Volley Fire by Ancient Missile Troops

[Eleatic Guest]

Musket volley fire was introduced by the Dutch rebels in the late 16th century in their fight against the Royal Spanish Army of Flanders and its tercios and the tactics spread gradually to other European armies. The great tactical advantadge of volley fire over individually timed shooting is that it creates a 'death corridor' which pushes back the advancing army. Ideally, the next row of musketmen would be in a position to shoot at the moment the following enemy ranks reoccupy the lost ground and so on.

However, volley fire was not something new to warfare. Richard Lionheart and his crossbowmen, for example, employed these tactics very successfully against Saladin during the 3rd Crusade. Still, I am not aware of more examples and this seemed to be the exception from the rule. Medieval armies may not have been generally liable to the discipline and cold rationality which such tactics require.

But the practical and disciplined Romans were certainly in such a disposition of mind. Do we have any evidence of volley fire practiced by ancient armies?

[Robert Vermaat]

But the practical and disciplined Romans were certainly in such a disposition of mind. Do we have any evidence of volley fire practiced by ancient armies?

How about the throwing of the pilum into an advancing enemy? Not sure of the soure material though, but I suspect others will be able to help out.

Another would be a volley of axes perhaps?

[Eleatic Guest]

I would define a volley as a series of shots done simultaneously by a large body of missile troops. In this sense the throwing of the pilum does not seem to be volley fire, because all pila were thrown at once and only once-there was no rotation system.

[kazeryu]

I would have thought that the pilum was too short range to be very effective as a volley-weapon anyways (not that I've ever thrown one...). Seems like it would be more useful to break up the enemy line as they closed on the legion.

I say this because even if your volley takes 95% of the enemy out of action, that still leaves a few who are more determined than ever to close the distance and kill you, and a few swords/axes swinging amongst your neat lines of javelineers/slingers/archers/musketeers causes trouble in a hurry. So it would seem wise to have the "kill zone" be sufficiently far away that you can pick off the survivors.

So unless you are using a force multiplier like an atlatl, I would think you'd have to use some kind of bow for this tactic to be effective.

[ValentinianVictrix]

I think the effectiveness of missile fire, especially hand-hurled missles, during the Roman period has been greatly exaggerated. I remember reading an article a number of years ago on this very topic where the author looked at battles where specific numbers of killed and wounded were given and where missle fire between the opposing armies was mentioned. If I remember correctly the author suggested that very few casualties were inflicted by missile fire, in the main the casualties tended to happen when one army was routed and the victors slaughtered those running away. It appears the main effect of missile fire was psychological and used to break up the enemies ranks.

[Cerco 21]

This is quite interesting, how about auxilia Fundibularius?

Where the slinger units organized? Would they fire on command or at will?

[kazeryu]

If I remember correctly the author suggested that very few casualties were inflicted by missile fire, in the main the casualties tended to happen when one army was routed and the victors slaughtered those running away. It appears the main effect of missile fire was psychological and used to break up the enemies ranks.

I have heard of the former (most casaulties after the battle is already decided), but I would tend to disagree with the latter on one point -- Even if spears/arrows do not kill the enemy, they can be very annoying (or even heavy) when several of them are stuck in his shield or armour. A soldier may even be obliged to cast aside his shield completely if he cannot break or dislodge the shaft(s).

Obviously this doesn't apply to slings, and probably not to pila which are designed to have the head and shaft separate after throwing.

[Vindex]

I think you need to be more specific in your definition of volley fire or perhaps explain what you are trying to grasp more clearly.

Volley fire is a co-ordinated launch of any weapon.

OR

Volley fire is a single weapon firing as ordered until it's volley has completed; so for modern artillery for example, one or more guns firing a specified number of rounds and then stopping (Fire For Effect - FFE).

Are you perhaps just referring to volley fire by rank if you refer to muskets (although I'll admit to knowing nothing about the Dutch rebel engagement)? This leaves your line undisturbed but the impact of such a volley can leave a sizeable hole in any enemy. If you are is that a viable comparison/example in this instance? By the very nature of the manual launch of a spear (or slingers for that matter) you cannot do it in "serried ranks" ie one behind the other as the man in front of you has to get out of your way, and that's a serious disruption of your own line with dangerous gaps.

If, however, you have ranks of bowmen that would work as a second rank can fire over or in between a first rank and you could possibly stretch it to three ranks if the front knelt down. (You can of course have more if you have a fortification to fire from as well).

As for the effect - all stand off fire is disruptive in it's first tactical use, surely, and casualties are an added bonus.

And cue my FAVOURITE bit of volley fire...well, someone had to...please note volley orders. Volley fire as a general order (co-ordinated line of fire) and volley by rank. Speaks for itself...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmuYkYnxeBE

[rrgg]

I think you might also need to consider the fact that it's pretty taxing hold a strong war bow at full draw, which means you probably aren't going to have a situation like in the movies where everybody draws their bows and then waits for the order to fire.

[Gaius Colletti]

I would have thought that the pilum was too short range to be very effective as a volley-weapon anyways (not that I've ever thrown one...). Seems like it would be more useful to break up the enemy line as they closed on the legion.

Certainly the pilum is not a long range weapon like the bow or a scorpion, but certainly when say a 100 men, 500 men, 1000 men or 5000 men all at once throw their pilum into an advancing army, the entire first wave is left either dead, injured, or at least without a shield, with the remaining enemy troops left unscathed by the volley more than enough for your well disciplined troops to handle. It doesn't matter how pissed off they are, not letting your emotions get the best of you in the heat of battle is a tactic used by the Spartans, Romans, and even in the modern US army against the taliban and al-Queda, let your enemy try to be a hero and run into enemy fire, while you stand your ground

[M. Demetrius]

And usually, it is reported, Romans carried not one, but two pila. When the replacement ranks showed up, well, you can guess what was next.

[richard robinson]

Alexander was working on a block of archers (if I recall correctly) located within a phalanx when he got sick and died- not to be repeated until the nusketeer formation within a pike phalanx.

Richard

[Titus Marius Secundus]

Oh gosh, you got me on a Zulu rampage! I hate those noises the Zulu made! I love it when after most battles, there is no sound
I think a Roman pila is an acceptable example. With reserves it would seem a steady volley. Also, in the latter legions of the 3rd to late third century....didn't a legionary carry a short, weighted version of a pilum, with a different name. Usually carried about 7? more? less?

[ValentinianVictrix]

Acording to Vegetius, sometime during the 4th Century AD the Romans began replacing the pilum with a heavy thrusting spear called the Spiculum. This was roughly 6 feet long. The infantry were also said to carry a couple of shorter, 3.5 feet long javelins called Veruta. Diocletian raised two legiones, the Herculanii and Jovii, who were said to be the first to be also armed with five Martiobarbuli, also called Plumbata, that is lead weighted darts, these fitted behind the shield. It's not clear how wide spread the use of martiobarbuli was, Ammianus makes no specific mention of them in his history. Vegetius implies that the Later Roman legiones had a proportion of archers who presumably provided overhead fire support.

[Robert Vermaat]

Acording to Vegetius, sometime during the 4th Century AD the Romans began replacing the pilum with a heavy thrusting spear called the Spiculum. This was roughly 6 feet long. The infantry were also said to carry a couple of shorter, 3.5 feet long javelins called Veruta. Diocletian raised two legiones, the Herculanii and Jovii, who were said to be the first to be also armed with five Martiobarbuli, also called Plumbata, that is lead weighted darts, these fitted behind the shield. It's not clear how wide spread the use of martiobarbuli was, Ammianus makes no specific mention of them in his history. Vegetius implies that the Later Roman legiones had a proportion of archers who presumably provided overhead fire support.

@ Spiculum: not exactly a 'heavy thrusting spear'. With 5.5 ft length, it was not particularly long, and Vegetius describes it as a throwing weapon first. In fact, it may have been another word for the pilum, or perhaps a Latin name for the Germanic angon.
@ Martiobarbuli (Vegetius is almost certainly in error to call them Mattiobarbuli) or plumbatae, the spread of the martiobabulus or plumbata is largely limited to the Danube frontier. An exception is Britain with an unusual high number of finds, but moderate numbers have turned up from the Rhine through Switzerland and Austria, but Slovenia and Serbia represent the main region of finds. Three finds from Greece may well belong to the Archaic Period (6th-5th c. BC), and apart from 4 finds from the Caucasus, no finds are reported from Asia, and the same goes for Africa. That would explain the absence of plumbatae in Ammianus (although he uses generic words for his missiles), which until now is confirmed by research on cities like Amida and Dura Europos. Although the plumbata continued in used until at least the later 6th century (we know it from the Strategikon), that seems not have meant a use throughout the Empire.