Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Boiotian Shield
#1
Being a newcomer to this site I'm not sure if you have discussed this issue or not?

The conventional wisdom (at least that which I've encountered thus far) amongst ancient wargamers and military speculators - is that the Boiotian shield was an anachronism by the time of the Persian Wars, despite it still being heavily featured on pottery etc.

I understand that many believe it was merely symbolic in its representation - a civic logo of sorts.

However, I wonder if it was still being used by Thebans and other members of the Boiotian League at all during the 5th Century?

There are two types as far as I can determine (as shown on pottery)...

(a) an elliptical shield with the double cutaway

and

(b) a circular (apsis?) shield which also has this double cutaway usually with an extended rim.

I would be interested to know any forum members' views on this.
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#2
Please see this thread:
Boeotian/Dipylon Shield
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... an+beotean

If you be kind enough to search Greek Histroy section for
"Beotean" or "Beotian" you will find relevant posts.

Kind regards
Reply
#3
Thanks Stefanos - I've read all those entires. Some nice work by various individuals making their own shields. 8)

But do you think it possible the Thebans (or any other Boiotians) still used these shields during the Persian Wars or even thereafter?

If the hoplon/aspis was the proven superior - why would anybody bother with an alternative except on the grounds of cost i.e. having received it as an heirloom - why replace it?
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#4
Pottery in Louvre and British museum shows both shiled types on the same vessel at the same time frame.

Probably Malians, Phokians and Locrians were the last to convert as from "peltastic" they became more "hoplitic".

The Beotian shield was kept by the Thessalians as cavalry shield-I still research that.

Kind regards
Reply
#5
There seem to be two variants as far as I can see:

We have discussed the actual Boiotian proper, and I am grateful for the comments above. This is the shield (as I understand it) that is basically in geometric terms two half circles with a rectangular section in between - the latter having the scoops removed. This is the type of which some excellent plywood reproduction photos featured in the thread on the subject.

However, I have seem images of a purely circular shield - also with scoops at each side. Is this another form of the Boiotian - or merely some half-way house variant of an actual Argive Aspis? Or is it simply artistic licence?

I wonder...
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply
#6
The term Beotian comes because this type of shiled is depicted on the Beotian coins.

The larger version of the Geometric Era is called "Dipylon shield" because it first appeared on pottery from the Dipylon excavations in Athens during the late 19th century.


The logical conclusion is that it was a slow evolution from the Mycenean 8-shaped shields that appear on frescoes of Tyrins ans Mycenae.

Unlike "argive" shileds none survived intact so speculation is heavy about its construction.

Kind regards
Reply
#7
What do you think of the suggestion that the dyplon and boetian shield never existed. It was suggested by Webster back in the 50's that, just as later art showed heroes carrying anachronistic dyplons, the early portrayals of dyplons represented not contemporary shields, but a throwback to mycenean figure 8 shields. Thus it never existed.

The fact that many of these eary Dyplon look so much like Labrys axes sideways makes me wonder if there was some iconic significance.
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#8
The Dipylon and Boeotian shields probably did not derive from the Mycenaean figure-8 shield, which was out of use by the end of the Bronze Age, but rather from the (apparently) Hittite shield which has curved top and bottom and concave sides. It's a much more similar shape and size, and was very popular in the late Bronze Age, same time the Dipylon is showing up.

I'm pretty sure these were real shields. But it possible that later depictions of the Boeotian shield were meant to portray an event in the heroic past, or maybe to link the character to some hero. Just a shot in the dark--other folks have done a LOT more research on that topic than I have!

Khairete,

Matthew
Matthew Amt (Quintus)
Legio XX, USA
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/legioxx/">http://www.larp.com/legioxx/
Reply
#9
Never existed....ceremonial....artistic impression....
Well it is just a theory.

Well its a logical thought but with little support.

We can not just disregard something show in the art.
Perhaps it is not accurate but who can prove beyond doubt that it never existed.

Who can prove that the artist of the Geometric amphoras currently in the National Museum in Athens had never seen these shields?

Who can say that the artist of the amphora Louvre F12 does not depict a horseman with a beotian shield?

Kind regards
Reply
#10
I don't have definite ideas about the existance of the dyplon- I posted the theory because I recently came across it.

I do however believe that the "boetian shield" never existed. I think the representations are an artists attempt to draw cut-outs in an aspis to make it conform to a heroic model. The fact that the rim almost touches, but does not join for strength speaks against it being a real practical shield.
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#11
Graphic reconstruction 12th century B.C. shield from Crete (Herakleion Museum).
Black and white photos of the original circulate round the internet.
Please see the warriors left and right
We might not want to accept classical artists interpretations on pottery but this Bronge Age artists who decorated the shield must have seen something.

Kind regards
Reply
#12
Quote:Graphic reconstruction 12th century B.C. shield from Crete...

At that date this would have been a Dipylon, which I don't think anyone doubts existed, not the later more controversial boeotian shield.

I am struck by how much they look like Hittites and Lycians.
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
Reply
#13
Paul,

You wrote:
>What do you think of the suggestion that the dyplon and boetian shield never existed. It
>was suggested by Webster back in the 50's that, just as later art showed heroes
>carrying anachronistic dyplons, the early portrayals of dyplons represented not
>contemporary shields, but a throwback to mycenean figure 8 shields. Thus it never
>existed.

I believe that there are a couple of strong arguments against discarding the representation of dyplon shields as artistic shorthand or a throwback by artists. They are:

- The shield is technically feasible to produce
- There is not a consistent usage of it in the representation of heroes, which makes it difficult to argue that it is shorthand.

There are also a couple of points on interpretation that must be considered:

- If you discard the dyplon shield as not representative you would also have to discard everything else associated with heroic representation as it is immediately suspect. In other words you can't have your cake and eat it too.
- As heroic scenes compose the bulk of vase art on the subject we are interested in, that would virtually eliminate vase art as a source for interpretation.

However, as helmets, greaves, cuirasses, swords exist that clearly demonstrate that the vase art is a fairly good representation of every other item in context with dyplon shields, it is reasonable to believe they existed. Given the extremely limited sample set of surviving shields contemporary with the representations of dyplon shields (1-2) I don't see a foundation for a strong argument against this position.

All that said, I do believe that the dyplon shield is on its way out at the end of the archaic period. But I also believe it did exist.

Have fun!
Cole
Cole
Reply
#14
.......except that all the other items of Hopla depicted on pottery have turned up in the archaeological record.......except ANY remains identifiable as coming from a Boeotian shield. ( crests, being organic, are not present in the record either)........so the existence of such a thing must be considered speculative, until if and when something does turn up Confusedhock: Confusedhock:
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)

"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
Reply
#15
Paul,

You'll note that my position is, "I believe it existed", not asserted that it did Smile

It is a speculative position, based on the arguments in my previous post. However, it is my view that the argument that it did not exist is much more tenuous.

First, It seems to me that it is mere assertion that the dyplon is artistic convention. Its also a slippery slope. There are a number of other items that there is no archeological or literary evidence for that are depicted in the context of heroic art contemporary with dyplon shield depictions:

- tapered spear shafts
- deeply bowled aspides
- the shape and drape of the chitoniskos

And thats just to name a few.

Have fun,
Cole
Cole
Reply


Forum Jump: