Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How tall was the average Roman Soldier
#16
Quote:A cavalry helmet found in Newstead, Scotland belonged to a trooper who was 5' 4" at the most.

Ave! Welcome to RAT! Not to start by sounding confrontational, just had some questions about the information you posted. Was this helmet found with a skeleton? Because I'm not sure how else it could be determined how tall the owner was, based on the helmet size alone.

Quote:Similiarly, 2 cuirasses found in Corbridge, England have a girdle length suitable to someone of similiar build

My own copy of one of the Corbridge cuirasses fit me just fine, and I'm over 6 feet tall. It also fits other wiry guys over 5'8". I don't think we can use artifacts like those to determine height with any accuracy.

Vale,

Matthew
Matthew Amt (Quintus)
Legio XX, USA
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/legioxx/">http://www.larp.com/legioxx/
Reply
#17
hmm wayy back then I probably would opt to be a fisherman, woodcutter, or a shepherd or hunter, yeahh I know a lil of how to mend nets and soo on, I'm pretty good with a sling soo I much rather prefer to be Auxilia than a front line legionary, possibly from idk the Balearic Islands Big Grin
James Andrew
Reply
#18
Skeletal remains of a soldier in Pompeii were 5'7" (1.7m). Remains dated to the 4th C were 5'5" (1.65m) thought to be from an elite army unit. There were also remains from the fort at Velsen which were c.6'2" (1.9m), but it's apparently believed that the individual would have been local Frisii.

Pages 9 to 10 of Roman Legionary: 58 BC - AD 49 (Osprey)
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#19
I used to work in a living history museum and something I have heard a lot of people say that irks me is this: "Oh look at this house, look at their clothes - how tiny people used to be in olden times - we are so much bigger now." Overall, people were slighter than we are today ON THE WHOLE. Individuals always break the mould - then and now. People were not smaller then because of some genetic predisposition to being smaller, they were smaller on average because of improper vaccination aganst childhood diseases that stunt growth and because of improper nutrition and a a whole host of other ENVIRONMENTAL factors.

I forgot to address the original question! I would guess that the classical soldier of Greece or Rome would have been 5 and a half feet tall give or take an inch or two and of "wiry" build. Modern people who engage hevily in the types of athletic and military tasks that they did, typically have a lot of long lean muscle mass - constant labor does that to the human body. It actually takes practice and a very specific training regimen (High weight, low reps) to make your muscles exhibit hypertrophy or "bulk up" like bodybuilders. Muscle naturally takes a long hard shape under cosntant exercise. Think of a build more like a "dancer" than "Arnold".
MARCVS VELIVS AVITVS (Reid Neilsen)
LEGIO VII GEMINA FELIX
"SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERUDITIONIS HABES"

http://www.whitemountainforge.com
Reply
#20
Hello All !

I would like to give some comment (in a bad English as usual) though I have not been here for a long time.

I cannot add any more about the sources and historical point of view. Vegetius seems to be a good advice about size and weight, idealistic though.

My comment is about biology. It will be hard to explain in English but I will try to be as clear as krystal :

We have genes. We all know that. But what we didn't knew untill recently is that we have biological way of inhibition of those genes.

Size is a complex genetic matter (aside the environemental matter). Robustness, tallness, fitness, wheightness... all are commanded by genes, and a mix off all give our stature.

The environement has two way to modify our stature :

- directly : cold, humidity, lack of food, of variety of food, etc.
- indirectly : by influencing the inhibition of the genes responsables for the stature.

When manutention is required, the people tend to be less tall and more heavy stature. This kind of stature is fit for hard work.

When manutention is less required, people tend to be more tall and more thin. We can see that in most civilized world since 1970. The two last generations is far taller and less heavy than the generation before.

Nutrition is for something but work and inhibition of the genes too.

It is a big find in the scientific world because it means you may have a genetic patrimony but never, strictly never express it.

As someone here said, all his family is small but he is tall. The same in my family. (Belgium)

So it is reasonable to think about roman soldier size depending of the work they did and, in fact, depending of the work they had to do while child, the work the mother and father did, etc.

It won't give you any numbers but a good start to think about it.



One last thing : I read here Romans had parasite. It is true, but it is true since then and until now. I do not remember the numbers exactly but between 20 and 50 pc of the populations of civilized world are infected by worms without knowing it. It reduce a little the immunity system (regulation is a better world), and reduce the energy absorbed by the body.

Except if we know exactly the proportions of ancient Romans infected, it is impossible to accept this parameter as an influencing parameter.

Hope I have been readable and wish you good health !
Proximus (Gregory Fleury)
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Average height of a Roman fortlet in Britain tikeshe 4 1,824 08-01-2017, 01:14 AM
Last Post: Dan Howard
  How much could an average Roman soldier carry? TheMexican1821 9 2,995 09-19-2012, 11:11 AM
Last Post: TheMexican1821
  A Tall Order! Brythonic Boundaries AD43 Theoderic 11 3,000 08-20-2012, 11:30 PM
Last Post: John1

Forum Jump: