Shield-strap

[TR M VALERIVS]

The Macedonians certainly did use both hands to grip their 18' sarissa, while still carrying the shield protectively on the left. Their shields had a duel point of contact method, where the left arm goes through a large bracket, until stopped by the elbow joint. The hand then encountered a strap near the shield edge; rather than grasp it, however, it goes through the strap so that the strap rests at wrist level. This leaves the left hand relatively free to grasp the sarissa, forward of the right hand. Here's a shot of Legion VI Victrix employing this method, which can be seen in Connoley's Greece and Rome at War, in a recent film shoot:

I don't have a better photo of the inside shield at the moment, but it's quite similar to what Peronis shows, substituting a strap for the metal bracket. And every person has both hands on their sarissa, while the shield provide maximum protection.

I was [also] wondering if this was how Roman mounted units controlled their shields in combat, while having the reins in one hand and a lance in the other. Obviously, there's simply not enough hands on a human to do everything. I thought this idea would go against what the evidence suggests, there being a central boss in most depictions, but Peronis solved that mental block by pointing out one doesn’t actually have to use the handgrip most of the time, that a shield might well be equipped with both a central handgrip and the two-point anchor system (my thanks to him on that one).

I will be experimenting in the next few weeks with a Praetorian hexagonal design, using Peronis’ method. I may offset the straps somewhat, and make the upper one at a higher level (and canted to the right) than the lower one (which will also be canted to the right). I’d built some Teplar shields for a movie shoot last summer, and found this to be a more comfortable arrangement, since the arm does not naturally rest at a perfect 90 degree angle to the ground when riding.

Theodosius, the only problem you may encounter is that Roman cavalry shields (aux, Prae., LR) are almost always shown flat; I believe your beautifully-constructed LR job is an infantry model…? While it certainly could be rigged up as Peronis suggests (as evidenced by the similarly-dished Macedonian shields of Leg VI), their may be horse-related issues that come into play when employing a large, dished shield on horseback.

Salve,
M VALERIVS
[size=75:whj72hih]AKA, Jim Whitley[/size]

[Tarbicus]

I don't doubt that that method of holding the sarissa works, but (sorry, have to say it), are you positive your group's physical arm strength is equivalent to an ancient man's arm strength? Given that his day-to-day life would have probably been all about physical toil?

How many in the photo are physical labourers?

[Theodosius the Great]

Ave T M Valerivs,

Theodosius, the only problem you may encounter is that Roman cavalry shields (aux, Prae., LR) are almost always shown flat; I believe your beautifully-constructed LR job is an infantry model…? While it certainly could be rigged up as Peronis suggests (as evidenced by the similarly-dished Macedonian shields of Leg VI), their may be horse-related issues that come into play when employing a large, dished shield on horseback.

I'm not sure if concaved shields were used by late cavalrymen, but I'll ask around. And I don't doubt you when you say that a big shield may cause potential problems while riding, but the height is actually 4 inches shorter than the hexagonal shield made by Deepeeka. Of course, mine is much wider than the hexagonal shield, so I don't know if that'll have consequences.

I, too, would like to do some experimenting and find out. Thanks for the warning and your compliment


Theo

[Peroni]

I'd like to see if I can adapt my concave shield to your design. I'll need to use rivets.

I had the added advantage of putting all the strapping and riveting (flat-head copper nails) onto/through the shield BEFORE I applied the linen covering! That way, the rivets do not show at all on the front face.

You will have to paint the rivets to match your nice shield I guess(?) :?

[Theodosius the Great]

I had the added advantage of putting all the strapping and riveting (flat-head copper nails) onto/through the shield BEFORE I applied the linen covering! That way, the rivets do not show at all on the front face.

Yeah, I was wondering about this too. You may be right, it might be the only way. But I was thinking about adding strips anyway so that I could store plumbati (darts).




Maybe Vortigern or Faventianvs can help me. Again, congratulations on your design, Peroni.

[TR M VALERIVS]

Ave, Tarbicus! Not sure I understand the question, but I'll do my best: you are correct, most of those pictured presumably do not have the strength of a soldier from this period. One or two of these are women, and most in the formation are academia. This explains why the sarissa, both raised and levelled, are rather askew, despite the heads and buttspikes being light-weight rubber (18' of wood is extremely unwieldy... no pun intended). I was merely illustrating the method of using the shield while having both hands otherwise occupied, that the puzzle had been solved long before the Romans came along. And that the Romans, always willing to adopt from those before them, could easily have utilized this method for their cavalry units. There's no evidence to confirm or refute it, anyway.

Hope this was what you meant...?

M. VALERIVS / Jim Whitley

[Dan Howard]

It is possible to have a shield that is flat on the back and convex on the front. Homeric circular shields were made of multiple layers of rawhide with each circle made from a smaller diameter than the one underneath so that the construction bulges in the middle. The bronze facing went over the top to give a smooth curved surface. IIRC Spanish "aradgas"(sp?) were constructed in a similar manner (though they were "heart" shaped, not circular).

[Matthew]

[color=darkblue]The Macedonians certainly did use both hands to grip their 18' sarissa, while still carrying the shield protectively on the left. Their shields had a duel point of contact method, where the left arm goes through a large bracket, until stopped by the elbow joint. The hand then encountered a strap near the shield edge; rather than grasp it, however, it goes through the strap so that the strap rests at wrist level. This leaves the left hand relatively free to grasp the sarissa, forward of the right hand.

Is this really true? What is the evidence for it? It was my understanding that it remained unknown whether the Macedonian Sarissa Phalanx (of whatever period) used Shields in conjunction with their Sarissa.

Matthew James stanham

[Ron Andrea]

Gentlemen,

Great discussion, supplemented by even better pictures.

One question, as you have described the hanging shield for a mounted soldier, it would be a passive protection to his left side only, correct? Would that be a battle position? Would he carry it on his back during non-combat movement?

[Felix]

[color=darkblue]The Macedonians certainly did use both hands to grip their 18' sarissa, while still carrying the shield protectively on the left. Their shields had a duel point of contact method, where the left arm goes through a large bracket, until stopped by the elbow joint. The hand then encountered a strap near the shield edge; rather than grasp it, however, it goes through the strap so that the strap rests at wrist level. This leaves the left hand relatively free to grasp the sarissa, forward of the right hand.

Is this really true? What is the evidence for it? It was my understanding that it remained unknown whether the Macedonian Sarissa Phalanx (of whatever period) used Shields in conjunction with their Sarissa.

Matthew James stanham

It is absolutely known that Asclepiodotus says this. He describes the shield of the phalangite as being about 2 feet diameter and used with the sarissa. Such a shield has been found in Asia Minor, from the Hellenistic period (see Connolly).

As to its use, it would have been worn on the forearm while wielding the sarissa; away from the field it could have been worn on the back or at the side. Plutarch (IIRC) describes the Macedonians as swinging their shields around when they prepared for close combat.

[Robert]

Salve Omnes,

Having a carrying strap on my cavalry shield has enabled a small test. Trying to carry a shield as high as in the picture of the tombstone called for a very short strap. This made the shield very difficult to don. After a few bumps, scrapes and a near choking, the results are known. Carrying a shield in this position seems nearly impossible. The alignment in respect to the body is totally wrong, the shield will not hang in the straps this way. Nor can I envision a strap attachment which would allow this position. When trying to walk, the shield sags sideways and bumps the back of the head, pivoting at the shoulder.

What does work very well is the attachment of the shield strap to the cross-bar (I put two rivets with brass shackles through the wooden crossbar nearer the shield boss then the edge), and having the adjustable strap over one shoulder. The shield can be moved completely to the back or can hang more to the left (or right) side when riding. I have seen several re-enactors riding with this technique (I don't ride), it allows good control of the horse and free use of the right arm.

[Flavius Promotus]

Very interesting! Thank you Robert

I hope to be able to complete my dished oval before the end of the year :?

[Robert]

Good luck to you, Florian! Mind you, my shields are first century Valkenburg type. No dishing, straight slab. There could be a difference in use in later periods, but the test was pretty conclusive as to carrying height. Have two blanks lined up for fitting and painting, will experiment further on carrying with a strap. Will keep you all posted

[Poftim]

Jaime,

Here's the photo of the back of my cavalry shield with the guige strap.

The long strap goes around my right shoulder and buckles up there.
The left arm goes through the other two support straps in order that the reins can be held comfortably in the left hand without bothering with the wooden shield grip.

That said, having a vertical grip on the shield also helps too.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b242/ ... CF1830.jpg

I am looking at your picture and your device, and wondering why you don't hold the shield in your left hand, sword/spear/spoon in your right, drop the reigns and control the horse with your knees and weight-shifting? Out here on the ranch, the cow ponies can be controlled with just knees and weight shifting, in fact the indians hardly ever used reigns from what I recall. Seems simpler, doesn't it?

[Robert]

Hi Eric,

Spoken as a true "master of the horse"! From what I have seen here (Holland/Germany), riders use reins, but yes, your observation makes perfect sense (to one never on a horse). Takes a lot of training, I presume, horse and rider acting as one. Does this imply a one rider, same horse ratio, or are these cow-pony's receptive to all riders using similar means of guidance?