Fighting Stance?

[Torvus]

I've been wondering, with the shield wielding soldiers of the Ancient world, did they stand with their front leg on the same side as their shield, or vice versa?

And... did the Romans use an Argive grip on their shields, or a center grip?

[Apgad]

I don't really know for sure, but practising with a saucepan lid and a kitchen knife I would stand with my shield leg forward, and sword leg back. That allows you to brace against a direct charge, or step forward into an attack.

[Watchman]

Left leg forward was the standard "international" basic guard with shields, particularly big ones.

While the Romans of course used the loop-and-handle arrangement in the hoplite panoply they'd picked up from the Greeks, the scutum instead worked with a single central grip.
...and given what that thing weighs, the troopers ought to have developed some pretty impressive muscular definition in their left arm and connected muscle groups...

[pezhetairoi]

They most probably did, considering that while the scutum weighs 5 kilograms, they practiced sparring with double-weight scuti in pre-campaign training...

[Gebeleisis]

5 kilos? that is too little m8.


the weight of a scutum was about 20+ pounds so around 10 kilo's
even that weight is small considering the fact that its a large shield and comparing it with the spartan one (45kilos+weight os the piece of leather that guarded the legs)

[Stone and Blood]

...and given what that thing weighs, the troopers ought to have developed some pretty impressive muscular definition in their left arm and connected muscle groups...

Would be something like a left handed tennis player xD

[Ayce]

What about left handed warriors, were they thought to reverse their usage, or were they left to their own devices (except in some formations like phalanxes which needed coordination)?

[konny]

5 kilos? that is too little m8.


the weight of a scutum was about 20+ pounds so around 10 kilo's
even that weight is small considering the fact that its a large shield and comparing it with the spartan one (45kilos+weight os the piece of leather that guarded the legs)

I think the early oval Scutum was about 10 Kg, while the later rectangular model was about 6 - 7 Kg.

[Stone and Blood]

A left handed warrior in a phalanx would create a weak point. If I were a general, I would give him another task, like being a shok infantry, or archer.

[Gebeleisis]

I think the early oval Scutum was about 10 Kg, while the later rectangular model was about 6 - 7 Kg.

the rectangular is 10 :)


(browsed on the internet )

[English Patriot]

What about left handed warriors, were they thought to reverse their usage, or were they left to their own devices (except in some formations like phalanxes which needed coordination)?

Not sure about the ancient period, but in the middle ages, left handed children were taught to use their right hands, with things like phalanxes, I think it would be important all the soldiers use a right hand sword grip..

[Watchman]

the weight of a scutum was about 20+ pounds so around 10 kilo's
even that weight is small considering the fact that its a large shield and comparing it with the spartan one (45kilos+weight os the piece of leather that guarded the legs)

A) you're thinking of the "Argive" aspis, which was in universal use among hoplites and populary copied. Nothing particularly "Spartan" about it.
B) the weights I've seen quoted for those things are around 8-9 kg, actually a bit lighter than full-sized scuta in other words.
C) 45 kg is the kind of mass that ranks as massively heavy for full body metal armour - only some immensely strong full panoplies worn by some heavy cavalrymen solely for mounted action reach that kind of weight. For the sake of comparision, an Early Modern "three-quarters" cuirassieur plate armour (covering everything except the shins down and the backs of the legs) with a double-thickness bulletproof breastplate only weighs a bit over thirty kilos - and that was universally viewed as so heavy only the cavalry ever wore such.

[konny]

the rectangular is 10 :)


(browsed on the internet )

Than you are browsing different sites than me, provided we are talking of the netto weight without covers and the like.

[aftzengeier]

Ehm... Ancient Roman men had an average height of 1,50m - max 1,65m (!!!) I don't think giving these dwarves such heavy shields would be of some use. I just can't imagine how to get a shield that heavy without smothering it in steel! Weren't the roman shields quite thin?

[Geoffrey S]

With a bit of training 5-10 kilos is certainly doable. 45 kilos is ludicrous - just try rapid movement with a dumbbell of that weight, or lifting it a couple of times...

[Gebeleisis]

well 10kg is easy for even a child m8.
and the thing is that the shield is HUGE in dimension.only the wood would weight more.

i dont think they were thin due to the fact that they were one of the most usefull shields in antiquity (but a falx can cut it from one blow)

anyways i dont seem to agree with the height of the men back then.
1,50 - 1.65 is preety small compared to the descriptions of the time and all the stuff found in roman relics.

[Watchman]

The 160-something range of the average would sound like the about standard distribution for a premodern society subsisting on a functionally vegetarian diet.

Anyway, the scutum was made with triple plywood construction so it obviously wasn't going to end up all that thin no matter what you did. Add in the hide covering and the metal reinforces, and you end up with one pretty hefty piece of armament. 'Course, a shield that strong and massive also has a fair number of advantages...

Incidentally, if that's the furthest the falx blow cut into the shield it's not really much to write home about. Granted it's probably a bit of an achievement to get the blade in that deep actually, but the practical usefulness is kinda so-so - in fact, the weapon is now more likely than not sort of stuck in the sheld, which isn't an exactly healthy situation to be in particularly if you don't have a shield yourself.

[Geoffrey S]

well 10kg is easy for even a child m8.
and the thing is that the shield is HUGE in dimension.only the wood would weight more.

Oh, I agree 10 kilos is light enough. But not for hours at a time, let alone while parrying blows.

[Watchman]

Thankfully, it'd have been unusual indeed for them to have to do that without breathers. Not exactly the most "user friendly" protective device in any case, that much is clear - particularly as the grip was horizontal, which would seem to me like resulting in a bit uncomfortable position for the arm.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Actually, the hoizonatal grip has been shown to provide better stability when recieving blows in most cases.

[Watchman]

Well, I did assume there was a good reason for it. But it seems a bit on the uncomfortable side all the same, plus you won't be able to hold a spare throwing-spear in the same hand like you can with vertical grips.
Tradeoffs, tradeoffs...

[Dhampir]

Not sure about the ancient period, but in the middle ages, left handed children were taught to use their right hands,

This holds true until the 1950s, for the most part, in America.

[Watchman]

Trying to force leftie kids into becoming right-handed was AFAIK more of a "Victorian" thing that went on until relatively recently; tended to cause all kinds of neurological issues too. I'm under the impression folks of earlier times cared rather less (in fact, at least one Scottish highland clan's keep was built to take advantage of the high proportion of "southpaws" in the family), but presumably warriors were expected to also learn to wield their arms in the usual order so they didn't screw up shieldwall lines.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

In some instances lefties were used on the left flank, the seem was considered a trade off worth the protection provided to the flank.

[Ayce]

This holds true until the 1950s, for the most part, in America.

And until the end of the commy period here. Being left haded, I think I'd be used as a skirmisher/archer/slinger back then (or strategist :P)

[cmacq]

And... did the Romans use an Argive grip on their shields, or a center grip?

The key to understanding the use of the Scutum is the design of the boss and grip.


http://www.realarmorofgod.com/shop/p...ge.php/pID/428

http://www.realarmorofgod.com/shop/p...ge.php/pID/426

http://www.realarmorofgod.com/shop/p...ge.php/pID/302

http://www.realarmorofgod.com/shop/p...ge.php/pID/399


Photo of the Dura Europos Scutum.


Reconstruction of the Doncaster shield board.

[Gebeleisis]

well i am a lefthanded person and no one told me i have to be trianed as a right handed one,it seems unfair.

anyway back on topic.


i dont know,if the romans were so bright why didnt they add another grip or how do you call it for the upper part of the hand like a hoplite has?

it could've provided a more comfortable way of using it and even reducing (sp?) the pressure of the shield weight upon the hand giving the bearer a more powerfull grip and a more flexible and fast way of movement

[Watchman]

There's a variety of pros and cons in either method. For example, with the center-grip you can "hold out" the shield rather further away if necessary - probably a good idea too if you expect heavy shield-piercer javelins incoming, too. It's also generally more maneuverable that way.

'S a matter of tactical preferences and specific fighting style.

[Gebeleisis]

well a textile one could be easily removed and added back to place,depending on the situation,no?

[Watchman]

Given what the other necessary arrangements for the arm-strap method are like, and the fact the central-grip method all but requires a shield boss, no, not really.