I have just finished reading a book which catalogues the evolution of armor throughout the centuries (the name of the author escapes me...) and while reading a section on ancient Greece it said "During the early period of Greek history they used rawhide shields, 5 to 7 layers, which were 6' tall and weighed somewhere around 120-200lbs, using a strap which goes around the neck to support the weight of the shield. Because of the shield's size, little to no armor was needed."

Now, I'm no expert on the subject by any means but I find the use of a shield, larger than most People I know, is highly improbable. I'm not sure but I think the information he gave may have been derived from a section of the iliad by Homer where the poet tells of these thickly constructed shields and the author then made the mathematical calculations to find out how much a shield such as this might have weighed.

In short, I'm just wondering if these shields actually existed during the time of the ancient Greeks, maybe as a Pavise or something of that sort, or if this is just a piece of misinformation. I have tried to find this information myself (searching for it actually led me to this forum) yet I cannot find any information to support either side of this conflict.

Two words. Poetic licence.

Everyone knows that people where much larger, stronger, and butcher Back in the Days™.
This is cumulative, and by the time the Illiad is written, the troyan wars are Back in the Days™ x7

So if the warriors in Homer's day used shields backed with one layer of rawhide, multiplied by the Back in the Days™ factor (BitD™ Factor) of seven, the original Homeric shield ends up at 17,14 pounds....

Well, assuming that the shield was 3' wide (probably too big, but possible), then we are looking at a total area of 18 sq. ft. Steerhide leather typically weighs in the range of 5 oz./sq. ft. That gives us a weight range of 450 - 630 oz for 5 to 7 layers. About 28 - 39 lbs total ballpark weight for leather. Add in what you will for frame and straps. I don't think you will be at 120-200 lbs.

Jeff

I figured this, but I couldn't find any source or piece of information to support or dismiss this claim. I thought if something like this existed it would more than likely be an oversized pavise, yet I have found no proof of the Greeks using a shield of that type. Poetic licence does make a lot of sense. A lot more sense than a shield that size.:p

I've just started to research ancient weaponry and still have a lot to learn (Still in high school). Thanks for the help.

The subject was recently discussed here. http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=5409. The heaviest shield so far found in the archaeological record is a variant of the Roman scutum that weighed around 22 lbs (10kg). And this is plenty heavy enough.

FWIW there is only a single unambiguous reference in the Iliad to a full height shield and that is Hektor's, and Homer specifically says on multiple occasions that Hektor's shield is circular in shape (it is possible that Hektor is attributed with two different shields though, one that is full-height and one that is circular). The only shield that is described with seven layers of hide with a bronze facing is Aias (Ajax) but Homer gives absolutely no indication what shape it is. Personally I think it was circular like all the other shields described in the book. The only other shield where the number of layers is mentioned is Teukros and his has four layers.

I agree. Assuming that a typical warrior was around 5'9" - 5'10" then it is safe to assume that Aias was well over six feet tall. Obviously he would be able to carry a heavier shield than his companions - hence the seven layers of hide instead of four, which is likely to have been a more typical construction (a four-layered hide shield is also mentioned in the Odyssey). His size, however, doesn't suggest in any way that his shield had to be a different shape to any of the others that were carried. I have spent three years going through the Iliad in the original language specifically looking for shield references and there is nothing to suggest that Aias carried a full-height shield.

Trojans and Greeks.
About ten years ago we had a great exhibit come through Montreal at the Point-a-Callieres museum. They had many armor pieces from the greek colonies in the south of modern day Italy. I measure 5foot nine and the jambieres or grieves would have fit great on a ten year old boy, no way they would have fit my average built leg. The same could be said for the corinthian style helms they had. Way too small for an average built 5 niner. The romans took over the south of the peninsula around third BC, which means that you're dealing with armor used between the sixth and the third BC, give or take a few hundred years going back in time. These guys were 5 two , five four max, the five 4 being the linesmen of their
day. The shield shapes shown on the kraters(pottery) used for wine and such are round. A good example can be seen in Stephen Bull's Guide to Arms and Armor which shows two Athenians circa 460 BC (page 25) with round shields, one with a scorpion device the other a snake. On page 23 there is a photo of a relief on a tombstone which also shows a round shield, the view being from the inside so you can see the loops used to hold the shield. Amazing what these little guys could do in the age of chariots, they sure fired up Homer's imagination.
Jean-Carle Hudon

Naturally, though, those figures are going to vary depending on whether you're using a modern ruler or the old systems of measurements taken using... body parts of the people of the time. What are we using as a typical conversion factor?

I don't know about conversion factors. The grieves I saw and briefly handled were about six to eight inches too short and also too slim for a modern man's calf muscle, the corinthian helm would only have fit a modern man with a small head, no way to put it on my 23-24 inch crown. These must have been small men. I had seen the like a couple of years previous when a similar exhibit came through Montreal, dealing with '' the Gold Of The Thracian Horsemen '', showing artefacts from warrior class graves. Again the objects were remarquably small by our standards, again the grieves showed the tibias to be quite short. These artefacts covered the eighth to third century BC, roughly, and the territory covered in part what is now Bulgaria and neighbours.

An other issue would be the thickness of the rawhide. Unlike heroes, cattle where a lot smaller in medevial or anticent europe. They are about half the size of pressent day breeds.

Using reverse logic, the leather had to be so thin you needed four layers to stopp a broze age weapon...

I found the book in question. It Armor Written by Sean Morrison.

The information given in this book is obiviously derived from poor sources, and even worse translations.

Just wanted to add, for those of you drummers or knowers about drums out there;

I could use my 22" ride cymbal for a shield you know, its also got that little hand space in the middle from the bell.
Would it work? Would it be useful?
Probably not, but its worth a talk about :)

Mr Cooksey,
makes sense. Scythians were east of Thrace, similar culture, horsemen. It would not be unusual for a chieftain to be a fairly sturdy product in a very physical ,warrior ,semi-nomad society. The finds that amazed me the most had to do with those taller light haired nomads found in Mongolia. Do you have any info on those burial finds ?
Jean-Carle Hudon

Are you perhaps thinking of the Altai burials?

Irritatingly, a lot of the detailed information on these early kurgans hasn't been published yet.
Except in the form of news briefs in the major periodicals and a couple of National Geographic-type introductions, of course . . . .

I want to see the site reports, in English. :-)

Edited to add:
I have read a little bit about the Pazyryk kurgan burials, in the Altai.
The human remains here a bit more "Asiatic" in morphology and genetics (from the tests so far) than are their cousins to the west in the Pontic and Don regions. Still have light hair fairly often, though.
This whole Scythian question is really troublesome for modern anthropologists, as both the wide-spread nature of the culture and the evidence for actual physical migration is playing merry heck with "modern" ideas about human movement and cultural awareness in earlier eras.
Migration and inter-cultural transmission has been out of vogue for over 40 years now, and it is only starting to be re-accepted.