I had always thought that the long metal points/shanks of 'classic' pila (ie those commonly depicted or described and before any idea of the spiculum was introduced), whether they be socketed shanks, or pinned/dowelled, or additionally weighted with lead(?) balls; were described as un/low-tempered and/or, when breakable wooden dowels are used, so that they become, effectively, one-shot weapons and unsuitable for an enemy to re-use; or help encumber a penetrated shield.
I did see a comment, however, that when pila were used to also try and hold off cavalry that the shanks were indeed more tempered to facilitate this; although that would seem to go against the original purpose.
Does anyone know if there is a written reference to that effect, or whether it has been determined from examining the metallic structure of an actual find? If the latter, I just wondered if it might have been a mis-diagnosis of tempering during manufacture and the actual process was age-hardening?
The function of a pilum was a weapon used over a short distance to go into the enemies shields just prior to engagement, the pilum metal shank could bend but also stay in the shield so that the enemy had to dump it then leaving them open to the Roman shield wall without good cover.
I think it has been mentioned that wood dowels may have been used to help the pilum to bend when these broke, however I fail to see just how this could happen when we consider the construction of this weapon.
Penetration, yes of course, but as then confirmed, to bend and encumber the shield (if that's what it penetrated - catching an actual person also achieves the aim), often causing it to be discarded (job done) and additionally preventing it from being re-used by the enemy.
As I understand it, the use of a 'frangible' wooden dowel is for the pilum design where the shank of the head ends in a flat tang with two (or three) holes - similar to this perhaps. This is then secured using one or more wooden, instead of metal pins - which would (the intent) break on impact/after penetration.
This method is an alternative, or adjunct, to a less tempered shank being more 'bendable'. In either case, weapons recovered later from the battlefield are then able to be put back into service with either simply replacing the dowels or straightening the long shank with only a relatively simple forge.
That pila were, afaik, designed like this makes them fairly useless for anything other than their primary purpose (ie for perhaps holding off cavalry, hence the thrust of the question), or for things like basic guard duty and crowd control when a more standard hasta might be more suitable.
What I'm therefore wondering is whether there are any archaeological finds that result in a determination of less tempering or more hardening, or whether this change in construction is detailed anywhere?
Mark.
I have made many of these over the years and to say that wooden dowels would break on impact is impossible, for just how is the iron plate of the metal shank going to move when it is locked into its slot with these wood dowels. The full impact is taken up by the heavy wooden shaft of the pilum when the iron point hits a shield or or anything for that matter so just how are these wooden dowels going to break. ??
The only reason it cannot be thrown back is that it locks into a shield the soft iron bends and therefore the enemy has to discard his shield in the last moments before full impact with the Roman shield wall.
Richard.
I'm not sure if there is evidence for square shafts on the pilum but that is exactly how I begin when I have produced them in the past, I start with a 2 X 2 inch square piece of wood that is cut down to a round shank.
This way the upper block with its slot for the soft iron point is part of the complete wooden shaft and not like the one shown by Mark in those drawings where the upper block has simply been glued onto its shaft as a cheap and easy way to make a pilum.
Mark, PM me your email and I can send you Peter Connolly's article on the pilum from JRMES 11, "The Reconstruction and Use of Roman Weaponry in the Second Century BC." It covers many of the questions you are asking.
Quote:Mark.
I have made many of these over the years and to say that wooden dowels would break on impact is impossible, for just how is the iron plate of the metal shank going to move when it is locked into its slot with these wood dowels. The full impact is taken up by the heavy wooden shaft of the pilum when the iron point hits a shield or or anything for that matter so just how are these wooden dowels going to break. ??
The only reason it cannot be thrown back is that it locks into a shield the soft iron bends and therefore the enemy has to discard his shield in the last moments before full impact with the Roman shield wall.
Thanks Brian, that's just the additional sort of information that I was after - that you mention the 'soft iron bending' was indeed my understanding originally and why I was querying the information I recalled on the additional tempering to help use more as a 'spear' in the face of cavalry in the first place - and whether there was a reference.
But please understand that the 'frangible wooden dowel' is not my idea - but one indeed I have seen mentioned before and is once more mentioned in that lovely video interview (13-15 mins in).
That said, as an engineer I can imagine the possible construction of such a pilum - and it's one without the nice square cap in the picture I found and posted. The one I am thinking of has a plain flat tang at the end of the 'softer' iron shaft that is simply socketted into the wooden shaft with first an iron pin and then the wooden dowel. The weapon functions just fine and is completely robust and penetrates an enemy's shield - it's construction is fine. What I assume then happens is that the weight of the wooden shaft acts laterally against the metal shaft that is through the shield as the warrior tries to dislodge it and that dowel breaks at that moment - so that even if the iron shaft hasn't bent very much the wooden part then dangles down anyway and indeed makes the weapon useless for throwing back.
So - the wooden dowel not my idea - but I could imagine it possibly working.
In addition - Polybius mentions both round and square shafts for the pilum in Bk6 - certainly many of the images I have seen have a square cross-section and mating a tang to a squared section makes a lot of sense.
And lastly - to Bryan - thanks. If it has reference to the actual tempering of finds I would indeed be most curious?
There is another reason that a pilum iron point cannot fold over if such a wooden rivet was used is that looking at these types shown in this picture, they have a metal sleeve which protects the top end of the slot in the wood therefore just this piece of metal alone would prevent it folding.
[attachment=10464]spear-pilum-oberaden-mcb1.gif[/attachment]
So metal 'caps' or 'sleeves' do seem to be a part of a tanged (as opposed to socket) pilum construction and thus any 'frangible pin' idea is simply a red herring introduced by none other than Plutarch? Good to know and quite a surprise - it is, after all, apparently a not unreasonable idea.
In which case it is all down to the lack of tempering in the metal shaft - which Connolly suggests are too thick to bend!
In summary, therefore, is the entire idea of 'bending/distorting pila' not matched by any of the actual archaeological evidence?
Another interesting article is in Ancient Warfare Magazine Vol. V, Issue 1., by RAT's own Paul McDonnel-Staff, which basically covers this very topic about Plutarch's pilum and the wooden rivet. Basically, it wouldn't have worked. Besides, the design of flanges at the joint of shank/shaft during the time period of the Late Republic show that the Romans seemed to be attempting to make pila stronger, not weaker.
Also, don't let the standardized pila carried by many modern reenactors fool you, as it appears in actuality the shape and styles of pila shanks seems to have been quite varied. Some even were shaped like needles and others had incendiary purposes.
Some examples from Smihel:
[img width=250]http://www.parkvojaskezgodovine.si/regio_carsica_militaris/eng/images/gradisca/s2.jpg[/img]
![[Image: pef_1099.jpg]](http://www.outfit4events.com/runtime/cache/images/productFull/pef_1099.jpg)
perhaps. This is then secured using one or more wooden, instead of metal pins - which would (the intent) break on impact/after penetration.
