VEMBRACES

[Tarbicus]

I don't buy into the whole "people were smaller back then", we have several soldier skeletons to tell us that the Romans were not that much smaller than we are today. The Herculaneum soldier was 5'7" I believe. Julius Caesar was 5'7" though some reports have him labeled as taller, Augustus was considered short and still was probably only 5'5".

Marius even stated that the minimum height of a soldier should be 5'10" (in Roman feet mind you), and this rule was most likely rarely followed).

Even if they were "shorter" that does by no means establishes they had hands any smaller than someone today who is "shorter" as well

Julius Caesar was considered tall by his contemporaries. It hardly makes him 6'4". The Herculaneum soldier may have been ~5'8", but all of the males lying around him averaged 5'5". I've looked into this subject before.

Osteometric variability

Worthwhile measurements were recorded from nine crania and ten mandibles associated with the crania. Of these, eight were male skulls, and two female. The cephalic indices of the male ranged from 70.0mm to 78. 1mm, with a mean of 75. 1mm. The mean cephalic index compares well with the 74.4mm (Belgae), 75.6mm (Dobunni), and 75.7mm (Brigantes) of the Romano-British period (Goodman & Morant 1940). The mean also compares very well with the male Romans from Great Caster-ton - 75.0mm (Denston 1970).

The reconstructed stature of four females ranged from 1.543m (5ft 0¾in) to 1.613m (5ft 3½in) with a mean of 1.562m (5R 1½in). The stature for the males ranged from 1.619m (5ft 3¾in) to 1.803m (5ft 11in), with a mean of 1.714m (5ft 7½in). The mean stature for the males is 6mm (¼in) shorter than that for the males at Great Casterton - 1.720m (5ft 7¾in), and 38mm (1½in) in excess of the 1.676m (5ft 6in) of males from Maiden Castle (Trevor 1954). The mean of 1.562m (5ft 1½in) for the females is 32mm (1¼in) more than the 1.530m (5ft 0¼in) for the combined

Now, if we knew which part of the skull was being measured...

Note also that the Roman skeletons at Great Casterton are cited as being on average 5' 7¾". This is also a common height from the other sources I have found, which I'll post once I've finished my searching.

A report on remains from a suburbia in Rome puts the average male Roman height from a 1st/2nd C necropolis at 166.6 cm (just over 5' 6" I believe).

I like my gear to be at least 5% larger than the original find.

And smaller stature as an inherited racial characteristic does, IIRC, mean smaller hands.