Posted on 09/19/2005 3:32:59 PM PDT by blam
September 19, 2005
Notebook: Archeology
Medieval ancestors measured up to our height standards
By Norman Hammond, Archaeology Correspondent
OUR ANCESTORS were as tall as we are, contrary to popular belief. Over the past five millennia the average height of men in Britain has remained stable at about 170cm (5ft 7in), and that of women at 160cm (5ft 3in). We may be surprised at how small the armour worn by the Black Prince or King Henry V was, but such giants on the battlefield were not physically large and were towered over by contemporaries of all classes.
The enduring myth that people in the past were much shorter than we are today contains a small element of truth, writes Sebastian Payne, chief scientist at English Heritage, in British Archaeology. There have been small changes, and average height has increased by an inch or so over the past 50 years, he says, attributing the increase to better health and nutrition.
The myth seems to stem from such things as low doorways on some medieval houses, and the small suits of clothes and armour in museums. But Dr Payne says that there are plenty of tall doors, and we simply dont register normally sized outfits. Recruits in 18th and 19th-century military records were considerably below todays average heights, he says, but adds: Recruits are often from poorer families whose average height is less, and were often not fully grown.
In the abandoned medieval village of Wharram Percy in Yorkshire, the churchyard has yielded hundreds of skeletons for analysis. There ten-year-olds were around 8in shorter than children today: by the time they were fully grown they were nearly as tall as modern adults.
A study by Charlotte Roberts and Margaret Cox, drawing together evidence of stature from skeletons across the country, shows that adult heights in both sexes have remained constant since the Neolithic era.
British Archaeology No 84: 51
"It always amazed me how they could have wielded those huge swords."
One thing is that they're not as heavy as they look, and another is that you can use the weight of the pommel to rotate the blade when cutting, which takes a lot less power than waving the whole thing around.
George Washington was over six feet tall.
Hubby and I collect WWI & WWII items. The WWI uniforms are TINY...oddly so (we have quite a few). I'm 5'4"; 125 lbs; and can barely get my arms and shoulders into the mens' uniforms.
Occasionally, at a very large show we will see a larger-sized uniform; they are so rare they command $1000, or so.
Even the larger sized WWII uniforms are more expensive, as most are what we would consider a small or medium today.
HOWEVER, I have WWI & WWII Red Cross nurse uniforms that fit me perfectly. I think that mens' frames have changed far more than those of women.
Perhaps, I guess anything is possble. I am just remembering the ones I'vce seen in various museums, such as Ft. Hays museum in Kansas that has leftover unitforms of both Indians and Military that are all smaller. All the Civil War uniforms I remember in museums are smaller as well.
Ever since I hit 6'3" I've tried to get a few more inches by drinking more cold beer.
The bad part was I had a bunch of long dry spells where cold beer was unavailable. Maybe that was what did it, the break in treatment.
Anyway, I'll continue trying.
Other than the uniforms it is hard to find pictures of troops with their cloths off until WW II. There were a bunch of pictures of the Civil War prisoners but they had been starved.
There is one picture of a British Infantry unit on the move in the desert of Iraq in WW I. They are wearing shorts and just walking along at a good pace. That picture has the biggest collection of "Twiggy" like bird legs I've every viewed in one place.
Our local historic site turned up about 50 soldiers on either side earlier this year.. We're closer to the North :-).
Good point :-).
Interesting. Could be that men's diets have changed more than women's ... or that men, having a great potential height (on average) than women, show the effect of dietary improvement more.
Interesting. I wonder if they had thin legs to start with, or were showing the effects of hard marching and Army food.
Edward Longshanks was Edward I. He was the Great Grandfather of the Black Prince.
Cheers,
CSG
Id be towering over the average Brit at 5 10!
Cheers,
CSG
Cheers,
CSG
(Who has his own hot, heavy, steel suit at home)
Luckily he's a good-natured kid, since he over towers all his middle-school classmates and some of his teachers. I worry, though, when I see some of the older girls start taking interest in him...
Ping to post 116. How's your boy holding up? :-).
True, but still more range than most people expect.
The decorative things we see in museums are thin and for show. They would have been gilt, as well as jewel encrusted for pomp and circumstance.
There is highly decorated parade armor, but there also is the heavily fluted Maximillian plate armor that was both practical, and of lighter weight.
War armour was plain, and had a medium thickness, so to not be too heavy nor too weak. Jousting armour was thick and heavy, but meant for jousting and the impact of two charging horses.
Many people see these suits, and think they were typical, as opposed to the munitions grade stuff worn in battle. Less of the battle stuff is around in museums, compared to the jousting and tourney stuff.
(Who has his own hot, heavy, steel suit at home)
As do I. I suspect for the same reason.;^)
>>>Medieval ancestors measured up to our height standards
Where is Steve Quayle's Giant Theory!!!!
wouldn't ceremonial armour also tend to be armour of the way high ups in the aristocracy, who wouldn't have had the armour comissioned until they were in their seat of power and were older? i've noticed that people tend to shrink as they get older, which may be a contributing factor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.