01-02-2008, 11:06 PM
Wolfgang wrote:-
....Gentlemen, I too am somewhat troubled by the various figures we have
On the one hand we have Connolly's figure, which I simply find very difficult to accept ( and surprising if true), on the other, a shield some 20mm thick for the most part seems to go too far the other way.
Two posssible lines of investigation present themselves - the best would be to get Blyth's 1982 report, and see what figure he gives or if the drawing is a scale one, the second would be to contact Manning Imperial ( and I know someone on RAT knows them personall from previous threads, and find out the thickness of the centre of their poplar shield, and how they dealt with problem.........
As to weight, most estimates are 7-9 kg for an aspis of vatican type....and if Manning worked from that, then we could have a circular self-fulfilling hypothesis
A comparison with viking shields, of which many survive ,several intact may also shed some light......
Like Aspides, they were generally 85-95 cm diameter, made of light wood planks (pine,fir,linden-basswood to our American friends) butted together, sometimes but not always covered or backed with thin leather. The planks are often of uniform thickness and average 12-20 mm thick, though some go up to 30 mm at centre. Tapered shields can be as little as 6mm at the rim. ( one shield found in Latvia intact was very unusual in being 6mm or so thick, but it was padded and stuffed with grass between wood and leather to 'thicken'it and provide a padded shock-absorbing surface to blows) and I am excluding the Gokstad shields because these are considered funeral ornaments, not battle shields.
They weighed typically 7-8 kg.
We hear, too, of exceptional blows (usually spear, sometimes axe) penetrating these,just like Aspides.
There is considerable variety in them ( and we would suspect, in Aspides also, if more survived)
Interestingly, they were wielded single handed from a boss-covered handle.
We might expect Aspides, with their forearm support and steeply curved rim to fit over the shoulder to be heavier, therefore - perhaps as much as 8-9 kg? More?
As a BTW:-
Quote:It would be interesting to estimate the weights of the two different aspis reconstructions. A shield with a thicker centre makes much more sense, but what would be the weight of a shield with a 2,0/2,5 cm thick and big wooden centre? Seems very thick to me, even if it was made of light poplar.Giannis wrote:-
Quote:Indeed,with Paul M's digram we have almost the entire shield made by 2cm thick planks.This is VERY THICK and heavy!
....Gentlemen, I too am somewhat troubled by the various figures we have
On the one hand we have Connolly's figure, which I simply find very difficult to accept ( and surprising if true), on the other, a shield some 20mm thick for the most part seems to go too far the other way.Two posssible lines of investigation present themselves - the best would be to get Blyth's 1982 report, and see what figure he gives or if the drawing is a scale one, the second would be to contact Manning Imperial ( and I know someone on RAT knows them personall from previous threads, and find out the thickness of the centre of their poplar shield, and how they dealt with problem.........
Quote:Paul,did you make experiments with that thick wood?..alas no - they were a hasty spur of the moment experiment with a 'waste' length of pine plank I had, and a small sheet of copper my son had left over from jewellery making...I didn't have a 2cm thick plank....though I might do some comparative tests with 4 and 8 mm ply.....
As to weight, most estimates are 7-9 kg for an aspis of vatican type....and if Manning worked from that, then we could have a circular self-fulfilling hypothesis
Quote:Also,there are vase paintings that show fully penetrated shields by spears(though the one I have in mind shows a homeric scene)....keep in mind that the vases show a 'topos', but the anecdotes of Koronea and Brasidas, if true, tell us that the 'lighter,thinner' trend was appraching its limit by that time. Of course,logically, you want the lightest shield that will do the job.......
Add to these the aftermath of the Koroneia battle,with the "crushed" shieds.
A comparison with viking shields, of which many survive ,several intact may also shed some light......
Like Aspides, they were generally 85-95 cm diameter, made of light wood planks (pine,fir,linden-basswood to our American friends) butted together, sometimes but not always covered or backed with thin leather. The planks are often of uniform thickness and average 12-20 mm thick, though some go up to 30 mm at centre. Tapered shields can be as little as 6mm at the rim. ( one shield found in Latvia intact was very unusual in being 6mm or so thick, but it was padded and stuffed with grass between wood and leather to 'thicken'it and provide a padded shock-absorbing surface to blows) and I am excluding the Gokstad shields because these are considered funeral ornaments, not battle shields.
They weighed typically 7-8 kg.
We hear, too, of exceptional blows (usually spear, sometimes axe) penetrating these,just like Aspides.
There is considerable variety in them ( and we would suspect, in Aspides also, if more survived)
Interestingly, they were wielded single handed from a boss-covered handle.
We might expect Aspides, with their forearm support and steeply curved rim to fit over the shoulder to be heavier, therefore - perhaps as much as 8-9 kg? More?
As a BTW:-
Quote:(I should note here that many vases show a much more gradual domed shape than we generally ascribe to the aspis. In these cases they could gain from the sloped effect.)..that is quite correct and these shallower, uniform domes without the pronounced curved rim represent an earlier type of Aspis (7-6 century), with a shallow dish some 10 cm deep and a rim of aprox 5 cm. The steep shouldered Vatican/later type, some 15 cm deep, appears circa 550 BC. Some pottery shows both types ( e.g. a lekythos in NY has apparently a hoplite armed with each type - I have not seen it, but it is evidently illustrated in M.F.Vos(1963) 'Scythian archers in archaic Attic vase painting')
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
