Jimbow Posted December 7, 2005 Report Share Posted December 7, 2005 Alitte of topic i know, but i'm just sayin i choose spear on it's primary function, and although the shield can be nasty in the right hands (or wrong hands, depending on how u look at it), it's not primarily a weapon. That's obviously the case in terms of its primary use. However, if the Roman soldiers were trained in the use of the scutum as an offensive weapon, and not just to block with, then I would argue that it could be loosely classed as a weapon. A biro is something they wouldn't have been trained to kill with Another weapon that I don't think has been mentioned is the pick-axe/dolabra. There are written sources saying it was used in battle, and one source cites it as the best way to crush your enemy in certain circumstances. Jim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eggers Posted December 7, 2005 Report Share Posted December 7, 2005 Alitte of topic i know, but i'm just sayin i choose spear on it's primary function, and although the shield can be nasty in the right hands (or wrong hands, depending on how u look at it), it's not primarily a weapon. That's obviously the case in terms of its primary use. However, if the Roman soldiers were trained in the use of the scutum as an offensive weapon, and not just to block with, then I would argue that it could be loosely classed as a weapon. A biro is something they wouldn't have been trained to kill with Another weapon that I don't think has been mentioned is the pick-axe/dolabra. There are written sources saying it was used in battle, and one source cites it as the best way to crush your enemy in certain circumstances. Jim. Thanks jim, i stand corrected. Ok i'll vary my favourite weapon, to the soldier. If the soldier knows how to use something effectively, then he (or she) is the finest weapons avaliable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
military Posted December 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 Have to disagree with you there I'm afraid In the hands of a Roman soldier it most definitely was used as a weapon to hit the enemy, using the boss to punch with, and the edges to smack on an enemy's foot or up into his chin to make him falter or lose balance. Search around for reenactor accounts of its use in this way. Jim. thanks for the heads-up. I'll look into shield tactics abit more. I know that the spainish devised a shield so small, it was barely bigger then a clinched fists, used but troops trained to get inbetween a phalanx's pikes and could deliver a nasty punch, if used that way. But i still thinking (at the moment) that thats not the shields' primary function. Afterall if we are including anything which can be a weapon, then anything can count as a weapon, pens, keys, bread-knife and it makes the whole thing a lot more complicated. After all, discipine, ideaology and leadership can all be counted as weapons if u stretch the concept far enough. Alitte of topic i know, but i'm just sayin i choose spear on it's primary function, and although the shield can be nasty in the right hands (or wrong hands, depending on how u look at it), it's not primarily a weapon. Or am i alone on this one? Yes, but the formations of Chinese infantry never faced the Romans and their pila, did they? True but they did face their fair share of quality bad guys too. Romans aren't the only empire to include highly quality troopers well, thanks for the dicussion. I needed most of that and one of my friends will love the info I got for him! -military Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost_Warrior Posted December 8, 2005 Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 Shield is a "defensive weapon" and yes, anyone who ever got cracked up alongside the head with one will tell you it definitely IS a weapon. Spears are good long range, but in close fighting, they are practically useless. Also, if you use them one handed, and have a shield in your other hand (such as in a phalanx) they are very awkward to meneuver. More so if it's a long spear, and there are alot of people behind and to the sides of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honorius Posted December 15, 2005 Report Share Posted December 15, 2005 I would say the Elephant or horse...but do you consider them weapons or not? If not i would say the Pila Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princeps Posted December 15, 2005 Report Share Posted December 15, 2005 (edited) The Gladius of course! I perticularly like one a quote attributed to a general whare he describes how the legions' stabbing motion was far superior to the slicing technique employed by most barbarian tribes. Makes sense to me. After that, the falx. Used by the Dacians, it prompted a re-design of legionarries helmets http://www.sabii-de-toledo.ro/Catalog/Fabr...omania/falx.jpg edit/also, the war hammer is a good one http://www.windlass.com/foot_soldiers_war_hammer.jpg Edited December 15, 2005 by Viggen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLavius Valerius Constantinus Posted December 15, 2005 Report Share Posted December 15, 2005 I remember seeing the falx being used in action for a History Channel documentary on the Legions in Dacia, my was it scary. The helmets of soldiers were basically cut like cardboard. Thus, the new helmets were outfitted with strong braces, which really helped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spurius Posted December 15, 2005 Report Share Posted December 15, 2005 I'm kind of partial to Military's answer: ballista These cast iron tips are nine to ten centimeters long: http://www.legionxxiv.org/catapulta/ballistaboltpoints.jpg and the thrower: http://www.ihistory101.net/espanol/rome-pi...ge-machines.gif Ouch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Favonius Cornelius Posted December 15, 2005 Report Share Posted December 15, 2005 Come on folks...it all begins and ends with the incendiary pigs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viggen Posted December 15, 2005 Report Share Posted December 15, 2005 <offtopic>We do not allow hotlinking from other sites, and as a courtesy to the webmaster of those pictures we do not want them to be hotlinked here either, therefor i removed the images and just displayed the links... regards viggen </offtopic> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spurius Posted December 16, 2005 Report Share Posted December 16, 2005 <offtopic>We do not allow hotlinking from other sites, and as a courtesy to the webmaster of those pictures we do not want them to be hotlinked here either, therefor i removed the images and just displayed the links... regards viggen </offtopic> My bad. I'll get on the flogging.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbow Posted December 16, 2005 Report Share Posted December 16, 2005 But that's not what makes the pilum so unique and effective; if it hits the ground, its long, slender soft iron shaft bends, making it impossible to throw back at the roman lines. I hate to ruin the party on the pilum and its ability to bend, but tests just published by Peter Connolly using very accurate reconstructions of many types found have pretty much proven that they didn't bend. It also looks like the literary sources have been misinterpreted all along. His paper can be read in "Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 12/13". Not only did he test them, but he got his brother-in-law who is a heavy farm labourer to repeat the test with the same result. However, most of the tests did see the pila penetrate the scuta, which backs up source descriptions of that aspect, and the only way to get them out was to cut them. Cheers, Jim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Favonius Cornelius Posted December 16, 2005 Report Share Posted December 16, 2005 But that's not what makes the pilum so unique and effective; if it hits the ground, its long, slender soft iron shaft bends, making it impossible to throw back at the roman lines. I hate to ruin the party on the pilum and its ability to bend, but tests just published by Peter Connolly using very accurate reconstructions of many types found have pretty much proven that they didn't bend. It also looks like the literary sources have been misinterpreted all along. His paper can be read in "Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 12/13". Not only did he test them, but he got his brother-in-law who is a heavy farm labourer to repeat the test with the same result. However, most of the tests did see the pila penetrate the scuta, which backs up source descriptions of that aspect, and the only way to get them out was to cut them. Cheers, Jim. Is it possible that the guy did not have the right balance of iron content? If the pilum head was mostly iron for instance and not well tempered, it would bend more easily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbow Posted December 18, 2005 Report Share Posted December 18, 2005 Is it possible that the guy did not have the right balance of iron content? If the pilum head was mostly iron for instance and not well tempered, it would bend more easily. To be quite honest it's highly unlikely as it is Peter Connolly, one of the leading and most published ancient history illustrators and researchers, literally placed by many at the same level as Robinson for his contribution to our understanding of the Roman army over the past 30 years. When he says "I think it was like this" people take a lot of notice. He tends to be quite "exact" about what he publishes and did take advice I believe on the metal used for the pila. Don't forget that he also took a look at the written sources, and found the interpretations that we have come to accept and found major flaws in them, and can prove it as well. In a nutshell, none of the written sources say that pila bent, only a type of hasta, and that's were the first notions of the bendy pilum came from. Cheers, Jim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Favonius Cornelius Posted December 18, 2005 Report Share Posted December 18, 2005 Is it possible that the guy did not have the right balance of iron content? If the pilum head was mostly iron for instance and not well tempered, it would bend more easily. To be quite honest it's highly unlikely as it is Peter Connolly, one of the leading and most published ancient history illustrators and researchers, literally placed by many at the same level as Robinson for his contribution to our understanding of the Roman army over the past 30 years. When he says "I think it was like this" people take a lot of notice. He tends to be quite "exact" about what he publishes and did take advice I believe on the metal used for the pila. Don't forget that he also took a look at the written sources, and found the interpretations that we have come to accept and found major flaws in them, and can prove it as well. In a nutshell, none of the written sources say that pila bent, only a type of hasta, and that's were the first notions of the bendy pilum came from. Cheers, Jim. Ok, sounds like he knows what he is talking about. I'm curious, I seem to remember reading about a wooden pin in the pilum head which would break and this render the pilum useless as well, did he try to replicate this? How often did he try it, a few tosses or a full exploration of scores of tosses? Ancient technology does not work terribly well you know. I wonder also if there are any ancient references to the use of the pilum. If many authors mentioned its functions as a bending head rendering shields and throwback useless, it would be suprising that they could get away with it often seeing as how it was being used during their day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.