Artillery range, 1st Century AD

[D B Campbell]

I recall somewhere that the actual longest range for sharps is something closer to 40 degrees.

By Baatz's (mathematical) reckoning, a 30-mina (13kg) stone-projector set at an angle of 43.5 degrees will carry the stone shot over 400m, ...

Mathematically the same for any (subsonic) missile (arrow or stone), with the same initial velocity.

[Sardaukar]

BTW, it seems that Roman machines fired/lobbed single stones (or bolts). Would have it been possible to fire infantry with some sort of "grapeshot"..maybe lobbing basketful of smaller stones with onager? Probably could not hit anything...and was probably very dangerous to own troops too... Was something like "area effect ammunition" ever mentioned ?

[P. Clodius Secundus]

BTW, it seems that Roman machines fired/lobbed single stones (or bolts). Would have it been possible to fire infantry with some sort of "grapeshot"..maybe lobbing basketful of smaller stones with onager? Probably could not hit anything...and was probably very dangerous to own troops too... Was something like "area effect ammunition" ever mentioned ?

Duncan?...anyone?... In my limited research and reading I haven't seen any evidence, and I've been looking for it. It's certainly a possibility, especially with the open structure of the carroballista. A linen or wicker bag filled with large sling glandes launched in the face of a massed assault would theoretically make quite a mess. As "final protective fire" like canister shot, or from a defensive position where there are no friendies in the way ,it's something worth trying. Just duck when you launch the first few! :wink:

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

I have not come across any mention of grape-shot in the sources. I know when trying to fire two balls at the same time on a ballista, the chance of them flying all over the place but to the enemy is large... The only siege instrument probably capable of firing multiple stones would have been the onager, but also there, no info.

M.VIB.M.

[Crispvs]

Backtracking here a little, going back to range versus accuracy.

That bolt shooting artillery was capable of accurately targeting individuals is demonstrated by both Caesar's reference to Gauls being shot one after the other as they tried to take burning brands against Caesar's siege ramp, and by the much later reference to the targeted shooting of a German chieftain as he rode by, which left him pinned to a tree.

With reference to possible ranges which could be reached with accuracy, the evidence from Hod Hill may be useful. A number of houses were identified in the excavation of the unploughed area of the hill fort. The largest house which was found had been surrounded by a fence of some sort and as this feature was absent from the other houses, it has reasonably been surmised that this may have been the chieftain's house. A number of artillery bolt heads were found embedded in the chalk and of these, virtually all were found within this 'chieftain's' house, with the remainder found in a pattern of a line curving away from this house, suggesting either targeting shots or wind drift. Clearly, the artillery shooting was directed specifically against this house, perhaps as an act of psychological warfare to demonstrate what the Romans were capable of doing to any point they chose to target in the fort (perhaps to encourage a quick surrender). Whatever the intention, it shows that they were capable of targeting a particular spot without too much difficulty.
Regarding the range they were shot from, it has been suggested to me by Alan Wilkins that the bolt shooters were placed on the rampart of the fort itself and the bolts were only shot from a range of about 150 yards. Certainly some of the heads were found embedded at quite a high angle. However, whilst in general I am a great respector of Wilkins' views, I am not convinced of this interpretation. I think that given the effort required to get the machines up onto the rampart, possibly under fire, even if they could be set up very quickly once up, infantry could have fought their way to the house well before the artillery was up and ready. Therefore I question the idea of the artillery having been placed on the fort's rampart. When I was there a few years ago, John Smith, the Dorset county archaeologist, suggested that the artillery was placed on the hill opposite at a point overlooking the hill fort. If this was the case (and to my mind, given the targeting of the house and my questioning of the rampart position, this is more likely), then the artillery would have to have been shooting with a good degree of accuracy over a distance of around four hundred yards.

Our testing of our own artillery, sprung with nylon rope, produced ranges of well over two hundred metres (the tape was metric). We have shot our cheirobalistra alongside Alan Wilkins' near identical cheirobalistra and have always had the impression that the horsehair used in his springing was more powerful than the nylon ours is sprung with. As we are led to believe that horsehair was considered vastly inferior to sinew as a springing material, how much better was sinew? 40% better? 60%? 100% better? If the 150 yard range is based on modern reconstructions of Roman artillery, how much more powerful and thus long ranged would the actual Roman ones have been?

Crispvs

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

The positioning on the hill across from the site in the previous post overlooking the chieftains house poses a thought in my mind about one of the camps overlooking the Masada Fortress and its artillery range...

These are apparently Roman stones shot onto Masada by Onagri...



M.VIB.M.

[Sardaukar]

I have not come across any mention of grape-shot in the sources. I know when trying to fire two balls at the same time on a ballista, the chance of them flying all over the place but to the enemy is large... The only siege instrument probably capable of firing multiple stones would have been the onager, but also there, no info.

M.VIB.M.

I thought it would be quite inaccurate..I bet someone tried that in antiquity too. 8) Other idea than using f.ex. wicker basket would be to use rope to tie 2 rocks together bit like this with loose section of rope between rocks:



Alas, I don't have onager to try... That sort of "special shot" would have been time-consuming to make and Romans, being practically-minded people, would probably not bother. Small rocks in wicker basket, maybe.

[D B Campbell]

These are apparently Roman stones shot onto Masada by Onagri...

Highly unlikely (imho). Similar stones were stockpiled by Herod the Great at Herodium. They are most probably Herodian stones designed for rolling from above onto attackers below. (If you think this unlikely, Philon has a section in his Siegecraft describing how it could be performed using wooden chutes.)

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

It might be unlikely, just added the comment to the photo because that was wat some archeologists, (Yadin etc.) thought of these stones.

It is however interesting to see whether there have been any artillery finds on Masada which would be Roman without a doubt, just like the bolts and stones found on Maiden Castle, Dorset. Especially with Masada, range comes into mind because it is such a high rock that the only really feesible spot to launch artillery from would be the fortress (Camp H) on top of the Gorge overlooking Masada itself.



M.VIB.M.

[D B Campbell]

Especially with Masada, range comes into mind because it is such a high rock that the only really feasible spot to launch artillery from would be the fortress (Camp H) on top of the Gorge overlooking Masada itself.

Unfortunately, the distance from Camp H to Masada is around 500m -- too far even for the "long-range champions" !

Incidentally, here is the view that you get when you stand on the north rampart of Camp H. I would challenge any artillerist to even see a target there, far less accurately shoot at it!
[attachment=0:y26ow86b]<!-- ia0 MasadaFromCampH_small.jpg<!-- ia0 [/attachment:y26ow86b]

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Still, a lobbed stone or bolt would ruin most peoples days up there.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Thanx for that photo Duncan, I did not know it was that low.. the aerial photography can sometimes distort your perception..

I am still wondering if thorough excavation of all the camps has ever been done.

M.VIB.M.

[P. Clodius Secundus]

Unfortunately, the distance from Camp H to Masada is around 500m -- too far even for the "long-range champions" !

Incidentally, here is the view that you get when you stand on the north rampart of Camp H. I would challenge any artillerist to even see a target there, far less accurately shoot at it!

I'm just paraphrasing Marsden here but, Agesistratus claimed 700 yards with a three-span euthytone and 800 with a four-cubit palintone. Even allowing for a significant degree of hyperbole it would still be possible. Schramm got 370 M from his two-span. Payne-Gallwey reported 500 M with an eight-pound shot, and that's after stopping his onager's arm short. I too, doubt you could target a particular individual, but even at that range it would be difficult to miss an entire fortress. If your object is to keep them pinned down so your engineers can build a ramp that ought to do the trick.
If I manage to build one, do you think they'd let me take the shot? I'm guessing no :wink:

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

That thought also crossed my mind !! :mrgreen:

M.VIB.M.

[D B Campbell]

I'm just paraphrasing Marsden here but, Agesistratus claimed 700 yards with a three-span euthytone and 800 with a four-cubit palintone.

Athenaeus Mech. 8.7-8, regarding Agesistratus, records that "his three-span catapult used to shoot three and a half stades with 12 minas of spring; the four-cubit, being a palintone, shot four stades." Marsden took the stade to be 200 yards. Strictly, it's 600 Greek feet, which most often equates to 176m (192 yards), but shorter stades were in use: it's still a long way. Nevertheless, the point of the story was that this distance was exceptional because of the amount of torsion-rope Agesistratus had managed to cram into his catapult springs.

As you know, I am not a great supporter of the "extreme range" camp, but my argument has more to do with not being able to see your target, rather than not being able to reach it. I also stand by Baatz's mathematics, but his calculations presume that catapults impart an initial velocity of around 70m/s to their missile -- nobody has ever tested this. (If it turns out that the missile travels faster, the theoretical ranges would lengthen accordingly.)

Schramm got 370 M from his two-span.

Two-span? :? btw Schramm didn't believe the Athenaeus quote.

I too, doubt you could target a particular individual, but even at that range it would be difficult to miss an entire fortress.

Camp H was clearly sited for surveillance -- from here you can see if anyone tries to climb down the cliff into the wadi. I'm not sure that the odd arrow rattling off the battlements would scare anyone unduly. (btw Camp H is nowhere near the siege embankment.)