Plumbata - Printable Version +- 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: Plumbata (/showthread.php?tid=1271) |
RE: Plumbata - Renatus - 12-19-2018 Doesn't it all depend on the tactical situation and what you are trying to achieve? If you want to create confusion in the enemy's rear ranks, an under-hand throw, lobbed over the heads to the front ranks, seems to be indicated. On the other hand, an over-hand throw would seem to be more accurate, if directed at the enemy's front rank or a charging horseman. Vegetius seems to imply the latter: 'If soldiers throw them at the right moment, it seems almost as if shield-bearing infantry are imitating the role of archers. For they wound the enemy and his horses before they can get not merely to close quarters, but even within range of javelins.' (Veg. 1.17 - Milner's translation) However, he does not rule out the alternative. Incidentally, Robert, your last post merely repeated Brucicus' earlier one, without adding a comment of your own. What's that all about? RE: Plumbata - Robert Vermaat - 12-19-2018 (12-19-2018, 12:12 PM)Renatus Wrote: Doesn't it all depend on the tactical situation and what you are trying to achieve? If you want to create confusion in the enemy's rear ranks, an under-hand throw, lobbed over the heads to the front ranks, seems to be indicated. On the other hand, an over-hand throw would seem to be more accurate, if directed at the enemy's front rank or a charging horseman. Vegetius seems to imply the latter: Well exactly, I could not have put that better. Actually I tried to, in a lot more words, in my answer above/ (12-19-2018, 12:12 PM)Renatus Wrote: Incidentally, Robert, your last post merely repeated Brucicus' earlier one, without adding a comment of your own. What's that all about? I reply to get the html of the text, which I then copy in Word, before pasting it back here. You caught me while I was actually busy writing the answer (got away with it so far). Maybe I should enter a short tekst while answering, to prevent confusion. RE: Plumbata - Renatus - 12-19-2018 (12-19-2018, 01:34 PM)Robert Vermaat Wrote: I reply to get the html of the text, which I then copy in Word, before pasting it back here. You caught me while I was actually busy writing the answer I can see why you would click on 'Reply' to get the text and then work on it (I do that) but surely there is no need to post it. Incidentally, there is a 'Quote' button that does not seem to work. Is that right? RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-19-2018 (12-19-2018, 10:38 AM)Robert Vermaat Wrote:(12-18-2018, 06:13 PM)Brucicus Wrote: You are missing the point. RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-19-2018 Correction to my previous post: When throwing the dart OH the tip of the dart in the cocked position will point upwards and just above and behind the thrower's head. The thrower should be standing sideways to the target. I must've been having an LSD flashback when I wrote that about the fletching. ;-o RE: Plumbata - Renatus - 12-19-2018 This looks like a good picture of a lawn dart. RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-19-2018 (12-19-2018, 09:32 PM)Renatus Wrote: This looks like a good picture of a lawn dart. That is it! Thank you, Renatus. Once I get used to the forum engine I'll be more facile in attaching images. They came in various colors. It was a kid's toy and the object was to get more darts to land in the ring ... but boys will be boys and we found other, more er. challenging ways to utilize them. I have 3 brothers.... Recipe for disaster, but we all made it out alive and only scarred mentally. One interesting application of the darts ended up piercing my buddy, Mike Bailey's, foot. I believe that that dart is a very good proxy for a plumbata. I think the manufacturer even admitted/advertising having used the plumbata as a model. I'd be interested in seeing objections to using soft-tipped versions for determining flight characteristics, e.g. relative distance of different throwing methods, relative accuracy. I think one could alter their weight with minimal impact on flight behavior through the use of lead tape or lead-core fishing line, but I can't be sure until I have some in hand. I can envision some cool reenactments testing tactical assumptions using a whole bunch of the sort-tipped ones. There is a nice PhD thesis in this maybe and could potentially add a lot to the state of knowledge of this vitally important subject. After that we tackle peace in the Middle East... Happy Christmas, Renatus RE: Plumbata - Renatus - 12-20-2018 (12-19-2018, 11:07 PM)Brucicus Wrote: Happy Christmas, Renatus Thank you. The same to you and Robert and everyone else. RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-22-2018 Here is a study that confirms all I have claimed about proper throwing technique: https://www.academia.edu/10355883/Learning_to_throw_to_maximum_distances_Do_changes_in_release_angle_and_speed_reflect_affordances_for_throwing Subjects untrained in throwing were given capable instruction and supervised practice for a month. Their progress was measured throughout the course of the project. Bottom line - proper throwing technique allowed subjects to about double their initial (untrained) throws. I consider this to be the stake in the heart of any reasonable counter-argument. Sorry that the established science has turned out to be rubbish. At least now we have the opportunity to set the record straight and re-assess the conclusions based on improperly designed and misguided 'scientific' studies. That makes this a good day, right? Do I get a PhD now? How about a cookie? Reputation points? Don't make me beg. ;-) Frohes Fest und Einen Guten Rutsch ins Neue Jahr! Brucicus RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-24-2018 So how did the Roman Army really use plumbatae in battle? Although new, informed, testing has yet to begin, let us assume that proper overhand throwing allows for more distance and better accuracy than underhanded throws so that we can theorize how plumbatae may have actually been employed on the battlefield. As part of this think piece I am including my thoughts on what would constitute the perfect plumbata for each battle situation. If the archaeological record should produce plumbatae corresponding to the idealized types, then that may give us basis to infer the battle technique for which they were employed. Against Approaching Enemy Enemy at extreme plumbata range With the overhand throw offering more reach than earlier assumed attainable, adversaries would be engaged sooner (i.e. when farther away). In coordination with archery units, skilled plumbata use could be an effective force multiplier. One example: Roman archery could, given favorable battlefield conditions, act against enemy bowmen in 'counter battery' suppressive fire while skirmishers or other troops move in close enough to quickly launch dart after dart into the infantry or perhaps, cavalry masses, using the weapon's reach as a buffer against sudden attack. Another example: Archery providing high-angled plunging fire forcing enemy shields up while the darts arrive at a lower angle, forcing enemy shields down. A 1-2 punch of that nature would severely impede or could even discourage the progress of an attacking force, I conject. It was certainly advantageous for the Romans to keep the adversary in the killing zone for as long as possible. A bigger kill box does precisely that. En masse delivery of plumbatae to their extreme ranges thrown overhand can be delivered by troops assembled in a somewhat 'loose' formation, e.g. quincunx or, because the overhand method, unlike the previously espoused method, requires little space side-to-side, with only slightly increased spacing in files. Being in close proximity offers the advantage of rapid reassembly in the face of an onrushing foe. Underhand distance throwing would require much looser 'formations' than overhand. The very nature of the underhand throw relegates it to being a front-line-only weapon when reach is required; as stated in a previous post, a launch angle of approx. 12 degrees is required for a plumbata to clear an obstacle 170cm tall 4 meters in front of the thrower, the number I use to represent the height of an average Roman soldier (I name him Flavius Targetus). With 4 meters between lines we are looking at huge, loose formations that complicate the process of quick reassembly. Conclusion Frankly, I see no advantage that the underhanded throw offers for combat at extreme range, and I therefore conclude they were not thrown in that manner for this battle situation. Plumbata implications: If I were to develop a plumbata specifically for long distance attacks it would have a long wooden shaft (by plumbata standards) and a shorter than standard (yes, I know there are no real plumbata "standards") metal shank leading from the weight to the arrowhead. Why? In an overhand throw the length of the shaft essentially extends the length of your arm, i.e. your leverage, just as an atlatl does. The farther out you move the center of mass, the more energy it develops when thrown. The shorter metal arrow shank moves more mass closer to the end of the dart, thereby maximizing energy potential (and distance) in a tradeoff for some penetration depth capability. Enemy at Medium Range As the adversary approaches to a distance just outside of pilum/franziska/javelin range, archers stationed to the rear of the Roman formation may find it difficult to bring the enemy in battery for direct fire due to not being able to find a safe shooting lane, or in some cases may lose complete sight of the enemy due to the nature of the terrain, enemy fire, and/or the archers' positioning. The same impediments may make their plunging fire difficult and ineffective as well. In this situation, the overhand thrown plumbata can essentially, as Vegetius alludes, replace archers. At medium distances the Romans would have tightened their formations in anticipation of a charge, ruling out en masse underhand throws. Direct, aimed fire as well as high-arced plunging fire are both quite attainable with the overhand throw at medium distances, from formation, so that one-two punch mentioned above could still be delivered. While en masse throwing would predominate this battle phase, I believe that, at this distance, it was quite possible that certain individual enemy targets were prioritized for 'sniping'. (As an aside, I expect accuracy tests at all distances using overhand delivery will surprise those of you unfamiliar with the method. We'll see.) Conclusion Lobbed (underhanded) throws from the rear of the Roman formation were certainly a possibility, but they would need a fair amount of space to launch them, thus keeping their numbers and their potential effectiveness low. As that method offers no particular advantage and only disadvantages, I do not believe that underhand throws were used in that battle situation. Plumbata implications: Designing darts for this situation I would end up with a dart shorter than the above, but with a longer metal arrowhead shaft and more added weight. Distance isn't the main concern, it's accuracy and impact that matter now. The heavier weight makes up somewhat for the dart's shorter length, and the shorter length also helps in en masse throwing from formation. The lengthened arrowhead shank is for enhanced penetration This dart would also suffice in meeting the requirements of a plunging fire missile: A high arcing throw expends much of its energy in the ascension. For it to be effective as a weapon of war it must recapture as much of the spent energy as possible via the fall to the target. The extra weight allows the dart to accelerate downwards towards terminal velocity faster than a lighter one, resulting in higher impact and more penetration. Enemy at Close Range As the adversary closes to within pilum range and then on to the press of spear-against-shield, both overhand and underhand methods have their place. In a close Roman shieldwall formation, I believe that a version of the overhand throw that I describe as a 'flick' may have been used. The 'flick' is simply an abridgement of the complete, proper overhand throw, but eliminating the initial reach-back and subsequently eliminating the need for a follow through. The 'flick' is accomplished by grasping the dart on the shaft behind the fletching (true for all methods mentioned here) so that the dart is pointed up.) Facing the enemy, raise your throwing arm so that your elbow is the same height as your shoulder, then simply snap your arm forward and flick the wrist toward your target. Basically, it is the same motion as pub darts, but because you are holding it by the shaft behind the fletching (like holding an ice cream cone)... and because the dart's mass is out towards the other, pointy end, enough energy is developed to get off a quick, accurate (in a Roman context) strike that might dissuade your not-so-friendly Goth buddy 5 meters away from continuing to try and puncture you with his spear. With timely communications, second, third and maybe fourth lines could, I conjecture, coordinate on the spot to keep up timely, deadly, harassing fire literally into the faces of their enemies. At the same time as the front ranks are engaged, the rearmost ranks would be lobbing plumbatae underhanded onto the enemies back ranks. In this situation, these plumbateers could be formed more tightly side-to-side (but still trying to be far enough away from the ranks in front) because the underhand lob is a close-up precision throw and the proper technique for that throw keeps your throwing hand close to your body throughout the delivery. It's the bocce ball toss. Testing has shown that this is the most precise way to hit nearby targets. As distances grow, however, accuracy quickly diminishes. But for close-in plunging fire this is the way to go. And I imagine it would be very effective. One can deliver high arcing shots via the overhand throw AND achieve more height than with the underhand method, but accuracy is lost and, speaking personally, even as a young man, because it requires a sharp torso tilt and suffers from a lack of horizon for orientation, I got dizzy trying to do it more than a few times. Others are more stalwart than I am, I am sure. Conclusion Both throwing methods, adapted to the short distances involved, offer unique capabilities that would be of great value in this battle situation. I have no doubt that the lobs occurred, but the 'flicks' are just supposition based on my knowledge of throwing and belief that necessity is the mother of invention was as true under the Romans as it is today. Plumbata implications: The best dart, to my mind, for the close-in, direct, "flick" attack would need to be short for ease of use in close quarters. It wouldn't need much weight added to it because it doesn't have far to go and it is not expected to deliver a forceful impact. I can only speculate what an optimal arrowhead and shank design would be. I think it would probably be just a more delicate version of the others. For the plumbatae lobbed underhanded into the enemy's rear, I would think that they would be given substantially more weight and that the wooden shaft would be somewhat more substantial to allow better purchase on the grip so to avoid friendly fire due to sweaty palms/poor throws and to withstand the higher forces that the additional weight brings into play. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I hope this make sense. Any thoughts the community wishes to share gratefully accepted. I don't intend for this list to be inclusive of all battle situations. More just capturing a string of thoughts. Goodnight RE: Plumbata - Mark Hygate - 12-24-2018 {This discussion has certainly woken up...} - and a question springs to mind; given the discourse on 'overhand' vs 'underhand': - Whilst I'm aware of, really, only one style of 'underhand' (with, or without, imparting a spin) - where I've thrown balls, lawn darts and even 'normal' darts that way on occasion... What, precisely, is the version of 'overhand' being suggested (or perhaps more than one)? I ask that having also thrown balls; for range; for pitching (softball rather than baseball); English style bowling; the classic circular overhand for grenade throwing; pub darts; and sport javelins - all of which are actually rather different in technique. And, thinking about it, if you have space on the spot (open-order or even soldier-level quincunx) then the plumbata could even lend itself to a circular-spin (cf discus) technique - I wonder what range could be achieved with that! RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-24-2018 (12-24-2018, 02:56 PM)Mark Hygate Wrote: {This discussion has certainly woken up...} - and a question springs to mind; given the discourse on 'overhand' vs 'underhand': Mark: I am talking about standard overhand distance throwing, such as a baseball outfielder making a long throw to home plate. That is the only proper overhand style for devices the size and weight of baseballs, softballs (not actually soft, btw) and plumbatae, really. Everything else is just a modification of that motion imposed by the requirements of the sport (i.e. a cricket bowler's straight arm delivery is by rule) or by the peculiarities of the thrown device (long javelin, short pub dart). I don't understand what is meant by 'discuss throw'. Plumbatae and discs are of much different design. The fletching (or 'flights') already impart a spin around its long axis to the dart just as the rifling of a gun barrel imparts spin to a bullet. If that is what you mean by spin, then it already occurs. Rotation around the short axis would be disastrous to both the dart's distance capability and accuracy. Perhaps you are thinking of using a sling to achieve even greater distances? There are parallels in history which suggest this is possible. The use of atlatls would also extend range and were known to the Romans, I understand. Softball pitching is underhand throwing, and the classic circular overhand grenade toss (just like a cricket bowler's delivery) hasn't been taught for grenade throwing since at least the 1970's, if not much earlier. I assume your reference to 'English style bowling' is meant to describe cricket 'pitching'. The only other forms of bowling of which I am aware, such as lawn, lane, and Kegeln, are all performed underhand. Thanks for joining in! I hope my responses clarify the issue for you. Enjoy the Holidays! RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-24-2018 Here is a short video illustrating proper technique without the encumbrance of technical jargon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dusz0WUYZxk Here is a video showing two children demonstrating the overhand style. The young lady actually demonstrates the wrong way to get into the ready position and if not corrected will lead to serious arm problems. At the end of the short video the boy and girl throw simultaneously. Note how the boy reaches as far back as he can with the ball before moving the arm forward and releasing the throw? That is the proper way to perform the overhand throw. He looks like a natural thrower. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fPGb1elphc And here is a video showing overhand throws as performed by the best throwers in the world. Note how accurate one can be with this method. There are no restrictions in baseball as to how you throw, yet they all use the same form because it is the best when power and accuracy are required. Imagine a bunch of guys like this releasing dart after dart in your direction with malicious intent! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5ctPAqt_wk I hope this helps you visualize what I am saying. Merry Christmas, RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-26-2018 I hope everyone has had a nice Christmas or whatever you celebrate this time of year. This video is very brief. It shows a man throwing plumbata heads into a shed door. I hope it is his shed door. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HnMbI9XZ-A I can tell by the way he finishes his throws, when in frame, that he is throwing overhand. I can't judge how mechanically sound he is, but he is getting his body into the throw. Note that by necessity he is holding the arrowhead in his hand by the shank, not the held-in-the-fingers pub dart "push" style (which is only useful if you are fighting a battle down at the ol' Pig & Whistle!). This grip allows him to take all the energy that has built up in his body and snap it into the dart head via the wrist and do so delivering all his energy towards the target. These are very broad heads and will not penetrate nearly as well as, say, a bodkin point on a narrow shank, a la pilum. There is neither additional weight for impact nor fletching for guidance, so strikes are off the preferred strike angle. But can you doubt that there is considerable power in such a delivery method? Now add in the missing wooden shaft which would extend his throwing arc, again multiplying his force, the weight and fletching.... do you doubt that even those huge heads would have completely penetrated those doors? Also, please take notice of how quickly he is able to get off those strong throws. Yikes!! RE: Plumbata - Brucicus - 12-29-2018 Built a plumbata (186g, 40cm) and have been testing it today. Underhand, my throws are consistently 31m. Overhand I've been getting 45-47m regularly. I sprained my knee during the testing (I am 67 and arthritic) so my eldest son took over. His best UH throw was 51m, his overhand throws were all in the 57-60m range. We had a headwind of 7mph to contend with. While the difference is less than I had thought, we are still seeing about a 20% increase in distance with the overhand method. I did notice much more initial instability at launch when thrown overhand. Despite this, my son reported his overhand throws were more accurate than underhanded ones. My conjecture is that the overhand release imparts so much energy that any aerodynamic flaws are exaggerated. Because I used PVC pipe for the dart's body, I believe that I have too much mass in the shaft. I plan on switching to thinner, lighter hardwood dowels for future tests. I used PVC for strength in resisting breakage, but I think they are too thick and are causing problems. So, at the very least the myth that overhand plumbata throws have a maximum range of 30m has been well and truly busted. I am going to try to attach a photo of my plumbata. I tried this 10 minutes ago and my whole message disappeared, so if that happens again I shall post without the photo. Thanks all, |