Macedonian infantry shields

[Mark G]

Didn't the Swiss hold at shoulder height?

[Erpingham]

Didn't the Swiss hold at shoulder height?

Not in the 15th and early 16th centuries.  Here's the well-known Fornovo pikeblock.

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk50/Dstaberg/The%20Renaissance%20at%20War/OrdonnaceArchersatFornovo.jpg

Marignano

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Marignano.jpg/220px-Marignano.jpg

Altdorfers Battle of Issus painting from 1529 shows Landsknecht-style Macedonians using the shoulder-high charge position though.  Exactly which posture Monluc is proposing is perhaps moot, therefore.

[Patrick Waterson]

It would seem EXTREMELY difficult to hold anything that would pass as a pike "at the end" while maintaining any control as to where the pointy end was pointing.

But it is, according to sources, what was done ... So fencing could be and was done with a Renaissance pike.

How would this compare in length and weight to an 18' Chinese chang qiang or Nobunaga-style Japanese yari?  Renaissance pikes, according to a quick internet trawl, seem to have varied between 12' and 18', with the former perhaps prevalent; English Civil war pikes were issued at 16' length but troops tended to shorten them; the Fornovo and Marignano illustrations suggest to me pikes about 12' long or perhaps slightly less.

My impression is that with a weapon which is basically a long light spear one might get away with this kind of thing, but a robust 18' or more 'true' pike would cause terminal balance problems if held at one end.  Hence it seems to me that both gentlemen are correct insofar as one deems a long and heavy pike impossible to handle in such a manner while the other points out that lighter, shorter weapons were indeed held this way.

Altdorfers Battle of Issus painting from 1529 shows Landsknecht-style Macedonians using the shoulder-high charge position though.  Exactly which posture Monluc is proposing is perhaps moot, therefore.

I recall years ago reading an assertion that the Swiss changed their pike-holding technique from points-up to points-down at some juncture because they found that when facing cavalry an upward-held point glanced off armour and flew uselessly upwards while a downward-held point was deflected to the ground and the shaft remained an obstacle.  Might they have simply held the pike differently when facing armoured cavalry?  And might this explain the occasional shoulder-high depiction?

Much as I'd love to talk comparisons of 16th century and Macedonian pike tactics, I fear it may take us away from the subject of the thread.  But, for the interested, I recommend this short piece which quotes plenty of period sources
http://www.marquisofwinchesters.co.uk/Ecwr-Guidelines/Guidelines-pikefighting.html

Nice collection of quotes.

We seem to be running out of interest on the shield front, so I for one would have no objection to a continuing pike discussion, although it may be worth starting a new thread for the purpose.

[Dangun]

But it is, according to sources, what was done.  Duncan has already mentioned Monluc

Absolutely agree - no disputing that.

I just wonder whether there is something we can infer/guess from a combination of the sources and the apparent difficulty of what they suggest. For example, holding a pike-length thing at the end, would be a lot easier if you were stationary. Or as Patrick suggests, maybe the pikes were lighter or shorter than the quoted length. The "chang" (長 or 长) in chang qiang means long and so perhaps by implication there was something shorter?

Does anyone know an approximate weight of these pike (e.g. 18' Chinese chang qiang)? I would be interested in doing some basic physics of what force would be required to hold it upright, if you were to hold it at the end.

[Erpingham]

Renaissance pikes, according to a quick internet trawl, seem to have varied between 12' and 18', with the former perhaps prevalent; English Civil war pikes were issued at 16' length but troops tended to shorten them; the Fornovo and Marignano illustrations suggest to me pikes about 12' long or perhaps slightly less.

The Swiss standardised on 18ft pikes in the 1470s, so I doubt the later examples were shorter.  Pikes were issued by the canton, so returning one you had cut six foot off would be frowned upon.

[RichT]

On the subject of Macedonian shields, does anyone else get the impression that the phalangite shields in the Pergamon battle plaque are held to the right of the sarissa? Or would this be just a misleading impression conveyed by casual sketching?

That is how it looks, yes (ie the sarissa sticks out to the left of the shield). As this plaque is the one and only depiction of phalangites actually using sarissas in the whole of ancient art and archaeology, it's hard to know what to make of it. I think everyone has concluded that it's just an error or lack of precision on the part either of the original artist, or of the person making the drawing (the original is now lost). I can't think of, and don't think anyone has proposed, a way of holding the sarissa/shield that would work like this. Though I do have a memory, as I might have mentioned, of a Phil Steele (?) Slingshot article a few years back suggesting something, if not quite like this, then at least unusual. If the left arm were held high and crooked downwards, and the sarissa gripped from above by the left hand, then a shield strapped to the left forearm might end up to the right of the shield. It sounds (and feels, in impromptu tests) very awkward though. I think sticking to artistic licence or error is the safe bet.

[Erpingham]

Does anyone know an approximate weight of these pike (e.g. 18' Chinese chang qiang)? I would be interested in doing some basic physics of what force would be required to hold it upright, if you were to hold it at the end.

Well, the pikes in the armoury in Solothurn turn out to weigh between 2.5-3.25 kg. and are 4.5-5m long (this is an approximation - I haven't studied all the 100 pikes to get a real average).  Anyone really wanting to go in depth, you can get the dimensions of all of them in the online catalogue.  It's a bit tricky so I'll quote a post at myArmoury

The Solothurn armoury have measurements including weight for all of their preserved pikes as part of their online collection
http://emp-web-45.zetcom.ch/eMP/eMuseumPlus?service=StartPage

Click "suche", in the field marked "Sammlungsbereich" chose "Stangenwaffen" in the drop down menu and click "suchen" and you will be able to browse all of their polearms including pikes.

We also need to be aware of the difference in weight given the level of seasoning of the wood.  Greener wood was also more prone to sag; here is our old pal John Smythe again

"Also I would that the staves of the picques should bee of a tite and stiffe ashe, and not of ashe that dooth sagge, and bend when the piquers doo carrie their piques breasthigh before hand couched, because that such sagging and bending ashe, although it be verie tough yet it is more heavie then the other ashe; besides that the piquers cannot carry the piques of such sagging, and bending piques so even and straight in their Enemies faces, as they may carrie the other piques that doo not bend nor sagge, but are tite and straight."

[Patrick Waterson]

On the subject of Macedonian shields, does anyone else get the impression that the phalangite shields in the Pergamon battle plaque are held to the right of the sarissa? Or would this be just a misleading impression conveyed by casual sketching?

That is how it looks, yes (ie the sarissa sticks out to the left of the shield). As this plaque is the one and only depiction of phalangites actually using sarissas in the whole of ancient art and archaeology, it's hard to know what to make of it. I think everyone has concluded that it's just an error or lack of precision on the part either of the original artist, or of the person making the drawing (the original is now lost). I can't think of, and don't think anyone has proposed, a way of holding the sarissa/shield that would work like this. Though I do have a memory, as I might have mentioned, of a Phil Steele (?) Slingshot article a few years back suggesting something, if not quite like this, then at least unusual. If the left arm were held high and crooked downwards, and the sarissa gripped from above by the left hand, then a shield strapped to the left forearm might end up to the right of the shield. It sounds (and feels, in impromptu tests) very awkward though. I think sticking to artistic licence or error is the safe bet.

Thanks, Richard: attempting to hold everything that way does look (and feel) rather counter-intuitive, not to mention virtually dislocating the left shoulder.  We can keep this notional 5 o'clock position tucked away in a quiet corner with a big question-mark over it and carry on with a working hypothesis whereby the sarissa is held at 7 o'clock-ish from an ahead view of the shield.

Does anyone know an approximate weight of these pike (e.g. 18' Chinese chang qiang)? I would be interested in doing some basic physics of what force would be required to hold it upright, if you were to hold it at the end.

Well, the pikes in the armoury in Solothurn turn out to weigh between 2.5-3.25 kg. and are 4.5-5m long (this is an approximation - I haven't studied all the 100 pikes to get a real average).

If this is indeed representative (without having crunched numbers for the whole inventory) it suggests pikes weighing only 6-7 lbs, or about half a pound per two feet of length, which might well be manageable from beyond the centre of gravity.

Contemporary kung fu spears are about 7' long and weigh 2.5 to 3 pounds (source), which shows roughly the same relationship.  At a very approximate guess the chang qiang at 18' would weigh in the region of 9-10 lbs assuming a) the shaft was of about the same thickness and b) the spearhead was not much heavier. The Leeds Armoury has a 12' yari which weighs in at around 5 lbs.  An 18' yari might be expected to weigh about 8 lbs, again suggesting a likely weight for an 18' chang qiang of about 9 lbs (as opposed to, say, 6 or 12 or 18 lbs).  Instinct suggests this could be problematic if not held at the centre of gravity, but actual calculations would be a better guide.

By contrast, I would estimate the weight of a 21' Macedonian sarissa at 22-24 lbs, not least because of the counterweight.

We also need to be aware of the difference in weight given the level of seasoning of the wood.  Greener wood was also more prone to sag; here is our old pal John Smythe again

"Also I would that the staves of the picques should bee of a tite and stiffe ashe, and not of ashe that dooth sagge, and bend when the piquers doo carrie their piques breasthigh before hand couched, because that such sagging and bending ashe, although it be verie tough yet it is more heavie then the other ashe; besides that the piquers cannot carry the piques of such sagging, and bending piques so even and straight in their Enemies faces, as they may carrie the other piques that doo not bend nor sagge, but are tite and straight."

John Smythe is a true gift to the English language.   Presumably a tite and stiffe ashe (probably a 'mountain ash'; they are heavier) would have a weight somewhat exceeding the half-pound-per-two-feet which seems to be suggested by Solothurn armoury averages, which we can perhaps regard as a lower-end benchmark for pike weights.

[Duncan Head]

By contrast, I would estimate the weight of a 21' Macedonian sarissa at 22-24 lbs, not least because of the counterweight.

Assuming cornel wood, or ash? Constant-width shaft, or tapering? Large spearhead, or small?

Markle in the 1970s estimated 14.5 lb for an 18-foot cornel sarissa, constant diameter, large spearhead - someone quoted this on RAT:

The eighteen-foot sarissa minus the length of the point and its socket (0.51 m. = 1 ft. 8 in.) and that of the butt-spike (0.445 m. = 1 ft. 6 in.) would equal 178 in., excluding the cones of wood inserted into the sockets of the head and butt. The volume of this shaft (π r2 h: 3.14 x .56 x 178) would be 313 cu. in., and its weight would be this figure times .03 lbs. per cu. in., which would be 9.39 lbs. The weight of the iron sarissa-head is 1235 grammes = 2.7 lbs. and that of the butt-spike 1070 grammes =2.4 lbs. (The weight of the coupling sleeve is not given and is hereby excluded.) The total weight of the eighteen-foot sarissa is thus 14.5 lbs. On the assumption that a fifteen-foot sarissa had iron parts of the same weight and size as those described above, it would weigh about 12 lbs.

The more recent reconstruction by Connolly ("Experiments with the sarissa – the Macedonian pike and cavalry lance - a functional view", JRMES 11, 2000), and estimates by Sekunda ("The Sarissa," in Acta Universitatis Lodziensis, Folia Archaeologica 23: 2001), assuming the smaller spearhead, tapered shaft, and in S's case at least the use of lighter ash, result in lower weights even though, IIRC, they both use large buttspikes.

[Jim Webster]

On the subject of Macedonian shields, does anyone else get the impression that the phalangite shields in the Pergamon battle plaque are held to the right of the sarissa? Or would this be just a misleading impression conveyed by casual sketching?

Looking at it carefully, the Pikeman 'nearest to the camera' does appear to have his sarissa to the left of the shield, but the one next to him as his sarissa to the right of his shield.

My suggestion is that the artist was portraying combat and the 'leading' pikeman is bringing his shield across to defend himself from a blow from the cavalryman coming in

Jim

[Dangun]

Markle in the 1970s estimated 14.5 lb for an 18-foot cornel sarissa, constant diameter, large spearhead - someone quoted this on RAT

So working with Markle's 0.053lbs per inch of wood plus 2.7lbs for the blade of a sarissa, we might estimate a:
* 12' Yari - at about 9.2lbs, pretty close to previous comments
* 18' Chang qiang - at about 12.3lbs, again, pretty close to previous comments

So just a crude thought experiment...

If your left hand is the fulcrum, 3ft from the end of the chang qiang and your right hand is at the end, you are - very roughly - supporting 11lbs (5kg) of weight and average of 7.5ft in front of you, and so to hold the pike level, you are having to exert about 28lbs (13kg) of downward force with your right hand. I think that's quite a lot? I think?

[Erpingham]

So just a crude thought experiment...

If your left hand is the fulcrum, 3ft from the end of the chang qiang and your right hand is at the end, you are - very roughly - supporting 11lbs (5kg) of weight and average of 7.5ft in front of you, and so to hold the pike level, you are having to exert about 28lbs (13kg) of downward force with your right hand. I think that's quite a lot? I think?

A European pike would be held with hands about 5ft apart - the front hand by the left shoulder, the right fully stretched out.  In the European grip you also lay your right arm on the top of the pike, adding its dead weight to the balance.  A hold with hands only three feet apart feels awkward - are you sure that's how they did it?

P.S. Is it time to implement Patrick's split between pike and shield topics?

[Swampster]

From left hand at left shoulder to right hand fully stretched back sounds just a touch over a cloth yard, so a bit more than 3'.

If I (at 6' tall) put my hands at shoulder height, to get to 5' gap my right arm is fully extended and my left has a slight bend.
At waist height, both arms are fully stretched to get to 5' and it is decidedly uncomfortable.