Position of the Centurion

[Boyar Son]

Well I was wondering, why were the centurions placed in a dangerous position? (Other then leading the troops)

They could be singled out and hit by a javilin or killed by ten barbarians that saw him alone. I know he's next to his troops but still in a dangerous position.

Any comments?

[Zaknafien]

centurions were picked for their loyalty and bravery, they were expected to lead by example and cow less-resolute men into standing in formation. most centurions, promoted from the rankers, required 15-20 years service to be promoted in this way. the ranks of centurions were certainly not equal, and there were lesser and greater degrees depending on cohort and century he was posted to. I do not think of them being in any greater danger than any other man in the century when battle was joined, perhaps less-so because of the better equipment they would possess.

[Boyar Son]

But I dont think that equipment and experiance would stem the tide of hundreds of barbarian charging at him. The Romans made him too important to lose with the requirement of 15-20 years of experiance so I dont know how they could easily replace him.

[Zaknafien]

centurions did in fact have a high mortality rate, but we dont have evidence saying they were specifically targeted this was more likely the result of personal heroism on their part I think. targeting of officers was not a widely used tactic in ancient warfare, you know.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I would have to dissagree with my emminant coleague here slightly, Above all a Centurian was expected to be reliable and diciplined, personnal heroism, whilst desirable had to be secondary to these concerns. Centurians were not nessessarily in the front rank. In fact I would have thought the second rank a more likely position, as psychologically he would be able to push his men foward because his voice would come from behind them.

[Zaknafien]

well I agree somewhat with that, but it was the optio's position to keep the century moving forward, the centurion was more of a combatant commander akin to a platoon leader or first sergeant in today's terms i believe. Part of the criteria for selection centurions was their 'hardness' and willingness to fight to the death. their casualty rates exceeeded that of other officers because they were the 'front line leaders'. The centurion I think would obviously stand beside the standard bearer, the symbol of the century and the icon by which the men knew where to stand and for what to fight. it would make sense to me, then, that this would be up front, where men could see it and 'be inspired' by it and him.

[Atilius]

Concerning the temperment of the centurion, Polybios says:

And they wish the centurions not to be so much bold and adventurous, as men with a faculty for command, steady, and of a profound rather than a showy spirit; not prone to engage wantonly or be unnecessarily forward in giving battle; but such as in the face of superior numbers and overwhelming pressure will die in defence of their post.

[Geoffrey S]

I'm half wondering if the OP is too influenced by the RTW depiction of officers.

[antisocialmunky]

I would imagine that the placement of the centurion would be besides a unit that has not been engaged, behind a unit that is engaged, or infront leading a charge: Besides to issue commands to form up or move here and there, behind to determine the best course of action for his unit, or infront to lead the unit by example.

I would refer to more recent formation fighting tactics(pike and musket era) to determine the centurion's best placement since command and control for then was pretty much the same as in Roman times.

[Warmaster Horus]

If I understand Atilius' reference to Polybius correctly - and I'm not saying I do - then it has nothing to do with the question at hand. In the face of "superiour numbers and overwhelming pressure", the sacrifice of the centurion's life is that which is expected of him. Because by then, he has learned the idea of the chain of command, and if his orders are to defend an area, then he must defend it, giving all he's got. And if he doesn't, then he's good for the chops.
About his position, he's supposed to lead by example, like Zaknafien said. And, anyway, if the back row of a century doesn't hear what the centurion says, isn't the optio supposed to repeat the order?
In any case, once the battle is joined, one doesn't really have a choice in who to target. The two battle lines merge together, making it impossible to distinguish one person from another, in the enemy ranks.
When you've got a big, hairy guy in front of you, just screaming for your blood, you can't go after the one who killed your friend. No, you kill the one in front of you, and then go after the other one.

[Zaknafien]

well lets remember that the century was primarily an administrative subdivision of the cohort, which was THE tactical unit of the day. Centuries would not fight by themselves but as part of the cohort. its not like modern-day squads in platoons, the whole platoon would be fighting. the centurion himself, while primarily responsible for training and administrative details, was a leader expected to show the other troopers how to act and respond during battle and march.