Etruscan army

[gavindbm]

I have become interested in the Etruscans so thought it was worth starting a thread on the subject.

I am (at present) particularly interested in views as to what type of shields the Etruscans used - did it vary by 'class'?  If they changed over to the scutum then when did the change over happen?

So far I've found a post on the Aventine miniatures web site https://aventineminiatures.co.uk/late-etruscans/ which says "The Argive shield was used by the Etruscans 'till they lost their independence, and beyond'. Troops equipped with the Scutum represent the gradual change over to Roman equipment. They can also represent Etruscan Alliance or League troops using captured Roman equipment."

There is a thread on the forum about shield patterns http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=7101.0 and linen clad Etruscans http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=1522.0

And a general thread on early Italian warfare http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=1376.0

[Duncan Head]

There is of course an Osprey on the Etruscans, and also an Italian book of similar style.

In the earliest period, 8th-7th centuries or so, there are both early representations of scuta and surviving bronze-faced round shields, possibly ceremonial. Michael Eichberg's 1987 book studies and collects representations of such early scuta. Later, the hoplite's Argive shield was introduced - at least one of the best surviving examples of the type is Etruscan - but it isn't really clear whether it was as common in actual usage as in art.

The scutum starts to get commoner in Etruscan art I would say in the 5th century, though it's not always clear whether the subjects are Etruscans or Celts (or someone else); this article has some relevant illustrations. But Argive shields are still common in later Etruscan art: realism or classicising?

That the different classes have different shields is an interpretation based on Livy's (and Dionysios of Halicarnassus') account of the Roman army under Servius Tullius, where the First Class had round bronze shields and the Second and Third have scuta. This is a period when Rome is still under Etruscan influence and the suggestion is that it reflects an Etruscan army - the idea goes back at least to Peter Connolly in the 1970s and is followed for instance by Fossati in the Italian book linked to above. It is often reinforced by reference to the Certosa Situla - though of course that isn't Etruscan, but Venetic.

Anything much more than that is probably guesswork.

[DBS]

Perhaps also worth noting that there tends to be an implicit assumption that the Argive shield can only be used effectively by hoplites in a Greek-style phalanx, and the scutum by troops in a looser formation, ergo, they are incompatible for use in the same formation.  Not a theory to which I subscribe, but I think it drives a lot of the hypotheses around the Etruscans.  As I have said before, there tends to be an obsession in some circles with uniformity of kit that would gladden the hearts of modern RSMs, but in reality chaps would turn up with what they had available, could afford, and would be used rather than sent home.

[gavindbm]

Duncan -> thanks.

That the different classes have different shields is an interpretation based on Livy's (and Dionysios of Halicarnassus') account [and] goes back at least to Peter Connolly in the 1970s

How could I forget Connolly.  I have his "Hannibal and the enemies of Rome" which beautifully illustrates the model.

[DBS]

Connolly undoubtedly made mistakes - trusting the Loeb translation re Carthaginian pikemen... - but his work was still seminal and reinforced my fascination with the ancient world fifty years ago as a child.

[Erpingham]

I recall an epic discussion which touched on the subject of classes, shields and whether Etruscans had to fight like Greeks if they had hoplite panoplies. See http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=1376.0 and following. This was an epic "Patrick v. the World" battle but IIRC it did dig up some evidence.

[Jim Webster]

I recall an epic discussion which touched on the subject of classes, shields and whether Etruscans had to fight like Greeks if they had hoplite panoplies. See http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=1376.0 and following. This was an epic "Patrick v. the World" battle but IIRC it did dig up some evidence.

To decide how Etruscans fought when they had hoplite panoplies you'd have to decide how hoplites fought then 

Warband anybody 

[DBS]

Well, for Illyrians with hoplite panoplies, warband quite possibly.

Kit does not equal tactical employment necessarily.

[Swampster]

For the later period. Taylor's "Etruscan Identity and Service in the Roman Army" thinks there was a change from round to oval around the late 4th/early 3rd centuries. He says that the continued portrayal of the clipeus was due to Hellenic influence and were an anachronism.
The various oval shields shown generally look more similar in size to those shown for Celts than on the Ahenobarbus relief. Could be artistic differences, different ages or whatever.

Taylor also points to the lack of body armour on the figures he thinks are Etruscans. FWIW, I have just bought some figures sold as Roman penal legionaries to use as something like these - they are a pretty good match.

[Swampster]

_If_ Taylor is right about the date for the adoption of the oval shield, I wonder whether the Negau helmet/scutum combination of many of the Aventine figures would have been an unusual sight. From an (rather cursory) search, it looks like the Negau was more common in the century or so beforehand.

OTOH, there is the danger that giving the Etruscan figures a Montefortino and large scutum would make them pretty much identical to Romans, so no point in producing the figures.

On a related note, I think if I wanted to do a Pyrrhus era Roman army, I'd be tempted to use something like the Aventine allied legionaries with the muscled square cuirass for triarii on the assumption that mail would have been rare at that point. I'd want them in 15mm though, and I'd end more or less duplicating the figures I have in mail depicted in the more usual way. I wouldn't dream of duplicating figures for such a minor aesthetic reasons. Honest.