06-22-2010, 08:43 PM
Quote:The answer to the first question is that they would have to move the porpax off center towards the antilabe in order to allow the wrist to pas through it and extend beyond the rim of the shield. Off center porpaxes are not uncommon even in old-style aspides and such are shown on the reliefs at Ephesus for whatever they are worth. Given the state of preservation of dedicated arms that could be seen by contemporaries, I think they are more accurate than you give credit.
But the shield on the Pydna monument has a central porpax, perhaps even off-centre, but away from the antilabe side of the shield. Are you suggesting then that the soldier would adjust his porpax mid-battle? Or is the soldier on the Pydna monument a non-phalangite with a different kind of shield? And for larger shields, I would imagine that porpakes might have to be moved a fair distance off-centre. Have tests been done on how this affects the abilities of the bearer to wield it effectively in close combat?
Quote:I see no reason to simply attack your notion of using just the wrist strap, bouncing off such ideas seems to me to be what RAT is for, but lets see how it would function. There is a problem with making the antilabe a porpax and using the strap to help support the sarissa's weight. See my diagram below. Because the strap is flexible, it cannot support asymetric loads without changing shape. To a sarissaphoroi this means a sawing across his neck as the side of the shield with the wrist falls, as in the central figure. The only way around this is to use a porpax to shift the force towards the center of the shield or move the attachment points of the strap left to shift the suspension system. This relies on the left hand portion of the shield counterbalancing the force on the right and pivoting on the left strap attachment. The problem is that the man's body limits how acute this angle can get, thus how much you can use to couterblance the sarissa's weight.
Of course this assumes that the strap was used in any way to support the weight of the sarissa. Later pikemen got along just fine without one. The problem here is that if its not helping you hold up the sarissa, its surely hindering you moving freely, so there must be a reason that they still drew their shields in front of them before battle other than as a big hanging pectorale.
I don't envision the telamon being used to support the sarissa's weight - as you state, pikemen since have functioned just fine without such support. And Plutarch's (or rather Phylarchus') words are quite explicit: Cleomenes taught his phalangites to bear their aspides with ochane instead of porpax. The strap replaced the porpax as the primary means of supporting the shield's weight. The telamon therefore supported the shield's weight, the loop placed where the antilabe was was used to maneuver it, and the arms bore the weight of the sarissa. And why must there be a reason that they used their shields other than as a big hanging pectoral? For the majority of the men behind the front ranks, that's probably all their shields ever did, anyway.
Ruben
He had with him the selfsame rifle you see with him now, all mounted in german silver and the name that he\'d give it set with silver wire under the checkpiece in latin: Et In Arcadia Ego. Common enough for a man to name his gun. His is the first and only ever I seen with an inscription from the classics. - Cormac McCarthy, Blood Meridian
He had with him the selfsame rifle you see with him now, all mounted in german silver and the name that he\'d give it set with silver wire under the checkpiece in latin: Et In Arcadia Ego. Common enough for a man to name his gun. His is the first and only ever I seen with an inscription from the classics. - Cormac McCarthy, Blood Meridian
