04-05-2001, 04:47 AM
Salve,<br>
<br>
The weight of kit is a much debated item and estimates can vary greatly. Junkelmann and his companions marched with some fourty to fourty five kilo's of kit and packs across the Alps, but other estimates are some set lower at some thirty kilo's. The differences in estimates are partly due to different types of equipment used (eg the older model of legionary shield is a couple of kilo's heavier than the later rectangular model, mail coats can vary in weight depending on size of link, width of iron wire and cut) and partly to disagreement on what the Roman soldier actually carried with him. While some consider every and all items named in the source material as those required toi have been carried on the march, others suggest that some authors ascribe simply too much gear and assume that the various tools were distributed among several men rather than carried by a single man. A march made in full kit several years ago induced much sympathy for the latter position, though perhaps not exactly on scholarly grounds
.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
<br>
The weight of kit is a much debated item and estimates can vary greatly. Junkelmann and his companions marched with some fourty to fourty five kilo's of kit and packs across the Alps, but other estimates are some set lower at some thirty kilo's. The differences in estimates are partly due to different types of equipment used (eg the older model of legionary shield is a couple of kilo's heavier than the later rectangular model, mail coats can vary in weight depending on size of link, width of iron wire and cut) and partly to disagreement on what the Roman soldier actually carried with him. While some consider every and all items named in the source material as those required toi have been carried on the march, others suggest that some authors ascribe simply too much gear and assume that the various tools were distributed among several men rather than carried by a single man. A march made in full kit several years ago induced much sympathy for the latter position, though perhaps not exactly on scholarly grounds
.<br><br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
