Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
About the pila
#1
That is the weapon the legions threw before they went into battle, right (well, that's what I've gathered looking at some of the posts)? I thought it was a pilum. Could it be either one, or is it strickly pila? Or, is pila plural? Just wondering.<br>
<br>
Romulus Agustulus, Ceaser of Rome<br>
Veni, Vedi, Veci: I came, I saw, I conquered.<br>
games.acmecity.com/timetraveler/539 <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/uagustulus.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Agustulus</A> <IMG SRC=http://www.ezboard.com/ezgfx/gicons/black_fire.gif BORDER=0 WIDTH=10 HEIGHT=10> at: 1/30/01 5:58:22 am<br></i>
Reply
#2
Salve,<br>
<br>
Pilum is singular, pila is plural. According to Polybius, a Greek historian from the second centry BCE, Roman legionaries carried two such heavy javelins into battle, a thin and a thick one. Most depictions and descriptions of later times suggest that only one pilum was carried. In addition, it seems hat the thicker, heavier variant became more common. It is possible that in some battles stocks of javelins were replenished after troops had expended theirs, though whether this holds just for the republic or was also common during the empire is unsure.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#3
What was the approximate weight of these things then, and hence what sort of range could be achieved with them. I've seen estimates of a bout 2kg for reconstructions, but hte figures were rather rough. I presume the lighter pila was considerably so, so as to increase range by an amount making the two types worth having, but if the lighter was disguarded than perhaps the difference was minimal? Perhaps the re-enactors would know more, but I'd also be interested to know how they were thrown, particularly whether or not the scutum was disguarded to aid the process. lso did they spin them with leather thongs or the like, and what sort of accuracy could be achieved. I know this was irrelevant when the target was a unit and not a man, but it' be interesting to know<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
<br>
Cat <p>It's not a bug, it's a feature</p><i></i>
In the name of heaven Catiline, how long do you propose to exploit our patience..
Reply
#4
Have you seen Gary Bruggeman's Roman army website? He used CAD and an apparent engineering or perhaps physics background to produce estimates of flight arcs, throwing room required, max effective ranges, etc. Very interesting stuff.<br>
<br>
The link is on the RomanArmy.com Links page under Featured Websites.<br>
<br>
Jenny <p></p><i></i>
Cheers,
Jenny
Founder, Roman Army Talk and RomanArmy.com

We are all travelers in the wilderness of this world, and the best we can find in our travels is an honest friend.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
Reply
#5
i know the site, but not that bit. i'll go look se<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
<br>
Cat <p>It's not a bug, it's a feature</p><i></i>
In the name of heaven Catiline, how long do you propose to exploit our patience..
Reply
#6
Salve,<br>
<br>
The range is given in a lot of different modern works as thirty meters, a figure derived from tests performed under Napoleon III. It is however unclear how these tests were performed (weight of javelin, use of a thonged javelin or normal one, use of armour and shield or not, weight of armour and shield if any). That range might seem a little optimistic compared to test throws done in reenactment equipment, but Roman soldiers were probably on average better trained and more athletic (certainly more than me at least) so better performance seems likely. Roman troops are described both by Polybius and Vegetius to deploy with ranks set six Roman foot apart, an obvious precaution measure for troops throwing long javelins with butt spikes like the pilum.<br>
<br>
Some info on experiments with javelins can be found in this book: M. Junkelmann, Die Legionen des Augustus (1986).<br>
<br>
Light javelins called a lancea were used with an amentum or throwing thong to improve range and accuracy (note however that this same word was also used for a type of spear with decorated spear head of Gallic origin, which should not be identified). I am not sure whether the variants of the pilum were ever so equipped.<br>
<br>
Shields were very likely not discarded: if the enemy is in range, so are you!<br>
<br>
A third century source claimed a one in ten hit percentage for Roman javelins, though it is not fully clear how reliable that estimate is.<br>
<br>
There is more on javelins and related subjects in threads on the Vardulli Roman army forum:<br>
<br>
network54.com/Hide/Forum/79193<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#7
At the last Roman days event, we did a few competitions, racing and pilum chucking among them. While throwing pila several of our swords flew our of their scabbards: likewise the pugios. This also happened during the foot races, which could have been a problem if someone stepped on them in the grass.<br>
<br>
I wonder if this is because we're all inexperienced folks throwing these things, or if that was a real tactical problem for Roman infantry. Seems to render you less effective to be disarming a tenth (that was about how many lost parts) of your folks just to throw a spear. Heave the spear, go for the sword..whooops..<br>
<br>
The must have worked this one out. <p>Richard<br>
An enthusiast and scholar wannabe<b>
[email protected] </p><i></i>
Richard Campbell
Legio XX - Alexandria, Virginia
RAT member #6?
Reply
#8
I imagine that the 1-in-10 hit efficiency refers to a kill or wound. If the pila were thrown in range and not too early ("throw when you see the white of their eyes" - ordered the centurion) against a dense infantry formation (Gauls, Germans, Greeks and other Legionaries) then the effectiveness must include also the shields struck that became dangerously weighed down by the pila stuck into it. The thin head and thinner shaft made all the momentum go into a small spot and penetration was highly probable. If I were in the front line and a pilum was stuck in my shield AND just a few meters away there was a line of Legionaries about to charge at me I would be so worried that maybe I would drop my heavy and almost useless shield and maybe shuffle about to get behind the protection of someone nearby. Dropping the shield I would make myself more vulnerable if another pila volley arrived or in sword fighting. And if I did any shuffling about I would risk making confusion in my ranks. The pilum was truely a deadly weapon and it created all kinds of problems even if only 1 in 10 of the enemy where killed. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ugoffredo.showPublicProfile?language=EN>goffredo</A> at: 7/5/01 7:47:15 am<br></i>
Jeffery Wyss
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
Reply
#9
Salve,<br>
<br>
If the statement is based on truth, the one in ten ratio compares very favourably to that of longer ranged weaponry like arrows or firearms. With a formation drawn up in several ranks the javelin must have been a point target weapon only for those in front, for the rear it is likely to have been an area target arm for their view of their opponents must have been very limited. A high rate of 'fire' seems to have been a major aim in ancient and medieval warfare judging by surviving texts, which seems to imply that the terror effect of having a large mass of missiles rain down on an opponent was deemed as important as actually hitting targets.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=sandervandorst>Sander van Dorst</A> at: 7/5/01 7:57:40 am<br></i>
Reply
#10
Sorry if someone's mentioned this already...<br>
<br>
I read in Dodge's <i> Hannibal</i> that the Romans went so far as to rmove one of the iron retaining pins holding the head to the shaft to guarantee that they would become useless after they were thrown.<br>
<br>
Pretty devious... <p><br><i>SI HOC LEGERE POTES, OPERIS BONI IN REBVS LATINIS FRVCTVOSIS POTIRI POTES.</i></p><i></i>
Reply
#11
Salve,<br>
<br>
That is derived from Plutarchus, who ascribes this innovation to Gaius Marius. This contrasts with earlier descriptions of the weapon where the firm connection between shank and shaft was remarked upon. The removed pin was replaced with a wooden wedge meant to break up on impact, so the head would swivel when picked up again (an effect that I observed in a <i> pilum</i> a couple of years ago). Later on sources say the shank behind the point was left untempered to make the shank bend after impact to make it useless after being thrown.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
Reply


Forum Jump: