A new reconstitution of the manubalista of Xanten

[Emmanuel]

I have finished the manubalista. There is a photo of it




For the handle whom you talk. I have read an original manuscript of the text of Héron of Alexandria. And on it, we can see a little circle at the end of the chelonium just before the the handle. May be it's an axis to turn the handle. It's my proposition for my chirobaliste as you can see on the photography before. For the handle of the manubaliste, I try an other interpretation of the mesures given by Héron. It's the same for the brachhia of the manubalsita. I prefer to take the way of Heron who gives us the way of fabrication.

[jkaler48]

It is truly a thing of beauty - worthy of the RAT Artilley award!

[Emmanuel]

Thanks for all. If some body can give me some informations on arrows. I'am working on it. If I follow the system of Vitruvius. The arrow must be of 9 times the diameter of the foramen of the manubalista so 27 centimeters. But I have a problem because of a photographywhere we can see some romans bowmen with the arrows posed on their hats... Il this case, 27 is too long.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Very beauty. It's interesting you have used iron arms instead wooden ones. It's sure stronger and more safe. Can you put a detailed picture of it?

Congratulations!

[jkaler48]

here are three photos of bolt heads at the Roman Artillery Yahoo group
but no complete bolts. They were much shorter than arrows I believe.
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/RomanA ... rowse/98f6
I thing a complete bolt may have been found at Duras Europa.
Also the wood part of bolts has sometimes been reconstructed using
baseball souvenir mini bats which you could probably find on Ebay.
_________________
John Kaler
MSG, USA
Retired
Member Legio V (Tenn, USA)
http://web.utk.edu/~cohprima/
Moderator of these Yahoo groups
Primarily for storage of photos,files&links :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Romanshield/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pugio/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Romangear/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RomanArtilley/

[aitor iriarte]

Emmanuel,
9D is the standard length for the bolts, from Greeks' time on. notwithstanding, no real wooden shaft has been recovered, just iron heads.
There is a good bunch of Third century AD wooden shafts from Dura, (published by S. James) and they are certainly shorter than they should be (judging from a surviving iron point). Maybe it was a later development, associated with iron-framed palintones, or maybe earlier bolts weren't text-book ones either... :?
For earlier short bolts, you have the Qasr-Ibrim, Haltern or Vindonissa model. It has been dismissed from Schramm on as a forepart for long, conventional bolts, but I have argued elsewhere that the design has its own aerodynamical characteristics, not very suited to fit a rear shaft, moreover.
Returning to your Xanten machine. I'd wish I'd be able to make such things by myself (given that I had spare time for it :roll: ). Notwithstanding, I wouldn't have employed the composite arms (iron/wood) described by PseudoHeron for the Cheiroballistra (and the rest of metallic-framed palintones, if everybody's assumption is correct). If we are to follow descriptions of the wooden-framed euthytones, arms should be all-wooden.

Aitor

[D B Campbell]

For the handle whom you talk. I have read an original manuscript of the text of Héron of Alexandria. And on it, we can see a little circle at the end of the chelonium just before the the handle. May be it's an axis to turn the handle. It's my proposition for my chirobaliste as you can see on the photography before. For the handle of the manubaliste, I try an other interpretation of the mesures given by Héron. It's the same for the brachhia of the manubalsita. I prefer to take the way of Heron who gives us the way of fabrication.

As I said before, a beautifully made piece, Emmanuel. Well done!
(Comme j'ai dit avant, votre machine est admirable, Emmanuel. Bien fait !)

I must say that I share Aitor's misgivings, as your machine seems to be a hybrid between Vitruvius' scorpio and Heron's cheiroballistra.
(J'ai les mêmes doutes comme Aitor, parce que votre machine semble être un hybride entre le scorpion de Vitruve et le cheiroballistra d'Héron.)

It is not my intention to criticise your handiwork, which is excellent. But I would be interested to know why you made certain design decisions.
(Ce n'est pas mon intention pour dénigrer votre ouvrage, qui est excellent. Mais je suis intéressé pour savoir pourquoi vous avez fait de certaines décisions. )

For example, you have curved the arms, as Vitruvius describes for the scorpio, but you have reinforced them with metal, as Heron describes for the cheiroballistra.
(Par exemple, vous avez les bras courbés de Vitruve mais les bras de métal-renforcé d'Héron.)

And I am confused by your explanation of Heron's chelonium. I cannot find the word in his text.
(Aussi, je ne comprends pas que vous signifiez de chelonium de Héron. Je ne peux pas trouver le mot dans son texte.)

Félicitations, mon frère !

[D B Campbell]

Can you post as many photos of your reconstructions as you have available on the Roman Artillery group?

Hey, John. Just browsing your Roman Artilley Yahoo group.

Where did you get the photo entitled UNknown?
It is clearly Gamala -- I wonder who carted their catapult all the way up there?!

[Emmanuel]

I try to explain you what are my decisions for the manubalista. We have discover just the capitulum. My proposition is not to make an other same reconstitution of all the manubalista which we can see in many group. While the rest have benn not find, I prefer to think that the others parts are made may be made like the cheirobalistra of Heron. I Know the text, because I make an edition of it for my Master II ans I prepare now a thesis on the romans catapults, with many hypothesis which are may be not real, but as me, you know that the catapult of Lyon which seems a cheirobalistra has the name of a little chariot for romans soldiers befor Michel Feugères identifies it... There is many problems on the catapults. My problem is that I can't buid an onager, but I try to make it by computer with the laboratory of the Plan of Rome of the university of Caen, in which I work too near my post of latin teacher. If you speak of the arms. Why I take iron and wood and with a curve. When I examine the mesures of the find of Xanten, I have been surprise that these are the same proportions of the text of Vitruvius. So may be It'is possible that they use the type of arms which are descript in the text of heron. It's an hypothesis. I thaink that the proportions of all the catapult are better with them than with strong but bigger arms in wood. Thanks for your suggestions and continue. Itt's good for me. Sorry for my english. It's very good that very known persons like you and Aitor can said something on my work. Do make yourself somes reconstitution of catapult. I have see your works in many scientifical review with Alan Wilkins.

[AuxArcher]

It came out beautifully, Emmanuel.

I too would like to clarify some areas of your machine. Please take it in the spirit of a fellow fabricator.

I again referred to the photos of the Xantan find, and it doesn't even to appear to me to be a Vitruvius' style machine, but an earlier design; the inner or counter stanchions are seperate components, rather than the single composite center stanchion with the very tiny arrow appature. I'm still trying to puzzle out how old they estimate the orginal find is, but so far, no published report . Did you pick and choose what features you liked from each era?

Perhaps one way of looking at artillary reconstruction / interpretation is not what you think they should have looked like, but what the evidence shows us thus far, pending of course revised thoughts as more study is undertaken. Changing things around to improve performance is like, perhaps, turning a classic car into a hotrod. You have a better performing auto, but you have lost the original vehicle. The late period curved metal arms with a early wooden machines seems an odd anachronism.

A few questions about the machine, if I can.

Number one, how do you span and lock back the trigger prior to firing? Since you dont have a ratchet system (my own small machines will use the Greek style linear ratchets, and I do feel stongly that that could be a correct approach for a very early small machine), I can't see how you keep the trigger back in firing position as you arm the machine and aim it. How do you keep the slider and trigger in cocking position?

How did you fabricate the (what appear to be) rivets to attach the iron and bronze plating to the spring frame? I am thinking more and more that the original used rivets driven through various spots and peened over, but that would assume you had counter plates. I just can't tell from the photos of the original and the xray photo if they are rivets or nails, or the reproduciton made for the museum. I wrote to that legio, but they aren't talking either. It seems maybe this is a great secret or something. Arg.

Finally, how does it perform? Range, accuracy, poundage at draw? Stuff like that. In other words, is it a killer?

Thanks, and I do hope you address my questions. You never did with your larger scorpion from earlier this year.

[P. Clodius Secundus]

Dane,
Tracey Rihll's time-line has the Xanten dated at @ 50AD. That places it about 75 years after Vitruvius If her dates are correct, this would make curved arms not only possible, but a reasonable conclusion. It puts it before Heron so that would seem to preclude iron cores though. As far as the ratchets on the manuballistae, I would suggest that the "C" channel one found at Elginhaugh might be appropriate. It's dating of @ 90AD is a bit after Xanten but well within range compared the much earlier Greek saw-tooth ratchets. It would seem to be very practical in one respect. Where the saw-tooth ones are usually depicted in pairs, one on each side of the case, this type would need only one. It could be mounted centrally along the axis of the draw at the rear of the case. Given the reduced draw weight of a hand held weapon it would only need to control last portion of the draw. Having only one ratchet and pawl would not only be simpler and lighter, but it would only require one hand to operate. This would be a major consideration on a hand held machine where one hand is needed to support the weapon.

[Emmanuel]

So I try to explain you my method. Sorry for my english wihich is not very rich.
1. I have passed many time for my thesis on the text of Vitruvius
2. I have made an edition critical of the text of Heron of Alexandria on the cheiroballistra, with consultation of many originals manuscripts. For me he describes a little catapult and his datation is almost the second part of the fisrt century p.C.
3. The find of Xanten is just a capitulum with his modioli and is data tion is almost 50 p. C.
When I examines the real photographies of the the fin of Xanten (not these whose are on internet...) I can see a capitulum which is almost equal in long and in large, 21 x 21 with the lenght of the modioli on the top and on the back you arrive at the 28 cm. If you see the foramen, of 3,5 cm, you can see that it's a proportion of the capitulum.
There is a real possibility that alla the mesures of the find are like the system of Vitruvius. And I verifie that ans it's almost good.
For the irons and wood arms of the machine, it is a an arm which is describes in Heron. Theses armes are curved as we can see in a cartoon of a manuscript., but without mesures, so I take alla the proportions of the curved arms of Vitruvius and with the same system of proportion I make these iron and wood arms.
At least, for the way to arm the machine in firing position, i use also a cartoon of a manuscript and my work . I you see all the reconstitutions of chirobaliste, you can see a kid of little piece rectangular at the end in iron behind the manucla which is posed like a visor in a vertically position. I make the same, but I put it in an axis and I use of it to put in position of firing (see the photography).
For the perform of the machine. Now I try and I make a shoot at 120 meters in parabolic position, but I have some problems with the arrows.

I hope that I give yoiu some responses at your questions. My position is not to put many kind of machine in just one, but to complete by reals things the abstents parts of the find of Xanten.
n catapult
3

[AuxArcher]

Randi, is it possible to post that component you refer to from the Rihll work? I am having a hard time picturing it, and would like to consider that system as I draw up the next scorpio-minor. Simpler to construct and to operate is all good.

If there was one, there was probably more machines of this size. I guess we can only wait and see if more come to light. I'm guessing that a smaller machine would also be a good way to test new ideas at a cheaper cost in time and materials in the ancient world.

I agree on the curved arms, btw. My own current works will feature stright all wood ones, but there are future projects whispering to me yet.

Dane

[AuxArcher]

Emmanual, your English is much better than my French. Worry not.

Thanks for the info. And 120 meters is pretty good, considering too that you are working out the bugs, and are using modern rope (I assume you are). Performance will only increase as you test and perfect the machine.

[D B Campbell]

Tracey Rihll's time-line has the Xanten dated at @ 50AD. That places it about 75 years after Vitruvius If her dates are correct, this would make curved arms not only possible, but a reasonable conclusion.

I would be verrry careful using any details from this book! :roll:

For the Xanten find, the only publication available so far is:
H.-J. Schalles, "Eine frühkaiserzeitliche Torsionswaffe aus der Kiesgrube Xanten-Wardt", in H.G. Horn, H. Hellenkemper, G. Isenberg & J. Kunow (eds.), Von Anfang An. Archäologie in Nordrhein-Westfalen (Köln, 2005), pp. 378-381.

It doesn't appear in Rihll's bibliography, but that is where she has drawn her information from. Where Schalles recommends "eine Datierung ins 1. Jahrhundert n.Chr., vielleicht in dessen Mitte" (381), she simply glosses that as "c. 50 AD", missing the subtlety of the original.

It puts it before Heron so that would seem to preclude iron cores though.

That was my point precisely, Randi.
The Xanten find clearly conforms to Vitruvius' description of a scorpio, so it ought to have curved wooden arms.

It's worth noting that we don't actually know that it was hand-held. My own preference is for a stand-mounted version. But that falls into the realm of theory rather than fact.