Slingers

[sunjester]

Just read an interesting article in the July Edition of Current Archaeology, concerning the Iron Age fort and Roman camps at Burnswick in Scotland, and the large numbers of Roman missiles, ballista stones and bolts, arrowheads and lead sling bullets. Especially hundreds of the latter, which come in three different styles. The largest were lemon-shaped and weighed about 50g, the were slightly smaller acorn-shaped bullets and a much smaller lemon-shaped style with a mysterious hole through them.

During a ballistic assessment using replicas of the different bullets an couple of interesting facts were revealed. The larger 50g bullets would easily reach 200m on a low-trajectory shot (i.e. a more accurate aimed shot) and much further if "lobbed" overhead. This would give Roman slingers an equivalent range to the English longbow (modern tests using war arrows seem to average out at 200m effective range with a maximum range between 300-400m). Other tests have shown that the heavy lead slingshot impact with only slightly less kinetic energy than a round from a .44  magnum revolver. The 20g bullets were just as interesting as it was found that they could be slung in groups of 3 or 4 like a form of grapeshot. Also the little holes  created a whistling or buzzing noise in flight, probably for a form of psychological warfare.

So there is a case for slingers having a greater range than most short bows, cause more damage from a greater impact and having a negative morale effect on the target!

You can see an extract from the article, and hear the slingshot buzzing in tests, here http://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/features/burnswark.htm

I'm considering getting some slingers for my Romans now!

Cheers,
Graham

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Romans were full of evil tricks like that!

Flaming pigs, Corvus ramps, all that jazz...
My favourite is evidence that they used to grow brambles up the side banks of forts, rooted in the 'leg breaker' in the trench. Not only would it make accessing the fort really difficult, it would have provided a ready supply of tasty berries come the Autumn!

[Ithoriel]

Even that doyen of close combat, the Roman Legionary was trained to use a sling, according to Vegetius.

It says something about the effectiveness of slings, bows and other missile weapons that they decided that closing rapidly with the enemy and sticking him with something sharp was still preferable to trying to gun them down with massed sling fire.

I believe Pompey's men were so badly affected by Caesar's slingers that they constructed wooden spaced armour for their helmets to lessen the effect.

So much we don't really know about the use and effectiveness of ancient weapons, hats off to the archaeologists, historians and re-enactors giving us at least educated guesses about it all.

[barbarian]

It says something about the effectiveness of slings, bows and other missile weapons that they decided that closing rapidly with the enemy and sticking him with something sharp was still preferable to trying to gun them down with massed sling fire.

Could mean one thing or the opposite.

[fsn]

I can understand the use of slings - cheap and (I believe) reasonably accurate. Easy to carry a lot of ammunition, and if pushed you can sometimes pick up more from a handy stream bed.

I can understand the use of bows. Sexy, pointy sharpy ouchy arrows. Get through armour better than a slingshot.

Javelins? Why on earth would anyone arm troops with two throwing spears? Short range. OK, they pack a punch, but I'd rather field archers or slingers. Only use for javelinmen would be against slow moving heavy infantry without their own missile weapons. 

[Ithoriel]

Javelins work in the rain, bows don't. Which is presumably why bows are more prevalent in areas with low rainfall for most periods.

There are images from the Bronze Age of men fighting with two, three, four or more arrows in them so self bows, at least, look to be less than certainly lethal.

Javelins are sharp and pointy, so if you close with an enemy with a bow or sling you are at a certain advantage.

I suspect that sling, bow and javelin all had advantages in certain circumstances which is why all three remain in use for so long.

[FierceKitty]

Javelins were often preferred in forests, bows on mountains. This makes sense, really. Arrows would be stopped by relatively light vegetation, and their range wouldn't be much use in terrain which reduced visibility. The point is often made too that you could retain one of your javelins (I take it this isn't about pila, which were a very different creature) as a stabbing weapon. And finally, textile defenses might often stop an arrow, but would be useless against a javelin.
Slings - don't need to penetrate armour to concuss or fracture, and the shot is invisible in flight (so you don't have a chance to raise your shield); and rain wouldn't handicap a slinger that much. The Conquistadors were pretty contemptuous of all other Aztec weapons, but feared their slings, and even in the nineteenth century an English officer observed that Pacific islanders could use a sling as dangerously as a musket. Main disadvantage is that in close formation slingers would be in danger of knocking each other's teeth out.