08-06-2014, 10:35 AM
Thank you both...
Penetration, yes of course, but as then confirmed, to bend and encumber the shield (if that's what it penetrated - catching an actual person also achieves the aim), often causing it to be discarded (job done) and additionally preventing it from being re-used by the enemy.
As I understand it, the use of a 'frangible' wooden dowel is for the pilum design where the shank of the head ends in a flat tang with two (or three) holes - similar to this![[Image: pef_1099.jpg]](http://www.outfit4events.com/runtime/cache/images/productFull/pef_1099.jpg)
perhaps. This is then secured using one or more wooden, instead of metal pins - which would (the intent) break on impact/after penetration.
This method is an alternative, or adjunct, to a less tempered shank being more 'bendable'. In either case, weapons recovered later from the battlefield are then able to be put back into service with either simply replacing the dowels or straightening the long shank with only a relatively simple forge.
That pila were, afaik, designed like this makes them fairly useless for anything other than their primary purpose (ie for perhaps holding off cavalry, hence the thrust of the question), or for things like basic guard duty and crowd control when a more standard hasta might be more suitable.
What I'm therefore wondering is whether there are any archaeological finds that result in a determination of less tempering or more hardening, or whether this change in construction is detailed anywhere?
Penetration, yes of course, but as then confirmed, to bend and encumber the shield (if that's what it penetrated - catching an actual person also achieves the aim), often causing it to be discarded (job done) and additionally preventing it from being re-used by the enemy.
As I understand it, the use of a 'frangible' wooden dowel is for the pilum design where the shank of the head ends in a flat tang with two (or three) holes - similar to this
perhaps. This is then secured using one or more wooden, instead of metal pins - which would (the intent) break on impact/after penetration.This method is an alternative, or adjunct, to a less tempered shank being more 'bendable'. In either case, weapons recovered later from the battlefield are then able to be put back into service with either simply replacing the dowels or straightening the long shank with only a relatively simple forge.
That pila were, afaik, designed like this makes them fairly useless for anything other than their primary purpose (ie for perhaps holding off cavalry, hence the thrust of the question), or for things like basic guard duty and crowd control when a more standard hasta might be more suitable.
What I'm therefore wondering is whether there are any archaeological finds that result in a determination of less tempering or more hardening, or whether this change in construction is detailed anywhere?
