Don't worry about it, I can sound a bit uppety some times. The important thing to remember is I don't do subtext and I don't pull puches. What you read is what I think.
Thats mostly a good thing.
I was reading an article earlier, I'd post it but its on a university network, Celtic swords got longer and lost their points, this is attributed, by the author, to the swirch from chariot "taxies" to full mounted warfare. It sounds a very improbable weapon for any foot soldier to use.Originally Posted by Oldgamer
I'm afraid you're a little out of date here, several well preserved shields were found in the Middle East and dated to around the 1st century AD, IRRC. The method of construction seems to have been three layers with the grain alternating between horizontal and vetical. The examples were weighted between 10-11kg.Concerning the weight of the scutum, much would depend on the thickness of the plywood from which it was made. I've never been able to find any truly reliable source concerning this. We don't even know how thick the "plys" were, and from what type of wood they were made. It's very possible that the plywood we used in my re-enactment group was too thick.
Its definately possible but I must admit that its more impressive to do infront of your mates than on the battlefield. I was talking to one of my friends today who knows more than either of us, he said you can "garage-door" with the shield and slam the edge into their face relatively easily, which also has the advatage of keeping them at arm's distance.I guess that it would be possible for a highly-conditioned warrior to do a face punch, if the opportunity presented itself. For the quality of all of our research, we don't really have a clear idea of what happened man vs. man in ancient warfare, except that men died.
Right now I'm wondering how to break it to the team that Manchester university have decided that the Romans didn't have a red die that would take to horsehair.
Bookmarks