Macedonian infantry shields

[Duncan Head]

Hypaspists are fun - I'm happy to argue about hypaspists, but the problem is that there is almost no evidence, and no academic consensus to argue for or against. More broadly - how about Macedonian shields? This is a subject on which I have a Slingshot article on the back burner and wouldn't mind kicking around here if anyone is willing. There is a consensus (Macedonian phalangites' shields were small and carried on a strap round the neck) which is in my opinion very possibly wrong. Ties in to hypaspists too (where the consensus is more or less that the chaps with 'hoplite shields' on the Alexander Sarcophagus are hypaspists, as they can't be phalangites as phalangites' shields are small (see consensus part 1)) - also in my opinion very possibly wrong.

OK, here's a new thread.

I don't really recognise that as a statement of the current academic view on Macedonian shields (though you can certainly find "little buckler hung round the neck" repeated in quite a few places). There certainly was a strap, but not just a strap. The big question as far as I can see is whether there is one type of "Macedonian shield" or two distinct sizes.

As for the hoplite shields on the Sarcophagus, they can't be phalangites' shields - or at least, they can't be shields used with the sarissa. But that's not primarily because of the size, but the shape. Using an Argive shield, the left hand holds a grip that is some distance in from the edge of the shield, because of the broad, flat rim. Therefore, I don't see how the left hand can hold the antilabe and a pikeshaft at the same time.

(I'm not sure that my 1980s idea that the Sarcophagus figures were hypaspists was ever a consensus, though.)

[RichT]

OK thanks Duncan, a good beginning.

I don't know what the consensus is or if there is one, but I think that the views of Markle are those most commonly quoted - he sees there being two types of Macedonian shields - the small rimless pelte/pelta, the one Asclepiodotus calls 'bronze,, eight palms across, not too hollow' - and the classic hoplite shield, as seen on the Sarcophagus. He (like you in the 80s) thinks the hoplite shield was carried by Hypaspists and the pelta was carried by the Foot Companions (in Alexander's army and the Successors that is), and that sculptural shields on the monument in Beroia depict these two types.

Problems:

There certainly was a strap, but not just a strap

Is it certain there was a strap - Markle offers some coin depictions of shields with what look like straps, but is that all the evidence? When Cleomenes adopted the sarisa (or Philopoemen? Sorry I've forgotten and don't have references to hand) he trained his men to carry the shield not with a 'porpax' but with an 'ochane', but I think 'ochane is 'handle' not 'strap', and it's not clear what the distinction is between ochane and porpax.

they can't be shields used with the sarissa

Is that certain either? There is a figure on the Sarcophagus (one of the pediments) holding a prisoner by the throat, and his hand projects beyond the rim of his shield. So do we know for sure that a sarissa can't be held with an Argive aspis? Cleomenes/Philopoemen's reform involved a change of carrying arrangements, but not a change of shields - nothing is said about new shields. I don't know how the left hand would hold the sarissa, but it seems to me possible that it could. The only depiction of the carrying arrangements of Macedonian shields - figures on the Aemilius Paullus monument - seem to show standard porpax/antilabe - yet everyone assumes (I assume) these were sarisophoroi.

Got to go, more later...

[Duncan Head]

I don't know what the consensus is or if there is one, but I think that the views of Markle are those most commonly quoted - he sees there being two types of Macedonian shields - the small rimless pelte/pelta, the one Asclepiodotus calls 'bronze,, eight palms across, not too hollow' - and the classic hoplite shield, as seen on the Sarcophagus.

More recently Juhel and Sekunda are arguing that there are two kinds of non-hoplite Macedonian shield, based chiefly on the sizes of recently discovered bronze shield-facings from Greece and FYROM - all round, rimless and decorated, but one group about 75 cm in diameter, one group about 65 cm. The smaller one would be the "pelte" of the Antigonid peltasts. Of course the smaller size also conforms to the "eight palms" of the tacticians - although they seem to be suggesting that the pelte carried by their "peltasts" is smaller than the eight-palm shield of their hoplitai, which suggests either an error by the tacticians or an error in the identification.

Sekunda at least, I think, would add the Argive shield as a third type carried by the phalanx, as he seems to think that the Sarcophagus shields are those of Alexander's "line" phalanx.

There certainly was a strap, but not just a strap

Is it certain there was a strap - Markle offers some coin depictions of shields with what look like straps, but is that all the evidence?

I think that when you get "the Macedonian troops ... drawing their peltai from their shoulders round in front of them" (Plut. Aem. Paul. 19.1) then you're looking at some sort of shoulder-strap, baldric or whatever.

When Cleomenes adopted the sarisa (or Philopoemen? Sorry I've forgotten and don't have references to hand) he trained his men to carry the shield not with a 'porpax' but with an 'ochane', but I think 'ochane is 'handle' not 'strap', and it's not clear what the distinction is between ochane and porpax.?

It's Kleomenes - Plut. Kleom. XI.2:

raised a body of four thousand hoplitai, whom he taught to use a sarissa, held in both hands, instead of a doru, and to carry their aspides by an ochanē instead of by a porpax

"ochanē" is rendered "strap" in the Perrin translation; but the LSJ does seem to suggest that "ochanon", at least, is equivalent to porpax. However in Herodotos II.141 the ochana belong to Assyrian, so presumably non-hoplite, shields; and are eaten by mice, so he is thinking of something leather, or at least organic. Hence I suppose the "strap" - Kleomenes' shields use something leather instead of a bronze porpax.

they can't be shields used with the sarissa

Is that certain either? There is a figure on the Sarcophagus (one of the pediments) holding a prisoner by the throat, and his hand projects beyond the rim of his shield. So do we know for sure that a sarissa can't be held with an Argive aspis?

You could probably even drop the antilabē on an Argive shield in order to grasp something like hair; holding a pikeshaft is a different question.

Cleomenes/Philopoemen's reform involved a change of carrying arrangements, but not a change of shields - nothing is said about new shields.

And nothing is said about them being the same shields, either. They have aspides with ochana rather than aspides with porpax, that's all.

I don't know how the left hand would hold the sarissa, but it seems to me possible that it could. The only depiction of the carrying arrangements of Macedonian shields - figures on the Aemilius Paullus monument - seem to show standard porpax/antilabe - yet everyone assumes (I assume) these were sarisophoroi.

I don't think everyone does - I've seen that one identified as an Argive shield, though I cannot immediately think where.

[Duncan Head]

Incidentally, if anyone has JSTOR access, these might be useful:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25010697 - J K Anderson, "Shields of Eight Palms Width"
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4129993 - "Der Makedonische Schild aus Pergamon der Antikensammlung Berlin"

Haven't read either of them, and I know the Pergamon shield only through the painting in Peter Connolly's books.

[Dangun]

I have sent them to your inbox.
I included a couple of others that may be related, but appear after the Markle 1999 article, and some of Markle's earlier stuff.

Not my area though, so I have no idea of relative relevance. 

And if anyone else wants them, please let me know.

[Duncan Head]

Very kind of you, Nick, thanks. I'll try to have a read tonight and see if they tell us anything new.

[RichT]

Thanks for the articles. I don't suppose anyone here speaks German and feels like translating the 'Der Makedonische Schild' article...? I haven't read that one - I also have Liampi's 'Der Makedonische Schild' (though as I have no German I haven't read it either - but it has tables and diagrams...)

At the time Anderson wrote 'Shields of Eight Palm's Width' there were far fewer examples of actual Macedonian shields (or shield covers) than have been discovered since, and they might have altered his conclusions a little - was it Anderson elsewhere or someone else who concluded that all the archaeological, literary and artistic evidence showed that the shields of the phalanx were aspides not peltai and were pretty much the same size as standard hoplite shields, if rimless. That conclusion might be altered a bit now since the found shields seem to be around 65-70 cm - which is bigger than Asclepiodotus' eight palms width though not much.

I'm not convinced by two types of shields of 75cm or 65cm as that seems like a small enough variation to be within normal bounds (presumably shields did come in different sizes, to allow for people with different length arms). But however you look at it, it seems to me very hard to believe the 'eight palms' of the tacticians - given that found shields are a bit larger than this, depicted shields are significantly larger than this, and that Asclepiodotus (etc) himself says that the hoplites carried 'the largest size of shields' and the peltasts smaller shields (which if smaller than eight palms would have had to be dinner plates).

Anderson's observation that the AP monument shields are markedly convex (as are a number of other depictions of Mac shields) and that "this explains the recommendation of the tacticians that the shield should be 'not too hollow'" has always perplexed me - far from explaining it, it seems to contradict it.

I suppose the question then is which phalanx Asclepiodotus is describing. "Of the shields of the phalanx the best is the Macedonian, of bronze, eight palms across, not too hollow", he says. So first of all - the best shield for the phalanx (in his humble opinion) is what he describes. but other shields are available. And does he mean "the best is the Macedonian, a shield which is bronze, eight palms across, not too hollow", or does he "the best is bronze, eight palms across, not too hollow, and of Macedonian type". The Macedonianness of a shield seems to be its decoration (the familiar hoops) and its lack of rim - not its size or construction. This might mean there are not two or even three shields for the phalanx, but many, in use in different times and places. Interestingly if there is a Ptolemaic origin for Asclepiodotus' work, which is possible, the Ptolemaic shield example we have (no reference, sorry - Allard Pierson Museum I think - it's a stone shield model onto which a bronze cover was preumably hammered) - is noticeably flat, very different from the AP monument or the Pergamon plaque or the coin depictions. It is also a bit larger than eight palms (about 70cm as I recall).

Duncan:

Sekunda at least, I think, would add the Argive shield as a third type carried by the phalanx, as he seems to think that the Sarcophagus shields are those of Alexander's "line" phalanx.

I'm inclined to agree with him on this, in that I've not been convinced (yet) that it's impossible to carry an Argive shield and a sarisa. Experimental archaeology to the rescue?

Duncan:

I think that when you get "the Macedonian troops ... drawing their peltai from their shoulders round in front of them" (Plut. Aem. Paul. 19.1) then you're looking at some sort of shoulder-strap, baldric or whatever.

So am I right in thinking that's the only evidence? If so I'm not convinced by that either - I imagine it would be normal for anyone to march with a shield on their shoulder then bring it to their front when going into action, and I don't see evidence in that for a strap. There might have been a strap of course, but I just don't think this is good evidence for one (and at any rate if there was a strap, this would seem to imply it was a carrying strap, not used in action when the shield was brought to the front). I don't think this is clear at any rate.

Duncan

It's Kleomenes - Plut. Kleom. XI.2... "ochane" is rendered "strap" in the Perrin translation; but the LSJ does seem to suggest that "ochanon", at least, is equivalent to porpax. However in Herodotos II.141 the ochana belong to Assyrian, so presumably non-hoplite, shields; and are eaten by mice, so he is thinking of something leather, or at least organic. Hence I suppose the "strap" - Kleomenes' shields use something leather instead of a bronze porpax.

Thanks that's the one. It would make sense if it's the material that's different, but that it is still a loop on the back of the shield, not a baldric round the neck. This would give more flexibility for the carrying arm. I have another reference somewhere (Herodotus) that the Carians (?) replaced their shield straps with ochana - which implies to me that ochane is not a baldric (though of course usage may well have varied).

Duncan

And nothing is said about them being the same shields, either. They have aspides with ochana rather than aspides with porpax, that's all.

True. He doesn't say, and absence of evidence etc - but taking the simplest explanation, it seems to me that same shields, different carrying arrangements is perfectly possible, if nothing more.

I don't have an overall theory on all this that fits all the evidence (sadly, I don't think any one theory ever will) but my overall impression based on these bits and bobs and a dose of wild speculation is:

- the phalanx of Alexander (the Foot Companions) carried (at least some of them) standard Argive shields, with some different carrying arrangement that freed the left hand to hold the sarisa. These are what are depicted on the Sarcophagus.
- the Hypaspists, being lighter equipped and used for special missions etc, dispensed with the heavy Argive shield and carried 'peltai', rimless Macedonian shields, significantly smaller and lighter than the hoplite aspides.  Some of the Foot Companions (the 'lighter equipped') might also have had these shields
- in the later years of Alexander's reign and under the Successors there were a lot of changes and variations which are lost to us, but which led to some level of standardisation, for the hoplite phalanx, on large Macedonian shields, rimless, heavily convex, not much smaller than classic Argive shields (and called aspides, not peltai). At the same time, the Hypaspists and their successors, the guard units, transformed into 'Peltasts' and retained the smaller (maybe flatter) Macedonian shields, called peltai.
- there remained considerable regional and chronological variation as different shields came into and out of fashion. Some still used Argive shields (Cleomenes' Spartans, maybe). Some used slightly smaller shields for the hoplites (the Prolemies, maybe).

Feel free to shoot all this down...

I will revisit my notes and those articles also.

[RichT]

Here are the other references I was after.

Plutarch Philopoemen 9 "In the first place he changed the faulty practice of the Achaeans in drawing up and arming their soldiers, for they used thureoi which were easily carried because they were so light, and yet were too narrow to protect the body, and spears (dorasi) which were much shorter than the sarissa. For this reason they were effective fighting at a distance, because they were so lightly armed, but when they came to close quarters with the enemy they were at a disadvantage. Morever, the division of line and formation into small units (speirai) was not customary with them, and since they employed a phalanx without either projection (probole) or close order (synaspismos), like the Macedonian, they were easily dislodged and scattered. Philopoemen showed them all this, and persuaded them to adopt aspis and sarissa instead of thureos and doru, to protect their bodies with helmet and thorax and greaves, and to practice stationary and steadfast fighting instead of mobile movements like peltasts."

Pausanias 8.50 "As the Achaeans now turned their gaze on Philopoemen and placed in him all their hopes, he succeeded in changing the equipment of their infantry. They had been carrying short spears (mikra doratia) and shields like the Celtic thureos or Persian gerra. Philopoemen however persuaded them to put on breastplates and greaves and also to use Argolic shields (aspisin Argolikais) and long spears (dorasi megalois)."

Plutarch Cleomenes 11 3 "Then he filled up the body of citizens with the most promising of the perioikoi and thus raised a body of 4000 hoplites, whom he taught to use a sarissa held in both hands instead of a spear (doru) and to carry their shields (aspida) by a handle (ochane) rather than an armband (porpax)."

Herodotus 1 171 "It was the Carians who first taught the wearing of crests on their helmets and devices on their shields and who first made ochana for their shields; till then all those who used shields carried them without ochana and guilded them with a baldric (telamon) which they slung round the neck and over the left shoulder."

The historicity of all these events is not undisputed of course. But assuming the accounts are accurate, interesting points are:
- Achaeans had equipped themselves as thureophoroi some time earlier in the 3rd C.
- changing to Macedonian armament meant a general increase in defensive equipment (shields and armour)
- shields used are aspides, specifically Argolic aspides - which to me means 'hoplite shields'
- the ochane is specifically contrasted with the shoulder strap

My conclusions are that sarissai could be and were used with 'hoplite shields', and that sarissa-bearers carried their shields using some not fully understood leather handle, but not with a baldric or strap.

[Andreas Johansson]

Thanks for the articles. I don't suppose anyone here speaks German and feels like translating the 'Der Makedonische Schild' article...? I haven't read that one - I also have Liampi's 'Der Makedonische Schild' (though as I have no German I haven't read it either - but it has tables and diagrams...)

I speak German but I'm likely to have little time for translation in the near future. If you sent me the article I could try and summarize.

[RichT]

Thank you! Anything at all would be most helpful. I can't work out how to send the article so I've PMed you a link.

[valentinianvictor]

I took photograph's of said Sarcophagus when I visited the museum in Istanbul a couple of years ago. I'll check as I took pictures of all four sides and the top so if I find anything of use I'll post it here.

[RichT]

I should add that there are vase depictions of hoplites holding shield and spear in the left hand, e.g.

http://i551.photobucket.com/albums/ii459/history_of_macedonia/Sun%20of%20Vergina/athenian_hoplites_departing.jpg

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/295/1823/1600/scan0001.jpg

Not in action of course - since the hoplite wielded his spear one handed - but to me this does demonstrate that it's not impossible in principle to carry a rimmed aspis while holding a spear in both hands.

[Duncan Head]

I should add that there are vase depictions of hoplites holding shield and spear in the left hand

And if you're holding your spear vertically, I can see that that's not a problem; sources as early as the Chigi vase seem to show hoplites with two spears, after all. But the hoplite on your second vase has his spear passing inside the line of the rim, which isn't going to work with a spearshaft held in both hands unless he's holding his shield horizontally below the pikeshaft.  With the departing hoplite it's less clear because of the angle of the picture, but he may be in the same position. Still don't really see that holding a pike in two hands is practical with a rimmed Argive shield. You might manage to do it with an extremely long cord handgrip, I suppose, but then is the shield going to stay upright and under any control? Perhaps if there's a baldric taking the weight?

Sorry I haven't replied to other points yet: I still intend to do so before too long.

[Chuck the Grey]

I remember that when Alexander was campaigning in Thrace at the beginning of his reign, the so-called "free Thracians" were preparing to roll wagons down a slope to break up the phalanx. One of the commands that Alexander gave was for his men to lie down and lock shields allowing the wagons to roll over them without harm. That would seem to indicate that the Macedonian shield was somewhat larger than the small pelta implied in some writings.

I remember a modern commentator, maybe JFC Fuller, suggesting that the soldiers that locked their shield may have be the hypaspists equipped with the hoplite shield.

Food for thought?

[Patrick Waterson]

Arrian I.1.9 is your reference, Chuck.

"... any sections [taxin] ... which were caught in the narrow pass were to form in the closest possible order [perikatalambanointo, xunneusantas = squeeze into the tightest group possible], such men as were able lying prone on the ground with shields locked together [sugkleisai es akribes tas aspidas = with shields precisely closed together] so as to give the heavy wagons, as they careered down the hill, a chance to bounce over the top of them without doing any harm."

It may or may not be significant that Arrian refers to these shields as 'aspidas': in I.6.4 he uses the word for the shields of the Macedonian phalanx and in II.11.6 he uses the word for a Persian shield when Darius' chariot, shield, mantle, and bow are captured following Issus.  IV.23.2 has 800 'pezikais' (infantry of unspecified nature) mounted on horseback for speed, still carrying their 'aspidas'.  In VI.10.2 Peucestes, a hypaspist, shields Alexander with the sacred aspis taken from Troy (which Diodorus has Alexander use at the Granicus), though in Diodorus XVII.98.5 Alexander himself is carrrying a pelta.

Arrian XVII.13.2 uses 'aspis' for a 'normal' cavalry shield, contrasting this with the 'pelta' carried by the assumed Amazons produced by Atropates, governor of Media, for Alexander's inspection.  This is the only time he uses 'pelta' in any context, so either everyone else everywhere carried the aspis or Arrian is using it generically as a shield-word.