What was the pilum made of?

[Paullus Scipio]

Robert, I'm not saying lead could not be the material used for pila weights - it has some advantages as you have pointed out - just that it may not have been lead, but some other material.
I get particularly uncomfortable when looking at the funeral monuments showing 'double weighted' pila! That would be an awful big weight !
I guess it wouldn't go far, but with such a big weight (whatever the material ) it would pack some penetration!
Again, has anyone done some experiments with weighted pila ? It should be relatively straight forward, even if the weights are merely temporarily slipped on to 'ordinary' pila. (Alas, I don't yet have pila !! )

[Magnus]

You know, the weights we see on some pila shafts in sculpture may in fact be because the wood sometimes used is a lighter soft wood, thus the extra weight is required to penetrate. Lead seems to be the logical choice...readily available, and less value than say bronze since bronze was rather in high demand for military and civilian items. Lead is also a lot easier to work with, making it a lot more field expediant.

I tend to agree with David on this one. Lugging around spare javelin shafts isn't very efficient. If they ran out of pila shafts, then I can't see why they wouldn't use what's on hand in the nearest forest. Remember, the pila were rescued after battle for the iron shafts, not necessarily the wooden. Figure this, what's easier to come by...wood or iron? (And I am NOT saying they didn't re-use the wood shafts.)

And they are not hard to make, nor does it take long to hammer out the iron shafts. If you can recover the javelin, great...if not, who cares. So are these weapons ones which require a lot of effort or resources? Not really. Probably takes longer to carve the wooden part of the shaft than forge the iron part of it.

[Peroni]

Probably takes longer to carve the wooden part of the shaft than forge the iron part of it.

Not if you include the fact that it had to be hammered from a large stock iron billet. These vary in size from about 250mm x 40mm to 300mm x 60mm.

David Sim in his book 'Iron for the Eagles' says that a billet hammered into a length 700mm by 13mm was enough to make a pilum shank.

He gives the production time for one pilum as 10 hours 26 minutes from billet to finished item using 13.5kg's of charcoal.

Quite expensive to produce! Sim suggests that as it lasted as a weapon over a considerable time period, and had several modifications to the design, that the effectiveness of the pilum, justified its expense.

Billet to forged bar
forged bar to flattened bar
'upsetting' the end to form the point
shaping the point
reducing the shaft with fullers and cross pein hammer
flattening the shaft
flaring the tang end and punching of holes.

[Robert]

Hi Magnus, when pondering on your last sentence, one would (and should) wonder why such an elaborate attachment was used. This is one of the main reasons I have difficulty regarding the pilum on general as a "fire and forget" weapon. I do realise there are different sorts of pila over time, some flanged, some tanged, some socketed (I have a simple socketed pilum for my auxillia impersion). I feel there is a lot more to the pilum then we tend to think ... The contribution of Marcus (hi Ade) only strenghtens this belief. Much attention and research is paid to other parts of the equipment, so I was somewhat peaved by the "cheap chucker" comment. I seem to recal that in Republican days a heavy and light pilum were carried. Perhaps the weight was used to obtain a heavy shorter range pilum to smash through shields, allowing standarisation in fabrication of both heavy and light pilum.
On the wood issue, sure, "any port in a storm" . If you have the choice, perhaps shy away from cedar, eucalyptus and gumtrees. :lol:

[Magnus]

Probably takes longer to carve the wooden part of the shaft than forge the iron part of it.

Not if you include the fact that it had to be hammered from a large stock iron billet. These vary in size from about 250mm x 40mm to 300mm x 60mm.

David Sim in his book 'Iron for the Eagles' says that a billet hammered into a length 700mm by 13mm was enough to make a pilum shank.

He gives the production time for one pilum as 10 hours 26 minutes from billet to finished item using 13.5kg's of charcoal.

Quite expensive to produce! Sim suggests that as it lasted as a weapon over a considerable time period, and had several modifications to the design, that the effectiveness of the pilum, justified its expense.

Billet to forged bar
forged bar to flattened bar
'upsetting' the end to form the point
shaping the point
reducing the shaft with fullers and cross pein hammer
flattening the shaft
flaring the tang end and punching of holes.

Thanks for the information Adrian! If one pilum iron shaft takes 10 hours, do you think then perhaps that either A) the romans employed apprentice smiths to get it to the final stages, decreasing the time taken by the master smith? B) had pre-forged iron bars specificly for the use of making them into pilum shafts. Not that we have proof of it, but any down time a smith might have could have gone into pre-working a lot of weapons that took time to make.

HIJACKING ALERT! I think we're moving a bit into the iron shaft part here...the original focus was on the wooden haft. Now, I never for once said that the pila was a fire and forget weapon, because they have a lot of value, damaged or not. BUT, having said that, I also don't think it's a weapon of high quality when it comes to it's finishing and materials. Let's face it, it's not nearly as detailed or polished as a pugio or gladius. It can stay fairly rough and still be effective. Thus, I don't think that the wood choice for the wooden part really makes that much difference. Especially when a fair % of Rome's enemies weren't armoured to the point where it would make a difference.

[Robert]

True Magnus, but the original question was "What kind of wood would be the prefered material for making a shaft?" A reasonable answer to that would be ash, looking at the characteristics and availability. I do believe it would be good sense to carry a large quantity of roughed pilum points (slim cilindrical billets), made wholesale in specialised workshops and of course a supply of ingots to shape to whatever was needed (including spare pila). This would reduce production time to no end in the field and limit the amount of iron lugged around in the baggage train.

[Magnus]

But a soft wood is easier to work and therefor faster to produce. So who is to say "prefered" means hardwood? The wood shaft of a javelin, unlike a spear isn't tied into the weapon's efficiency so much because a spear must resist breaking due to thrusting as well as being thrown. In my mind, the requirements for a hardwood shaft is much, much less for a pilum than a say a spear. Also, there is no reason why pine or cedar would simply break upon impact. It's quite feasible that this type of wood is more than capable of surviving multiple uses.

[Hibernicus]

I would think that it would be simpler to carry coppiced poles of ash that could be used for a variety of things such as tent poles, tool handles, furca, pilum handles etc etc. Larger poles could be used for scutums.

Ash and fir if green are just about as easy to shape, and not much different when dry, in coppiced pole form. Quartered splits of ash, when dry, are just slightly harder to work than fir.

Modern lumber works differently than does green wood. Quartersawn lumber works best but can be harder to locate and can cost more.

[Peroni]

Magnus wrote..

If one pilum iron shaft takes 10 hours, do you think then perhaps that either A) the romans employed apprentice smiths to get it to the final stages, decreasing the time taken by the master smith?

Without doubt. Apprentices and journeymen would have assisted in reducing the billets to workable size and the smith would do the finishing. This still happens in modern forges in my local area.

Sim suggests the same.

B) had pre-forged iron bars specificly for the use of making them into pilum shafts. Not that we have proof of it, but any down time a smith might have could have gone into pre-working a lot of weapons that took time to make.

Most if not all the Roman iron billets I have seen in museums here in the UK have been an almost standard size. Their value could be measured better in standard stock billets, the same as the iron-age british stck bars that are shaped like swords. The examples of these that I have seen have socketed ends (Like a spear head) for a handle to show that the metal was pure enough to work without it splitting. They have a forge-welded tip too.

[Malleus]

It seems to me that if you win the battle or skirmish, youcan get back most all of your expended pila.

Unless your enemies are nomads, they most likely also have a coppicing system that can be exploited, making a large train of spares unneccessary. Agrarian societies have similar needs and solutions to get suitable wood. As some campaigns or occupations were lengthy, trade for suitable material seems as likely as going into the forest to harvest suitable material with ax and saw.

Steve/Malleus

[Robert]

Nasty thing about fir is the knots. Ash has far less knots and a nice long grain, much nicer to work, more predictable in the split. I will go for the "coppiced poles of ash" (Hibernicus) anyday, especially when the multipurpose character is taken into account. Any army traveling could stock up at whatever grove they passed, replenishing supplies.
Still think ash should not be classed a hardwood, medium density at best. It just grows too fast te be a proper hardwood, this being the reason it is seldom carried in commercial trade these days. It's not that ash is scarce, it just doesn't make it to the sawmils these days.

[M. Demetrius]

Still think ash should not be classed a hardwood, medium density at best. It just grows too fast te be a proper hardwood

I went to a store that specializes in hardwoods and veneers, and was told by the clerk that all deciduous trees are "hardwoods", while all conifers are "softwoods". He said, "Even balsa is a hardwood."

When I said, "But oak is much harder than balsa", he replied, "Now we're talking about density. That's a different subject." I understand his terminology, but it was new to me.

So by the wood seller's definition, ash, oak, hackberry, poplar, cottonwood, chinaberry, all are hardwoods, though there's quite a range of densities there. I still use the term "hard" for woods that are, well, hard, and "soft" for those that are easier to cut and bend, such as pine...unless I'm in his store, of course. When in Rome....
8)

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Still think ash should not be classed a hardwood, medium density at best. It just grows too fast te be a proper hardwood

I went to a store that specializes in hardwoods and veneers, and was told by the clerk that all deciduous trees are "hardwoods", while all conifers are "softwoods". He said, "Even balsa is a hardwood."

When I said, "But oak is much harder than balsa", he replied, "Now we're talking about density. That's a different subject." I understand his terminology, but it was new to me.

So by the wood seller's definition, ash, oak, hackberry, poplar, cottonwood, chinaberry, all are hardwoods, though there's quite a range of densities there. I still use the term "hard" for woods that are, well, hard, and "soft" for those that are easier to cut and bend, such as pine...unless I'm in his store, of course. When in Rome....
8)

Yeah, I was bowled over when I found out balsa was a hard wood!!!
Talk about oxymorons!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Robert]

Just to further complicate matters. The ash common in Europe and used to make ski's, spears and neolithic flatbows is the Fraxinus excelsior, related to the olive tree (family group) and common to wet groves and woodlands. It will grow on a chalky soil but will also do well on clay and nutrition rich sandy soil. It's picky about light, though, likes a sunny spot and will be pushed out by beech (but then, what isn't? ).

In North America there are the:
Eucalyptus fraxinoides - White Ash
Eucalyptus paliformis - Wadbilliga Ash
different species of trees with a similar common name "ash". The white ash is similar in appearance to the European ash, as is echoed in its second Latin name.
Sorry guys, next time, I will add the Latin name of any plant or tree referred to from paleobotanical sources. :oops:

[Matt Lukes]

Apparently the bits of haft remaining in one hasta point and a buttspike from Kalkreise are ash- there are a few of such artifacts around Europe, however this was the only one I could get positive species identification for, which is why I go for ash. It does not require coppicing, is very easy to work, the grain is nice and straight naturally, and it's strong- it stands to reason that if it were good enough for longer weapons like hastae, it'd be more than suitable for shorter ones like pila :wink: