Alright, here's another question for the technology, and craft inclined...How were the wood poles (staff) for the sarissas made? I can go to home depot and buy them at about $10 a piece, but I don't know how the ancients cut the wood to be round, even and long, supposing that that's how they were.
And did they warp??? We imagine the sarissas in a long procession of Phalanxes, resembling a porcupine - nice and straight, but the wood must have warped, specially during the more humid areas Alexander went to in his later campaigns. And no matter what, I don't think Alexander had a constant reinforcement of supplies coming in whenever he wanted, so I wonder if the soldier had to patch these up when they were broken??
Another thing, the "Logistics" book mentions that Alexander relied heavilly on ships, which of course could not meet him everywhere, just along the coasts, the book also caculated each soldier's possible weight burden (weapons,rations, utensils) I don't remember it mentioning sarissas, and for the life of me, I can't imagine a mule carrying a bunch of 16 foot long sarissas, and carts (the books also mentioned) were highly avoided because it's more trouble than it was worth, especially if you want to travel fast. So...is it possible that they carried these??? If you think about it, they are quite cumbersome, and must have been left behind somewhere when crossing mountaneous, or forest terrains.
how much wood can the wood chuck chuck??????
Moderator: pothos moderators
Re: how much wood can the wood chuck chuck??????
Hi Lucian,you might find this in the book by Hans-G++nter Buchholz, Der Werkstoff Holz und seine Nutzung im ostmediterranen Altertum, Weilheim : Verein zur F+¦rderung der Aufarbeitung der Hellenischen Geschichte 2004. I don't know whether you have acces to a scholarly library, but if not, I'll have a look at it myself, if find the time.regards,abm
-
marcus
- Somatophylax
- Posts: 4871
- Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:27 am
- Location: Nottingham, England
- Has thanked: 45 times
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: how much wood can the wood chuck chuck??????
I'll be interested to know, too! I read something about this recently, but can't for the life of me remember where. I reckon I'll have to draw up a list of all the books and articles I've read in the last two or three months, and work through them again. Bother!If I *do* come across it again, I shall of course let you know.ATBMarcus
Re: how much wood can the wood chuck chuck??????
Marcus, are you thinking of the article in the book, Studies in the History of Art, Vol. 10: Macedonia and Greece in Early Hellenistic Times, 1982. I *know* you have this book. 
Lucian, this article by Minor M. Markle is called Macedonian Arms and Tactics under Alexander the Great, (p. 87-111). In it there is a page and a half of involved calculations for the weight of the sarissa, which Markle computes to be 13.70 lbs. (6.216 kg.) for the heaviest sarissa, and 6.6 lbs.(3.007 kg.) for the lightest. He also makes reference to the contemporary writers Theophrastus and Aslepiodotus for information on the sarissa and Macedonian arms, but we don't have these writers transcribed (yet). And although I can't find it on a quick glance through the article, I seem to remember that it is Theophrastus who says the shaft was made of cornel wood. Markle also discusses when the sarissa would have been employed in battle by the phalanx, pretty much concluding that it was only used on the flat and open spaces of Alexander's major battles. Polybius 18.28.32 concurs that it wasn't at all useful on any rugged terrain, which is why, he says, the phalanx eventually failed against the Romans. Alexander was too smart to make such a mistake. You can find the Polybius piece halfway down the page at:
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/R ... s/18*.html Markle also maintains that sarissae "would not have been carried by the Foot Companions on expeditions involving fast and long marches during which skirmishes and battles might occur in unexpected places, often on rugged terrain." Presuming that Alexander did keep the sarissas with his army after Gaugamela, I'd guess that were transported with the baggage train so they would be available for use if necessary, but wouldn't encumber his forces at other times.I don't have a clue about whether the wood shafts eventually warped, how they were made, or what they might have used for a replacement. Perhaps some of that info is in Theophrastus.Best regards,Amyntoros
Lucian, this article by Minor M. Markle is called Macedonian Arms and Tactics under Alexander the Great, (p. 87-111). In it there is a page and a half of involved calculations for the weight of the sarissa, which Markle computes to be 13.70 lbs. (6.216 kg.) for the heaviest sarissa, and 6.6 lbs.(3.007 kg.) for the lightest. He also makes reference to the contemporary writers Theophrastus and Aslepiodotus for information on the sarissa and Macedonian arms, but we don't have these writers transcribed (yet). And although I can't find it on a quick glance through the article, I seem to remember that it is Theophrastus who says the shaft was made of cornel wood. Markle also discusses when the sarissa would have been employed in battle by the phalanx, pretty much concluding that it was only used on the flat and open spaces of Alexander's major battles. Polybius 18.28.32 concurs that it wasn't at all useful on any rugged terrain, which is why, he says, the phalanx eventually failed against the Romans. Alexander was too smart to make such a mistake. You can find the Polybius piece halfway down the page at:http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/R ... s/18*.html Markle also maintains that sarissae "would not have been carried by the Foot Companions on expeditions involving fast and long marches during which skirmishes and battles might occur in unexpected places, often on rugged terrain." Presuming that Alexander did keep the sarissas with his army after Gaugamela, I'd guess that were transported with the baggage train so they would be available for use if necessary, but wouldn't encumber his forces at other times.I don't have a clue about whether the wood shafts eventually warped, how they were made, or what they might have used for a replacement. Perhaps some of that info is in Theophrastus.Best regards,Amyntoros
Amyntoros
Pothos Lunch Room Monitor
Pothos Lunch Room Monitor
Re: how much wood can the wood chuck chuck??????
I will take a look at everything you guys have posted, although I don't know if I can find the "german" book posted here, but I'll have to see. Cornel wood??? that's so interesting!!And I assumed that the sarissa would only be used in the open plain, I couldn't imagine having to drag that thing through a forest! As I've said, it's a pretty interesting military craft (sarissa) but it seems very cumbersome, and especially for one who liked speed.I recall a passage from I Claudius (theatre version) in which the battle that Quintillus Varus lost was also due to the factor that the Roman shields became wet from the downpour, and too heavy to carry. That made me think of the sarissas too. Wood although plentiful, at times might have been a problem, granted that Alexander fought in sands, but what about Philip?