+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence (/showthread.php?tid=11497)
Pages:
1
2
Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Nerva - 01-13-2008
Last August and September Tom Feeley and Alan Wilkins did some research into the effect of pilum and ballista bolts on skulls. This has been used to make a documentary for the History channel which I do not think has been shown yet. They used a standard Pilum, a manuballista and a 3-span.
Anyway, the results we're interesting and Tom Feeley has given me permission to discuss them with you. A number of sheep skulls we're used. Now I appreciate that human skulls would have been a better target, unfortunately the local sheep we're prettier so they won out :wink:
The pilum produced the same results every time, they stuck into the skull and left a perfect square hole when removed - no shattering or irregular holes, nice and neat square holes.
The ballista bolt on the other hand 'Always' shattered the skull - no neat hole, either a shattered skull of a bloody big irregular hole.
So, I think it's reasonable to assume that the skull found at Maiden Castle and elsewhere with neat square holes were the result of Pila, not ballista bolts.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Gaius Julius Caesar - 01-13-2008
Even if it was a long range shot? A lot of the energy might have been spent.....yeh ken?
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Nerva - 01-13-2008
I don't know the ranges involved Gaius. I can talk to Tom again and see waht they we're. I expect the Pilum ranges were much shorter than that of the Ballista.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Gaius Julius Caesar - 01-13-2008
Quote:I don't know the ranges involved Gaius. I can talk to Tom again and see waht they we're. I expect the Pilum ranges were much shorter than that of the Ballista.
Yes I imagine so! I was thinking of the ballista's at Maiden castle tho', which would have been fired from outside the castle/fort. Unless they were mounted on towers or surrounding hills, which someone mentioned before, it wouldbe a long range shot. Still, it would certainly sound feasible for the more direct fire aspects....ours are pretty under powered too!
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS - 01-14-2008
Probaby a correct assertation... sadly no direct contemporary sources are left for the siege of Mai Dunn........
Pesonally I think the kinetic energy of a scorpio bolt would also leave a crack in stead of a square hole, however human skuls should be tested or a mateial compareable in thickness and hardness... and mind you the human skull is fairly thick.
the energy of a ballista ball would leave a sack of bones.... and according to Flavivs Josephvs who of course almost invented exaggeration, could take off the head of a person (believable) and least but not least fling a foetus from a womb 90 meters far!!!!!! how is that for ancient abortion!
M.VB.M.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Nerva - 01-14-2008
We're just going to have to get some human volunteers Marcus :wink: No point in using us Irish though, our Skulls are far to thick :lol:
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS - 01-14-2008
without getting modern and on the wrong topic (LOL) cant we supply certain troops in certain countries with ancient weapons for field trials???
one ballista and one onager per platoon.......
M.VIB.M.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Ebusitanus - 01-19-2008
I have noticed that most reenactor folks use cord to tense their repro Ballistas. I believe the old romans used animal sinews which gave them a much stronger shot than the modern cord ones. Where those experiments done with cord or sinew ballistas?
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Iagoba - 01-19-2008
Yes this is a thing I always (well, since I discovered reenacting) asked myself. Probably is because is much easier to get cord than sinews. And probably the later ar classified as "animal waste" or so.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - M. Demetrius - 01-19-2008
One reason people use modern cord is that it's impervious to weather changes and humidity. Sinew, rawhide, or hair ropes lose tension as the water causes them to expand. Availability, as you say, Iagoba, and modern regulations about animal products is another drawback.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Dan Howard - 01-19-2008
Dead bone performs completely differently to live bone. The closest we can come to approximating this is using a freshly killed animal. Even a few hours is too long since the skulls become too brittle. What is the nature of the sheep skulls used?
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Iagoba - 01-19-2008
Eek!
My History teacher never mentioned that shooting at sheep´s heads could be related with it! :lol:
In the begining of March we have a meeting our area´s historical fencing to do also something simmilar...
but with longsword. Even our blunt swords (but heavy, 1´8 kg X 1´20 m.) can shatter somehow badly a coconut.Gore!
I remeber a history (Fron Herodotus´"History" if my memory is good) about breacking Egiptian and his enemies skulls found at a battle site. He said that egiptian skulls were hard to break, instead, his enemies were brittle.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - JVL - 01-20-2008
I have heard that the legions used animal skulls for target practise since there are finds of skulls with square holes on them. This of course suggests that the skull was not "fresh", but it had been used as a target for some time, certainly longer than few hours. And using a skull as a pila target seems a bit weird for me, because the skull is a small target to be hit with a spear and secondly the function of pila was to penetrate a shield ( I think), not a skull.
Correct if I'm wrong.
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - Tarbicus - 01-20-2008
Could the skulls have been attached to a live animal at the time? Moving target practice?
Re: Pilum versus Ballista - Skull Evidence - M. Demetrius - 01-20-2008
Penetrating a shield was one of the purposes of the pilum, but the primary purpose was to penetrate the guy holding the shield, with or without hitting the wood first. At least that seems to be the consensus of opinion around these parts.
Back when I was in practice, I could strike a kitchen match with a tomahawk about 3 out of 5 times. (you have to hit the tip of the head with the edge of the axe, of course, a very small target from 4 or 5 meters). Nowadays, I can still stick the axe in the target but nowhere near as controlled as back then.
I should think that a Roman line soldier could hit a target the size of a skull from his normal throwing distance almost every time. It's what kept him alive. I just sometimes won silly contests with other people doing the same thing, and only practiced a couple of days a week for a year or so. The soldiers practiced a whole lot more intensively and seriously.
With a pilum, though, I can hit the ground just about every time! :lol: Other targets are fairly safe.