The "Fred thread": the Argead Macedonian Army

[Paullus Scipio]

Ruben/mein panzer wrote:

They clearly did change some time between 279 and 250 or so, but there could have been any number of reasons why by the time they finally made the switch

Certainly over-simplified reasons are to be generally avoided, but the Argive aspis/dory armed Hoplite Phalanx had been the mainstay of the armies of the poleis for the best part of 400 years or so. From 338 BC onward, they had been beaten by Macedonian phalanxes,( which rarely consisted of purely 'sarissaphoroi') but this did not prompt a change of armament, as Fred has pointed out. However, something else DID prompt the gradual abandonment of traditional hoplite panoplies shortly after 279 and that can only really be in response to the Gallic invasions. What other reasons can you suggest, especially as the change involved adopting a Gallic shield/thureos? ( The other change being adopting 'longche'/javelins ) - it looks very much as if armies were being 're-shaped' to fight Gallic invaders. The Boeotians seem to have been the first, shortly after 279 BC.(judging by several inscriptions, and tomb reliefs). However, by 245 BC, no more Gallic invasions having materialised, they switched to 'Macedonian' armament, having become an ally of Macedon.

Shields between 60 and 80 cm are typically called Macedonian, those between 80 and 100 cm in diameter Argive, and yet we find numerous hybrids, like larger Macedonian shields with small rims, or smaller hoplite shields with small rims. I'd like to see thorough tests conducted with shields of all types so far known, so that it could be established, for instance, when a shield became too large/dished/large-rimmed to be able to employ with a sarissa.

The picture is further complicated by the fact that the use of Tarentine mercenary cavalry ( most likely) spread the use of cavalry shields into the Greek/Hellenistic world. These were originally (4 C BC) slightly concave, apparently 60 cm or so diameter judging by 4 C BC coins, but rapidly grew in size. They could be ribbed/single grip ( like Gallic or Italic shields) or smooth faced, with porpax and rim - like a smaller Argive aspis. Even full sized aspides seem to have been used in the 3 C BC. Finds in the 3 C BC, especially the 'hybrids', are just as likely - perhaps more likely - to have been cavalry shields.

It is well known from inventory accounts that shields could be stored in the hundreds in temple treasuries, for decades or even centuries. These were considered somewhat like arsenals, so that, much like treasuries located in temples, if the need arose, withdrawals could be made. If round shields were needed to arm citizen troops on wide scale quickly, they could easily have drawn on the hundreds (or even more) of Argive aspides which had been in use up until less than a century earlier and easily converted them into suitable shields by simply popping off the porpakes and adding on telamones.

This is certainly hypothetically possible, but I can't think of any examples of this use of trophies to equip armies in the Greek literature. Furthermore shields, being largely organic materials, would quickly deteriorate and be unusable in not much more than ten years give or take. Also the Greeks had a well-known aversion to such 'sacrilege', as the Phokian War attests. We hear of new shields being supplied, but not use of old ones.The only example of this that springs to mind is Roman use of captured Gallic trophy shields and gear to equip the 6,000 'volones' in the immediate aftermath of Cannae - but these had been captured less than 10 years before.

Also, why would you take off porpaxes? I don't believe the idea of shields simply slung from the neck ( an incredible encumbrance, and body armour does this job much better), but even if this unlikelihood occurred, why remove porpaxes and render them completely useless for when it came to swords and hand-to-hand?