Vegetius and slings

[Dan Howard]

There is a passage in Vegetius mentioning that slings were more effective than arrows. I was wondering whether Vegetius actually witnessed the sling in action or whether he was simply imagining the "good old days".

[Epictetus]

I believe that some people have argued that he didn't have much personal experience. Note his conclusion to Book I:

I have carefully collected from the works of all the ancient authors on the subject.

But as far as I know, not much is known of his life. It would seem odd to me for someone to write about military matters who didn't have at least some experience.

[Tiberius Clodius Corvinus]

There is a passage in Vegetius mentioning that slings were more effective than arrows.

I don't have the passage at hand, but is it the one where is also stated, that soldier fear slingshot more than arrows because they don't see the incoming projectile? (though I'm not sure this is from Vegetius at all)
His remark could also be just an overall assumption. Considered the easiness to make and carry a sling, use it (reasonably) accurate and the good availability of ammo, psychological factors (i.e. more difficult to cover against), and whatever ... slings are probably more effective. Well, actually more efficient, but it'd be interesting to see that the original term is.
Either way ... is it sure, that slingshot is less effective than arrow? Not sure here, but one unfortunate lad being hit by one or other would be pretty much out of the game. Different kind of wound, but same result.

[sonic]

Either way ... is it sure, that slingshot is less effective than arrow? Not sure here, but one unfortunate lad being hit by one or other would be pretty much out of the game. Different kind of wound, but same result.

I always thought that slingshot could be more effective than arrows, since there was more chance of a percussion injury suffered through armour?

[Epictetus]

There is this:

Soldiers, notwithstanding their defensive armor, are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood. It is universally known the ancients employed slingers in all their engagements. There is the greater reason for instructing all troops, without exception, in this exercise, as the sling cannot be reckoned any incumbrance, and often is of the greatest service, especially when they are obliged to engage in stony places, to defend a mountain or an eminence, or to repulse an enemy at the attack of a castle or city.

http://www.pvv.ntnu.no/~madsb/home/war/vegetius/

[Tiberius Clodius Corvinus]

Thanks for posting the passage David.

[Eleatic Guest]

There is a passage in Vegetius mentioning that slings were more effective than arrows. I was wondering whether Vegetius actually witnessed the sling in action or whether he was simply imagining the "good old days".

Dohrenwend agrees with Vegetius (PDF): Robert Dohrenwend, „The Sling. Forgotten Firepower of Antiquity“, Journal of Asian Martial Arts, Vol. 11, No. 2 (2002), pp. 28–49

[Dan Howard]

However, the experiments by Gabriel and Metz in From Sumer to Ancient Rome conclude that slings were far less effective against armour than arrows.

Rereading the passage kindly posted by David it seems that Vegetius IS talking about slings in the past since he infers that they aren't being used in his time. His logic is sound though. A legionary could carry a sling with little trouble and it adds another tactical option for a commander.

[Magnus]

True. I wonder though if a sling bullet is just as effective as an arrow vs a helmet....

...but against body armour there's a lot more flesh and padding to absorb and redirect the kinetic energy.

Dan, that's a possibility, but why? It would be tough to deploy in a slinging role then back to heavy infantry without the enemy being on you. I'm assuming that's why they had missile troops and the legionaries stuck to the pilum. Plus they need a fair bit of room dont' they?

[Paullus Scipio]

Magnus wrote:

It would be tough to deploy in a slinging role then back to heavy infantry without the enemy being on you.

....perhaps not necessarily - IIRC there is a passage somewhere that slingers and archers both practised against straw dummies at 200 yards range, and if the troops performed this in open order, there would be plenty of time to take up shields and move into close order.
It would appear likely that all Auxiliary troops were practised in slinging, even the cavalry, as is apparent from this part of an adlocutio ( address to troops) by the Emperor Hadrian, as recorded on a column at Lambaesis in North Africa, A.D. 128.

It reads (in part):
"To the Cavalry of the sixth Cohort Equitatae ( part mounted cohort) of Commagene ( N.W. Syria)

...but you have avoided contempt by your keen-ness in doing what you have done with vigour.To this you have added throwing stones with slings and combat with missiles.You have on all occasions jumped with alacrity.The special care of my distinguished legate Catullinus is apparent in your quality under his command"

By Imperial times, it would appear that specialist units of slingers were a thing of the past.....hence the more generalised training in slinging.

[Robert Vermaat]

Nice one Paul, thanks.

[Dan Howard]

By Imperial times, it would appear that specialist units of slingers were a thing of the past.....hence the more generalised training in slinging.

But Vegetius says that slings were NOT in general use. He is specifically arguing for their introduction.

[Paullus Scipio]

...sorry, some clarification.
Vegetius wrote his De Rei Militaris probably around 390-395 A.D., though some date it later.Some of the manuscripts have a note that the text was revised for the 7th time in Constantinople in the consulate of Valentinian, who must have been Valentinian III, reigning 425-455.He tells us himself that his sources for his 'antiqua Legio' were Cato the Elder, Cornelius Celsus, Frontinus, Paternus and the imperial constitutions of Augustus, Trajan, and Hadrian .

The reference to 'Imperial times' above was the first/second centuries A.D., the era Vegetius seems to be harking back to......

[Dan Howard]

Magnus wrote:

It would be tough to deploy in a slinging role then back to heavy infantry without the enemy being on you.

....perhaps not necessarily - IIRC there is a passage somewhere that slingers and archers both practised against straw dummies at 200 yards range, and if the troops performed this in open order, there would be plenty of time to take up shields and move into close order.
It would appear likely that all Auxiliary troops were practised in slinging, even the cavalry, as is apparent from this part of an adlocutio ( address to troops) by the Emperor Hadrian, as recorded on a column at Lambaesis in North Africa, A.D. 128.

It reads (in part):
"To the Cavalry of the sixth Cohort Equitatae ( part mounted cohort) of Commagene ( N.W. Syria)

...but you have avoided contempt by your keen-ness in doing what you have done with vigour.To this you have added throwing stones with slings and combat with missiles.You have on all occasions jumped with alacrity.The special care of my distinguished legate Catullinus is apparent in your quality under his command"

By Imperial times, it would appear that specialist units of slingers were a thing of the past.....hence the more generalised training in slinging.

Do we actually have evidence of generalised slinging? All I've seen so far suggests that auxilliaries carried slings but not the legions.

[Tiberius Clodius Corvinus]

generalised slinging done by legionaries would only make sense to me from fortified positions. according to Ross Cowan legionaries ahd "only cursory introduciton" in slinging, which indicates to me that slinging was basically left to auxilliaries'.