shields

What is the benefit of curving a wood shield? Seems like added cost and complexity for no benefit.

>testudo
would've worked equally, if not better, using flat shields
>but the curve makes arrows and other projectiles glance off better!
grow up, I'm talking about wooden shields and not metal plates
>vikings
did just fine with flat shields
>kite shields and heaters
literally why

I agree that curved shields look neat but in actual use I fail to see how a basic flat shield, especially remembering that shields are disposable and meant to be repaired/replaced often, isn't superior

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >wood can’t deflect

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine being not only this stupid, but also so dumb to think that bending the wood was something that would make the shield twice as costly to make. Newsflash, they didn't buy them from fricking Home Depot... all this shit had to be done by hand. You think wetting and bending wood was difficult after all that other shit?

      >no argument
      >still mad
      pottery

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine being not only this stupid, but also so dumb to think that bending the wood was something that would make the shield twice as costly to make. Newsflash, they didn't buy them from fricking Home Depot... all this shit had to be done by hand. You think wetting and bending wood was difficult after all that other shit?

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They abandoned them later for simpler designs, just like the helmets because roman army has became too big to outfit it.

    At least in the helmet case the quality of metalurgy and metalwork went down the shitter.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thats wrong in every way jesus frick.

      By the late empire metallurgy got better and Roman weapons and armors began being made on large industrialized facilities called Fabricae up to a higher standard. There are proof marks and clear evidence of standarized molds, fittings and specialized tools in late Roman archeological finds. The designs got more fficient and effective, single bowl helmets were replaced by Bipartite and Quadripartite ridge designs as well as Spangenhelms that could be easily repaired and refitted, on top of protecting better. Scale and Lamellar armor on top of mail became the standard and mail became more densely rivetted and gained sleeves. The swords grew longer and more capable of cutting on top of stabbing to face a higher threat from cavalry. The spears grew longer tips and the shields became oval with reinforced rims to be capable of tighter formations than the curved Scutum.

      The late Roman empire was just better equipped than the high imperial one.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >i have never served in an ancient early-iron age army
    >i have never engaged in armed& armored hand-to-hand combat against murderous barbarians
    >i have never blocked the axe blows of a brutish germanic tribeBlack person with my scutum
    >i have never bashed a carthaginian to the ground with my scutum
    >i have never had arrows, javelins, or rocks launched at me by belligerent enemies, with only my scutum to protect myself
    >i have never braced shoulder-to-shoulder with comrades and withstood the charge of enemy pikes or shield walls bristling with swords
    >i have never charged full-bore& hard-wienered at my enemy with my scutum in one hand and my gladius in the other
    >i have never marched 20 miles daily carrying my scutum on my back along with all of my gear& possessions for months on end
    >i have never even been in a physical altercation
    >but trust me i know better than the greatest army of its day

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think OP is wrong but its important to note that the Romans as a people actively fought against innovation, as can be seen with industries like agriculture. The roman Latifundia system was outrageously inefficent, and they knew of better systems as far back as 250BCE, but chose to innovate is they percieved pursuing "inefficency" to be the work of poor farrmers, rather than rich noblemen.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >curved scutum with central iron boss is highly effective at blocking attacks and bashing opponents
        >does all of its jobs perfectly
        >cheap& easy to produce& maintain
        >future homosexual screeches because the other legates& i didn't see the point in innovating on something that was already perfect

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >vikings
    >did just fine with flat shields
    Pick one. They got fricked up by every actual army they fought.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Pick one. They got fricked up by every actual army they fought.
      why does Normandy exist anon?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      have you ever read a history book in your life

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Do you know what angling armor does to effective thickness? Because the Romans figured it out. Also, try handling a large flat board of that size, and then a curved one. It changes the center of gravity and makes it much, much easier to march with.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A curved .... well anything makes an arch.

    What do we know about arches?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >What do we know about arches?
      romans were pretty fond of them?

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It cover single soldier body from wider angles. (This BTW Hollywood and popular folk history got Roman tactics wrong, "wall of shields blah blah blah". Roman made mode of warfare was like African warfare. Throw javelins, and it requires relatively lose formation so you get space for swinging during throw.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What is the benefit of curving a wood shield?
    Flat things are flimsy. If you curve them they become much stronger. Remember when you learned about eggshells in 3rd grade?

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The curve made the shield wrap around the body, offering more protection from attacks to the side. Widening the shield would do the same thing but it would not only make the shield harder to control but also crowd into the man next to you.
    >grow up, I'm talking about wooden shields and not metal plates
    Plywood covered in boiled leather and reinforced with iron. Regardless, angling the shield made it effectively thicker which made an attack less likely to penetrate. There was also plenty of blunt force attacks like kicks, shield bashes, and rocks thrown from city walls.
    >did just fine with flat shields
    The vikings were less aggressive with their shieldplay. Vikings would be very aggressive with axes and spears but only occasionally lashed out with the shield. The romans, on the other hand, were so aggressively in your face with their shields that you couldn't swing freely at them.

    This meant that romans were more vulnerable to opponent's reaching around the shield and trying to stab them from the side.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I feel like testudo was meme shit they did a couple of times in highly specific situations and didn't do 99% of the time

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It was a maneuver formation after all with the purpose of approaching enemy positions and resisting their missiles.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why are their skirts so short?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *