recursion in the see also section of Recursion.― Padenton|✉   03:05, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional Centurions 

message: I thought that tribunes commanded a cohort/480 men.Quintus Petronius Augustus 22:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centurions/tribunes 

message: Please add the Centurion "Rory Williams" to the list of important Centurions throughout time, in order to make this a more complete list.
SentinelTheFirst (talk) 06:28, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: this article is about centurions in history. Rory Williams is listed at Centurion (disambiguation). That is all that's needed. --Stfg (talk) 15:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centurion update 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Centurion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090410070558/http://www.pvv.ntnu.no:80/~madsb/home/war/vegetius/dere05.php to http://www.pvv.ntnu.no/~madsb/home/war/vegetius/dere05.php#04
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:51, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I need someone who is going to teach me English language grama and everything that makes someone like me fluent in particular language that is not her/his mother tounge I would like to share some things which may be
useful to you guys just like you gave me knowledge of my surroundings and the world as a whole Dubaio (talk) 14:39, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  learning English language 

message: Text under first photo claims that special transverse crest was:"worn to indicate the wearer's rank in regimental 'triumph' and honorific parades. Its purpose was purely symbolic. It was not part of the standard battle-dress of Roman soldiers in the field." apart from this claims that "Its purpose was purely symbolic" and used only at "regimental 'triumph' and honorific parades" being clearly erroneous as I will show it is also not supported by any references,not even modern not to mention original ancient.And of course that it was "not part of the standard battle-dress of Roman soldiers in the field"...but nobody even ever said it was.It was special crest for centurions not for every soldier.
Vegetius says:
"Besides the centurions, now called centenarii, were distinguished by different crests on their helmets, to be more easily known by the soldiers of their respective centuries. These precautions prevented any mistake, as every century was guided not only by its own ensign but likewise by the peculiar form of the helmet of its commanding officers. "
and a little later...
"But the centurions had complete cuirasses, shields and helmets of iron the crest of which, placed transversely thereon, were ornamented with silver that they might be more easily distinguished by their respective soldiers."
Vegetius therefore makes it perfectly clear that transverse crest(in latin known as crista transversa) was indeed used in battle and that it was one of its main purposes to serve as visual guide to follow for soldiers of the century next to their standards and next to being also one of visual markers of Centurion rank.We also have these special crests depicted on Centurion tomstones along with all other typical equipment used by centurions and their other symbols of rank-their complete battle gear with no indication it was just for parades only.In fact we also have many depictions of transverse crests depicted used in action.
So if nobody will justify why criticised claim should be correct I will errase it in a week.That unreferenced claim by the way goes even agains scholarly consensus.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.245.106.74 (talk) 17:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Purely symbolic" transverse crest 

message: The article gives three sources, "The Roman Legions", "The Complete Roman Army" and "The Roman War Machine". I was curious what the evidence is for disputing this seemingly quite obvious etymology so I went looking through these sources and am having trouble finding any disputation. I could get copies of the last two sources and look through them, but I'm not even sure what book "The Roman Legions" is referring to. No author or date of publication is mentioned and I'm not finding any book with that exact title anywhere. It strikes me that the short section in the intro on etymology could use some clarification.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.238.188.224 (talk) 22:34, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where exactly in the indicated sources is it disputed that the original etymology of centurion/centuria is from centum (100)?