What's up with the sergeants?

[ajaxfetish]

The word was not used by the Romans to the best of my knowledge (it sounds like you are thinking of Centurions) and its use has changed considerably from its medieval days to the present. Much like the way the constable was among the highest military officers in the kingdom and now refers to a standard policeman, or the way a captain was simply the commander of an armed force and the lieutenant his assistant, while now both titles are specific levels of military hierarchy. Many such terms have evolved over time.

Ajax

[gunslinger]

So, the MTW practice of making a "sergeant" an upgraded spearman or spear-carrying light cavalry has no grounding in reality then?

[ajaxfetish]

Well, the assignment of sergeants to such roles may be a little limiting, but is certainly grounded in reality. They wouldn't have been only spearmen or medium cavalry, just as knights weren't all swordsmen or Welsh irregulars only equipped with long knives.

Sergeants were basically non-noble professional soldiers (or at least as close to a professional as existed at the time). They were the next level of quality below knights and squires, and played a major role in some battles, making it into accounts such as that of Bouvines in 1214. Their role as mounted sergeants in the game is very satisfactory to me. As infantry, the spear is probably the most reasonable single weapon to give them, though some would likely also have been equipped with swords, maces, axes, polearms, etc.

Ajax

[CBR]

IIRC there are sources that mention mounted sergeants that were better equipped than most knights.


CBR

[Watchman]

Well, not all knights were rich. Quite the contrary really. Most noble families would tend to spawn more than one son, and as estates were normally inherited by the primogeniture principle (ie. the firstborn son pretty much gets everything) the younger brothers by and large either had to take the holy orders or take their weapons and armour and go sell their military skills to the highest bidder (or, as also happened, their eldest brother - no reason why they couldn't become *his* household knights, as such) to support themselves.

AFAIK many sergeants could well be quite markedly better off financially than most landless wandering knights were; after all, the sergeants could own land too in the feudal pyramid and could similarly be employed as parts of some lord's personal military followers.

As a side note, an incredible amount of modern military terminology and rank titles (at least in English) can trace their ancestry directly back to the Middle Ages. "Colonel" was apparently originally a Late Medieval Spanish term for what IIRC seemed to be a big-time condottiere, for example.

[L'Impresario]

As a side note, an incredible amount of modern military terminology and rank titles (at least in English) can trace their ancestry directly back to the Middle Ages. "Colonel" was apparently originally a Late Medieval Spanish term for what IIRC seemed to be a big-time condottiere, for example.

Good thinking heh, but "colonel" comes from the latin equivalent of "column", columna if I'm not mistaken. Maybe the word you 're looking for is caudillo - ofcourse the word came to encompass many extra meanings over the years.

[Watchman]

Wiki claims it first reappeared in late 1500s Italian as colonnello in charge of a colonne of troops, and entered English through French. *shrug* Following up the word "column" didn't yield much though (indeed, the article looked downright dubious and confused), so as of yet I'll be a tad sceptical of the claim to Roman origin. It's not like the Romanic languages were ever exactly shy of altering old Latin words to their convenience anyway.

Whatever the specific origin though the point of rather ancient ancestry behind assorted titles remains. "Captain" I know was already in use during the Middle Ages, and probably "corporal" as well ("myriad", although not a military term nowadays, was apparently a Persian unit designation in Classical times...).