06-28-2014, 11:49 AM
Quote:Are they capable of the same range of movements. or carrying weights, of wielding weapons?
I think I could suggest a practical answer to that. Some time ago, there was a debate on here regarding the possible site of Boudica's last battle (I'm sure some of you remember it!). One of the methods proposed to help locate the battle was an analysis of the water needs of a legion. The problem was, the study used a modern US army (I think) estimate of water intake for a soldier in the field.
You might think that a soldier would need the same amount of water today as in various periods of history - however, this was apparently not thought to be the case. I was reading an interesting article recently by Patrick Mercer (ex Tory MP, military man and novelist) about the British army in Afghanistan today and in the 19th century. He made the point that a modern infantryman carries a much greater load that a century ago, and a lot of that weight is water for personal consumption.
In the 19th century, the bulk of weight transported by an army was fodder for pack animals - the individual soldier, on the other hand, had to make do with a single canteen of water, which he filled himself whenever he could - something which today would be regarded as a cripplingly hazardous risk of dehydration.
This change in thinking on the water and supply needs of soldiers has drastically altered military planning and, by extension, the shape of military campaigns.
So, while human beings in general may not have changed all that much, the understanding of what humans are capable of doing has changed, and the demands placed upon individual soldiers has changed likewise. We might imagine, therefore, that a legionary of Caesar's Gallic campaigns would be quite a different physical specimen to the average infantryman of today's armies (just as conscripts of the first world war actually looked different in build and physique to young men today, as revealed by photos of enlistment parades...)
Nathan Ross
