Weapons

[military]

there were so many different weapons in the ancient roman times. which one was your favorite? mine is the ballista/catapult. amazing how smart they were, isn't it?

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

I don't have any but I think the pilum is kinda cool because it was really powerful and it had a pyschological effect with the little hole at the bottom of the spear that make that really scary noise that something is coming at you.

Edited December 6, 2005 by FLavius Valerius Constantinus

[Lost_Warrior]

My favorite would have to be the trusty gladius

[Pantagathus]

My favorite would have to be the trusty gladius

 

Mine would be another legacy weapon of the Iberians... The Falcata

 

A sword with the power of an axe. Could cut a shield or render a helmet useless... For offensive combat, a short gladius in the left hand and a falcata in the right was hard to match. Render the shield useless with a blow from the falcata and thrust in with the gladius... :pimp:

[Lost_Warrior]

lol I need a shield of some variety because my left hand really isn't useful with a sword.

[eggers]

without sounding boring, probably the spear.

 

It is the oldest, and most wide-spread form of weapon and is very flexible. U can have long spears to use in a phalanx, or flag pole/standard, add an axe head on there and u get a halberd. Make it lighter and u get a javelin, or (with few mods) a pilum. Give it to a horseman and u end up with a lance. Add a sword blade to it and u get a Naginata. U can have smaller spears for use with one hand, or heavy long spears for use in 2 hands.

 

They are the best weapon for cavalry (melee weapon, not including guns, bows etc). It is very easy and cheap to make compared to other such weapons like a medevil sword. Most of all they are still in use in the military today. A bayonet on a rifle makes a spear that can shoot. Don't believe me, do some research, and u'll find out that thats where bayonets came from, to protect musketmen from cavalry charge, as spears have done (mostly) in ages past. They are easy to use, as re-anactments have shown that random people have been taught to use a spear and form a sheild wall in about a week, or 2 part-time training.

Edited December 6, 2005 by eggers

[Hadrian Caesar]

Well, I suppose aren't entirely incorrect, but it all depends on the warrior's style of warfare. And anyway, although the spear does keep the enemy at a distance, the man holding it becomes totaly vulnerable once the enemy gets past its point. This disadvantage was made up for by the creation of formations such as the phalanx, which truly is unbeatable by any other infantry...that is, except by the roman legion and its waves of pila(see my text on the topic: phalanx vs. legion).

 

None can argue over the pilum; it's the perfect infantry throwing spear. First of all, a wave of these deadly weapons usually kills its targets. And, if not, if it simply penetrates the shield, its barbed head renders it impossible to remove, thereby obliging the infantryman to drop his shield. But that's not what makes the pilum so unique and effective; if it hits the ground, its long, slender soft iron shaft bends, making it impossible to throw back at the roman lines. So either way, the enemy infantry has the disadvantage.

Edited December 7, 2005 by Hadrian Caesar

[Pertinax]

shield-for offence and defence, gladius, and a mace on the belt for after hours close quarter work (skulls,ribs etc).

[eggers]

Well, I suppose aren't entirely incorrect, but it all depends on the warrior's style of warfare. And anyway, although the spear does keep the enemy at a distance, the man holding it becomes totaly vulnerable once the enemy gets past its point. This disadvantage was made up for by the creation of formations such as the phalanx, which truly is unbeatable by any other infantry...that is, except by the roman legion and its waves of pila(see my text on the topic: phalanx vs. legion).

 

Well the romans, and the gauls when they leveled an roman army and sacked rome. This in turn caused the romans to adopt the maniple system of warfare. Maybe spear was a bit ambigous, after all if u modify any weapon past a threshold it'll become another weapon entirely. Tough cookie now i think about it.

 

Bugger it, i'll stick with the spear at the moment. After all, in early republican army, if a roman solider lost his spear it was considered a huge dis-honour, and the chinese once called the spear the king of weapons. I'll stick with spear because of the sentimental value that many cultures placed on it.

Edited December 7, 2005 by eggers

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

Well losing your spear was better than losing your shield, because then, people would definitely know you've fled from battle since its so heavy to carry while you're retreating. What I mentioned was a somewhat motto for the Spartans, their mothers would no longer regard them as her son if he didn't bring back his shield.

[eggers]

Well losing your spear was better than losing your shield, because then, people would definitely know you've fled from battle since its so heavy to carry while you're retreating. What I mentioned was a somewhat motto for the Spartans, their mothers would no longer regard them as her son if he didn't bring back his shield.

very true, "come home with this shield or upon it" is supposed a well known phrase that a spartan mother said to her son.

And true the shield has had alot of changes in design etc, but its not really a weapon. Though in medievil germany, they did add spikes to the bottom and top of shield and had to duel it out, using only those shields. And if u hit or pushed someone with it, it probably would do a bit of damage anyway, but i still wouldn't class it as a weapon. So in the favourite weapon thread i would have to say a shield is

[Jimbow]

the shield has had alot of changes in design etc, but its not really a weapon. Though in medievil germany, they did add spikes to the bottom and top of shield and had to duel it out, using only those shields. And if u hit or pushed someone with it, it probably would do a bit of damage anyway, but i still wouldn't class it as a weapon. So in the favourite weapon thread i would have to say a shield is

Have to disagree with you there I'm afraid In the hands of a Roman soldier it most definitely was used as a weapon to hit the enemy, using the boss to punch with, and the edges to smack on an enemy's foot or up into his chin to make him falter or lose balance. Search around for reenactor accounts of its use in this way.

 

Jim.

Edited December 7, 2005 by Jimbow

[Hadrian Caesar]

Well, I suppose aren't entirely incorrect, but it all depends on the warrior's style of warfare. And anyway, although the spear does keep the enemy at a distance, the man holding it becomes totaly vulnerable once the enemy gets past its point. This disadvantage was made up for by the creation of formations such as the phalanx, which truly is unbeatable by any other infantry...that is, except by the roman legion and its waves of pila(see my text on the topic: phalanx vs. legion).

 

Well the romans, and the gauls when they leveled an roman army and sacked rome. This in turn caused the romans to adopt the maniple system of warfare. Maybe spear was a bit ambigous, after all if u modify any weapon past a threshold it'll become another weapon entirely. Tough cookie now i think about it.

 

Bugger it, i'll stick with the spear at the moment. After all, in early republican army, if a roman solider lost his spear it was considered a huge dis-honour, and the chinese once called the spear the king of weapons. I'll stick with spear because of the sentimental value that many cultures placed on it.

 

Yes, but the formations of Chinese infantry never faced the Romans and their pila, did they?

 

the shield has had alot of changes in design etc, but its not really a weapon. Though in medievil germany, they did add spikes to the bottom and top of shield and had to duel it out, using only those shields. And if u hit or pushed someone with it, it probably would do a bit of damage anyway, but i still wouldn't class it as a weapon. So in the favourite weapon thread i would have to say a shield is

Have to disagree with you there I'm afraid In the hands of a Roman soldier it most definitely was used as a weapon to hit the enemy, using the boss to punch with, and the edges to smack on an enemy's foot or up into his chin to make him falter or lose balance. Search around for reenactor accounts of its use in this way.

 

Jim.

Quite true.

[Pertinax]

or watch Pullo training Octavian

[eggers]

Have to disagree with you there I'm afraid In the hands of a Roman soldier it most definitely was used as a weapon to hit the enemy, using the boss to punch with, and the edges to smack on an enemy's foot or up into his chin to make him falter or lose balance. Search around for reenactor accounts of its use in this way.

 

Jim.

 

thanks for the heads-up. I'll look into shield tactics abit more. I know that the spainish devised a shield so small, it was barely bigger then a clinched fists, used but troops trained to get inbetween a phalanx's pikes and could deliver a nasty punch, if used that way. But i still thinking (at the moment) that thats not the shields' primary function. Afterall if we are including anything which can be a weapon, then anything can count as a weapon, pens, keys, bread-knife and it makes the whole thing a lot more complicated.

After all, discipine, ideaology and leadership can all be counted as weapons if u stretch the concept far enough.

Alitte of topic i know, but i'm just sayin i choose spear on it's primary function, and although the shield can be nasty in the right hands (or wrong hands, depending on how u look at it), it's not primarily a weapon. Or am i alone on this one?

 

Yes, but the formations of Chinese infantry never faced the Romans and their pila, did they?

True but they did face their fair share of quality bad guys too. Romans aren't the only empire to include highly quality troopers