[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Berserkergang wrote:
[quote]Stern wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Stern wrote:
[quote]Berserkergang wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I do not know if you of the posters who posted that this is not a feat ever enjoyed the glory of prolonged marches with heavy rucksacks, but as far as I could find out the most US army special forces do is around 50 lbs in training.
The most anyone did ever do where Roman soldiers with up to 100 to 150 lbs.
Fiven that those soldiers usually are skinny runts that brings them to about 300 lbs tops which is still way below 400.
If any one of you ever tried to walk 26 miles with 100 lbs on his back you would know that is neither pleasant, nor easy.
[/quote]
Your a fool, these guys were not “skinny runts”. skinny maybe, also the most effective infantry of its time. And they were everywhere. One day you rebel figuring the romans were chillin in milan, and literally they would cross half a continent in mere weeks. Also, skinny runts do need less food. PX would be an expensive soldier[/quote]
Ok, so at Caesars time thee average height of a roman soldier was 148 cm. So, they were not skinny runts, they were perfectly average dwarfs.
Which hauled up to 69 kgs of equipment but at this point we really should consider whether their very, very low center of gravity was not a massive help.
[/quote]
I doubt the “average” height of a roman soldier was 148 cm (4.8 ft). If we’re really talking about “average” height that means some soldiers were 160 cm tall while others were between 120 or 130 cm (3.9 to 4.2 ft). Totally implausible. Heck! full blood male pigmies have an average height of 4 ft 10 in![/quote]
Interesting subject. There’s debate over the average height of the romans which includes dietary factors, integration of other conquered races into the legions and which period you’re referring to.
To say the average height of a roman is X is a broad and misleading statement. While at some point the recorded average height of a roman citizen may have been 4.8 feet, they have also been recorded at an average of 5.5 ft and more. Gaius Marius, who pretty much reformed the legions into the bad-assery they became, lowered recruitment restrictions and opened them up to all regardless of wealth or class. This undoubtedly had an impact on the average height of the legions when you take into consideration the nutrition of the lower classes however even he had a personal standard when it came to the minimal height of a roman soldier which, as far as I can ascertain, was 5.10ft. Of course, this wasn’t strictly adhered to during recruitment according to records and was later lowered even more to fill in the ranks. But even at that - there was no shortage of volunteers during the Marius reform and I doubt they couldn’t afford to be picky.
Consider further the expansion of the empire, which required a greater army obviously, and you have to also consider a great portion of that army were conscripted ‘barbarians’ and mercenaries, former enemies of the Empire, who were “on average” even taller than your true-blooded roman citizen.
So, yea, to say the average height of a roman legionary was 4 foot 8 is at best misleading.[/quote]
Sorry guys, the Roman records themselves show that the average height of a Roman soldier was around 148cm. 300 years later it was around a gigantic 165, but only because they recruited more Gauls and Germans.
[/quote]
At the end of Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus’ reign. It’s important to keep that distinction in mind as even that link you provided suggests that before the “end of his reign” the average height was actually higher.
In fact I’m still sceptical they were ever actually that short. I see plenty of anthropometric/anthropological and Roman history resources telling a very different tale to that link you’ve posted.[/quote]
An AVERAGE height of 4.8 ft is impossible, period. If the romans were pygmy-sized people it wouldn’t go unnoticed! [/quote]
I waiting for your well researched paper on the flaws of the height measuring system of the Roman legions.
[/quote]
I’ll give you some uncited work.
This subject needs clarification. The Roman stock we are specifically speaking of, and which was traditionally used for generations, was generally of Italians living north of Rome and south of the Po River, along the southern boot closest to mainland Greece, and along the coast south of Rome. Rome, until much much later, was strictly a Roman army. This means you had to have Roman citizenship to join.
The reforms you speak of changed the recruitment patterns, easing the financial burden of military service. Previously, Rome maintained its military forces in much the same way Greek states did. In Greece, the hoplite was generally a self equipped fighter and were not usually identically equipped. Macedon and Sparta were distinct in this sense. Poorer soldiers were often utilized as slingers and javelin men, much the same way a roman velite would operate.
Rome classified its military into five general groups before marian. Equites, triarii, Princeps, Hastati, and Velites. It was, at this time, the most effective and logistically advanced force in the world. The different classes were self equipped from horsemen, heavy spearmen, heavy infantry, regular infantry, and skirmishers. However, this only drew from a pool of men who owned land and were members of a certain wealth bracket. So when Marian introduced reforms, he simply adopted a policy that favored the recruitment of the growing populations of poorer Romans, armed them and maintained them.
As for size, there is a perilous misconception. Yes they were smaller when faced with some barbarian/outlanders. Frequently, the barbarians they met were not beserker warriors but starving masses who had been migrating like a herd. Further, perceptions were often tinted by fear of a monstrous opponent, attempts to demonize their opponents, and arouse bloodlust and depravity in their soldiers. Remember, compared to Eastern people the romans were broad and stocky.
On Roman citizenship, it slowly spread in a Zerg like manner, but was very specific and did not include a majority of those who lived under Roman regulation. Rome, you must understand, was a giant racket whose entire purpose was to systematize tax regulation of as much land as the could for the benefit of the Roman state, however it was organized.
We’re looking a society, if we walked the streets of Rome, that would be much leaner than today. However, though a typical male would be maybe 5’6,130-170 lbs, you would certainly see massive people, tall people, short people. An average person today would probably appear odd, as we would be proportioned as if we were an average mannequin blown up to 120%.