[Dan Howard]

I've just had a quick read through the Feature called The Shield: An Abridged History of its Use and Development http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_shield.html
One of my areas of interest is in early shields and this part of the article has a few inaccuracies. Apologies if this isn't the right place for this post.
* The Greek shield was never called a hoplon. At the time in question the most common name was aspis but sakos and rhinos were also used.
* Earlier Greek shields were never made entirely of bronze. They were made of multiple layers of oxhide with a facing of bronze. Often the bronze facing is the only thing that has survived by the time it was found in a grave site.
* The Argive shield has nothing in common with the earlier shield except that both were circular. It is unlikely that one evolved from the other.
* The article seems to confuse earlier Greek shields which often were larger than the classical aspis. The shield curtain was only attached to the shorter variants so tripping over would rarely have been a problem. Argive shields never covered chin to knee. Earlier shields were this large but they weren't used in the same manner as an Argive shield.
* The article fails to distinguish between the Republican scutum which is longer and heavier (with rounded edges) than the Imperial scutum (squared edges) and they were made differently: the Republican scutum incorporated felt while the Imperial one used linen. There was a weight difference of at least 5 lbs between the two typologies

[Sam Barris]

[Dan Howard]

[Sam Barris]

No worries. Slow and painful sounds about right for Attic and Homeric. I only know them secondhand, having been once married to a classicist. Hopefully I'll have the time to delve more deeply at some point before I die. Poetry in dactylic hexameter is amazing, if read correctly.

Anyway, your critique is pretty much accurate, and I still plan to check on those two point tonight. And you're right that my treatment was pretty basic. Perhaps a good future idea for this site would be a series much like the ones done for Oakeshott's sword types. That would allow a more complete analysis of the items in question. The tactical questions, and their various socio-political implications, could fill a volume even without getting into construction, regional specialties, decoration, etc.

I can't speak about the Roman point you brought up. I didn't do that setion.

I'd be interested in reading your excerpts from the Iliad, if you wouldn't mind posting.

[Dan Howard]

[Chad Arnow]

Dan,
Thanks for your post. After the last time you and I corresponded about the name of the Greek shield, we added this editor's note to the article:

[Dan Howard]

I forgot that I'd commented on this earlier. If myArmoury publishes my first submission on mail armour I'll spend some time helping to rewrite this also.

[Chad Arnow]