When was the Aspis/ Hoplon phased out ?

[Paullus Scipio]

Some, of course ( see RAT debates passim) see this passage as evidence that a Macedonian 'sarissaphoroi' could wield pike and 'aspis', others that the passage is evidence for the hanging of shields freely by straps ( there's a well known reconstruction of the phalanx where the men are shown this way)......in my view, both these interpretations are wrong, because the 'aspis' is just too large and heavy to successfully use with a 'sarissa' ( why did the Macedonians, and others armed 'Macedonian fashion' use the 'pelta' otherwise? ), and a 'hanging shield' is just a useless encumbrance ( might as well strap it in tight, and call it a 'pectorale', :lol: )

Plutarch, or more probably his source, is making a 'literary flourish' in pointing out the difference between old shields and the new type ( the strap) and in doing so has created a terrible ambiguity for us moderns ( but not for ancients familiar with the weaponry)...........if only Plutarch/his source had written something like:-

Plut. Cleom. 11.2] Then he filled up the body of citizens with the most promising of the free provincials, and thus raised a body of four thousand men-at-arms, whom he taught to use a long pike, held in both hands, instead of a short spear, and to carry their shields('pelta' instead of 'aspis' for shield - we can't tell if 'aspis' means the specific 'argive aspis', or is just generic for "shield") by a strapand porpax instead of by a fixed handle.implies a 'thureos' grip? If a 'porpax'/arm-loop was meant, why not say so, and use that word? Or if the 'argive aspis' was meant then say something like " by a strap and porpax instead of by porpax alone"....

Better we did not have this ambiguous piece of 'literary flourish'/text at all, for Polybius simply tells us at Sellasia the two phalanxes (Macedonian and Spartan) were armed the same !

There would then be no grounds for the confusing speculation/interpretation...... D