Crescent Pelta shield design and mode of use

[Mick Hession]

Functional explanations for the pelta's shape seem rather laboured to me. A goatskin, cut lengthways, has a naturally crescent shape. Stitching each half-hide to a frame gives you two decent-sized shields from one animal. Round or oval shapes waste more material.

Cheers
Mick

[Imperial Dave]

good point Mick, taking this a little further, is there a parallel with some of the Pictish type shields which do, on face value, bear a resemblance?

[Patrick Waterson]

Functional explanations for the pelta's shape seem rather laboured to me. A goatskin, cut lengthways, has a naturally crescent shape. Stitching each half-hide to a frame gives you two decent-sized shields from one animal. Round or oval shapes waste more material.

An interesting thought, assuming the Thracians suffered from a scarcity of goats.  If not, the drawback is that one presumably then has to spend extra effort making a kinked frame for the shield - and still has to do a lot of trimming to get the hide shape to fit.

Just a thought, but if I were going to have nothing but goatskin between myself and incoming missiles, I would be very inclined to take a whole goatskin and fold it over on order to have double the thickness of hide for protection.  Of course, if one made the fold along the centreline the natural crescent on each side would match up in the same place ...

[Mick Hession]

A Thracian may well have a shortage of adult goats that he's willing to kill, perhaps (rather than keep alive for their milk, for example). I've never woven a basket but is a crescent-shaped curve of wickerwork that much harder to make than a round one?

You are of course correct that a double layer of hide would be stronger, but if you're a skirmisher, a shield's purpose does not have to be to absorb blows as it's more efficient to deflect them (the sort of things the Caledones did initially at Mons Graupius; the old Irish poem cycles call it the "shield-feat"). I suspect most Thracian warfare "at home" was the sort of low intensity skirmishing observed between Papuan tribes in modern times. Such warfare is not especially lethal as large, slow objects like javelins that are coming at you relatively infrequently can be seen and dodged. Of course, a bigger battle is a far more dangerous environment but that's not the problem that the pelta was originally designed to solve.

Cheers
Mick
   

[Patrick Waterson]

I've never woven a basket but is a crescent-shaped curve of wickerwork that much harder to make than a round one?

It does mean the outside support cannot simply be bent into a circle, but has to 'change course' part-way or have another curved piece inserted.  The shape would also make wickerworking a little more challenging once one got to the crescent part.  Of course, once you have generations of people doing this sort of thing it becomes habitual second nature, and suggestions that one might shift to a simpler round pattern would be scorned.

One possible advantage of such construction for a wicker shield is that there are no very long, and hence weak, structural cross-members from one edge of the shield to the other on the elbow-to-hand axis; the resilience of a smaller shield is thus combined with the increased coverage of a larger shield.  Whether this was a real advantage would depend on some serious materials analysis which is a bit beyond my ken.  Howevert, see below for the resilience of Thracian shields.

I suspect most Thracian warfare "at home" was the sort of low intensity skirmishing observed between Papuan tribes in modern times. Such warfare is not especially lethal as large, slow objects like javelins that are coming at you relatively infrequently can be seen and dodged.

Xenophon's experience with Seuthes suggests there was a bit more to it than that.  Although most of his actions were of the plunder-the-village variety, on one occasion the Thynians attacked the village Xenophon and his men were occupying.

"All this happened during the day, but in the night that followed the Thynians issued from the mountain and made an attack. And the master of each separate house acted as guide to that house; for in the darkness it would have been difficult to find the houses in these villages in any other way; for each house was surrounded by a paling, made of great stakes, to keep in the cattle. [15] When they had reached the doors of a particular house, some would throw in javelins, others would lay on with their clubs, which they carried, so it was said, to knock off the heads of hostile spears, and still others would be setting the house on fire, meanwhile calling Xenophon by name and bidding him come out and be killed, or else, they said, he would be burned up then and there." - Xenophon, Anabasis VII.4.14-15

Xenophon and his men armed themselves and counterattacked.

"Then the Thracians took to flight, swinging their shields around behind them, as was their custom; and some of them who tried to jump over the palings were captured hanging in the air, with their shields caught in the stakes, while others missed the ways that led out and were killed; and the Greeks continued the pursuit till they were outside the village." - ibid. 18

We may note in passing the way the Thracians carried their shields when they wanted to move rapidly - and how this would provide protection against someone shooting at them while they retreated.  Also, those shields and their straps were strong enough to support a well-built Thracian warrior dangling from the top of a fence paling, which suggests reasonably sturdy construction.

I honestly doubt that scarcity of goats would be a major limitation: while females might well be kept for milk, male goats would be kept to a necessary minimum for various reasons and would provide a regular supply of raw materials (and meals).  The preponderance of goat casualties if the females were 'milkers' would of course be kids, which might be a bit on the small side for a one shield=half a goat construction ratio.

[Mick Hession]

I am not suggesting that the price of goats had much to do with anything. It just strikes me as a more plausible origin for a crescent-shaped shield than some of the alternatives being suggested and doesn't preclude evolution into something more robust by Xenophon's day.

Cheers
Mick

[Patrick Waterson]

I am not suggesting that the price of goats had much to do with anything. It just strikes me as a more plausible origin for a crescent-shaped shield than some of the alternatives being suggested and doesn't preclude evolution into something more robust by Xenophon's day.

We can certainly bear it in mind; all shield types had to start somewhere. 

The phrase peltas symmetrous has caused immense problems for the understanding of this passage. The word symmetrous should mean "of the same size", but, for example, in the Loeb Classical Library Series translation of Charles L Sherman it is translated as "convenient", Parke rendered the word as "symmetrical", and Anderson as "of proper proportions", both phrases essentially meaning nothing. It is obvious, however, from the later words of Diodorus, that these peltai gave sufficient cover to the body, that they are essentially the same size as the hoplite shields they replaced, but lighter, as they were handled with absolute ease.

Certainly the first meaning that LSJ gives is "commensurate with, of like measure or size with", but other meanings are listed as well.

True.  It is something of a puzzle whence Nick Sekunda gets his idea that 'it is obvious' from Diodorus'

"... thus successfully achieving both objects, to furnish the body with adequate cover (stepein hikanos) and to enable the user of the pelta, on account of its lightness (kouphotēta), to be completely free in his movements" (XV.44.2)

and

"After a trial of the new shield its easy manipulation (eukhrēstia) secured its adoption, and the infantry who had formerly been called "hoplites" because of their aspis shield, then had their name changed to "peltasts" from the pelta they carried" (XV.44.3)

that the pelta was 'essentially the same size' as the shield it replaced.

(If it were, might they have needed a larger breed of goat?  )

One notes that Diodorus describes Iphicrates' pelta as providing adequate/sufficient (hikanos) cover, not the same degree of cover as a hoplite aspis.

[Duncan Head]

He seems to be assuming that if the new shield didn't give the same degree of coverage as the old one, it wouldn't be "sufficient". I agree with Patrick that this is perhaps not entirely obvious.

[Alan_Rowell]

As a Thracian re-enactor, if not a contact fighting one, might I suggest the crescent allowed the horns to hold an opponents shield on a temporary  "lock" or even disarm him.  In which case the two hold grip helps in applying  the force and allows a twist.  The two hold grip also places the pelta parallel to the forearm being more comfortable than a flat surface against the knuckles ( I can attest to this) and I suggest would be better able to take blows without resulting in broken knuckles (which fortunately I cannot attest to!).

[Jim Webster]

As a Thracian re-enactor, if not a contact fighting one, might I suggest the crescent allowed the horns to hold an opponents shield on a temporary  "lock" or even disarm him.  In which case the two hold grip helps in applying  the force and allows a twist.  The two hold grip also places the pelta parallel to the forearm being more comfortable than a flat surface against the knuckles ( I can attest to this) and I suggest would be better able to take blows without resulting in broken knuckles (which fortunately I cannot attest to!).

the forearm and knuckles points I can understand.
But would the shield be solid enough to lock or disarm an enemies shield?

[Patrick Waterson]

It would presumably need to be more than just goatskin on wicker.

Alan, have you any thoughts on what the shield would be made of?  A re-enactor's thoughts and experience are always worth having.

[Edit - got Alan's name right this time!]

[Imperial Dave]

thanks for taking the time to post Alan. I was a reenactor in a former life although my 'arena' was Dark Ages