11-05-2007, 02:44 AM
So Paul, about seventy odd talents you estimate? A reasonable spend but pocket change given the resources of empire.
The point is more silver as armour. How soft is it as a metal? The assumption is that the bronze (insert your favourite alloy here) coverings were to protect the wood that formed the shield. Would silver perform well in this regard? It was perhaps a silver alloy?
My wife is the materials scientist, perhaps I should ask her!
Either way, it was reserved for the picked corps and, one assumes, its agema. It was, most definitely, a mark distinction and differentiation. The members of the unit certainly let no one forget it.
Just on arming - or re-arming - for the Indian invasion, Lane Fox, in his "boys' own" style Alexander, makes the claim that the entire Macedonian infantry dispensed with the sarissa at the outset of this campaign as it was too "unwieldy" for India. He follows this up by boldly claiming that they never (under Alexander) used the sarissa again. He presents no evidence, just the statement and a note referring to a forthcoming article.
This all sits rather at odds with Diodorus description of the Hydaspes where he has the Macedonians dealing with the elephants and their mahouts with "their long spears".
Perhaps, realising the error of their ways, they somehow rivited their hoplite spears together? Anyone know of the article he refers to?
The point is more silver as armour. How soft is it as a metal? The assumption is that the bronze (insert your favourite alloy here) coverings were to protect the wood that formed the shield. Would silver perform well in this regard? It was perhaps a silver alloy?
My wife is the materials scientist, perhaps I should ask her!
Either way, it was reserved for the picked corps and, one assumes, its agema. It was, most definitely, a mark distinction and differentiation. The members of the unit certainly let no one forget it.
Just on arming - or re-arming - for the Indian invasion, Lane Fox, in his "boys' own" style Alexander, makes the claim that the entire Macedonian infantry dispensed with the sarissa at the outset of this campaign as it was too "unwieldy" for India. He follows this up by boldly claiming that they never (under Alexander) used the sarissa again. He presents no evidence, just the statement and a note referring to a forthcoming article.
This all sits rather at odds with Diodorus description of the Hydaspes where he has the Macedonians dealing with the elephants and their mahouts with "their long spears".
Perhaps, realising the error of their ways, they somehow rivited their hoplite spears together? Anyone know of the article he refers to?
Paralus|Michael Park
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu
