Oberaden Pilum. a thought...

[Hibernicus]

But the groove on the other one, the one pictured below, goes all around. The groove is below all three rivets, unlike what might be the damage in the example you refer to..

BTW....Did you see the rivet shank in the damage? Seems to be a small square visible.. opposite the rivet head. What do you think?

I mean the pilum is complete in every other respect- wouldn't it make a whole lot more sense to add the weight before installing the shank?

I've done both and the installed shank makes it easier to work with.. extra room for helping hands.

There's no evidence whatsoever that the groove is even intentional, and without any evidence of lead, there's simply no support for the idea- save that it might kind of look like a sculpture that is more different than similar

I don't disagree.

Have you had an opportunity to examine more than the illustrations?

[Matt Lukes]

It only appears to go all the way around in one of those diagrams, the second is identical to the one I have that is inconclusive as it's a front view with a slight angle to the right. The rather more detailed one I posted of the 'back' side contradicts the mostly 'right-side' one you have Sean. Why exactly they're different, I can't say, but I'm inclined to believe far more detailed diagrams than any that are rather less-so.

Now when you ask about rivet shanks in the 'damage' I refer to Sean, do you mean the long groove from the lower rivet square to the colette of this same artifact? There is indeed something round at the top- presumably the broken shank of the upper rivet, and the square head of the bottom one, but oddly nothing of the third one that your diagram shows is between them. Where do you see something?

I certainly can't argue with your experience of finding it easier to cast the weight with a fully-constructed pilum as opposed to just a haft- I've never done either myself :wink:

Looking at the diagram of the 'back' side just now I have an alternate explanation for the groove- notice that there are cracks going from side to side at at least 3 positions along the length of the block- perhaps the 'grooves' were simply cracks too that water was able to get through and over time eroded the wood. It explains the smoothness. Of course I can't quite explain just why it'd only happen at this point and not any of the other three, :lol: but I don't know the specifics of the site at which the artifacts were found.

Unfortunately, these diagrams- particularly the 'back' side are the best images of the artifact I've yet come across- I WISH I had close-up pictures of the piece. It'd sure help with this issue...

[Matt Lukes]

Oh, and I don't have a specific reference for the sculpture- it's the bunch of 'Praetorian Guards'

[FlaviusCrispus]

The weighted pilum pic appears to be from the Cancelleria relief, which shows Praetorian Guards accompanying Domitian (who's head was later recut to resemble Nerva). The best close-up of the entire scene I could fine is here:

http://www.thorsberg-miniatures.de/art_ ... rt_deu.htm

...about 1/3 down the page. A couple of other notes of interest: The pilum shaft appears unusually short, and there doesn't appear to be a butt spike.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

perhaps the thing behind the lead weight is a spring washer/circlip device?

B. Angel

[Matt Lukes]

There's another problem- the Cancelleria Relief is dated to around 92 or 95AD (references disagree a little), but the area of the Oberaden site where the pila were found is described as Augustan. That means the artifacts pre-date the sculpture by nearly a century and unless there's an Augustan depiction of 'weighted' pila, there's absolutely no reason to consider the possibilitiy of a weight associated with the artifact. Not since there's no physical evidence of one.

Also I'd understood the relief to be the best of just a couple of depictions. The LEGXX website mentions an even later tombstone, but nothing eariler. What's more, there really is no evidence that these are lead weights- that's just a supposition.

Since in statistics, all the individual probabilities of factors that must be true for an overall probability to be determined are MULTIPLIED, the probability of any theory being correct drops radically with each subsequent 'if' that is required: if the groove is intentional, if they completed the pilum prior to casting, if it just hadn't been cast yet before deposition, if one of the UNBELIEVEABLY rare partially-intact pila happens to be the one of the weighted types (with all the previous 'ifs' being correct), if the weight is indeed cast lead, if these weighted pila were made a century eariler than the most famous depiction, if being cast onto the shaped haft is the actual method of securing the weight as opposed to a collar and cord wrapping as could be the case in the sculpture, if the other details of the sculpture that are quite different than the artifact are wrong but the apparently high position of the weight is accurate... so is it more likely this is all true or that the grooves have another, more mundane explanation like time, deposition conditions, etc.?

[Crispvs]

I agree with Dan that the half of this pilum appears to be unusually short. I get the impression that it was probably longer originally but that the lower portion was carved fully in the round (it does slope gradually out from the shoulder after all) and has since been broken away. This would explain both the lack of a butt spike and the unusually short haft, which has presumably broken at this point because is is precisely at this point that the sculpture becomes very narrow (immediately below the thicker carved hand.

Matt, I am in complete agreement with you!


Crispvs

[Matt Lukes]

Well looking at the large scanned image I have, it's actually clear the end of the pilum in question is broken off:



What's more, the nearer of the two background pila actuall has its base visible and it's 'normal' length and has a butt spike- although the buttspike is an odd type- smaller in diameter at its end than the wooden shaft:



One other interesting feature that's not so easy to see on the foreground pilum, but is clear again on the closer of the background pila, is that the supposed 'weight' has eagles engraved on it- on the right side seems to be yet another wing, so they might even go all the way around:



To be honest, this depiction sure makes the ball look less like a lead weight intended to make the weapon more effective, and more like a decorative element- afterall the idea that it's a lead weight is just a theory...

Oddly, I've had a look at the tombstones in the Imagebase and thus far I've only found depictions of these odd pila on the stones of Praetorian Guardsmen- there are two or three (one kind of looks like it might have a ball, but it's not clear), and one appears to have two balls...

[FlaviusCrispus]

Matt--

That's an outstanding catch on the background pilum buttspike, and the eagle emblem on the supposed "lead weight"! Laud points for you!

It seems clear we do have a broken pilum shaft in the foreground, but thank the gods for all that low-relief work in the background (we have a similar situation with the Louvre "Praetorian relief," where the low-relief background seems to supply missing details on the broken foreground figures).

On the pilums we're making now, the shaft actually tapers into the butt spike, making for a nice even effect like we see on the relief, rather than having the buttspike overlap the shaft and leave an unsightly gap. It's nice to see aesthetics confirmed by archaeology for once.

I've had the chance to throw a couple of pila with a big metallic weight, and I did note the additional heft drastically reduces the distance I was able to get, on the order of half. I wondered then if the "lead" ball might in fact be composed of something different-- perhaps ceramic, or another, lighter metal like iron or bronze. The eagle emblem would be easier to impress on a ceramic weight, although I suppose it could also be cast into a lead or metal ball via a mold. I'm not sure what this does to the idea of casting the ball in place on the pilum handle, but it's something to consider.

[Matt Lukes]

Thanks David

I agree about the buttspike too- certainly the end of the shaft is best tapered a bit, and if the spike doesn't open to the full diameter, it's rather better since the edge won't catch on things as it would if it were larger. I don't have such a significant 'lip'- it reminds me of is it a Greek type of buttspike maybe? I can't recall exactly...

I'd wondered about the distance issue with extra weight, and really whether it was a useful idea in the first place. The suggestion is that pila were getting lighter, so the weight increased the penetration power, but I don't really see that- socketed pila lacked the weight of the pyrimidal block, but they did okay, the ones with very short iron shanks worked, and so it seemed did the spike tang type whose haft transition style I don't think we know. No real evidence of a weight strikes me as rather telling- if it were really necessary we'd find them, yes?

As for different materials, pretty much anything could work- although most would have to be separate pieces, you couldn't exactly fire ceramic on the haft or cast copper alloy onto it :wink: Of course the fact that there's an eagle on the ones in the relief doesn'd discount any material- lead can be engraved fairly easily, wood can be carved, ceramic is very easy to engrave before its fired, and so on.

[Hibernicus]

Casting a lead weight with relief onto a pilum shaft is not difficult.

I like the tapered shaft idea as well. Its how we make our light javelins and they and pilum throw much better.

A tapered pilum shaft of pine with a lead weight is much easier to through than a weighted straight shafted ash shaft.

The extra penetration power of an Oberaden style pilum with a lead weight is rather spectacular... 10 meters is an easy throw... with practice...?

Can't wait to chuck some at one of our new scutum boards!

[Caballo]

"Oddly, I've had a look at the tombstones in the Imagebase and thus far I've only found depictions of these odd pila on the stones of Praetorian Guardsmen- there are two or three (one kind of looks like it might have a ball, but it's not clear), and one appears to have two balls..."
I think the recently discovered stele of a miles from the fleet has a double-weighted pilum as well? http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... ght=marine

[Matt Lukes]

Ah yes, it indeed seems to be- although the head is VERY large for a pilum. Well it was an interesting nacent theory- for a minute :wink:

Casting a lead weight with relief onto a pilum shaft is not difficult.

Well if there are eagles all the way around, at least a 4 part mold would be necessary- and it'd be fairly easy to simply engrave the lead afterwards.

A tapered pilum shaft of pine with a lead weight is much easier to through than a weighted straight shafted ash shaft.

But isn't the whole point is to increase the weight of the pilum? Why switch to a lighter wood just to be able to add a weight to make it heavier? I don't get it. Besides, pine is awfully soft for a weapon haft. It's a whole lot more logical to just use normal hafting material and add less weight...

And do you mean you taper the entire length of the shaft below the block? Is there any evidence of that at all? Mike was talking about the last couple of inches over which the buttspike fits...

The extra penetration power of an Oberaden style pilum with a lead weight is rather spectacular... 10 meters is an easy throw... with practice...?

So how much more does a weighted pilum with a light pine haft weigh vs. a normal ash one? And just how do you measure the penetration power?

[Hibernicus]

Well if there are eagles all the way around, at least a 4 part mold would be necessary- and it'd be fairly easy to simply engrave the lead afterwards.

Four part?.... seems over complicated for something so simple. A two part mold is more than adequate. We've begun the process of modifying one

But isn't the whole point is to increase the weight of the pilum? Why switch to a lighter wood just to be able to add a weight to make it heavier? I don't get it. Besides, pine is awfully soft for a weapon haft. It's a whole lot more logical to just use normal hafting material and add less weight...

I'm not sure what you mean by "switching" and "normal hafting material"..

As others have said Roman are opportunists. Ash is generally stronger than fir but you would make shafts out of whatever wood was readily available if you needed wood now. Though coppiced groves would likely be a feature in the vicinity of permanent military posts. Ash coppices well.

Modern plantation pine and fir are far softer than their natural growth brethren

If the lead is cast over a "bulb" or if its a 2" sphere or a 1.5" sphere all make a differencce in weight. There just isn't enough archaeological info.... thus we guess.

Heck, the eagles could have just as easily been carved wood or thin brass affixed to a wood sphere.... dunno!

The weight you remove from tapering is not that much. A tapered weighted ash shaft is easier to throw than a straight shafted ash shaft. ....more of the weight is up front, aerodynamics, it flies straighter..... and when you use a finger loop.. zing!

We'll experiment with a weighted straight shaft vs a tapered weighted shaft.

From my experience with unweighted shafts the tapered shaft will result in deeper penetration.

[Luca]

Very interesting topic.
I remember it was already discusse months ago on RAT, but I cannot find it anymore.
In that topic I was puzzled about our main praetorian inspiration freeze: the Cancelleria one. I made some layouts but I have lost them too.
Anyway the points I remember were more or less the same discussed by you:

1) lead or something else?
This is the major issue while discussing with other reenactors. I say probably no because:
a) lead is a soft metal that cannot keep a clear "eagle" impressed, by using it the lead tend too much to be modified by little hits/hurts.
b) Lead could result too heavy while launching it reducing the range (?). Test cannot be done simply by launching it because could result too "human-perception" based. We should test it with a device that can guarantee the same condition (impressed force) for each test lunch. Who knows a similar device?
c) lead should mean casted directly on the wooden shaft making the wood a bit more fair.
d) I believe it could be done more easily of bronze.

2) the Cancelleria relief
a) yes the short handgrip is clearly broken as you noticed correctly.
b) But the true puzzle is the piramidal cage probably casted together with the ball.
c) The Iron shaft (point) of the pilum (kept in place by the cage) is probably the same type of on of the Mainz.
d) The round "crown" at the base of the ball I believe it is composed of hobnails not inserted in the wood, but used to fill the gap between the hole in the ball and the wooden shaft in order. This can keep the ball in place without make the wood more fair.