avobe the centurion was the generals, region governors, and the emperor.
A Roman century was commanded by a centurion.
A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.A Roman centurion was a military officer. There were eleven grades or ranks of centurion so the title "centurion" covered a lot of officers. Incidentally, a centurion of the lowest rank commanded a "century" of 80 men, not the 100 men that is erroneously thought to have made up the century.
Most ancient remains pervail the knowledge that a Roman Centurion could control 100 men.His command would depend on his rank. There were many ranks of "centurion". The lowest ranking centurion commanded a century which was 80 men, contrary to popular belief that a century consisted of 100 men. If he commanded a cohort, he would command 480 men and if he were the "first spear" and commanded the first cohort, he had about 800 men under his command. The camp prefect, who was also a centurion, commanded the entire legion in the absence of the general and senior officers.
A military officer who commanded a minor division of the Roman army; a captain of a century.
It was the centurion, named after the Latin for 100 (centum)
There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.There is no such thing as a century of 100 men in the Roman army. A century consisted of 80 men. It was commanded by a centurion. Do not be misled by the word "century". It as nothing to do with the number 100 in army terms.
A Centurion. 'Fraid not. There was no title for a man in command of 100. A centurion commanded 80. Centuries, or Centuriae, developed from the Roman Tribal system, these could be made up from 80 to 100 men. Later, under the Marian reforms this became the 100 men we know today.
An officer who commanded 100 foot soldiers in ancient Roman military terminology was called a "centurion." The term "centurion" is derived from the Latin word "centuria," which refers to a unit of 100 soldiers. Centurions played a crucial role in the Roman army, responsible for training, discipline, and leading their troops in battle.
A centurion
There was no officer in command of 100 soldiers as there was no unit in the Roman army consisting of 100 men. You are confusing the title "centurion" with the number 100. A Roman centurion commanded 80 men, not 100.
There was no Roman officer in command of 100 men. There is a misconception that a centurion commanded 100 men, but this is false. The Roman army had no unit consisting of 100. An officer called a centurion, commanded a century which was 80 men. According to some military historians, the title "centurion" did not originate from the root word for one hundred, centum, but from the root word centuria, which was the voting assembly. The army kept this term, in my opinion, for the sole purpose of confusing students 2000 years in the future.
Chain of command for a legion: (Note: A legion was usually comprised of 10 Cohorts, each cohort was made of about 6 centuries, each century had 80 men plus the centurion)Chain of Command:Legatus: Commander of the Legion, in charge of about 5,280 men.Primus Pilus: Supreme Centurion of a Legion, Senior Centurion of the First Cohort, in charge of about 960 men.Senior Centurion: Commander of a Cohort, in charge of about 480 men.Primi Ordine: Commander of a Century in the First Cohort, in charge of about 80 men.Junior Centurion: Commander of a Century, in charge of about 80 men.File Leader: Basically the leader of a file in a Century, not necessarily a Commander, but just a soldier who did have slight authority of about 10 men in a file.