Roman Artillery?

[longshotgene]

O.K. I know the Romans had the onager, the ballista and the scorpion, but did they have the trebuchet at the time? Did they ever have it towards the end of the empire? I watched the movie Attila last night, and could have sworn that he had trebuchets. I always thought those were more a middle ages siege machine?

[Julius Ratus]

They were more of a medieval seige weapon, than an ancient one. The Eastern Roman Empire (mighty Byzantium) did have knowllege of them from 539 AD on; they appeared in the Strategikon of Maurice.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trebuchet

[caldrail]

Notice that Onager, Ballista, and Scorpion are latin words. Trebuchet is french (although I expect the byzantines had another name for it).

[Pertinax]

Checking Wilkins

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Roman-Artillery-Sh...0171&sr=8-4

 

The "one talent" ie: 26.2 kg ballista is attested the largest in regular use by the legions.Described by Philon of Byzantium as the "most violent" stone thrower , he gave detailed triple vallation plans to keep this piece of kit from being deployed to positive effect in siege works. Caldrail makes mention of these units in another thread on combat stress. This piece of equipment is not only very large and destructive but a very finely engineered thing, requiring an eight man crew to operate it , with a one round per hour firing rate when actually re-constructed (the BBC commissioned Wilkins to do this!), I assume a combat crew might increase this rather lamentable rate.

[ASCLEPIADES]

Notice that Onager, Ballista, and Scorpion are latin words. Trebuchet is french (although I expect the byzantines had another name for it).

Salve!

 

From the same JR's link to en.wikipedia:

 

"The Strategikon of Emperor Maurice, composed in 539, calls for "ballistae revolving in both directions," ('Βαλλίςτρας έκατηρωθεν στρεφόμενας), probably traction trebuchets"

 

Phonetically, something like "Balistas Ecaterothen Strefomenas"

Edited September 19, 2007 by ASCLEPIADES

[caldrail]

We should also remember that roman artillery, whilst it was part of the imperial legions train, was also constructed on an ad hoc basis. We have Josephus describing some massive siege engines put together to attack Jerusalem which are far bigger than the standard items.

[Pertinax]

This might be of some interest here

http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?automo...si&img=1924

 

Here we have a copy of a front plate from a scorpion.The original was found in a grave outside the walls of Cremona with various remains including three damaged skulls (possibly the crew).Likely to be from the clash between Vitellius and Vespasian recorded by Tacitus i(n Histories III).

 

Here are the heads of the torsion units:

http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?automo...si&img=1925

the materials are as near as possible to the original , but beaten sinew is not a modern industry. The brasswork is faithful to the original.

 

The full machine:

http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?automo...si&img=1926

[CiceroD]

Where were carroballistae and other Artillery pieces placed in battle order? (usually)

[longshotgene]

Surely the Romans would have had the ability to build bigger and larger things. If what Josephus describe was true, then they had this ability. I guess it probably came down to the fact that Rome was not as big on siege equipment as was countries were in the middle ages.

[Pertinax]

At Masada (AD 73) Wilkins enumerates seven sizes of stone projectile the 2, 4, 8. 16, 40 , 60 and 80 librae calibre .It is mentioned that to extend range on ocassions 4 librae machines were operated with 2 librae shot , 16 shot 8 and so on .However one talent ammo has been found at the top of the fortress, and even at a range of 168 meters , although somewhat "weakened" the impact would be huge.Wilkins also mentions that Vitruvius had improved on the basic hellenistic ballista design by using improved washers and spring frames,(essentially allowing more spring-cord to fitted to a machine).It appears then a Vitruvian "improved" one talent unit inclined at 50 degrees and maybe 200 meteres away could strike the upper works with force.

[caldrail]

Where were carroballistae and other Artillery pieces placed in battle order? (usually)

 

Difficult to say, and we should remember that these artillery pieces were intended as siege weapons primarily. On the battlefield, they were usually immobile, which suggests a defensive battle is the best form of deployment and then on higher ground with infantry cover and support. The battlefield is a dynamic place so the utility of these weapons is limited, and the cases where we know they were used is almost invariably against an enemy position. In fact, I can't think of any case where roman artillery was used openly on the battlefield.

[longshotgene]

Now I like most people realize that the movie 'Gladiator' was mostly fictitious. However, in the opening battle scene I find it interesting that they used the catapults for infantry assault. Was this part accurate at all?

[Pertinax]

Now I like most people realize that the movie 'Gladiator' was mostly fictitious. However, in the opening battle scene I find it interesting that they used the catapults for infantry assault. Was this part accurate at all?

The late John Davis of LEG II AVG (Architectus to that Legion, hence "head of artillery") was at pains to debunk the scorpions as portrayed in the film, he stressed the role of the weapon as an "area denial ordnance delivery system" , ie: tactical re-shaping of the battlefield rather than direct assault.Here is the great man (in raffish auxilliary gear) with his charges.These things are seriously accurate, delivering shot after shot into a designated target area, with archer backup a foe can be squeezed away from or toward a propitious location.As portrayed in the film they are a bit of a waste of ordnance , though the idea of technological superiority is certainly rammed home when the two Marcommani get skewered.

 

http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?automo...=si&img=962

 

Ballista front , scorpion rear .

[DecimusCaesar]

The Onager might have been a relativily late addition to Roman arms. Ammianus gives a brief and rather confusing description of it in his works, which he describes as a one armed stone projector. He also seems to refer to it as a 'Scorpio' even though that name usually refers to an arrow firer. He claims that Scorpio was the old name for the artillery piece and that in his own day it was known as an Onager 'a wild ass'.

 

There are breif descriptions of its use against infantry. Marcellinus describes it being used to repel Goths at the Siege of Adrianople in AD 378 (it was unsuccesful...not hitting one target, although it did scare the Goths), while at Amida, it is said that stones fired from Onagers crushed the skulls of the enemy.

[Pertinax]

Intriguingly Wilkins says " the one arm onager is the only type of stone thrower known to Vegetius (late 4th C writer on the Roman Army)" "It was perhaps the only torsion powered stone thrower to survive until medieval times if indeed it is the same as the mangonel". Torsion powered bolt shooting cheiroballistrae seem to continue in use right through to the 10th C "Tactica" (Leo).