Using A Shield With A Spear?

[Lucius]

From Marc's post there is a lot to learn.

 

PS: I did not look to see who the OP was, but I still hold to this being a complete derail, with a whole new rail built perpendicular to the first.

Yes, and we all have a ticket to ride.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I have a ticket to ride a palindromedary

[L. Marcus]

One head ate my ticket ...

[Markdoc]

Well, it was an epic derail, no question about that. But that's what we do around here

 

And Roman trade is a fascinating subject. We mostly think of Rome as an empire restricted to the Mediterranean, but after the conquest of Egypt, Rome acquired ports on the Red Sea, and ships from here sailed out and down the coast of Africa and across the Indian ocean to India where there were Roman trading posts. A book written in the 1st century BCE called the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, describes the trade routes and the trade goods to India and was almost certainly written by someone who had sailed those routes given the detailed descriptions. There were actually roman trade posts there with at least one temple to Jupiter

 

The Romans also had trade routes (though not under Roman control) across the steppes and northern India all the way to China. In the second century BCE, the Romans recorded sending trade embassies to China and surviving Chinese court records actually mention the arrival of at least one of these. But - according to the Chinese these did not cross the steppes, but came into southern China via what's now Vietnam. Roman coins and glass trade goods from the 2nd century BCE have been found in Vietnam, supporting what was written.

 

Not terribly relevant to longspear fighting, but just tell me that the idea of Roman legionaries sailing up the Mekong river, or building Roman temples in India, doesn't get your imaginative juices going!  

 

cheers, Mark

[Lawnmower Boy]

Whereas I'm fascinated by the small details, short distances, and internal trade. The embassy to China, which may or may not have been official, might have come via the Plain of Jars, a famous ancient route about which, in spite of its fame, we know all too little. Just as, inside the Empire, we have surprisingly little information about the usage of the Alpine passes. The Brenner Pass, for example, seems to have been used as an east-west route until Septimius Severus completed the north-south connection. That's three centuries after the route was in use! Ditto the Roman Saharan trade, which seems to have flourished within the Sahara without reaching across it, even though gold fields, which probably came into use in Byzantine times, were available just beyond. 

 

The forests, mountains, passes, oasses and fishing grounds of the Roman Empire are likely to have been under-utilised in general. But what did it mean, politically, culturally, economically and socially, for them to come into use? Why was full exploitation so often delayed until the period immediately after the fall of the Empire? Was the Roman governmental structure holding it back? (A libertarian would say, "of course," but there is also reason to think that the full Alpwirtschaft or commercial fishery was only possible in a regulated market, so that in certain ways, the "barbaric" sub-Roman period must have been more effectively regulated. (It's not a big leap here to think that it was the Church that was crucial here, of course.) 

[Lawnmower Boy]

Welp, I promised. Went to the library and looked at interesting books --one day is a little short to dive into Journal of Roman Studies on the subject. Lost a research day, more-or-less, but that's my fault. Though Markdoc owes me for forcing me to focus and substantiate my loosey-goosey opinions with his constructive and useful criticism, the rotter!

 

So: 

 

(i) Is there something like the Mesta in ancient Italy?

 

Ans: No: the geography is wrong (it's not a blocky penninsula with a large central plateau. It's an elongated peninsula with a T-bone skeleton of mountains). Also, the Mesta is an early modern phenomena depending on the early modern state, finances, and international trade.

 

ii) Are there drove paths in Italy?

 

Ans: There certainly are now, due to long-distance transhumance. As far as we know, these originated in early medieval, perhaps even sub-Roman times when regional church communities began to organise long-distance movements between summer and winter pasture. With some potential exceptions. The exception of interest here is the valley of the Tiber river, on which the city of Rome stands as the lowest fording place, and below which the estuarine marches of the Tiber blend into the more geologically complicated Pontine Marshes, forming a barrier of movement through the coastal lowlands, such that  "all roads leading to Rome." Specifically, the roads that I am thinking of here are the "ancient" ones (following the somewhat loosey-goosey argument of Alexandre Grandazzi, [The Foundation of Rome: Myth and History Trans. Jane Marie Todd [[ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999]]], 78--9), the Via Latina and the Via Salaria.  The Via Salaria is famous as the one by which the herds of the Samnites were supplied from the salt deposits at Ostia at the mouth of the Tiber, and Grandazzi's argument purports to show that the Via Latina was the spur by which the Latins brought their herds down to the coast.

 

Now, the key issue here is that while Grandazzi takes it for granted that it was the herds that were moved, some other formulations imply that salt was brought to the herds in the heights. I would take this cautionary more seriously were it not for the presence of extensive lowland marshes, not only the salt marshes of the Tiber mouth and the Pontine Marshes, but marshes found inland in the valleys of Latium, which were drained in the 300s BC. The most effective way of exploiting the biotic productivity of lowland marshes is as pasturage, salt marshes such as those found in estuaries being particularly valuable, and this is an ecosystem better exploited by catle than by sheep and goats, although certainly widely used by the latter, notably in England. For this reason I am inclined to grant Grandazzi's authority. But I would say that, wouldn't I, because I only have to cite him to close the book on the argument that there was a cattle drove path leading (through) Rome!

 

iii) Was the Via Flaminia, which crossed Italy southwest-northeast at an angle to the Via Salaria a drove path? This might seem lie a subsidiary argument at this point, but, damnit, I speed read Guy Bradley, (Ancient Umbria: State, Culture, and Identity in central Italy from the Iron Age to the Augustan Era ((Oxford: OUP, 2000)) yesterday, and I'm going to inflict it on you guys.

 

Umbria is the region served by the first leg of the Via Flaminia. It is the only inland region of Italy, this being a pretty hard thing to be, given the shape of Italy, though in ancient times it had an Adriatic coastline, and perhaps even extended across the Po Valley to the Julian Alps, per Herodotus. Some 40% of Umbria's land area is in the Appenines above 500m, good pasture land. As Cicero says in On Divination, the Umbrians are as skilled at augury as the Arabians, Cilicians and Phrygians, as they, like them, were “chiefly engaged in the rearing of cattle, and so they are constantly wandering over the plains and mountains in winter and summer.” Again, some caution is warranted. We have every reason to think that the agrarian economy of Italy was changing rapidly in the second and first centuries BC, and a lifestyle which Cicero might have seen as primordial may in reality have been quite a recent development. You will note in the Wikipedia article (but, oddly, not in Bradley), that pollen studies suggest that the highland forests were significantly thinned in just this period. 

 

What Bradley does have to tell us, by skillfully integrating archaeology, inscription, and sparse ancient history, is that Umbria, often seen as a unitary region of "civilised" city states in counter-distinction to primitive pastoral tribes such as the Samnintes, was anything but. The consolildation of settlement on known centres is a phenomena of the Final Bronze Age (c. 1000BC) at the earliest, and these are secondary centres, mostly located at the 500m contour between closely proximinal upland pasture and lowland plain --particularly suitable locations for transhumant grazing where a low-level political order could govern the transition. The traditional cities of Umbria are much later developments, and even the drainage of the lowland marshes is later than in Latium, coming after the Roman conquest, in the 200s-100s BC. The Umbrian political identity before this was more particular, local, and lacked clear "ethnic" identity. It might even be said to be tribal, although you can digress as long as you wish into the way that Classical authorities constructed political identity at this point.

 

We do not always have the archaeological data we would like to reconstruct ancient Umbria, but we do have(231--3) a full field full field survey of the basin of the Grubbio, the region around the city of Iguvium. This shows a substantial influx of population, or of intensification of use in the middle of the first century BC, both indicated and dated by extensive scatters of Roman Republic black-slip pottery. Yet vegetation analysis suggests a much more gradual intensification of agricultural use of the region going back to the early Iron Age. It is the imported pottery that is at issue, and it is best interpreted as evidence of a long-range trade in this period than before –or, apparently, after. That is, in this particular period, market-oriented production was bringing more pottery to this region. Along with this market-oriented intensification of exploitation in the valley bottoms, Bradley assumes that there must have been an intensification of exploitation in the pastures above --although presumably people didn't drag their fine, market-bought pottery up there! (This is where Bradley introduces the Cicero quote which I have already filched, and the pollen studies will slot in here as well.) 

 

Moving right along, we have the main driver of research into the agrarian economy of late Republican Italy, the ever-tendentious population question. Luk de Ligt is a great poponent of the "low count" position. (Luk de Ligt, Peasants, Citizens and Soldiers: Studies in the Demographic History of Roman Italy, 225BC—AD 100 ((Cambridge: CUP, 2012)).

 

To summarise: (155—6) Assuming a heavy demographic impact from the Second Punic War, the spread of agrarian slavery may be explaind by a shortage of free labourers after about 167. When we hear mention of freedmen rowers in the fleet, for lack of proletarians, who are now in the legions. It is supposed that this is not because of a shortage of freeborn poor farmers, but because they were not interested in working the land of others (280), while the rich preferred slaves as workers for a number of reasons, including because they cannot be called up for military service. This structural imbalance of demand needed rectification, but not because of population declines. In the mean time, small farmers could make use of spare time not spent cultivating their small farms by taking other jobs, such as muleteering (hugely important to the Roman urban economy), construction and the like.

 

(272—3) Another way of getting at rural population densities for de Ligt’s purposes is to look at theories of geographical distribution of market-oriented agricultural production, about which I need not bore you except to note the peripheral zone of intensive stock raising, attested in Italy for Apulia and Lucania and anchored on Cato on agriculture.

(275) Moving into the back country, as it were, de Ligt seeks explanations for apparent high population densities in certain rural areas, as picked up in field surveys, by explaining them as the pushing out of market-oriented production. De Ligt is satisfied that “a highly integrated market system centred on Rome” existed. Per models of market-oriented production systems focussed on a central metropolis, we expect to see bands of specialisation, including dairying and horticulture (I would add, and feed lots) closest to the city; arboriculture in the next zone, then arable, finally a distant zone of stock raising.

 

This is, as you might imagine, where I fit the distant-yet-market-oriented exploitation of the bottom land and associated upland pastures of the Grubbio. This is where (Umbrian) stock was raised for the Roman market. 

 

Finally, we move on to the question of the Roman cavalry. Here I dip into military history, which leaves me with some trepidation. "Internal" historical inquiries are in grave danger of being captured by enthusiasts and specialists, and military history is one of these fields. However, Jeremiah B. McCall, The Cavalry of the Roman Republic: Cavalry Combat and Elite Reputations in the middle and late Republic (London and New York: Routledge,. 2002) seems reasonably solid.

 

McCall points out that In the earliest days of the Republic, the elite Romans who voted in the prestigious eighteen equestrian centuries received horses subsidised by the state and served in the army as equites equo publico. As well, wealthy citizens who could afford to provide their own horses fought as equites equis suis. McCall wishes to argue that the EES was extensively used, as against some authors. He points to Cato’s grandfather, who was compensated for the loss of five horses in cavalry service. (2—3) I would be more convinced if we did not have two distinct strata of evidence. The EEP are identified by writing about cult. They were involved in the Procession of the Dioscuri, for example.When we turn to military contexts, authors who are also our only source for the military census tell us about equites usually without distinction. McCall's attempts to prove its existence also leave me with some faint doubt about the “equestrian census.”It isn't a serious doubt --I am sure that the first eighteen equestrian centuries existed!-- but I do have to point out a lacuna in our evidence. (7) Note also the inference that the equites were each accompanied by two servants. There are so many holes in this that I could --but I will here note the very faint possibility that he elite Roman knight was supported by a mounted servant. This is not an unknown thing in other contexts, but I do not want to refight the argument over armed servants, as I'd probably lose. 

 

So there was a noble cavalry. At the same time, we need to note that the equites, while Roman citizens, were "local notables." In the retrospective vision of Livy and Polybius, they were the aristocracy of provincial towns, with their social outlook and culture homongenised by participation in Roman life. However, looking to the evidence that the urbanisation of Italy was far later and less complete than these authors give us the impression of it being, we should take a more guarded view of their actual social environment. 

 

Anyway, we know that the Roman citizen cavalry disappeared. From 300 to 100, a citizen cavalry contingent was attached to each field army, and to allied cavalry as well. These were increasingly supplemented by other cavalry recruited from states outside of Italy. When? A fragment of Dio Cassius indicates citizen cavalry in Spain in c 140BC. Italian allied cavalry at least served in the Jugurthine War (112—05), and citizen cavalry against the Cimbri in 102. But in 50, Caesar went to Gaul with no citizen cavalry at all (101), and had 10,000 Gallic cavalry with him in the Civil Wars, no roman citizen cavalry at all. Yet Pompey seems to have had 7000 Roman and Italian cavalry, the “flower of Italy.” Perhaps this reflects the social classes from which Pompey drew his support? McCall sees this as an anachornism, but he seems to me overly fixed on the idea that the Roman citizen cavalry was formally abolished at some point. To be fair, he is dealing with a tradition that Marius did this. Like other recent authors writing on Marius' putative army reforms, McCall is skeptical, but his need for a specific date drives him to look to the Social Wars. In 88, we have the first definitive evidence of a Roman army without any citizen cavalry at all –Sulla’s 6 legions. And when he returned to Rome to enact his proscription, he had the same 6 legions –and 6000 horse, recruited from somewhere.

 

The final answer to McCall's question? New forms of prestige service in staffs, in command, are becoming available and sucking up all the eligible youth. (Plus business, advocacy, politics, estate management)

 

Well, okay. But how well do we understand this story, really? Finally, not really looking for deep insight, I picked up a book that had piqued my attention (and linked above) --Sullivan's Crisis of Rome: The Jugurthine and Northern Wars and the Rise of Marius. Unexpectedly to me, Sullivan ends his book not with a discussion of North African or North European barbarians at the turn of the 100s BC, or of the legendary figure of Marius, first great patron of the Julius Caesars, but the clan of the Metelli. How did five Metelli come to be consuls in such a short time. How did two Metelli come to celebrate triumphs on a single day? The point here isn't that there is some deep answer to their apparent dominance of the politics of the Roman Republic at the time of the rise of Marius. It is that we do not know anything about it. 

 

This weird mystery comes into focus for me in the context of Marius's army reforms, and, in particular, his recruitmentn of an army without reference to property qualifications. This is often presented as unprecededented, when in fact it is not. There is even a constitutional expedient, the tumultus Galliae (pardon my Latin). If the Gauls are in sight, everyone is free to join up. There was, incidentally, and to tie this tenuously back to the beginning of this particular thread drift, a tumultus proclaimed during the Pyrrhic War. Whatever we can say about the Roman army that fought Pyrrhus so effectively, it was not raised by property class, and there is no reason to think that it was the socially exclusive levee en masse of the eighteen equestrian centuries.

 

So, finally, are there poor stud farmers, mule-breeders, horsebreakers in late Republican Italy? This I haven't proven yet --I have some lines of inquiry to follow up on. I should think that reconstructed faunal assemblages will tell the tale when I follow up on the archaeological literature. But this is more than enough for now!

[Lawnmower Boy]

The October Horse

The Dioscuri

[bigdamnhero]

Wow, I turn my back for a couple months... Fun side trip tho!

bigdamhero, who started the thread, has been around for ten years. Imaginary ancient Roman cowboys aside, this wasn't his first rodeo.

Yup. And been playing Hero for closer to thirty. Gonna take more than spear angst to make me stop!

 

[Tanis Frey]

The Greek Hoplite had a bit of equipment for using long spears/Pikes with one hand.  It was a long leather strap with a cup at the bottom.  You would place the strap over your left shoulder and the cup rested against your right hip.  You would place the end of the pike in the cup and use your right hand to guide it.  This took the weight off your spear hand and transferred it to your shoulder, allowing you to use the pike in one hand and a shield in the other.

 

In Hero Terms the spear holder would be a

Extra Limb (AP:5, Only to use spears/pikes -1/2) CP: 3

[Ninja-Bear]

The Greek Hoplite had a bit of equipment for using long spears/Pikes with one hand. It was a long leather strap with a cup at the bottom. You would place the strap over your left shoulder and the cup rested against your right hip. You would place the end of the pike in the cup and use your right hand to guide it. This took the weight off your spear hand and transferred it to your shoulder, allowing you to use the pike in one hand and a shield in the other.

 

In Hero Terms the spear holder would be a

Extra Limb (AP:5, Only to use spears/pikes -1/2) CP: 3

Interesting build. I think extra strength only to offset STR min. would be a better build. Extra limbs don't inherently give extra strength.

[L. Marcus]

But they do help with the Two-Handed Limitation. I like the build.

[mhd]

They also used guiges, so enterprising PCs will have hoplites who use a shield and a two-handed spear and still have a hand free to throw javelins.

[Tanis Frey]

Interesting build. I think extra strength only to offset STR min. would be a better build. Extra limbs don't inherently give extra strength.

Extra STR is possible for the item.  Why?  To thrust the spear/pike with the piece of equipment I described, the Hoplite would swing their hip and the motion would carry into the spear thrust.

[Old Man]

I think I would throw in an OCV penalty for such an odd, vaguely obscene arrangement.

[Ninja-Bear]

Extra STR is possible for the item. Why? To thrust the spear/pike with the piece of equipment I described, the Hoplite would swing their hip and the motion would carry into the spear thrust.

The extra strength is only to buy off the penalty of using a two handed weapon one handed. It wouldn't be used to increase damage.

[bigdamnhero]

Extra Limb (AP:5, Only to use spears/pikes -1/2) CP: 3

Neat idea! I do feel like it should come with some sort of OCV penalty tho. As was discussed back on the first page of this thread, there's a difference between being able to hold a spear/pike steady as part of a shield wall with 100 of your closest friends, vs. maneuvering it in simple combat. OTOH, Rule Of Cool may apply.

[Markdoc]

It'd definately have some sort of an OCV penalty - not only would guiding the spear be exceedingly difficult, but you cannot thrust or stab with it: unless it was attached to your hip somehow, swinging your hip is not going to impart any significant momentum to anything hanging off your shoulder. So it wouldn't be much use.

 

At the risk of being a wet blanket, I very much doubt the item described was ever used to hold the pike during fighting. We have three detailed contemporary tactical manuals covering the macedonian and successor armies, including the phalanx (the tactica of Aelian, Arrian and Asklepiodotos). None of them mention such a practice - in fact they note that the pike was used in two hands. Plutarch describing the later phalanx of Cleomenes also notes also that their shield was supported by a strap, while the spear was held with both hands. There are also contemporary carvings and paintings of the phalanx. None of them show such a practice either (though it must be admitted that most of them are pretty stylized). Our best guess about how the shield was used with the pike looks like this:

This approach, with the shield used mostly for passive defence against missiles (you can still lift and move it to some degree while holding the pike) is probably why the shield used by the phalangites was significantly smaller and lighter than that used by other heavy infantry). This also matches the few surviving images we have.

 

The leather cup on a sling did exist: it was found in a macedonian grave in Iran. But historians disagree on what it actually was - not something to use in melee combat, but possibly something to carry the pike upright when maneuvering, which otherwise is fatiguing. Alternatively it may be something else entirely - in a contemporary source there is reference to a sling for casting javelins, rather like an atl-atl, which sounds a bit like this thing.

 

So there you have it.

 

cheers, Mark

[bigdamnhero]

possibly something to carry the pike upright when maneuvering, which otherwise is fatiguing.

Ah! That actually makes much more sense to me, and sounds like just the kind of thing some infantryman would come up with.