Pilum effects on Phalanx?

[Bryan]

:evil: Pilum Fail

[Bryan]

Pilum Fail

[Mark Hygate]

And none of those show the 'real' effect of the first 2 or 3 ranks of pila volleys from a cohort of legionnaires facing the wild charge of 1,000 hairy and incensed 'barbari'.

No test will be remotely realistic until there is the likelihood that anyone will die - it's not going to happen.

I used to throw javelin at county standard whilst at school too. The sport javelins are only superficially similar to hunting/killing light javelins and not at all like pila. In addition sport javelin is not concerned with accuracy, but simply range coupled with the need to make a mark upon the ground. I strongly suspect that roman soldiers were taught to throw from a standing start and with no run up - an exception being those with the lighter javelins (lancea?) who fought in more open order in the skirmishing style.

Considering the OP - I suspect that a volley of pila was of only relatively minor effect on a pike phalanx - that's not how the Romans fought them. The entire reason for the manipular system was to enable tactical flexibility and aimed at disrupting the tight and linear phalanx so that the legionnaires could break them apart, get past the pikes and engage with shield and stabbing sword. They had learned as much from their Greek forebears who had spent many decades reviewing the push and shove of opposing phalanxes that seemed to rely more on stamina. Let alone that the tactics were also effective against the Celtic barbari too.

[wolle1301]

Thorsten,

Also, exactly how high of an arc do you think pilum were thrown at? My guess, the max a man would attempt is about 45 degrees. Any higher and you lose distance and force.

The front ranks have the shields. However they are most vulnerable, But you should forget that the missiles direct at the phalanx would not be aimed too well. It is more the mass that makes it count. The same angles apply for bows and other missiles. Please set up a bunch of sticks in you yard and throw something into it. You will see how the dense "forest" will deflect most missiles.

How would you throw a 5-7 ft long pilum underhanded with any sort of force? Is there any evidence that anyone ever threw a javelin underhanded?

Why does underhand throwing decrease the force ? Did you know that softballs are bigger than baseballs and have more speed ? So how does underhand throwing limit the force?
There are mostly no underhand throws to raise the point of exit for the spear and gain distance with it.

Is there any explicit evidence of upperhand throwing of pila ?

At Berkamen we threw pila to skid on the ground. It works -sadly we did not make any videos.

[Bryan]

Thorsten wrote:

But you should forget that the missiles direct at the phalanx would not be aimed too well. It is more the mass that makes it count.

What makes you think that? Missile weapons can be exceptionally accurate. Spending many years doing practicing daily would make it even easier. Every ancient civilization placed an importance on accuracy with missile weapons. Numidians, Romans, Balearic islanders. Why would they not be accurate? These aren't unrifled muskets fired through a cloud of dense smoke. These are javelins, slings and bows held by men who since birth have used them to hunt, practice with, kill men with. Yet they couldn't hit an individual target?

Why does underhand throwing decrease the force ? Did you know that softballs are bigger than baseballs and have more speed ? So how does underhand throwing limit the force?

I am not a physicist or physiologist but my understanding is that the overarm motion is more powerful due the the use of the back muscles (more dense than chest). Also, according to wiki, the fastest underarm softball pitch (by a woman) is 89 MPH. The fastest baseball (overhand by male with a smaller ball) is 105 MPH. Yet both can hit a catcher's mitt at will, which is smaller than a shield (about the same size as a helmet, though).

My personal opinion: The pila didn't affect the phalanx all that much because the men in the front ranks were armored and because they were a professional warriors and wont stop quit and bitch out just because they got struck with a javelin (or sling bullet or arrow). Wounds are to be expected in battle if you are warrior. Like the old saying goes, chicks dig scars and glory lasts forever. And Gods forbit, if they did receive a debilitating wound, someone else would quickly take their place, no doubt helped by the many hours of drill that the men of the Macedonian phalanx were put through.

At Berkamen we threw pila to skid on the ground. It works -sadly we did not make any videos.

You could get pila to skip at will? or was this accidental or occasional? Every depiction of javelin throwing from the ancient world I saw was done in an overhand manner. Please provide a source for underhanded throws (not plumbata, that's a whole different ball game).

[M. Demetrius]

My personal opinion: The pila didn't affect the phalanx all that much because the men in the front ranks were armored and because they were a professional warriors and wont stop quit and bitch out just because they got struck with a javelin (or sling bullet or arrow).

A pilum that weighs around a kilo, with it's tip being about 1/4 mm, flying through the air after having been thrown by another professional warrior is not really something someone could overlook. It's pretty certain that if it hit any unarmored part of the body, it would penetrate quite easily. And the shock at the end of the shaft, when the wood part stopped its forward momentum would knock most people off their feet. It doesn't matter how tough the warrior is, a punctured lung, abdomen or neck will take him out of the fight.

BTW, Eddie Feigner, of "King and his court" fame, is recorded as pitching a softball 104 or 105mph. Underhand.

[wolle1301]

Thorsten wrote:

But you should forget that the missiles direct at the phalanx would not be aimed too well. It is more the mass that makes it count.

What makes you think that? Missile weapons can be exceptionally accurate. Spending many years doing practicing daily would make it even easier. Every ancient civilization placed an importance on accuracy with missile weapons. Numidians, Romans, Balearic islanders. Why would they not be accurate? These aren't unrifled muskets fired through a cloud of dense smoke. These are javelins, slings and bows held by men who since birth have used them to hunt, practice with, kill men with. Yet they couldn't hit an individual target?

I did not mean, that they could not. It however does make sense to pick out individuals, if you can simply fire into the dense mass. Throwing just at the formations allows to increase the speed and make the possibility higher, that one or the other shield cannot be blocked by the soldiers on the outside, but goes through.

You could get pila to skip at will? or was this accidental or occasional? Every depiction of javelin throwing from the ancient world I saw was done in an overhand manner. Please provide a source for underhanded throws (not plumbata, that's a whole different ball game).

As I stated, I did not see any depiction, where I can explicitly make out a "throwing". Therefore I cannot provide you with such a depiction. However where is your proof of the throwing ?
The first time it happened the skid happend accidentally while playing "spear-boule". We then tried to train it and it works maybe 3 out of 5, depending on the structure of the ground and if you hit a wave in the ground. However the skiding is not the right idea behind it. It is more a throw with a low flying curve aimed at legs or feet instead of the shield-protected part of the body.

[Bryan]

M. Demetrius wrote

It doesn't matter how tough the warrior is, a punctured lung, abdomen or neck will take him out of the fight.

And yet history, ancient, modern or otherwise, is full of examples of warriors that shrug off wounds and continue fighting.

The men we discuss in this forum came from warrior cultures. They were tough people, tougher than us in so many ways, and they didn't think the same as we do about things like medicine, war and killing. A scar was an honor to have, to show off in public. A wound was a wound, if it didn't kill you right away, a warrior ignores the pain and continues fighting. Back then they called it virtus by the Romans. I have no idea what the Greeks called it but some of you may know. Now they call it the "Warrior Mindset" or the "Combat Mindset." But its all basically the same though.

So, you get pierced by a javelin. It knocks you back. You pull it out and see blood oozing out of the wound. You're light headed. The pain is excruciating. But you can still stand. You can still breath and see. So you bite your lip, grab your weapon and you get back into the fight. Your reputation is on the line, Your brothers need you, the battle is not won yet. Besides, its better to die on your feet as a man than on your back being cared for by a slave, etc. You're not out of the fight if you're still alive.

I recommend anyone interested in warfare to study the psychological effects of combat and how men how overcome them. There are lots of books out there about the subject. Its not all armor, weapons and tactics...

"There are only two forces in the world, the sword and the spirit. In the long run the sword will always be conquered by the spirit." Napoleon

[M. Demetrius]

Surely you don't deny the debilitating effect of mortal wounds? Ancient battles had many fatalities, and many wounded warriors who were dispatched summarily by the victors. The human body has limiits. Getting a lung full of blood takes even the best warrior right out of the fight. Shock and exsanguination will win out when the adrenalin is used up, or even before. Medical fact.

[Bryan]

I wrote a nice long post but like six times before this week, my post disappeared. So I will make this brief.

Just because you are wounded, does not take you out of the fight. The warrior mentality is about overcoming fear and pain. If it doesn't kill you, you pick up your weapon and continue fighting. The battle isn't over, your brothers are still fighting, so you stay too.

History is full of examples of warriors with mortal, painful and debilitating wounds who continue on, against the odds. Why? Because they are warriors and that is what is expected of them. Just because you are hit, doesn't mean the fight is over with.

"There are only two forces in the world, the sword and the spirit. In the long run the sword will always be conquered by the spirit.'
Napoleon

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I heard Godfrey I of Leueven supposedly fought through the rest of a battle after taking an arrow through the testicle. Dunno if its true, never bothered to look it up.

[M. Demetrius]

The warrior mentality is about overcoming fear and pain.

Body mechanics will overcome resolve. No matter how determined one may be, a broken leg means you can not run. A severed carotid means you will bleed out in a few seconds.

[Bryan]

Body mechanics will overcome resolve. No matter how determined one may be, a broken leg means you can not run. A severed carotid means you will bleed out in a few seconds.

So every wound from a javelin, sword or anything else is going to result in a pierced lung, an arterial bleed or a broken and shattered bone? In other words, an instantly debilitating wound? I think you need to study up on the physiology of wounds and human anatomy. Humans are a lot tougher than you think. I am not saying someone with a pierced aorta is going to fight on. But not every wound is serious. At least not right away. With a stomach wound you can survive for days, albeit in pain. But pain can be overcome.

Body mechanics will overcome resolve

A broken leg does not mean everyone can not run, it means YOU wont. Others might, try at least. Here are just a few modern examples of athletes who continued on playing with injuries. They continued on...for a game.
Athletes Who Played Hurt

Imagine what your resolve can be if your reputation and honor, the lives of your friends, the future of your nation/kingdom, etc. were at stake? If you lose, your whole family might be killed or enslaved. (kind of like what happened after Pydna, right?) To me, that's pretty good motivation to ignore a wound that isn't INSTANTLY debilitating. You fight until you are completely physically unable to fight any longer. If you quit before that, then you are a quitter and a malingerer.

I remember reading a passage about a Roman soldier at Cannae who had lost the use of both his arms from wounds. So he chewed the nose off of an enemy Numidian soldier.

Also, according to Caesar, the centurion Marcus Cassius Scaeva took an arrow to the eye. Oh My God, his eye has been pierced by an arrow. Surely he must retire and quit the day, an arrow to the eye is a too much to continue, right? No, he pulls the arrow out (with eye attached to tip) and grinds it with boot and keeps fighting.

[M. Demetrius]

So every wound from a javelin, sword or anything else is going to result in a pierced lung, an arterial bleed or a broken and shattered bone?

No, sir, and I didn't say that. Some wounds from any kind of weapon could be ignored, or quickly bandaged (depending on the immediate situation). Others would be more serious and would require medical attention, if available. Some would be mortal.

Your posts below seem to indicate that you believe the Real Warrior would ignore all penetrating wounds from a pilum. That, and its lookalike, the soliferrum, would easily penetrate all the way through a body. It may not be all that easy to "pull it out and go on". I've never had that experience (have you?) and never want to. Yes, one might survive, if infection didn't set it, if the intestine was not cut--peritonitis--if the internal bleeding could be stopped, etc., etc.

A broken leg does not mean everyone can not run, it means YOU wont. Others might, try at least.

Hmm. Didn't see any broken femurs in that athlete list. A torn ACL or strained hamstring or badly sprained ankle is one thing. People can do extraordinary things in time of need, no doubt about it. The human body (and other bodies) are remarkably well designed and very resilient. And many people have been recorded as having performed amazing feats of all sorts of heroics after various injuries. What I'm protesting is the apparent statement that the ancient warrior will carry on in spite of being wounded. It just depends. Some might not, some might.

I don't know what I would do in such a situation, and neither would anybody else until put in it. Let's not descend to ad hominem here. Most modern combat doesn't require standing toe to toe and slugging it out with sword and shield. A broken leg might be just a minor distraction until one had to change location. I think I could still hit a slow-moving human sized target from 150-200m with a scoped .223, if I could keep my hands steady enough through the pain; at less than 75m, he's history, pain or not. But that's another story.

And the two Romans, well, I don't suspect the nose-chewer lasted long after that if there were any other Numidians in the immediate area. He would be easy pickings, if this anecdote happened. And it's clear enough that the arrow did not penetrate the back of the eye socket into the brain, isn't it? Gotta give Cassius high marks for grit, though!

[Bryan]

M. Demetrius,

Sorry if I came across as confrontational. I'm not trying to attack you personally. When I was referring to you, I was referring to mindset, which is probably the most important quality a warrior/soldier can possess. To me, when discussing why the ancients fought a specific way, it must be taken into account that they were from warrior cultures and didn't think the same most people do today. They believed truly in glory, the greatness of warfare and the will of the Gods. So to understand the mindset of the people, you have to understand the warrior mindset, which still exists today in military organizations, police and fire departments and athletic clubs and teams. Part of which is the "Never say die" and "Never quit" attitude. When I wrote A broken leg does not mean everyone can not run, it means YOU wont. Others might, try at least., I meant that if a person reading that line has a mindset of "Uh oh, I've been wounded, time to fall out of the formation to get treated", then that person has no business being in the front ranks of a fighting unit. At least with that mindset. I meant no offense to you personally.

Your posts below seem to indicate that you believe the Real Warrior would ignore all penetrating wounds from a pilum. That, and its lookalike, the soliferrum, would easily penetrate all the way through a body. It may not be all that easy to "pull it out and go on". I've never had that experience (have you?) and never want to. Yes, one might survive, if infection didn't set it, if the intestine was not cut--peritonitis--if the internal bleeding could be stopped, etc., etc.

I'm just trying to point out that just because someone is wounded, doesn't mean they will choose to stop fighting. The pilum and soliferrum were deadly weapons, sure. I won't discount that. They were probably instantly debilitating if they pierced your center torso. However, a professional warrior (especially those chosen to fight in the front ranks of any army, a highly sought after position) would probably ignore any wound that wasn't instantly debilitating. A professional soldier, who fights for a living, would be able to judge the effects of wounds. So if they take a javelin through the guts, they pretty much know they will die. If they can stand the pain, why not continue fighting? They probably won't last the whole battle, but they can last a little longer. Think of the stories they will tell of that man after the battle, how he yanked a pilum out of his belly and pushed forward, killing three Romans before he finally fell to a dozen other wounds...

I have some experience with actual warfare and can testify that the warrior mentality is huge in the military. Do I believe it all? Would I choose to go Hand to hand? No thanks. Like you, I'd feel a little more comfortable doing my killing with a rifle, machine gun or grenade launcher. But the ancients didn't have the luxury of a scoped .223 or a machine gun. They had a pilum for distance and good old cold steel and grit for close up. It must have been glorious to watch...man, I want a time machine.