Centurion comes from the Latin word "centurio," which means "commander of one hundred soldiers." The root "cent" in centurion refers to the number 100, reflecting the leadership role of overseeing a hundred soldiers in ancient Roman armies.
100 Napier St, Centurion
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.
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.
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.
There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.There was no Roman leader of 100 soldiers. There was an officer called a centurion, but he led 80 men, not 100. Don't be misled by the title.
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.
Sacajawea
100-500 USD
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.
No. Someone who has lived 100 years or more is a centenarian.