Roman Siegecraft

[Germanicus]

For a large period spanning before, and most of the Pricipate, the Roman army was the only army of the ancient world to possess siege technology. Where as once the advantage would always be with a defending army, the Romans changed the situation, and expanded accordingly.

 

At what point do you think the advantage over other states, or groups began to wane, and was the competing siegecraft learned from the Romans ?

[caldrail]

Not so. All armies could practice siegecraft to a lesser or greater degree, its just that the romans had professional engineers within their ranks that gave them a keener edge in this field.

[Germanicus]

Not so. All armies could practice siegecraft to a lesser or greater degree

 

Give me some examples then.

 

To quote Adrian Goldsworthy in "The Complete Roman Army" :-

 

"The defences of most Roman forts would have posed few problems for an army with some knowledge of siegecraft. However, for much of the Principate only the Romans possessed this technology."

 

Can anyone provide some examples to contradict this view ?

[Lost_Warrior]

What I can't understand about the Roman siege tower, is how come the defending army let the thing get close enough to actually serve any purpose? I mean, think about it. It was built of wood, right? If I were standing up on a fortress wall watching this thing come at me the first thing I would do would be shoot some flaming arrows into it. Did the Romans have some sort of defense against this?

[Princeps]

Google.com - siegecraft +BC

 

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/gabrmetz/gabr000e.htm

 

http://columbia.thefreedictionary.com/Fort...+and+siegecraft

 

http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/2004/...g/br10-sp04.htm

 

Dunno how relevant these are, I've only scanned them and I'm not sure if they're considered academic enough, but fwiw I would agree that siegecraft wasn't invented by the Romans by any means.

 

What I can't understand about the Roman siege tower, is how come the defending army let the thing get close enough to actually serve any purpose? I mean, think about it. It was built of wood, right? If I were standing up on a fortress wall watching this thing come at me the first thing I would do would be shoot some flaming arrows into it. Did the Romans have some sort of defense against this?

 

Some of the "high-end" towers were armoured.

[Lost_Warrior]

Some of the "high-end" towers were armoured.

 

Makes sense. What were they armored with? A type of chainmail? Or metal plates?

[Princeps]

The ones I've seen illustrated had plate armour. I think this would have been the best option for siege towers (as the main benefit of chainmail, afaik, is flexibility), so I dobt they used chainmail armour.

[Germanicus]

Dunno how relevant these are, I've only scanned them and I'm not sure if they're considered academic enough, but fwiw I would agree that siegecraft wasn't invented by the Romans by any means.

 

Dude, read the question, I'm not saying they "invented" it. What I'm saying is that they were the only Army to possess it and use it so skillfully as to be able to tip the balance from the defender, to the aggressor for a long period of time. (the late republic and Principate).

 

Who else in that period (you'll need a time frame) say 60BC-180AD possessed it. I guess no one, as your links indicate.

[Sextus Roscius]

The seige tower was a decidedly Roman thing for a long, long time. Though I think another one of their greatest military engineering feats was their ballistics technology. They used the ballista to greater effect than just about any civilization known to man. The balista is an especialy good weapon becuase it can be used against both infantry and defenses efficiently, and modifications of it allowed on to chuck rocks instead of bolts, for more economic use of the weapon.

 

That gave them a great edge.

 

Also, The Roman's had specific engineering groups of people trained in building seige equipment and building defenses. Plus the average soldier knew how to make earth works and the general lay out of forts, as well as how to operate certain seige equipment.

Edited February 27, 2006 by Sextus Roscius

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

Do ladders count? I mean really, how would you not use ladders in siege warfare during classical times.

[longbow]

What I can't understand about the Roman siege tower, is how come the defending army let the thing get close enough to actually serve any purpose? I mean, think about it. It was built of wood, right? If I were standing up on a fortress wall watching this thing come at me the first thing I would do would be shoot some flaming arrows into it. Did the Romans have some sort of defense against this?

 

Its actually not so easy to set alight a siege tower,they are made out of green wood which they soak with water untill its sodden,the frames are covered in sun dried hides which are soaked thoroughly too.You can loose arrows into them all day with out it catching a fire enougth to stop the thing.

Flaming arrows are over rated,i know Hollywood loves them but where they actually used that much?its not as if you dip your arrow head into some burning oil and loose it.You have to soak rags in the pitch and wrap and tie them to the arrow shaft,needless to say that dramatically affects the range and stability.

A good shot with a catarpult or Ballista would be better at stopping the towers or a wide spikey ditch in front of the walls.

The Celts had the answer to Towers and Battering rams,Hill forts.

Edited February 27, 2006 by longbow

[Kosmo]

The first to develop complex siege tehnics were the greeks during hellenistic time.

A famous city conqueror was Demetrios Poliocertes. He laid a long siege to Rhodos where he employed huge armored towers, stone throwers, rams, mines etc.

In fact, from that time until the gunpowder era no major development of siegecraft took place.

Romans bulit walls around the enemy from where they could atack the city defenders. This was not a new thing, but they used it much more then others.

Romans did not invent siegecraft but after uniting the mediterranean they were the only one still having this abilities.

As I said in another thread, dacians had, in the time of Burebista/Caesar, good siege abilities that they used agains greek pontic colonies and celtic hill fortresses in today Hungary and Slovacia.

[Lost_Warrior]

Its actually not so easy to set alight a siege tower,they are made out of green wood which they soak with water untill its sodden,the frames are covered in sun dried hides which are soaked thoroughly too.You can loose arrows into them all day with out it catching a fire enougth to stop the thing.

Flaming arrows are over rated,i know Hollywood loves them but where they actually used that much?its not as if you dip your arrow head into some burning oil and loose it.You have to soak rags in the pitch and wrap and tie them to the arrow shaft,needless to say that dramatically affects the range and stability.

A good shot with a catarpult or Ballista would be better at stopping the towers or a wide spikey ditch in front of the walls.

The Celts had the answer to Towers and Battering rams,Hill forts.

 

Ah, I see, so they *had* thought of that. I thought I was going crazy for a minute there, wondering how exactly that worked.

[Princeps]

Dunno how relevant these are, I've only scanned them and I'm not sure if they're considered academic enough, but fwiw I would agree that siegecraft wasn't invented by the Romans by any means.

 

Dude, read the question, I'm not saying they "invented" it. What I'm saying is that they were the only Army to possess it and use it so skillfully as to be able to tip the balance from the defender, to the aggressor for a long period of time. (the late republic and Principate).

 

Who else in that period (you'll need a time frame) say 60BC-180AD possessed it. I guess no one, as your links indicate.

 

Please accept my humble apologies for misreading your question Germanicus.

[Virgil61]

...

 

Dude....

 

Forgive me for being off-topic but I can't resist, is that an Aussie using an Americanism towards a 'Pom'?

Edited February 27, 2006 by Virgil61