09-13-2010, 03:46 AM
Quote:Your 'sarissa' would appear to be slightly oversized, Scott. The supposed 'sarissa sauroter' with flanges had a socket diameter of 34 mm/1.35 inches. The 'coupling' ( and I also am very skeptical of a coupling only some 17.6 cm/7 ins long) had a diameter at one end of 32 mm/1.25 ins. Being pine it is also too light - Connolly's reconstructions, of cornel and ash weighed in at 4.05 kg/8.9 lbs and 4.22 kg/9.3 lbs respectively, and were 5.844m/19.48 ft long - probably the upper end of length.
Still, for handling purposes, and allowing the differences in weight and so on between hard and soft wood, your 'facsimile' sarissa would give an appoximate feel of the real thing, and like Connolly, you have concluded it was reasonably easy to handle.....D
I wasn't going for exactness in the measurements or weights. But I'm sure every single sarissa, numbering in the tens and probably hundreds of thousands by the end, did not fit the precise measurements as you list and I'm sure varied by a few millimeters one way or another. And I was thinking of adding some weights along the shaft to give it a little more heft and then see how that feels. Either way, my experiments were more for handling and ease of use, and as you note, resembled Connolly's conclusions.
I, too, am very skeptical about a coupling of only 17.6 cm long. I just don't see how a sarissa, held together by a tiny metal tube, would have enough strength to penetrate a Roman shield and breastplate, the skin of an elephant, or withstand a frontal assault form a charging horse pulling a chariot.
Scott B.
