Weight and grip of sarissa and shield in macedonian phalanx

[Paralus]

Ruben, Paralus,

I think in light of the images Ruben posted and others like below of a Theban stele, the safest bet would be a hoplite. Of course we cannot be certain, but this would appear to be in the "cannon" of hoplite poses.

We seem to have this "pose" described by Xenophon (Anabasis. 5.6.25-27):

Thus he spoke as he rode along, while at the same time he began to lead the troops on slowly in line of battle; and after they had got the peltasts into position on either flank, they took up the march against the enemy. The orders had been to keep their spears on the right shoulder until a signal should be given with the trumpet; then, lowering them for the attack, to follow on slowly, nobody to break into a run. And now the watchword was passed along, “Zeus Saviour, Heracles Leader.” Meanwhile the enemy were standing their ground, thinking that the position they held was a good one. When the Greeks were drawing near, the peltasts raised the battle-cry and proceeded to charge upon the enemy without waiting for any order; and the enemy rushed forward to meet them, both the horsemen and the mass of the Bithynians, and they put the peltasts to rout. But when the phalanx of the hoplites kept moving on to meet them, marching rapidly, and at the same time the trumpet sounded, and they struck up the paean and after that raised the battle-cry, and at the same moment couched their spears, then the enemy no longer awaited the attack, but took to flight.

Couched clinches it I'd suggest.

[M. Demetrius]

So what does "couched" mean in this context?

[Paullus Scipio]

Paralus wrote:

Couched clinches it I'd suggest.

....except this might be a 'loose' translation. I'd suggest we look at the Greek word before considering the issue 'clinched' :wink:

[Paralus]

So what does "couched" mean in this context?

....except this might be a 'loose' translation. I'd suggest we look at the Greek word before considering the issue 'clinched' :wink:

…êlalazon kai hama ta dorata kathiesan

…raised the war cry and, at the same time, lowered (or let fall or couched) their spears

Now, prior to this, the order had been expressly given to “keep their spears on their right shoulder” (dorata epi ton dexion ômon echein) and then, on the signal to lower (kathentas) them for the attack.

Clearly if the spear is rested on the shoulder, lowering it for the attack means dropping it off the shoulder and carrying below the shoulder – “couched” in an upward angle as in the art above.

[Paullus Scipio]

Good enough!.....in fact excellent! No doubt there at all, so it 'clinches' it for me! :wink: D

[PMBardunias]

Now, prior to this, the order had been expressly given to “keep their spears on their right shoulder” (dorata epi ton dexion ômon echein) and then, on the signal to lower (kathentas) them for the attack.
Clearly if the spear is rested on the shoulder, lowering it for the attack means dropping it off the shoulder and carrying below the shoulder – “couched” in an upward angle as in the art above.

This is not nearly so clear as it may seem at first glance. For one thing hoplites often seem to have carried the spear resting on their shoulder at the balance point, about 1/3 up from the base, by holding it on or near the sauroter. In this position it can be "lowered" and held underhand, but the five feet or so of spear jutting up from the shoulder can also be "lowered" by dropping it forward into the overhand position. Probably the most important thing is that spears that are sticking up and back move to facing forwards, not the exact drop in elevation of where the spear is held.

[Paralus]

Two things. Firstly, Rex Warner translates "dorata epi ton dexion ômon echein" as "spears kept at the slope". This might be a "free" translation to facillitate your description. Secondly, the hoplites have just crossed a gully or ravine and are attacking a force which had taken a strong position on a hill. They are therefore atttacking uphill. It seems more logical to have the spears couched and angled up slope.

The spears are definitely "held" or "rested" but the word ômon literally translates as "ulna" (in the forearm). It is always translated (and used by Xenophon) to indicate shoulder.

The trick is the use of kathiesan and kathentas. This is to "let down" or "let drop/fall" (Thucydides describes the Peloponnesian ships "dropping" their oars - with disastrous results - in the face of Phormio's ships). Whilst I take the point (pardon the pun) of dropping the point, this description surely precludes the raising of the spear off the shoulder to lower the point? Particularly attacking uphill?

[PMBardunias]

Whilst I take the point (pardon the pun) of dropping the point, this description surely precludes the raising of the spear off the shoulder to lower the point? Particularly attacking uphill?

I disagree, the main point it that the spears are going from pointing up to pointing forward- the point dropping forward. How the hand moves that is dropping the point forward- its moving up as the point falls- is irrelevent. The dory in fact pivots forward at its balance point, not raising much at all above the height of the shoulder.

Attacking uphill is also not important. Hoplites surely did not change the way they held the spear because of a slope. It is my opinion that when charging they always used the dory overhand, underhand being relegated to pursuit.

[Paullus Scipio]

It is not so easy to run with a heavy spear held "overhand", and I expect that it is quite likely that the charge was carried out "underarm", just as described here, and that the shift to overhand ocurred in the last second or so before the clash....... D

[Paralus]

I disagree, the main point it that the spears are going from pointing up to pointing forward- the point dropping forward. How the hand moves that is dropping the point forward- its moving up as the point falls- is irrelevent. The dory in fact pivots forward at its balance point, not raising much at all above the height of the shoulder. [...] hoplites often seem to have carried the spear resting on their shoulder at the balance point, about 1/3 up from the base, by holding it on or near the sauroter. In this position it can be "lowered" and held underhand, but the five feet or so of spear jutting up from the shoulder can also be "lowered" by dropping it forward into the overhand position. Probably the most important thing is that spears that are sticking up and back move to facing forwards, not the exact drop in elevation of where the spear is held.

Well that last might well be correct but I think we're overcomplicating what appears a simple statement. The spears are ordered to be rested upon the right shoulder and then at the signal, lowered for the charge. You would suggest that the hoplite rested his spear - point up - against his shoulder (collarbone). That being so, the only logical position for the spear to wind up is underhand. The hoplite holds his spear - fingers to front and thumb behind - and at the signal allows it to swing forward by rotating the hand. It is now held underhand as shown in the artwork above. Some single handed gymnastics then need to apply so as to transfer the spear to an overhand grip.

For it to function the other way, the spear must be rested against the shoulde point down. This would clearly result in raising the spear rather than lowering it though.

I'd suggest that, in a classic hoplite "set piece", the order will have been to close up with spears in the overhand position before marching to contact. This, though, is not the Boeotian plain in Greece: the hoplites have crossed a ravine and are about to assualt an enemy uphill from them. They are not walking but "charging" the enemy position implying, as Paullus notes, a run. In the end the enemy flees and it becomes a pursuit.

[PMBardunias]

It is not so easy to run with a heavy spear held "overhand", and I expect that it is quite likely that the charge was carried out "underarm", just as described here, and that the shift to overhand ocurred in the last second or so before the clash.......

The only thing more difficult than running with a spear held overhand is to "shift to overhand ocurred in the last second or so before the clash" :wink: . There are those who believe that they hit the enemy line with the dory "couched" like a medieval knight (who tend to do this on horseback!) and they advocate the initial underhand position. I find this unlikely for a variety of reasons I've outline before. Changing over at the end of the charge I think far more dangerous that any possible benefit during the approach.

[PMBardunias]

For it to function the other way, the spear must be rested against the shoulde point down. This would clearly result in raising the spear rather than lowering it though.

The point is still resting point up. It is difficult to picture or describe, but real easy to do in practice. You start out holding the spear in any way you wish. When you want to raise it, you swivel around the hand so that the index finger is pointing down to the sauroter, palm up supporting the shaft, thumb to the outside, fingers inside. Since the spear is resting on your shoulder this is pretty secure. Then you simply drop the hand until the spear shaft falls forward and clears your head. The arm now moves out and up pivoting mostly at the elbow and is raised into an overhand position. I think Stephanos has video of them doing this. It is very easy and there is no fumbling or grip changing. Try this with a broom-stick- its simple.

There are variations on this theme. One, which can be done in close order, involves raising the arm straight up until the sauroter clears your shoulder, then letting it fall forward as you twist the wrist forwards. The grip is less secure because at one stage you can only hold it with thumb and forefinger, but it works well. Try it, play around. maybe you'll come up with something new.

[Justin of the New Yorkii]

I hope I'm not repeating material that someone else already brought up, but here is a passage about Alexander's campaign against the Getae from Arrian's Anabasis that is relevant to this discussion:
"Crossing the river Nestus, they say he reached Mount Hsemus on the tenth day. And there met him here, along the defiles as he ascended the mountain, masses of well-armed traders, as well as bands of free Thracians, who had made preparations to check the further advance of the army by occupying the summit of the Hsemus, where the troops had to pass. They had collected together their wagons and placed them in their front, not only using them as a rampart from which they might defend themselves, if hard pressed, but also intending to let them loose, where the mountain was precipitous, upon the phalanx of the Macedonians in its ascent. . . . But Alexander conceived a plan for crossing the mountain with the minimum of danger, and being resolved to take all risks, knowing there was no other possible route, he commanded the heavy-armed soldiers, whenever the wagons came rolling down the slopes, to open ranks so far as the width of the road permitted, and let the wagons run by; but if they were hemmed on either side, to huddle down in a mass and lock their shields compactly together, so that the wagons by their very impetus should leap over them and pass on without doing hurt. And it turned out just as Alexander had conjectured and commanded. . . . The wagons rolled on over the shields without doing much injury. Indeed, not a single man was killed under them. Then the Macedonians, regaining their courage, inasmuch as the wagons, which they had greatly dreaded, inflicted no damage upon them, charged with a shout against the enemy."

It would seem that if this story is true, the shields would have to be quite large in order for wagons to roll over the top of them.

[Nearco]

Then, the grip sistem in the macedoniand shield (phalangite) was the same that the aspis? with porpax?

I tried in a phalanx formation with one of these shields, the shield had the shoulder strap that was mentioned before. The movement of your arm is limited for the lenght of the strap and you can only move it up and down. In the other hand with that strap the shield stands always in a correct position protecting you. The real problem is to hold the sarisa with the left hand, the arm of the shield. The shield had a leather porpax in the center, so if you want you can use it or not. When I used the porpax it was almost impossible for me to hold the sarissa with my left hand (and the shield was not so concave as some that have bee found) I had no space to do it and the border of the shield really damages your hand. Maybe it is a mistake in the design of the shield.

When I used no porpax (just the antilabe as porpax for my wrist) I could hold the sarisa better and with this and the shoulder strap the shield still gets the correct position.

[MeinPanzer]

Then, the grip sistem in the macedoniand shield (phalangite) was the same that the aspis? with porpax?

I tried in a phalanx formation with one of these shields, the shield had the shoulder strap that was mentioned before. The movement of your arm is limited for the lenght of the strap and you can only move it up and down. In the other hand with that strap the shield stands always in a correct position protecting you. The real problem is to hold the sarisa with the left hand, the arm of the shield. The shield had a leather porpax in the center, so if you want you can use it or not. When I used the porpax it was almost impossible for me to hold the sarissa with my left hand (and the shield was not so concave as some that have bee found) I had no space to do it and the border of the shield really damages your hand. Maybe it is a mistake in the design of the shield.

When I used no porpax (just the antilabe as porpax for my wrist) I could hold the sarisa better and with this and the shoulder strap the shield still gets the correct position.

This is exactly a topic I am writing about at the moment, and I have come to much the same conclusion you have (though not based on reenactment, so it is very helpful to have your input!). We have no evidence whatsoever that any of the shield types employed by the phalanx were equipped with the porpax, though this has often been stated in scholarly literature. On the other hand, we have this statement from Plutarch, Life of Cleomenes 9.2:

Filling up the body of citizens with the most promising of the perioikoi he created 4,000 hoplites, teaching them to use the sarisa with both hands and to bear shield with strap (ochane), not with porpax.

This is as explicit as any scholar could ever hope such a statement to be: in order for these men to use the sarissa with both hands, they were not to use the porpax but to use a strap which would pass around the shoulders. So, that means that we have one piece of literary evidence against the use of the porpax, and nothing in its favour. And once we accept that such shields were only suspended by a strap (and perhaps a small secondary strap through which passed the left wrist for added control), we have to realize that there was no need to place any restriction on the size of the shield, its concavity, or whether it had an offset rim or not. Therefore, if we accept that the primary mode of carrying the phalangite's shield was with the strap and not with the porpax, we can also accept, for instance, that Argive shields could be carried by phalangites (as Pausanias tells us the Achaean infantry reformed by Philopoemen did), or that the large, very concave shields often found in Hellenistic art could be too.

I am not saying that phalangites never bore shields equipped with porpakes - they very well may have with smaller shields - but merely that we have no evidence for them doing so, and so we cannot assume that they could not have carried a certain type of shield because the use of the porpax would not have allowed it as so many scholars have in the past.