Scutum/Rectangular shields 410ad to 510ad?

[Matthew Amt]

I'm always a little puzzled by the idea that swords with 30-inch blades need so much more space to wield than those with 20-inch blades. Here's a photo of our local Battle of Hastings reenactment:

http://www.larp.com/midgard/02h10.jpg

I'm at the center in the green tunic. Obviously these are just reenactments, not competitive combat. But such fights are always quite a crunch, space-wise, with all of us very crowded together, shields often overlapping (smaller shields than most reconstructed Late Roman ones that I've seen), and we rarely have much problem swinging our long swords, axes, and clubs. Overhand, yes! Not a lot of finesse. But we almost never whack our allies accidentally. Again, these are reenactments, not competitive, and we don't generally use spears for safety reasons, but since the discussion was about the space needed to wield a sword I figured it was relevant.

There are also any number of SCA groups that use very large scuta in combat, very effectively. Plus, the scutum in the Republican era was quite a bit taller than 40 inches, and seems to have served just fine. I do agree that the degree of curvature can be a factor for some things, but most of that is kind of hypothetical in any case.

I'm just not convinced that shield shape dictated or permitted *significant* differences in tactics. At least not the change from rectangular scutum to large oval or round shield! I'm still thinking fashion had a lot to do with it.

Valete,

Matthew

[mcbishop]

I'm just not convinced that shield shape dictated or permitted *significant* differences in tactics. At least not the change from rectangular scutum to large oval or round shield! I'm still thinking fashion had a lot to do with it.

It may be pertinent that there seems to be a healthy market for police riot shields of the 1m/39 inch height. Perhaps they're all 'parade shields'... ;-) )

Mike Bishop

[PhilusEstilius]

Mike.
I realy don't think that police riot shields have any comparison and they can't be parade ones for there are situations where so many of them are trasparent, and with regard to the length some are even about 50 inch but this may be to stop house bricks and bottle bombs getting at the guys legs.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

But being Transparent, this would allow the policeperson, I almost said 'man'.....to show off 'it's' 'parade' uniform, without the shield blocking the audience's view..... :?: :wink:

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Brian,

I would like to point out to both Matt and Robert that where I mention 6 feet or 2 metres apart is in relationship to opposing forces, it is where I was trying to put my point to Fhyn as to how the curved scutum went out of use along with the close quarter style of fighting.

OK, I read that the wrong way.
Of course, they fought at all distances, first at bowshot range, then quickly closing to a very short distance and then to direct contact. I doubt that there was much fighting at 2 metres, which would in any case be work for the lances, not for the swords.

Where the Roman army had taken up the long spartha we also have to look at the fashion of armour that they now did not have so much of

Ah, but that is rather speculative, is it not? Especially for the earlier part of the century I would doubt this, and it may not even have been true for the eastern parts later.

I do not of course consider that the long spartha was just a slashing type of weapon it would be used in thrusting also, and as has been suggested the spear was used for thrusting at an enemy. Infact I would imagine the soldiers would have held onto the spear for now there would have been no more mass shock pilum throw before the shoulder crunch type fighting of earlier times.

Spatha. No, but they had plumbatae and a mass of other weapons being delivered throughout the engagement. But indeed, no pilae.

I still say yet again that the size of the earlier curved scutum still yet needs to be discussed, for the idea of 40 plus inches or so with a massive wrap around just makes it too unwieldy in any type of battle.

How come? Could you elaborate? I don't quite get it.

[mcbishop]

I realy don't think that police riot shields have any comparison

Well, I think there are at least some police forces who would beg to differ.






Those of us old enough to remember the miners' strike in the UK (I was living in Sheffield at the time and knew people who were on the picket line) could not but be struck (dreadful pun) by the similarity between police equipment at the time and Roman legionary gear.

I seem to recall that there is a North American (Canadian, possibly?) police museum that has a replica semi-cylindrical scutum precisely because they see the link with their own riot gear. I googled for it but gave up once I started getting 'nipple shields' appearing(!!!!).

and they can't be parade ones for there are situations where so many of them are trasparent

Er, I was joking there (dig at the common interpretation of the Dura shield as a 'parade shield') ;-) )

and with regard to the length some are even about 50 inch but this may be to stop house bricks and bottle bombs getting at the guys legs.

Those long ones are particularly unwieldy and I gather only used in special circumstances.

And the police aren't the only ones using this stuff. Protesters are wise to the use of shields and there is at least one manual on their use (I particularly liked the garbage can shields, which look like, yup, you guessed it, semi-cylindrical scuta).

Mike Bishop

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Hahahaha i click on the protester manual and the site opens including an ancient warfare magazine ad !!

Also, i find the "by Sarin" hilarious.

Here in Leiden i once tried to train some autonomous Left Wing protesters in the art of the cuneus for a demo, was not serious enough though to
actually have any effect...

The protesters did not bother making proper shields, banners were somehow more important.......LOL

M.VIB.M.

[Medicus matt]

Here in Leiden i once tried to train some autonomous Left Wing protesters in the art of the cuneus for a demo, was not serious enough though to
actually have any effect...

Conversely, some UK reenactors were chosen to train units of 'police' for a filmed recreation of a battle from the miner's strike (Orgreave) because of our experience in using long and short shields.

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi chaps,

I realy don't think that police riot shields have any comparison

Well, I think there are at least some police forces who would beg to differ.

Riot shields, at least those used in your photos, are used only in a purely defensive formation. The police are not attempting to use their gladii in any way... :wink:

Interesting as this discussion about riot gearis, it has no bearing on the topic itself, which is concerned with the disappearance of the rectangular shield.

[mcbishop]

Interesting as this discussion about riot gearis, it has no bearing on the topic itself, which is concerned with the disappearance of the rectangular shield.

On the contrary, it has everything to do with the topic, since it shows the connection between form and function. If, as has been argued here and elsewhere, fighting style changed, then the curved rectangular shield (not the flat rectangular shield which is a different beast) will have become redundant. Police forces deployed in close order have reinvented an appropriate shield. The same holds true of lorica segmentata: it is a close-order defence, less well-suited to all-round needs than mail and scale.

No gladii? Look on the right shoulders of the guys in two lines in the fourth picture. They just don't stick em out between their shields (perhaps it might be thought too aggressive) ;-) )

Riot shields only used defensively? I think some of the miners may have disagreed! Certainly snatch squads tended to use smaller shields but not exclusively. An interesting aftermath of the miner's strike was that Roman re-enactors started to beat their swords on their shields as the British police had done (I don't recall them having done it beforehand but am open to correction on that); a real chicken-and-egg scenario.

Mike Bishop

[Robert Vermaat]

OK, better but still not similar. Modern riot shields are mainly used as a means to protect against misssiles.
I bet the officer in the second picture, for instance, would have wished for a good umbo - this blow may have broken his arm.
True, police can use these shields offensively, but these (flat) shields were not designed for that, just for static defence.

Roman rectangular shields were not designed for a static defensive role, they were used to knock the opponent about before the latter was stabbed with the gladius. That it could also be used in a testudo role was a design plus, but I doubt that it was designed for that. But I'm no expert there.

I agree absolutely that the change from rectangular to oval/round had to do with changes in fighting style. For myself, i see two main changes:
one, the use of the lance as main battle weapon, which is better deployed over an oval/round shield than over a rectangular one (which would become unbalanced),
two, because of the development in fighting involving closed shield formations of the opponent (Roman or otherwise) which would favour the longer spatha over the shorter gladius or semispatha, resulting in an overarm slashing technique that is also facilitated by an oval shield instead of a rectangular one.

All speculation of course, which goes almost without saying. :|

[Tim Edwards]

It is also assumption that the average Early Imperial Roman scutum was rectangular.

If we can delete Trajan's Column from our mindsets, we will see that original stelae, shield covers and boards have a broad range of shape and dimensions.

Those Early Imperial shields that are rectangular are seldom anything like the dimesions of the Dura Europos scutum, whcih we all copy from each other ad nauseum.

I suspect that most original rectangular scuta were much narrower, and with a shallower chord, not unlike Mike's police there!

[mcbishop]

It is also assumption that the average Early Imperial Roman scutum was rectangular.

If we can delete Trajan's Column from our mindsets, we will see that original stelae, shield covers and boards have a broad range of shape and dimensions.

They are certainly depicted as such but it is difficult to assess the accuracy of such apparent dimensional differentiation. As an example, the flat rectangular shield of Annaius Daverzus (which in other respects is extremely accurate, but not - it must be said - a photographic representation) reaches from his shoulder to well below his knee (just above his ankle in fact). Artistic considerations and the skill of the sculptor all come into play with representational evidence.

Those Early Imperial shields that are rectangular are seldom anything like the dimesions of the Dura Europos scutum, whcih we all copy from each other ad nauseum.

Because it is the only intact archaeological evidence. One can argue till the cows come home that it is a special case and should be ignored, but that is always going to be speculation. Whether you're in the Big Shield School, the Little Shield School, or the Somewhereinthemiddle Shield School, you have to make a balanced assessment of the evidence. There are as many reasons to accept the Dura shield boards as ordinary combat equipment as there are for them being 'parade' shields (although we don't actually have any literary references to troops specifically having 'parade' shields, wheras there are one or two references to shields being used in combat).

I suspect that most original rectangular scuta were much narrower, and with a shallower chord, not unlike Mike's police there!

I think that is also an assumption (see above) ;-) ) So, to get back to the original question -

Has anyone heard of or seen any evidence, of these types of shields still being used within this time frame by the empire or its allies?

- the answer has to be 'no' archaeologically, and that representationally, it could plausibly be argued that that type of shield (curved and rectangular or sub-rectangular - rectangularity is less important than it being curved to the body) becomes more a symbol than an accurate representation, once you move out of the 3rd century AD (not least given the habit of later emperors of nicking sculpture from earlier monuments!). By the 4th century there is still remnant equipment being used (but lorica seg surviving to this date in Spain does not mean this holds true for the whole empire) so I for one would not dismiss the possibility of curved rectangular shields being used at this date (nor of real evidence being found to support such a notion), but that is a very long way from saying categorically that they were. As for the 5th century... who knows?!

Mike Bishop

[Graham Sumner]

Also note in Mike's pics 1 and 3 that the Police must have been expecting cavalry! wink:

The only mention I know of which describes this particular tactic, front row kneeling or crouching second row standing with shield resting on top of the front guys shield, is against missile fire as would appear to be the case in both pics. It happened during the campaign of Antony against the Parthians when their horse archers fired on the Romans. However when the Parthian cavalry charged the Romans stood up. So in my opinion the use of the shield in this way by some re-enactors as anti cavalry drill is not really correct.

An interesting aftermath of the miner's strike was that Roman re-enactors started to beat their swords on their shields as the British police had done (I don't recall them having done it beforehand but am open to correction on that); a real chicken-and-egg scenario.

I think you may be right Mike.

Graham.

[Robert Vermaat]

The only mention I know of which describes this particular tactic, front row kneeling or crouching second row standing with shield resting on top of the front guys shield, is against missile fire as would appear to be the case in both pics. It happened during the campaign of Antony against the Parthians when their horse archers fired on the Romans. However when the Parthian cavalry charged the Romans stood up. So in my opinion the use of the shield in this way by some re-enactors as anti cavalry drill is not really correct.

Since it's apparantly still a normal formation against cavalry by the 6th century (Maurikios), I have but little doubt that is was one of the normal formations in the Roman tactical inventory.
I'd say you are right about the anti-cavalry formation. Crouched when being shot at, standing with shoulders against the shields (like Arrian describes) when attacked by the cavalry at close quarters. The main difference between Anthony and Maurikios would be the length of the thrusting weapons available.