+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Reenactment (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Roman Re-Enactment & Reconstruction (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Thread: Umbo sizes (/showthread.php?tid=10487)
Pages:
1
2
Umbo sizes - M. Demetrius - 09-16-2007
Most everybody recommends using a shield boss with approximately 5" 125mm. I'm guessing that's because of the found artifacts, and their respective sizes. My problem is that 5" just doesn't fit my hand, and causes great discomfort on the metacarpals of the left.
I see reenactors wearing padded bicycle gloves, wrapping rags around their hands, weightlifter gloves (complete with velcro), etc., to counteract this same problem. I asked about it, and was told that we "make the bosses that size because that's authentic. That's the size they were."
Being a reasonably intelligent onager, I asked, "What was the usual size of found specimens of caligae?" The answer was "usually about our size 7 or 8" I asked, "What size are yours?" "Size 10 1/2."
Ok, Romans were typically around 5' tall, I'm 6'. So if Romans were about 5/6 of my height, and their shield bosses were 5", and their foot size around 8, then why am I not considered "inauthentic" for wearing size 10 1/2 (5/6 of 10/5 is 8.3, approximately) but "inauthentic" for using a shield boss with a diameter of 6" (5/6 of 6 is, of course 5). If we made our tunics exactly the same dimensions as those we find, they will certainly not fit us like they fit them, owing to our greater height and proportions. If we made our shoes their size, they won't fit, naturally, guys my size. If we make our helmets the same size as the found specimens (which unfortunately some do) they won't fit our larger skulls.
So it seems to me that to be "authentic", we should make the clothing and helmets, and scuta the size they would be proportionately to the size the Romans made them to fit them. Am I thinking in a wrong direction? BTW, my 6" shield bosses fit my hand just fine, and I don't have to wear a modern sport glove or anything else on my left hand.
Re: Umbo sizes - Marcus Mummius - 09-16-2007
Well, I can't agree with you completely. If you follow your logic a gladius should be wider and longer if a reenactor is bigger and taller. But then you are not showing the public correct replica's of Roman equipment anymore...
For purely recreational reasons I'd say, by all means scale up the dimensions. But your kit would be less authentic than if it were made to match the dimensions of original artefacts...
You say the Romans were about 5 foot tall... Is that 150cm? Because we know the soldiers were a good deal taller than that... I remember height limitations somewhere around 165cm. And Vegetius talks about taller men for the first cohorts.
3/4th of the people in my group are less tall than 6 foot and most have shoesize 7 1/2-8 1/2.....
Vale,
Re: Umbo sizes - M. Demetrius - 09-16-2007
Thanks for the reply. And point taken about the gladius. :lol:
In a nutshell, I don't see any real difference in the use of a short sword, and you're right, ultimately, that would be the logical extension.
What I am saying is that shoes, clothing, helmets, and umbones should be made to fit the person that's using them. I can't imagine 20,000 soldiers all complaining about "Why do your shield bosses have to hurt our hands?" as that would be such an obvious fix.
Perhaps their grip/handle was different from what is generally recommended, but it has been shown that the grip should be placed more or less at the center of gravity of the shield, so it won't tend to tip toward or away from the one carrying it. Less hand strain, less energy needed to carry it.
So far, I can't see a reason not to make the shield fit my hand, is all.
Re: Umbo sizes - Marcus Mummius - 09-16-2007
Quote:Thanks for the reply.
In a nutshell, I don't see any real difference in the use of a short sword, and you're right, ultimately, that would be the logical extension. What I am saying is that shoes, clothing, helmets, and umbones should be made to fit the person that's using them. I can't imagine 20,000 soldiers all complaining about "Why do your shield bosses have to hurt our hands?" as that would be such an obvious fix.
Perhaps their grip/handle was different from what is generally recommended, but it has been shown that the grip should be placed more or less at the center of gravity of the shield, so it won't tend to tip toward or away from the one carrying it. Less hand strain, less energy needed to carry it.
So far, I can't see a reason not to make the shield fit my hand, is all.
Yes, that's a modern problem and it needs a modern solution. Otherwise doing the hobby becomes impossible for quite a few people.
I for one have a pretty small head and small hands, so most original dimensions are excellent for me. I have no problems with my own scutum. I've carried some very painfull scuta (from other groups) and never was it the size of the umbo that was the problem, but the positioning of the umbo and the dimensions/shape of the handhole).
Vale,
Re: Umbo sizes - Tarbicus - 09-16-2007
Quote:For purely recreational reasons I'd say, by all means scale up the dimensions. But your kit would be less authentic than if it were made to match the dimensions of original artefacts...No way will you ever find me trying to squeeze into an authentically sized lorica. Surely it's better to have all gear in proportion as a proper visual aid to showing how large the weapons were in context of the size of the man.
Quote:You say the Romans were about 5 foot tall... Is that 150cm? Because we know the soldiers were a good deal taller than that... I remember height limitations somewhere around 165cm. And Vegetius talks about taller men for the first cohorts.Most found male Roman skeletons I know of are between 5' 5" and 5' 7.5". The tall blokes were the exception and mostly from a Northern context, IIRC.
Re: Umbo sizes - M. Demetrius - 09-16-2007
Quote:male Roman skeletons I know of are between 5' 5" and 5' 7.5True, as soldiers were taken from among the taller people then, according to Vegetius, et. al. Yet what size are typical military skeletons today? Larger, I'd reckon. And don't let's forget that the Roman "foot" (measurement) was also a little shorter than the modern "foot". (not talking about body parts here.) So six Roman feet is a little less than six modern feet.
Quote:No way will you ever find me trying to squeeze into an authentically sized loricaRight! Or Viking turnshoes, medieval armor, or 18th century waistcoats, etc., etc. In the last century, Westerners have grown larger than our ancestors, and we scale things up as needed. Really, it's more just the second half of the 20th in which we see humans getting much larger. Our grandparents, even, were considerably shorter, on average, than we.
Here in Texas it's uncommon to see high school boys wearing less than size 10 or 11 shoe, and it's not strange to see them with 13 and 15 sized athletic shoes. My wife and I suspect it's the hormones they put in the feed of the animals we eat, and perhaps genetic changes from Engineered Vegetables.
Re: Umbo sizes - C. Apollonius Priscus - 09-16-2007
As the Romans were practical people, one wonders what they did for the small percentage of big "ox" (bovis?) guys. I would speculate that there would have been some custom fitting involved here and there in the Legion for those whom government-issued equipment did not fit.
Could one be called less accurate for using items made in a larger size but accurate in every other way to the original? Debateable but I don't think that it would hold up in the wash due to practical reasons. You could also argue that only people in a certain size range should be reenactors! Modern man is generally larger and if the intent is to reenact the past, you have to make allowances.
One wouldn't wear a set of caligae three sizes smaller than his modern shoe size nor a helmet that woudn't fit on his head nor a tunic that he couldn't get into nor for that matter, carry a sword which he couldn't get his fist around the grip! While such larger sized items aren't "exact" copies of the originals, I'd use the term "exactly similar" :wink: to describe upsized replicas. They are practical solutions to a problem which I suspect that the Romans had on a small scale but which the archaeological record provides few if any samples. Just my .02
Re: Umbo sizes - Marcus Mummius - 09-16-2007
I agree with Priscus.
For real, reliable experimental archaeology you need people with the same body dimensions and overall consitution as a Roman soldier and 100% correct replica equipment. Of course this is impossible to attain... Concessions have to be made.
Vale,
Re: Umbo sizes - Dean Cunningham metalsmim - 09-16-2007
The problem lies not in the hole size but in the placement of the handle. your scutum is leaning top toward you too much and should be in a more balanced position. If the handle is placed further into or out of the hole it as a direct effect on which way the top leans (toward, away from or neutral position). Try altering the placement of the handle to get a neutral balance.
Re: Umbo sizes - Magnus - 09-16-2007
Quote:Well, I can't agree with you completely. If you follow your logic a gladius should be wider and longer if a reenactor is bigger and taller. But then you are not showing the public correct replica's of Roman equipment anymore...
That's not entirely accurate Jef...you don't wear a gladius. A person's hand is pretty self adjusting and can handle grip sizes larger and smaller than what is ideal.
Again, this boils down to what is logically acceptable. BTW, what is your seggie made out of? :wink:
Re: Umbo sizes - Matthew Amt - 09-17-2007
Quote:The problem lies not in the hole size but in the placement of the handle.
Bingo. Try backing the handle away from the hole about half an inch to an inch. Unless your shield is pretty flat that won't cause it to be badly balanced, and your hand won't have to mush into the boss.
As I understand it, average male height in the US today is around 5'9", while Roman soldiers probably ran in the 5'5" to 5'6" range (modern measurements). So only a few inches on average. Much of that is just due to better nutrition. Though apparently Iron Age Gauls averaged 5'10"! Big guys indeed.
Quote:My wife and I suspect it's the hormones they put in the feed of the animals we eat, and perhaps genetic changes from Engineered Vegetables.
Ha, that's a good one! Almost as bad as the fluoride in the water, eh?
Valete,
Matthew
Re: Umbo sizes - Tarbicus - 09-17-2007
Quote:As I understand it, average male height in the US today is around 5'9", while Roman soldiers probably ran in the 5'5" to 5'6" range (modern measurements). So only a few inches on average. Much of that is just due to better nutrition. Though apparently Iron Age Gauls averaged 5'10"! Big guys indeed.Four or five inches difference in height can make a significant difference to the dimensions of your kit. I walk around the British Museum, look at the gear there, and it's tiny compared to what we use. There's just no getting around that plain and simple fact. One exception springs to mind, an anatomical hinged footguard which looks like it fitted a modern foot. But then it was pointed out it probably went over a boot. :wink:
Take a read of this: http://dienekes.angeltowns.net/articles/hellenes/
Note that the Nordic type include today's Swedes and Dutch. I drink at a Dutch pub, staffed and frequented by many Dutch. As a rule they tower over us Brits.
Also there's this piece on head sizes with comparison maps: http://www.snpa.nordish.net/chapter-VIII4.htm
http://www.snpa.nordish.net/bilder/troe-map7a.jpg
Note the regional variations. If the same held true in ancient times then it makes complete sense to upsize your helmets at least, if you're from more northern European stock. Obviously, I believe in upsizing to fit modern stature, as IMHO it reflects more accurately the overall appearance of an ancient and also reflects more accurately the actual function of the armour when worn by a modern European.
Re: Umbo sizes - gaiusseptimiuslucianus - 09-17-2007
Hi Folks,
Just a data point re height. In London Bodies: The Changing Shape of Londoners from Prehistoric Times to the Present Day, Alex Warner, Museum of London, 1998, there is a summary of heights from excavated remains:
Prehistory: Male 170cm (5'7") Female 158cm (5'2 1/4")
Roman: Male 169cm (5'6 3/4") Female 158cm (5'2 1/4")
Saxon: Male 173cm (5'8") Female 163cm (5'4 1/4")
Medieval: Male 172cm (5'7 1/2") Female 160cm (5'3")
1998: Male 175cm (5'9") Female 162cm (5'3 3/4")
Interesting!
Lucianus
Re: Umbo sizes - Petre82 - 09-17-2007
Can't the argument best be summed up that most reenactors are making reproduction gear, and not replicas. Replicas would be exactly the same size, materials and construction as the original gear.
Since almost everyone is not the typical size of a Roman, 5'7", naturally things like tunics, shoes and armor need to be a little larger to fit.
I have the same problem in American Civil War reenacting. When looking at the original gear, even going back only 140 years, people have become substantially larger-not so much height, but weight.
By following the proper construction techniques, correct pattern and by using fabric as close to the original without recreating the actual industry that made it, I can make an accurate reproduction. It still would not be a replica as I am larger than a typical civil war soldier. I use the same logic for Roman Reenactment. Gear (swords, shields, pilums, pugios, belt plates, etc.) stays the same size as the original, but items I have to wear (tunic, armor, shoes, helmet, etc) I upsize to a comfortable fit. Items can be slightly larger and still be accurate since they are just reproductions. Just my two cents :roll:
-Peter
Re: Umbo sizes - AntonivsMarivsCongianocvs - 09-18-2007
Ave,
I’m very much of the opinion that you need to scale up the armor, helmet sizes, sword handles, etc so that modern man can recreate.
At 6 foot 2 inches tall (188 cm) and 245 pounds (111.13 kilos) I am not going to fit into, pretty much, any original Roman helmet.
Even when I go to museums in the US, the clothing of the Navy officers from the 1900s might fit someone half my size... and that’s only 100 years ago. When I see beds that US Civil War soldiers slept in, they look like children’s beds.
Human’s have, overall, grown larger and stronger. Yes Julius Caesar was very tall at 6 foot for a Roman but, he would be like a basketball player today, maybe 6 foot 5?
Unless you are copying a known find for some other project, aside from Recreation, then you need to scale up the items so you can wear them.
Serously, who would spend $1000 and hours and hours on making a kit that you could not wear?