Maybe, but at the same time the legionary cohort is a unit capable of "solo" operation and I think that their unit size reflects that...
I don't see a warrior as someone who lives by waging war, because actually he spend more time working as trader or farmer, while the soldier doesn't do anything else during his career...I agree with your point (that the Romans could field more well-trained men than the Celts), but I am not sure if you can make this distinction. I guess it depends on how you define the terms. I would define a warrior as someone who made war his profession. A soldier is a warrior that is a member of a formalized military, rather than a loose warband.
The warrior is more concern in loot and fame...
The young poorly-trained levy start with no experience and fight in single combat, if he survives become more expert and maybe richer...Also, I'd say single combat is something for expert warriors rather than poorly-trained levies. Roman legionaries were drilled to employ complex formation, but all non-skirmisher levies had to rely on some form of formation-combat in order to survive.
Yes, they form some sort of formation, but in detail everyone is fighting his own duel, while soldiers are more packed and fight in cooperation...
And the roman non-skirmisher levies were warriors from other societies allied to rome ^^
Bookmarks