Can someone answer this?

[Q. Vipsanivs Praetextatvs]

Can you speak with meters too? I don't understand pulgades ...

[L C Cinna]

Can you speak with meters too? I don't understand pulgades ...

Tarbicus numbers are between 1.65 m and 1.72 m for the average Roman.

@Jim: are those numbers calculated with samples from Italy only or are they taken from Roman graves from the Imperial period throughout the empire?

I guess the average hight would have slightly changed because of the huge influx of people from all over the empire?

[Tarbicus]

IIRC, they were mostly latin Roman graveyards. I'll see if I can find the links again (lost in a browser crash one day). What I was originally doing was trying to get around this whole issue of helmet sizes, and in the course of doing so discovered that the more scientific references I found absolutely say that head sizes are smaller when body stature is smaller. This made a lot of sense to me when you consider that a number of helmets, when made to actual sizes, barely fit modern European noggins, or leave little room for padding. Combine this with the nearly intact felt+fur lining found in one helmet, then I personally think an original helmet on an original Roman's head would look oversized to us. But I think it simply allowed for more shock absorbing materials inside the helmet, which in turn would keep it stable on the head.

[Q. Vipsanivs Praetextatvs]

Can you speak with meters too? I don't understand pulgades ...

Tarbicus numbers are between 1.65 m and 1.72 m for the average Roman.

Thank's :wink:

[Urselius]

Parts of what was Illyria, especially around Montenegro-Crna Gora, have very tall populations today. Perhaps this is the reason why Illyrians became so prevalent in the Roman Army of the 3rd century - 'Virtus Illyrici.'

[Crispvs]

One thing that these discussions of the height of Romans compared to Gauls or Germans tend to forget about is that by the mid first century AD it is like that the majority of recruits into the army came from the provinces and could be expected in all likelyhood to have native or mixed ancestry, despite the requisite citizen status. These soldiers would be likely to be taller than the 'Roman' average. Add to that the fact that by quite early on in the first century auxiliaries were already beginning to complete their 25 / 26 years service and were aquiring citizenship for themselves and their sons who could then legitimately join legions, meaning that in all likelihood plenty of legionary soldiers even by the time of the invasion of Britain, would have had no 'Roman' ancestry whatsoever.
All this means that much of this discussion of Roman heights is really rather academic.

Crispvs

[Q. Vipsanivs Praetextatvs]

All this means that much of this discussion of Roman heights is really rather academic.

Crispvs

I think the same, an ''average'' doesn't say a lot...

Furthermore, I think that height depends of a lot of circumstances too.

[Jona Lendering]

I think that height depends of a lot of circumstances too.

If I understand it correctly, good food is the most important factor to determine one's length. Still, the difference in height between an Italian and a Gaul was something that was noted by the people back then.

[Tarbicus]

All this means that much of this discussion of Roman heights is really rather academic.

Legions and auxilia weren't posted to Italy AFAIK and I'm certain the skeletal remains weren't at all military. I stand by my belief those heights were the average non-military type :wink:

[Q. Vipsanivs Praetextatvs]

I think that height depends of a lot of circumstances too.

If I understand it correctly, good food is the most important factor to determine one's length. Still, the difference in height between an Italian and a Gaul was something that was noted by the people back then.

Exactly what I mean :wink:
And a good diet depends of the status and, maybe, the region.
Another circumstance is the hstorical period, live's conditions weren't the same during punic wars that during the begining of the principate.