Need Some Roman Research Help!

[army_grunt13]

Guys,

I'm doing some historical research for the second book in my "Soldier of Rome" series, and am at a bit of a stumbling block. My first book, "Soldier of Rome: The Legionary" (coming this winter from iUniverse) was fairly easy to research. It takes place between 15-17 A.D. and covers the campaigns of Germanicus Caesar and his wars against Arminius in Germania. These campaigns are detailed in depth in the Annals of Tacitus, which was my primary source.

Since I pride myself in making certain that my books, though historical fiction, do not deviate from historical fact, I try and do as much research as possible. I've hit a snag when trying to do research for my second book, which starts in the year A.D 20, just prior to the Gallic revolt under Julius Sacrovir and Julius Florus (FYI: Soldier of Rome follows the career of a Roman Legionary, kind of in the same vein as C.S. Forester's Horatio Hornblower followed the career of a British Naval Officer). I used Tacitus again to provide me with the most historical research, however I find myself having to use what I think is an excessive amount of literary license on this one.

Thing is, the revolt under Sacrovir and Florus was not on nearly the same scale as that of the wars against Arminius. And since I intend to keep my books as historically "pure" as possible, I'm not about to invent entire wars that just did not happen. With that in mind, Books Two and Three of the Soldier of Rome series are going to be the most difficult for me to research. Together they take place between the years 20-28 A.D. in Germania, where our hero is a Legionary serving with the Twentieth Legion. Does anybody know of any valid historical sources that would be of use for this time period? Thanks!

[pdr]

Yes I know you are not writing about Roman Britain but try the British Library. Not to borrow a book, but they do sell books and things like reports on Roman digs and translations of the men's letters from Vinlandia was it? On Hadrian's wall. They also have some seriously good reference books to buy on the Romans.
Url up in resources.

There's also http://www.roman-britain.org/main.htm which has an excellent books and reference section which may put you on to something.

[Medievalist]

I'd Google Roman Germany; there are a couple of museums of Roman villas in Germany. There's the Journal Of Roman Archaeology, which has lots of articles about this period, though you'll likely need an academic library.

[Puma]

Not sure about this - but is there anything in the writings of Pliny the Elder or Seneca or ... Pliny is a bit young, but it's not impossible there might be some references. Seneca is the right time period. Second question, is there anyone in Greece who might have written something useful to you. And last question - are there any early German histories recorded from word of mouth accounts in illustrated manuscripts that might have some information? Puma

[BardSkye]

Another possibility is the folks over at Net Sword. Their knowledge of battles fought throughout pre-industrial Europe and Britain is extensive.

[robeiae]

Does anybody know of any valid historical sources that would be of use for this time period? Thanks!
Velleius Paterculus (http://www.livius.org/va-vh/velleius/paterculus2.html)

And here are some details on the Legio Valeria Victrix XX (http://www.livius.org/le-lh/legio/xx_valeria_victrix.html)

[Evaine]

The letters - some of which were actually postcards on very thin wood - came from Vindolanda, on Hadrian's Wall. Fascinating stuff, but possibly of marginal help for these research purposes.

[pdr]

I'd advise anyone writing about the Romans to read the 'letters' and 'diaries' written during the period. It's the best thing any writer of any period novel can do to learn how the people of their period thought and talked.

The Vindolanda 'letters' are a wonderful insight into the mind set of Roman parents writing to their sons far away, to the men and their preoccupations.

The hardest thing in writing a novel set several hundred years in the past is to get the characters to act and speak as 1st, 4th, 10th or 16th century people might do. Letters and diaries help.

[Medievalist]

I tried to post this earlier and couldn't. The Vindolanda Tablets site is here (http://vindolanda.csad.ox.ac.uk). It's not the most intelligently organized site, but there's a lot of useful, and interesting stuff there; poke around a bit.

[rekirts]

Here's a place with lots of knowledgable people: http://www.romanarmy.com/cms/

If you click on RomanArmyTalk, it will take you to the forum where you can ask your questions.

[Gabriele]

With that in mind, Books Two and Three of the Soldier of Rome series are going to be the most difficult for me to research. Together they take place between the years 20-28 A.D. in Germania, where our hero is a Legionary serving with the Twentieth Legion. Does anybody know of any valid historical sources that would be of use for this time period? Thanks!

I don't think there was much action going on in Germania Transrhenania after 16AD when Tiberius officially recalled the army from that area and stuck to the Rhine border. From that moment on the German tribes were at each others' throats again like good little barbarians. :D

I'm sure you can find another war somewhere in the Empire, though. The eastern client kingdoms were a bunch of troubleshooters, too. Or get your hero into Rome with a special commission - the intrigues in Rome are always fun. :tongue

[army_grunt13]

Thanks guys, I do appreciate the feedback! Oh, and Gabriele, sorry about hijacking your Germanicus/Arminius idea! :flag: As for campaigns/plots, I'm using the Gallic revolt under Sacrovir and Florus for the plot to Book Two (which ironically is called "Soldier of Rome: The Sacrovir Revolt"), and I'm PROBABLY going to use the Frisian revolt for part of the campaign plot in Book Three. Thing is, I almost feel like books Two and Three are almost "filler" before I get to Book Four, which is where things pick up again historically. However, I do not want "filler" books, but rather books that can stand in their own right.

I have to say that since posting this, I have gotten past a large portion of my writer's block and have been on a role with The Sacrovir Revolt. Currently I'm sitting at about 36,000 words, which isn't a bad start (my final version of The Legionary was about 123,000). I like Gabriele's ideas for "special assignments" to Rome. Hope I don't hijack any more of your ideas!

Thanks again!

[Medievalist]

Aw, ditch the Germanic barbarians, and come over to the Celts and Britain!

[army_grunt13]

Medievalist, don't worry, Artorius will take on the Celts in Britain in due time! Remember though, The Legionary takes place from 15-17 A.D., and the invasion of Britain didn't take place until 41 or 43 A.D. (can't remember which). But yes, I do have plans for that. I have plot points and reasons for keeping him in Germania through Book Three. Without giving away everything, suffice it to say that Book Four takes place in Judea, and Book Five in Britain.

[Medievalist]

The successful invasion, but there were encampments before then, and, though Ireland wasn't invaded, the Romans did explore the turf.

[Gabriele]

Thanks guys, I do appreciate the feedback! Oh, and Gabriele, sorry about hijacking your Germanicus/Arminius idea! :flag:

Lol, no big deal. There's in fact a German trilogy about the Varus battle and its aftermath by Iris Kammerer, and I thought I'd stay clear of that particular plotbunny. Until I visited the battle site and museum at Kalkriese this summer. Since Iris doesn't have the actual battle, and I love to write military historical fiction, I got the idea for A Land Unconquered. It will be my Nano this year.

There's place for more than one novel here. Also, I write epic standalones with more than one main character, not series. :)

Btw, have you read Simon Scarrow's Eagle series? He starts shortly before the British invasion in 43 and by now his MC is fighting in Syria.

If you visit my blog (http://lostfort.blogspot.com) and scroll down the sidebar to My Journeys: Pictures and Essays - Lost Romans, you'll find some entries about Kalkriese, with pics.

[Gabriele]

Aw, ditch the Germanic barbarians, and come over to the Celts and Britain!

I have these, too. Storm over Hadrian's Wall deals with the Picts (aka Selgovae, Votadini, etc.) and part of The Charioteer takes place in Britain during the time the Roman army left for good (the other part in Rome and a few chapters in Gaul).

[Gabriele]

Thing is, I almost feel like books Two and Three are almost "filler" before I get to Book Four, which is where things pick up again historically.

I have plot points and reasons for keeping him in Germania through Book Three. Without giving away everything, suffice it to say that Book Four takes place in Judea, and Book Five in Britain.

What if you combine book 2 and 3 ?

[Kentuk]

Would like to point out that periods and situations not well covered by the historians of the time are a great place for a novelist to 'play'. Need action? Move closer to the front i.e. the Emperor withdraws the legions leaving just a few people to do the work of many.

[army_grunt13]

What if you combine book 2 and 3 ?

I've thought about it, but the timeframe is just too long for one book. Also, I tried reading one of Scarrow's books and just could not get into it. The dialect and the way it was written just did not strike me as believable. To be honest, one turn off for me was reading that the Centurion was illiterate. Sorry, but I seriously doubt that an illiterate Soldier would have ever made it past Legionary if he couldn't read. I don't know, maybe I just didn't give them a fair chance.

As for having "the few do the work of the many," I'm kind of working that into the stories as well. I read that it was not unheard of for individual cohorts to be temporarily stationed away from the Legion and acting independantly. As for research into the machinations of the Roman Army, I found The Complete Roman Army by Adrian Goldsworthy to be the best single book out there. My Dad sent it to me when I was in Iraq, and it was (and still is) an excellent source for my works.

[Gabriele]

Yep, Scarrow uses a modern language I needed some time to get into. But since I enjoyed McCullough's books and she uses a - different form - of modern language as well, I gave it a go until my brain just reset the language matter to zero. At least it was consequently modern. What peeves me is when modern words creep into a more archaic language.

But Macro tries hard to cover his illitaracy and is always afraid to be found out. People like him still exist today - one of my former neighbours was illiterate and it took me several yeas to see through his excuses.

[Medievalist]

There was a high level of literacy in the army, in part, because the administrivia was huge. A fair amount of the materials from Vindolanda are revealatory regarding the literacy levels of the common soldiers ("Mom, send socks!").

[pdr]

Lindsay Davies has an excellent series of books about her Roman investigator, Falco. One of which covers the Germanic rebellion and Britain. Her research is very good.

Yes, Scarrow's use of language grated on me too and I knew that any legion's recruits were actually taught to read and write. A Centurion had to write reports so having him be illiterate didn't ring true.

[army_grunt13]

It wasn't only the illiterate Centurion which grated on me in Scarrow's books, but the way they talked to each other. I wonder if Scarrow has ever served in the military, because the sequence where the Centurion Primus Pilus is railing the recruits felt forced and just not believable. Honestly I pictured a cheesy version of the Drill Instructor from Full Metal Jacket in a Roman costume.

The series that I actually managed to make it through a couple books, because they were actually entertaining, was the "Emperor" series. But then again, while entertaining, the historical aspect was appauling (and these are books that I see all the time on the shelves at Borders and Barnes & Noble). It was so bad, that the only way to get through them was to think of it as a parallel universe with the names of the same people.

It is issues like these that make me so adament about keeping my novels as historically pure as possible. I have often found that the old adage, "Truth is stranger than fiction" to be very apt. While I'm certain that historical purists will probably find some errors in my books, I think they'll find that I stay true to the actual events more than most. I'm not out to reinvent history, but rather tell it as a story, rather than a dry history book (which I actually enjoy, but most people probably don't). Plus I also try and make it clear that literary license has to be used, and any deviations from known historical fact are an error on my part, and completely unintentional. Thankfully, the feedback I've gotten from the drafts of my first book have been favorable in that regard.

One interesting note: One historical character who plays a significant role in my series, yet I was able to take an enormous amount of literary license with is Pontius Pilate. I've worked my backside off trying to research him, and yet there is practically nothing documented prior to his appointment as governor of Judea in around 26 A.D. This basically allowed me to do as I pleased with him (anybody else ever done this?). All I could find was that he was an Army officer before, and a Tribune in the Praetorian Guard before his appointment. I have him as a Military Tribune who is in charge of the Legion's artillery in my first book. While the artillery officer part I completely made up, I was plesantly shocked to read in an excerpt from Josephus that Pilate one time makes the statement that he was at the Battle of Idistaviso, which ironically is the culminating battle in my book. So yeah, it was pretty neat to think that I basically created an entire portion of Pilate's life and career out of thin air, only to find out that according to Josephus he was in fact there. I mean, how cool is that?

[Gabriele]

Lol, I've invented a circus near Camulodunum for The Charioteer, only to read a few weeks later that archaeologists are digging up one exactly where I put it. :D

There's also a Roman fort at my backdoor, the easternmost ever to be found in Germany. Very recent discovery, too.

[army_grunt13]

There's also a Roman fort at my backdoor, the easternmost ever to be found in Germany. Very recent discovery, too.

I've read that the Romans still had some smaller forts east of the Rhine even after the Teutoburger disaster. I wonder if these were maybe observation posts? I read in Tacitus about how during his campaigns, Germanicus moved to reinforce one of these forts that was near Teutoburger Wald, yet turned out they were not under attack. I didn't include this bit in my book, because there is only one line written about it, and it didn't quite make sense to me. I would think that any such forts east of the Rhine would have been overrun. My thought is that if such outposts did exist, they were probably used for reconnaisance and were probably manned by auxiliaries. Thoughts?

[Gabriele]

Well, the fort at my backdoor (eastern side of the Visurgis river) has several layers; this and coin finds has archaeologists assume that it was used from the time of Drusus' first campaign in 9 BC until the moment Germanicus left Germania Transrhenania for good in 16 AD, perhaps with interruptions. It served as base camp and protection of a river ford. I can't say for sure if the garrison was auxiliary, the weapon finds point at traditional legionnaires plus cavalry. What is clear is that the structure, albeit mostly constructed of wood, must have been large, much like the typical rectangular, four gate one we know from forts west of the Rhine and south of the Hadrian's Wall; most of the wall of the fort is still visible, and there are stone foundations for granaries and other buildings, probably including a lazarett.

It will play a role in my novel, how could I miss the chance to use a place I know so well? ;)

[pdr]

that some of the Germanic tribes actually welcomed Rome? Trade and weapons and a bit of support from other tribes attacking were welcomed by two tribes in particular, I believe. And after the great rebellion some Roman outposts were left at strategic places.

My references are all packed in storage so I can't be more definite, my apologies.

[Gabriele]

Oh, definitely. Arminius' father-in-law Segestes remained pro-Roman even after the Varus battle, and the Marcomanni never joined the rebellion. Outposts were left east of the Rhine, but close to the border (like in the Wetterau) - forts as far as at the Visurgis/Weser were most likely abandoned because of supply issues.

I think the situation was pretty much the same as north of the Hadrian's Wall. After the Antonine Wall was abandoned, the Romans still kept some forts (Trimontium, fe., and earlier there were the Gask Ridge forts of the Agricola conquest), and I won't wonder if among the Selgovae, Votadini, Novantae etc. were some families or tribes who would have welcomed a closer contact with the Romans.

There was always trade, as was in Germania after the Limes was built, and in both cases, the occasional rebellion and large scale border raids occured. Also in both cases, the frontiers were overrun around 410 AD when the western Empire began to crumple at the seams. :D

I'm planning something of a series of novels dealing with the Scottish respective German border situation. Right now I have two dealing with the events around 410 (The Charioteer and Endangered Frontiers), and the Varus battle and Storm over Hadrian's Wall, though the latter is a later, 122 AD. Perhaps I'll tackle the time of Septimius Severus in Britain who had a lot of troubles with the tribes (and his sons) and the German invasions of the later 3rd century, but that will happen after I dealt with my Mediaeval saga revision, the Saxon/Charlemagne novel-in-planning and that battle of Nechtansmere plotbunny. :D.

[army_grunt13]

Segestes actually plays a role in my book. Good ally for Rome, but a terrible father to his daughter. To answer PDR's question, yes some of the tribes remained staunch Roman allies. The Batavi, which I believe were an offshoot of the Chauci (who fought for Arminius), served as cavalrymen under Germanicus. Their leader, Chariovalda, also has a small role in my book. His cavalry forded the Weser River and harrassed the German flanks, creating a diversion so that the Romans could cross. They paid a heavy price for it, though.

Flavus, the brother of Arminius, also remained loyal to Rome. I actually have the episode in my book where he confronts his brother (albiet from across the river) and the two get into a heated exchange.

Gabriele, thanks for the info. That would be so cool to have something like that outside your back door, so to speak! That actually answers most of my questions.

[Gabriele]

Flavus, the brother of Arminius, also remained loyal to Rome. I actually have the episode in my book where he confronts his brother (albiet from across the river) and the two get into a heated exchange.

Lol, seems everyone who writes about that time makes use of a possible confrontation between the brothers - Iris Kammerer does it, too. ;)

Btw, you can have a look at my blog (http://lostfort.blogspot.com) for some pics - also check the sidebar (scroll down to Important Entries and the My Journeys section) for more posts about Kalkriese and Hedemünden (aka the fort at my backdoor).

[army_grunt13]

Tacitus actually describes the confrontation in detail. One sequence that I'm certain I will get nailed for stealing from Shakespeare is when on the eve of the Battle of Idistaviso, Germanicus disguises himself as a Signifier (Signal NCO who wore the wolf skins and carried the unit's Guidon) and met with some of the common Soldiers to gauge their opinions of him and of the campaign. This of course was almost identical to a significant scene in Shakespeare's Henry V (one of my favorite plays). Thing is, I think Shakespeare got the idea from the Romans, for the act of Germanicus disguising himself to meet with the men prior to Idistaviso is documented in several sources as an actual event. Granted, like the confrontation between Arminius and his brother, it may have well been the Romans either creating the scene, or else exaggerating an actual event. However, since we will never know, I have decided to take both events at face value.

I'll have to get on your blog and see what else I can steal. . .I mean utilize! ;)

[Gabriele]

I'll have to get on your blog and see what else I can steal. . .I mean utilize! ;)

As long as you leave Hedemünden to me. :tongue

I have some suspicions that Tacitus' made the scene between the brothers up, but hell, who can blame him for it? What I'm going to filch is the use Ranke Graves makes of Cassius Chaerea who accoding to I, Claudius survived the Varus battle. Now, that one is too good not to use as well. :D

[army_grunt13]

What I'm going to filch is the use Ranke Graves makes of Cassius Chaerea who accoding to I, Claudius survived the Varus battle. Now, that one is too good not to use as well. :D

Good Lord, are we writing the same book or what??? I too have Cassius Chaerea as a survivor of the battle, though he is only mentioned in the first chapter. He establishes a rally point for survivors, who then cut their way out. A large chunk of the first chapter is of a Centurion and his men fighting their way to link up with Cassius. It is odd that I use that, because "I, Claudius" was based almost exclusively on Suetonius, who I have all but discounted for the most part, especially in regards to his depictions of Tiberius and Livia. I think all of us are guilty of "selective believing" when it comes to picking bits out of sources that most conform to what ideas we have for a story.

I know that Cassius Chaerea was the name of one of the assassins of Caligula. It never mentions it, but I'm not certain tha this would be the same person, seeing as how Caligula was assassinated 32 years after Teutoburger Wald, so I may play it off as Cassius' son instead.

Hedemünden is all yours, especially since I have no idea as to who or what that is.:D

[Gabriele]

I know that Cassius Chaerea was the name of one of the assassins of Caligula. It never mentions it, but I'm not certain tha this would be the same person, seeing as how Caligula was assassinated 32 years after Teutoburger Wald, so I may play it off as Cassius' son instead.

He's mentioned as centurion on Germanicus' army and as far as I understand Tacitus', it was the same Chaerea, then prefect of the Praetorian Guard, who was involved in the assassination. If he was about 20 at Teutoburg, he'd have been 52 when killing Caligula - not unrealistic. I have more troubles explaining why a member of the gens Cassius was a centurion and not a tribune in the first place, and if I have him at Teutoburg and Idastaviso, why he hasn't advanced during those 7 years. But why are we writers, lol, I should find a reason. ;)

Chaerea will play a pretty major role in my novel - since we know so little about him during the time of the Teutoburg battle and Germanicus' campaign, I can run with my imagination.

Iris Kammerer called Suetonius the 'old blabbermaul' (der alte Schwätzer). :D She has studied archaeology and classical philology and should know.

Hedemünden is all yours, especially since I have no idea as to who or what that is.:D

It's the name of the place where they found the Roman fort at the Visurgis river (the Roman name refers to both Werra and Weser).

[army_grunt13]

He's mentioned as centurion on Germanicus' army and as far as I understand Tacitus', it was the same Chaerea, then prefect of the Praetorian Guard, who was involved in the assassination. If he was about 20 at Teutoburg, he'd have been 52 when killing Caligula - not unrealistic. I have more troubles explaining why a member of the gens Cassius was a centurion and not a tribune in the first place, and if I have him at Teutoburg and Idastaviso, why he hasn't advanced during those 7 years. But why are we writers, lol, I should find a reason.

Ah crap, I have him as a Tribune in my book. Hence why I don't include him in the campaigns, because he would have long since moved on during that timeframe. A couple discrepancies I find is that if he was a Centurion, he would have to have been much older than 20, since unless they were politically appointed (which wasn't unheard of) it took a Soldier between 15-20 years to make Centurion (of course in my series, Artorius makes it at 10, but then again, he's a "super trooper").

Also, I didn't think that one got promoted from Centurion to Tribune. The way I understand it, the path through the Centurionate starts at Centurion, commanding a Century. The next step would be Centurion Pilus Prior, commander of a Cohort. Yes, I know that there were other names in between, though most sources I've read agree with my thought that these were simply to identify the man's actual position, and did not make him superior in rank until he made Pilus Prior. Otherwise, guys would be changing units every few months, and there would be no cohesion. So in my mind, a Centurion stayed where he was until he either retired or was promoted to Pilus Prior.

The next step was Centurion Primus Ordo, or "Centurion of the First Cohort." These men outranked even the Cohort Commanders, even though the number of men they commanded was fewer (a double-strength century of 160 men, vs a 480 man Cohort). They were the elite tacticians of the Legion. Leading them was the Centurion Primus Pilus, often referred to as the "Chief" or in my books, the "Master" Centurion. He commanded the elite First Cohort, and was also 3rd in Command of the Legion (some sources site there being a camp prefect senior to him, but I don't see it in all sources, and I think the position is redundant and possibly the same guy). As far as I know, this is as high as a "common" Soldier could ever hope to achieve. Now, if I understand it right, anyone who retired at the rank of Centurion or above was admitted into the patrician class of society. Therefore, his sons could be appointed as Tribunes.

You know, as much as it sounds like our books would be in competition, since both seem to have our facts straight (except where we may disagree on things requiring literary license) they may in fact compliment each other well.

[Medievalist]

I don't know if you guys already know them, but I've just seen two Osprey Militry History Books (http://www.ospreypublishing.com/), one on the Celts and one on Anglo-Saxon warriors, and I've got to say -- I'm impressed. I don't know how the rest of the books pan out -- I'd assume that the quality would depend on the author and artist, but these were good enough I've got them in mind to put on reserve the next time I teach an appropriate class.

[BardSkye]

Maybe you could make competition into an advantage when it comes to interesting agents in your works. If both are done at roughly the same time could they be pitched as two views of the same events?

[Gabriele]

Ah crap, I have him as a Tribune in my book. Hence why I don't include him in the campaigns, because he would have long since moved on during that timeframe. A couple discrepancies I find is that if he was a Centurion, he would have to have been much older than 20, since unless they were politically appointed (which wasn't unheard of) it took a Soldier between 15-20 years to make Centurion

Politically appointed is the best explanation in case of Cassius Chaerea, I think. Rosemary Sutcliff has a centurion leading a cohort to replace a fort garrison in The Eagle of the Ninth, and that Marcus is about 20 at the time. His grief is that after a severe leg wound, his military career is at an end.

In Imperial times the army structure changed a lot, maybe a commission as centurion was a way to start for those men of noble birth who wanted to make a career in the army as 'professional' soldiers. In Republican times the position of tribune was just part of the cursus honorum and many of those young men had not much involvement with the army afterwards if they didn't actively seek positions in that direction.

You know, as much as it sounds like our books would be in competition, since both seem to have our facts straight (except where we may disagree on things requiring literary license) they may in fact compliment each other well.

I have probably more scenes on the German side, and my book will be a standalone, not part of a series. So yes, we can just share the terrain. :D

[Gabriele]

Maybe you could make competition into an advantage when it comes to interesting agents in your works. If both are done at roughly the same time could they be pitched as two views of the same events?

Lol, I'm not sure when mine will be finished since I'm such a multitasker. I would not have started that particular plotbunny yet were it not for Nano. I should know better but I keep signing up and then have some 10K in Yet Another Project. Finishing The Charioteer and Storm over Hadrian's Wall would be more prudent, but it seems I'm addicted to Nano. :D

[army_grunt13]

I did a template on how Roman army rank structure compares to our own (by ours, I mean the U.S. Army). Not only that, but it provided a guideline for seniority and career paths. I cannot post attachments on here, so I will cut and paste some of my notes. The only time I used a modern military rank is in the case of the section leaders (8-man squads). I could not for the life of me find any rank listed, though I knew that SOMEBODY had to be in charge of each squad, so I went ahead and referred to them as Sergeants. I read in a number of books how they use modern ranks like Colonel and General, which can be annoying. I admit that I do flip-flop a bit between the terms "General" and "Legate," depending on the context. I tried to keep things as simple and realistic as possible. Let me know what you guys think. Oh, and for right now I'm just showing the "enlisted" ranks.

Rank / Position / U.S. Army Equivalent
Legionary / Common Soldier / Private to Specialist
Sergeant / Section Leader / Sergeant to Staff Sgt
Tesserarius / Guard/Duty NCO / Staff Sgt to Sgt First Class
Signifier / Signal NCO, 3rd in Command / Sgt First Class
Optio / 2nd in Command of Century / First Sergeant
Centurion / Century Commander / Captain*
Centurion Pilus Prior / Cohort Commander / Lieutenant Colonel*
Centurion Primus Pilus / 1st Cohort Commander / Colonel*

*I've read in many sources that where a Centurion's command authority was that of a modern Company Commander (ie Captain), since he came from the ranks, it was apt to think of him as BOTH a Captain and a Master Sergeant. Same with the Pilus Prior and Primus Pilus. I think of them as both a Lieutenant Colonel / Colonel AND a Command Sgt Major.

[Gabriele]

Lol, I don't know a thing about modern US Army ranks, al my military knowledge is historical. :D I'm just going to use the Roman terms.

[army_grunt13]

Lol, I don't know a thing about modern US Army ranks, al my military knowledge is historical. :D I'm just going to use the Roman terms. I just wanted to see if it made sense to anyone else. Aside from my use of the rank "Sergeant," all my uses are historical.

[BardSkye]

As an interested bystander with no qualifications at all, my thoughts would be that the Roman terms would be both understood and appreciated by those who know what you're talking about, and understood but not cared about by those who don't. I think the average non-scholastic reader could follow the characters' ranks and status simply by noting who's doing the ordering and who's doing the obeying.

Gabriele is not alone in not knowing what ranks are which or which ranks are what.