Tired of seeing crossbows in association with Julian in Ammianus.

[Black_Francis]

Hello there,

 

I just thought I would bring up something that bothers me greatly. In a whole bunch of places on the internet (scroll down to the bottom of = http://www.comitatus.net/cavalry.htm ) and in casual discussion the use of crossbows by Roman infantry escorting Julian is often brought up. It is this instance of "crossbow armed Romans escorting a Roman Emperor" that is constantly regurgitated. However, I find myself increasingly having to point out the correct context:

 

"....a short cut but was dangerous because it lay through dark woods.... To avoid delay he took with him only cuirassiers (Cataphractarii/Clibinarii) and artillerymen (Balistarii), an inadequate escort for a commander, and reached Auxerre by Silvanus' route." Ammianus Marcellinus XVI, II, Penguin edition, translated by Walter Hamilton 1986.

 

I mean heavy cavalry and artillery in a forest! I think the point Ammianus is trying to make is clear enough.

 

I just have to say:

Caption:

Use of the Roman crossbow (arcuballista) from horseback. Note how it can be reloaded by hand using the pressure of the saddle. Emperor Julian was on one ocassion escorted by ballistarii; rather than being catapult operators, they may well have been mounted crossbowmen, such as this.

O'RLY?

 

I am not trying to debate the use of the crossbow in the late Roman army, my point is to simply dissassociate the idea of crossbow armed infantry escorting Julian in this particular passage.

 

On an additional note, does anybody know where the idea of crossbow armed Bucellarii comes from?

Edited June 26, 2007 by Black_Francis

[longbow]

Infantry could carry the Manuballista easy enough,why dont you think its possible to use them in a forest?

 

L

[Black_Francis]

Infantry could carry the Manuballista easy enough,why dont you think its possible to use them in a forest?

 

L

I don't think that is is impossible to use them in a forest at all.

 

My point is that I don't think Ammianus was referring to cheiroballistra/manuballista or any other form of "crossbow" which is how the passage in question is often interpreted. The point he is making is that Julian is being accompanied by a wholly inappropriate escort of heavy cavalry and artillery. I believe he further emphasises this point by the use of the words "dangerous" and "dark woods" implying danger/menace and being difficult to traverse. This helps to further convey how inappropriate/insufficient/unable to repel an attack the escort was.

 

He uses the words:

dangerous+dark woods+inadequate escort for a commander. Combine this with heavy cavalry and artillery and I think the picture is clear enough.

 

I don't think he is simply describing the escort Julian had as it would be of no real consequence. What he is trying to convey is Julians somewhat daredevil and rash urge to follow Silvanus. Indeed Ammianus even describes Julian as being "on fire to imitate the example of this bold general (Silvanus)." in the same passage.

 

sed cum subsererent quidam Silvanum paulo ante magistrum peditum per conpendiosas vias, verum suspectas quia tenebris multis umbrantur, cum octo auxiliarium milibus aegre transisse, fidentius Caesar audaciam viri fortis imitari magnopere nitebatur.

 

5. et nequa interveniat mora, adhibitis cataphractariis solis et ballistariis parum ad tuendum rectorem idoneis percurso eodem itinere Autosiodorum pervenit.

 

Penguin:

When, however, some added that Silavanus, recently master of infantry, had with considerable difficulty taken 8000 auxiliary troops by a way which provided a short-cut but was dangerous because it lay through dark woods, the Caesar was on fire to imitate the example of this bold general. To avoid delay he took with him only cuirassiers and artillerymen, an inadequate escort for a commander, and reached Auxerre by Silvanus' route.

Edited June 26, 2007 by Black_Francis

[caldrail]

Infantry could carry the Manuballista easy enough,why dont you think its possible to use them in a forest?

 

L

 

Its the limited line of sight, short range of target acquisition, and suddenness of action in forest terrain that makes these things awkward (not impossible) to use. Of course, in a clearing its a different matter provided the enemy is on the other side, but generally, a forest trail is not the perfect terrain for ballistas.

[philosalexandros]

why did he take artillerymen?

[longbow]

ts the limited line of sight, short range of target acquisition, and suddenness of action in forest terrain that makes these things awkward (not impossible) to use. Of course, in a clearing its a different matter provided the enemy is on the other side, but generally, a forest trail is not the perfect terrain for ballistas.

 

I understand that Caldrail but speaking from experience of shooting Longbows,Recurve's and Crossbows in dense Forest i would say the Crossbow was the easiest to use, but obviously the downside is the reload time.If your going to use any type of Artillery in those conditions the Manuballista is as good as anything else,except maybe a Indian ambush Bow no bigger than 50" Nock to Nock but i dont think they had any of those .

This Deen (we call woods deens were i live) is were i learned to shoot (Poach ),its quite dense in the thick bits and allmost impossible to use a ELB (mines 76") its easier with a shorter recurve but i found a Crossbow to be easiest.

Not that i'd use a crossbow through choice,nasty weapon what has no class...

 

 

L

Edited June 27, 2007 by longbow