07-27-2001, 05:27 PM
The catapult stones from Corbridge that I have looked at were all made of the local sandstone and, although a few had split, most were intact and, I suspect, never used (they were used in the foundations of Site XI). Carving these things appears to have been the Roman army equivalent of painting coal.<br>
<br>
The article by Holley (Holley, A.E. 1994: 'The ballista balls from Masada', in Masada IV. The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963-1965 Final Reports, Jerusalem) is more concerned with calibres than the types of stone used - it is a fascinating read (although he does tend to 'fire' stones rather than 'shoot' them), but not much help to you. I have also seen (from another period) the stones shot by the Sultan Baibars (not personally, you understand) into the crusader-period castle at Sayhun in Syria, all intact. Of course, you could argue that any that did explode would be unlikely to be collected except in the most recent excavations, but I would doubt any commander would allow his troops to spend hours whittling away at these things if the stone used was softer than the walls at which they were shooting!<br>
<br>
Mike Bishop <p></p><i></i>
<br>
The article by Holley (Holley, A.E. 1994: 'The ballista balls from Masada', in Masada IV. The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963-1965 Final Reports, Jerusalem) is more concerned with calibres than the types of stone used - it is a fascinating read (although he does tend to 'fire' stones rather than 'shoot' them), but not much help to you. I have also seen (from another period) the stones shot by the Sultan Baibars (not personally, you understand) into the crusader-period castle at Sayhun in Syria, all intact. Of course, you could argue that any that did explode would be unlikely to be collected except in the most recent excavations, but I would doubt any commander would allow his troops to spend hours whittling away at these things if the stone used was softer than the walls at which they were shooting!<br>
<br>
Mike Bishop <p></p><i></i>
