03-26-2005, 08:51 PM
Quote:</em></strong><hr>What can we assume about the quality and condition of Roman shields and armor at this time?<hr><br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
as I've argued earlier, I think, we could assume that the Roman shields and armour could resist against the Parthian arrows pretty well. In fact 20 000 casualties of 100 000 shots would be a fantastic percentage. However as you already noted, 10 arrows for one archer seems a rather low number. We must also keep in mind that a significant number (and I would perhaps even say a major number) of casualties happened during the chaotic and disordered retreat of the next day, when the Roman army split up and thus became almost defenceless against the pursuing Parthians (the wounded were left behind and, if I recall correctly, slaughtered by the Parthians).<br>
I've also find a relevant story in Caesar. During the battles at Dyrrhachium (48 BC) a garrison of one fortress faced a fierce attack with heavy missile support. All men in the fortress were wounded, but there were wery low fatalities. In the shield of the centurion Scaeva they found 120 holes from arrows. The centurion survived and was promoted and donated by 200 000 sesterces by Caesar (Caes. B.C III.53).<br>
From our sources it really doesn't seem that the composite bow could penetrate shield and armour and disable the man behind on a permanent basis. And the tests of these weapons and armour I've read confirm this (Metz, K. S., Gabriel, R. A.: From Sumer to Rome: The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies, New York, 1991, p. 72-73).<br>
I think that the main effect of the Parthian rain of arrows at Carrhae was the wounding (but only sometimes killing) of legionaries and the huge decrease of morale of these men. The fact that the legionaries couldn't catch the Parthians to fight them and that the cataphracts were always near and ready to exploit any mistake of the Romans even enhanced their helplessness. I don't think Crassus could have won the battle, but I think he could retreat without extremely heavy losses and save his life.<br>
Greetings<br>
Alexandr <p></p><i></i>
<br>
Hi,<br>
as I've argued earlier, I think, we could assume that the Roman shields and armour could resist against the Parthian arrows pretty well. In fact 20 000 casualties of 100 000 shots would be a fantastic percentage. However as you already noted, 10 arrows for one archer seems a rather low number. We must also keep in mind that a significant number (and I would perhaps even say a major number) of casualties happened during the chaotic and disordered retreat of the next day, when the Roman army split up and thus became almost defenceless against the pursuing Parthians (the wounded were left behind and, if I recall correctly, slaughtered by the Parthians).<br>
I've also find a relevant story in Caesar. During the battles at Dyrrhachium (48 BC) a garrison of one fortress faced a fierce attack with heavy missile support. All men in the fortress were wounded, but there were wery low fatalities. In the shield of the centurion Scaeva they found 120 holes from arrows. The centurion survived and was promoted and donated by 200 000 sesterces by Caesar (Caes. B.C III.53).<br>
From our sources it really doesn't seem that the composite bow could penetrate shield and armour and disable the man behind on a permanent basis. And the tests of these weapons and armour I've read confirm this (Metz, K. S., Gabriel, R. A.: From Sumer to Rome: The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies, New York, 1991, p. 72-73).<br>
I think that the main effect of the Parthian rain of arrows at Carrhae was the wounding (but only sometimes killing) of legionaries and the huge decrease of morale of these men. The fact that the legionaries couldn't catch the Parthians to fight them and that the cataphracts were always near and ready to exploit any mistake of the Romans even enhanced their helplessness. I don't think Crassus could have won the battle, but I think he could retreat without extremely heavy losses and save his life.<br>
Greetings<br>
Alexandr <p></p><i></i>
