Polybius, horse archers arrows, roman armour, oh my.

[Aulus Perrinius]

Sorry if this is in the wrong spot


Okay you know the part where Polybius says:

(quoting from memory)

And when Crassus urged them to charge the Maille-clad Horsemen they were greatly discouraged for the arrows went through their armour and shields

(Something liek that anyways :roll: )


Okay I'm highly skeptical of the idea that an arrow could get through a Roman Scutum and Ring Armour. . .

So what's your opinion? What did Polybius really mean by that? Was it just a really awful translators error? Or what?

[Matthew Amt]

Ave!

I'd definitely want to see the exact quote before getting too deeply into the discussion, preferably with the original Greek and a good analytic translation. For one thing, I don't think Polybius implies that the horse-archers were mailed, though that's a minor point, here, of course.

In short, though, I would agree that arrows are unlikely to go through shield and mail. But put enough in the air, and you're bound to get at least a few that will go far enough through a shield to hit a man's exposed arms, or legs, or face, or neck. Or go between shields with the same effect. Getting your foot nailed to the sand will ruin your day personally, not to mention disrupting the formation if the army is trying to stay on the move.

We've had a few long discussions on arrows versus armor, which you might find if you do spend some time with the search function. Good reading! This particular passage has also been discussed, too.

Vale,

Matthew

[D B Campbell]

Okay you know the part where Polybius says: ...

Hmmm ... Polybius' Histories end in 146 BC. For Carrhae, you probably mean Plutarch?

Edit: Just had a look at the Greek on the excellent Hodoi Elektronikai web site. The verb Plutarch uses certainly means "to shatter" (rhêgnumi) the armour, or at least "break through".

[Alexandr K]

Hi,

well, of course Polybius certainly doesn't mention Crassus' defeat ;-) )


But both Plutarch and Cassius Dio mention that Parthian arrows at Carrhae penetrated armour. Here are the passages:

Plut. Crassus 24.
??????? ?? ???? ?????? ????????? ???????????, ????? ??? ?? ???? ????????, ???? ??????? ?????????? ??????????, ???? ??????????? ????? ????????? ???? ????????, ??? ???????? ???????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?????, ???? ?? ????????? ??? ??? ?????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ??? ??????? ???????????.

And when Crassus ordered his light-armed troops to make a charge, they did not advance far, but encountering a multitude of arrows, abandoned their undertaking and ran back for shelter among the men-at?arms, among whom they caused the beginning of disorder and fear, for these now saw the velocity and force of the arrows, which fractured armour, and tore their way through every covering alike, whether hard or soft. (Translation taken from Lacus Curtius)


Cass. Dio XL. 22.
?? ?? ???? ??? ?????, ??? ?????????? ??? ?????? ??????????, ??????? ??? ?????? ????? ?????????, ??????? ?? ????????? ?????????· ???? ?' ???????? ????????, ?? ?? ??? ???? ????????? ???? ??????????, ??? ???? ??? ??????, ?? ?? ???? ???? ???, ??? ??? ??? ????? ????????· ??? ?? ?????????? ????? ????????, ??? ?????????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ????????? ?????????· ???? ?? ? ??? ??????? ??????????, ? ??? ??????? ????????, ????? ???????? ???? ??' ?????? ????????.

The missiles falling thick upon them from all sides at once struck down many by a mortal blow, rendered many useless for battle, and caused distress to all. They flew into their eyes and pierced their hands and all the other parts of their body and, penetrating their armour, deprived them of their protection and compelled them to expose themselves to each new missile. (translation taken from Lacus Curtius)


See especially these:
???? ?? ????????? ??? ??? ?????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ??? ??????? ???????????

and
??? ??? ??? ????? ????????· ??? ?? ?????????? ????? ????????

„hoplon“ may mean „armour“ or „large shield“. Someone with better knowledge of Greek should analyse these texts, but they imply that the arrows can pierce armour.


While I admit that arrow can go through mail armour or shield sometimes I don't believe that it was common for arrows to pierce armour and kill or seriously wound a man behind it and I surely don't believe that that arrow can go through shield and then also through armour.

I think that exactly battle of Carrhae is quite a good example of ineffectiveness of Parthian arrows against legionaries equipped with shields and mail armour. The Parthians were shooting on the legionaries for a very long time and under the best circumstances one could ever imagine (An almost immobile and very dense formation, where – with Plutarch's words – every arrow found it's man. The Romans had very few cavalry and light infantry and therefore couldn't effectively attack the Parthian cavalrymen, who could move freely at their will). In spite of this the Roman formation withstood this and was able to repel an attack of Parthian heavy cavalry at the end of the day. When the Romans left the battlefield at night, some 4000 wounded were left. The dead were surely less than this number and we must remember that some of them were victims of fighting at close quarters (not all deaths and wounds were caused by the archers!). When we take into account the circumstances and the numbers of Romans and Parthians, the casualties aren't very high.

Greetings
Alexandr

[Ross Cowan]

Good points, Alexandr. I've long thought that Carrhae has been grossly misrepresented as the triumph of cavalry (and missile troops) over heavy infantry. As you demonstrate, the Parthians did not break the Romans. Crassus is primarily to blame for the subsequent break up of the Roman army and the destruction of some - but not all - of its elements.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I can well imagine well aimed shots penetrating mail, as the riders would be well out of pila range and what ho!

[Sean Manning]

In this case, it looks like "hopla" or "arms" mostly refers to shields. One possibility is that after many arrows stuck into the Romans' shields, the shields started to break up and no longer provided proper cover. Or that arrows penetrated deeply enough that the soldiers could no longer use their scuta.

I don't have any trouble believing that some arrows shot from a few dozen metres away could penetrate mail, even the light arrows used by most horse archers, but Alexander's point that only a fraction of the Romans were killed is a good one. And Dio mentions arrows hitting the soldiers in unarmoured parts like the faces and hands.

[marka]

I can well imagine well aimed shots penetrating mail, as the riders would be well out of pila range and what ho!

at most battles only a fraction of the weapons fired actually hit anybody (excepting shield hits)...at least one roman author moans about this.Even modern weapons up to ww2 seldom surpassed a 5% hit rate.The best most missile weapons accomplish is a trickle of casualties.
an additional consideration is that few soldiers actively try to kill the enemy soldiers....most try to look keen and survive and a few will desert at the first opportunity.

the parthians would be firing from further than pila range just in case the legionaries threw other missles at the them.
are there any natural missles ie stones at the battle site?
its probable lack of water,the heat,exhaustion etc all played their part at carrhae.

even i (possibly the worst archer in the country) could not miss a man sized target at 50m,given enough time to aim.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yes, I have read several accounts of the battle. I am just stating that I am positive that the archers were well capable of hitting aimed targets.
The attrition caused by the constant onslaught would have been what wore the troops down.
The fact that once you loose an arrow and you target moves a shield in the way is just a fact of warfare.
But as you are constantly under attack with no chance of a rest in the hot sun, viola, you are worn to exhaustion.
This is all covered in a very good book btw, I am trying to find the thread in reviews....

Found a review..<!-- l <a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=21341&p=187093&hilit=carrahe#p187093">viewtopic.php?f=18&t=21341&p=187093&hilit=carrahe#p187093<!-- l

[marka]

only bodkin head arrows would have a chance of piercing good quality heavy mail at relatively close range,trilobite head arrows would be far less effective.

another point do we know for sure that the early eastern roman legionaries definitely used pila (i know a lot have been found on the danube and the west)and was 'pilum' just a generic term.

[Sean Manning]

Hi Marka,

The Roman soldiers in Crassus' army had the same background as Romans fighting anywhere at that time. So as far as we know they had the same equipment. All the ancient terms for weapons were flexible, and quite a lot of different types of pilum heads have been found.

I'm not convinced that the Parthians kept out of range for thrown weapons: they might have relied on speed and a loose formation to avoid being hit as they galloped into close range, shot, and galloped away. Then again, perhaps they shot at longer range from standing horses, or even dismounted like some of Saladin's men at Arsuf, once the Roman cavalry and archers were beaten? And the Romans would run out of pila a lot sooner than the Parthians ran out of arrows ...

Sean

[marka]

Hi Marka,

The Roman soldiers in Crassus' army had the same background as Romans fighting anywhere at that time. So as far as we know they had the same equipment. All the ancient terms for weapons were flexible, and quite a lot of different types of pilum heads have been found.

I'm not convinced that the Parthians kept out of range for thrown weapons: they might have relied on speed and a loose formation to avoid being hit as they galloped into close range, shot, and galloped away. Then again, perhaps they shot at longer range from standing horses, or even dismounted like some of Saladin's men at Arsuf, once the Roman cavalry and archers were beaten? And the Romans would run out of pila a lot sooner than the Parthians ran out of arrows ...

Sean

have any pilum heads been found in syria-i googled it with no luck.
pila would have been a bit overkill where most of their eastern enemies were concerned apart from cataphracts.

interesting thought about the parthians dismounting.

[Matthew Amt]

only bodkin head arrows would have a chance of piercing good quality heavy mail at relatively close range,trilobite head arrows would be far less effective.

Interestingly, all surviving medieval bodkin arrowheads have been shown to be unhardened wrought iron, and quite light in weight. The heavier broadheads turn out to be very high-quality hardened steel, and 3 times as common as bodkins. Since medieval English archers were typically supposed to carry 18 heavy "sheaf" arrows and half a dozen light "flight" arrows, the only conclusion is that bodkins were flight arrowheads, shaped to fly a long way, while the broadheads were the armor-piercers.

I've got a tanged ancient arrowhead that is basically a short bodkin. I've also got a socketed trilobate one that really isn't much bigger. Either one *might* go through mail, given enough force. I just don't think it was a common occurrance.

Vale,

Matthew

[marka]

as you say it depends on the head and weight of the arrow,i thought the roman bodkins much more dart shape while trilobites were larger.
also depends on the quality of shield and mail too.
the contributors in skirmish experimented with different type of head fired by a longbow against a piece of heavy plate and the result quite interesting.

[Dan Howard]

There has been only one single published archery test that attempted to use decent replicas of both armour and weapons. It was published in the RA's Arms and Armour Journal and is titled:
"A report of the findings of the Defence Academy warbow trials Part 1 Summer 2005." By Paul Bourke and David Whetham. pp.53-82.

I wrote a review here.
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=79261

It has faults but it is the best I've ever read. Most of these sorts of tests aren't worth the paper they are written on. The only other work worth reading is "The Knight and the Blast Furnace" by Dr Williams but, IMO, he underestimated the amount of energy a longbow can deliver.