What was the range of an ancient javelin?

[PMBardunias]

DBx - IIRC DBx doesn't do ranged attacks at all so it's moot.

True, not for javelineers or skirmisher archers but only for massed archers. Perhaps give ankyle-thrown javelins slightly better combat factors?

But was the thonged javelin more effective or did it just go further?  If range doesn't matter in the rule set, it is hard to rationalise a better combat factor.

Ankyle were used in hunting, so the javelins must have been accurate.  I wrote a bit in my book about how the ankyle functions, which some might find interesting:

"The manner in which the ankyle functioned bears some explanation.  When accelerating any weapon, the amount of force applied is of course crucial, but just as important is the length of time that the accelerating force can be applied.  This is probably most readily understood by a modern audience by the example of length of barrel in a firearm.  Once a bullet leaves the gun barrel, the expanding gas that was pushing it down the barrel dissipates and the bullet then begins to decelerate as it is resisted by the air it is moving through.  For this reason, 'muzzle velocity' is most informative because it represents the moment when the bullet is moving fastest.  So the longer the barrel, the more time the confined gas spends accelerating the bullet and the more velocity imparted to the bullet.  The ankyle functions in a very different manner to produce the same result.  The thin leather thongs, of generally less than a meter in length, were wrapped around the shaft of the spear at a point just behind where it would have been gripped to throw.  The thrower would insert his first two fingers into a loop in the thong and grip the shaft.  As he released his grip on the shaft, his fingers pulled on the thong, which unwrapped as the spear moved forward, causing the shaft to rotate.  As with projectiles from firearms, this spin may enhance stability in flight, but is not the source of added range. The throwing motion involves many major muscle groups, but over half of the accelerating force is derived from elasticity in joint structures in a manner similar to a torsion catapult.  In fact, humans may have specifically evolved to throw objects, because our nearest ancestors, the chimpanzee, cannot perform this motion due to limitations in the shoulder carriage.   When launching a spear or javelin, it must be released at an angle of around 40 degrees upwards so that it follows an arching trajectory to gain distance.  This means that the thrower must release the shaft, and this ends spear acceleration when the arm has only moved through a portion of its arc in rotating around the shoulder.  The ankyle remedies this.  The spear is still released at an upward angle, but the two fingers in the thong's loop continue to pull the spear forward even after the shaft has left the hand.  It is this extension of the time that the thrower spends in contact with the shaft and accelerating it that accounts for the additional velocity.  As the shaft moves forward, the angle between thong and shaft becomes greater, imparting less and less acceleration and eventually slipping free of the thrower's fingers."

[Justin Swanton]

DBx - IIRC DBx doesn't do ranged attacks at all so it's moot.

True, not for javelineers or skirmisher archers but only for massed archers. Perhaps give ankyle-thrown javelins slightly better combat factors?

But was the thonged javelin more effective or did it just go further?  If range doesn't matter in the rule set, it is hard to rationalise a better combat factor.

If it was used it must have been good for something. Thonged or non-thonged would probably make no difference when targeting non-missile troops. Perhaps give a thonged javelineer a plus modifier when fighting a non-thonged javelineer since the former could outrange the latter.

[Erpingham]

Paul's explanation is very useful.  Paul (and Murray) don't think the thong causing spin helps with range - it seems to be a consequence of wrapping the thong round the javelin, not a deliberate design goal.  The hunting element does indeed suggest they could be thrown accurately if required, though not necessarily more accurately than a thongless javelin.  But, if the thong increases the velocity by allowing force to be applied longer, the javelin will have more KE and could, therefore, be a harder hitter.  Pretty irrelevant against unarmoured targets (e.g. fellow skirmishers) but more dangerous against line of battle?  Bit hypothetical, of course - the only thing we definitely seem to have evidence of is using them for range.

[RichT]

Yes in order to fly further (at a given trajectory) the javelin must be going faster, so the ankyle, by increasing velocity, both increases range and increases KE and so hitting/penetrating power. Spin might help with accuracy maybe.

But does it do so to a tactically significant degree? Tactically significant enough to represent in wargames rules? Tastes vary, but for me it would be - definitely not. If we have:

Javelins equipped with ankyle +1

Then we should also have:

Shields 60cm or more wide +1
Shields 10mm or more thick +1

And then why not:

Thrower particularly athletic and fit +1
Thrower ate especially filling breakfast +1

It's to avoid all this that we throw dice!

Roll of 6 - javelinmen have ankyles (or are Olympic athletes)
Roll of 1 - the ankyles got wet / fell off / the men weren't trained to use them

Maybe all else being equal ankyle-equipped javelinmen could sometimes have their quality upgraded a step (in rules that grade by quality), if not cancelled by other factors.

[aligern]

Richard, I really thought tgat tge 'specially filling breakfast' was a minus one, not a plus....at least that is how it affects my chubby little fellows.
Roy

[Justin Swanton]

In DBM(M) terminology you could make ankyle-throwing javelineers superior and the non-ankyle types average or inferior. That way no need to add more rules.

[Mick Hession]

At the level of abstraction of DBx (and indeed most wargames rules) different combat factors would not make sense. Also, it presumes all javelins are equivalent - Irish texts mention individuals using multiple spear-types, some mostly for throwing and others mostly for thrusting (though thrusting spears could be cast and vice versa) and illustrations show some with throwing-loop and others without.

One passage may indicate that effective range varied for different spear-types "The King of Ireland had not finished saying the last of those words when their enemies came near, and first they loosed vast showers of arrows and afterwards showers of spears, and the third shower was of javelins, so that the King rose against them with his followers, and they fought bravely against them." (Fragmentary Annals 366 - translation from https://celt.ucc.ie//published/G100017/index.html ). The "javelin" in the translation might be slightly off - the base text has  (frossa diomóra do sháighdibh ar tús, & frossa d'faghaiph iar t-tain, & an treas fross do leathgaibh where "leathgaibhh" is literally "half-spear" though usually translated as "dart". The context implies that the different missiles were loosed as the battle-lines closed, so we have the lightest spears thrown at the closest range. A Tudor writer described these darts as "more noisome... than deadly" so it may be that they were held until close range to maximise their effect.

Cheers
Mick   

[Erpingham]

In DBM(M) terminology you could make ankyle-throwing javelineers superior and the non-ankyle types average or inferior. That way no need to add more rules.

I don't know enough about the balance of these rules but I suspect this may give too great an advantage to the ankyle-users.  Mick and Richard clearly feel that the difference between javelins with and without thongs is insufficient on a tactical level to warrant a rules bonus.

In a less abstracted set of rules, where a differences between weapons are the basis of combat, it may be different.

[Mick Hession]

In DBM(M) terminology you could make ankyle-throwing javelineers superior and the non-ankyle types average or inferior. That way no need to add more rules.

I don't know enough about the balance of these rules but I suspect this may give too great an advantage to the ankyle-users.  Mick and Richard clearly feel that the difference between javelins with and without thongs is insufficient on a tactical level to warrant a rules bonus.

In a less abstracted set of rules, where a differences between weapons are the basis of combat, it may be different.

In DBMM the Ankyle-users would slaughter those without. 
Cheers
Mick

[Justin Swanton]

In DBM(M) terminology you could make ankyle-throwing javelineers superior and the non-ankyle types average or inferior. That way no need to add more rules.

I don't know enough about the balance of these rules but I suspect this may give too great an advantage to the ankyle-users.  Mick and Richard clearly feel that the difference between javelins with and without thongs is insufficient on a tactical level to warrant a rules bonus.

In a less abstracted set of rules, where a differences between weapons are the basis of combat, it may be different.

In DBMM the Ankyle-users would slaughter those without. 
Cheers
Mick

Let's see......basic factors for psiloi are 2 vs foot, which means a good chance (8 in 36) of one psiloi doubling and killing the other. Making one psiloi superior affects only the grading factors for close combat (which is what psiloi are considered to be engaged in).

Quoting from DBM 3.2:

Compare your element's total score before grading factors to that of its shooting or frontal close combat opponent before grading
factors then adjust it by each of the following that apply:

-1 if your element is neither artillery shooting nor elephants in close combat, and scored more than (S) opponents.

So the ordinary psiloi loses 1 from its die roll if it scores more than the superior psiloi. Without the modifier it has 9 out of 36 chances: it scores a 6 vs a 1,2,3; it scores a 5 vs a 1,2. It scores a 4 vs a 1,2; it scores a 3 vs a 1; it scores a 2 vs a 1. Now it has 6 chances out of 36: 6 becomes 5 vs 1,2; 5 becomes 4 vs 1,2; 4 becomes 3 vs 1; 3 becomes 2 vs 1. That's 25% reduced to 16.7%. Hardly a slaughter.

[Duncan Head]

Mick was referring to DBMM, which is significantly different from DBM 3.2. And in neither M nor MM can Ordinary psiloi be javelinmen, anyway.

[Justin Swanton]

Mick was referring to DBMM, which is significantly different from DBM 3.2. And in neither M nor MM can Ordinary psiloi be javelinmen, anyway.

Oh right. I see javelinmen in the DBM lists are generally inferior and sometimes superior. There does seem to be a mix of javelinmen and archers of which 1/4 count as ordinary (I suppose those are the archers). Using DBM rules anyone fighting an inferior javelinman will get a +1 if his score equals or exceeds that of the javelinman, which will make a difference.

Is there any difference in how DBMM handles superior/inferior modifiers?

[Mick Hession]

In DBMM superiors get +2 if they win and Inferrior are -1 if they lose so (with some variation depending on whose bound we're playing) you get something like:

I Dies   36%
I Recoils   22%
S Dies   6%
S Recoils   22%
Draw           14%

That's on a straight up single-element frontage fight of course. When you fight with a group the Superiors create overlaps that make things even worse for the Inferiors.

But a big battle set has no business getting into such granularity, IMO - even the notoriously detailed Newbury rules foreswore going down to that level. You could make an argument for a  skirmish set giving a range bonus though that's also an argument to encourage people to chuck their weapons away at maximum range, which didn't happen (accounts of Papuan tribal warfare describe missiles being thrown at ranges that are likely to hit; disarming yourself at extreme range on the off-chance of a hit is not a good idea)
 
Cheers
Mick

[PMBardunias]

At the level of abstraction of DBx (and indeed most wargames rules) different combat factors would not make sense. Also, it presumes all javelins are equivalent - Irish texts mention individuals using multiple spear-types, some mostly for throwing and others mostly for thrusting (though thrusting spears could be cast and vice versa) and illustrations show some with throwing-loop and others without.

One passage may indicate that effective range varied for different spear-types "The King of Ireland had not finished saying the last of those words when their enemies came near, and first they loosed vast showers of arrows and afterwards showers of spears, and the third shower was of javelins, so that the King rose against them with his followers, and they fought bravely against them." (Fragmentary Annals 366 - translation from https://celt.ucc.ie//published/G100017/index.html ). The "javelin" in the translation might be slightly off - the base text has  (frossa diomóra do sháighdibh ar tús, & frossa d'faghaiph iar t-tain, & an treas fross do leathgaibh where "leathgaibhh" is literally "half-spear" though usually translated as "dart". The context implies that the different missiles were loosed as the battle-lines closed, so we have the lightest spears thrown at the closest range. A Tudor writer described these darts as "more noisome... than deadly" so it may be that they were held until close range to maximise their effect.

Cheers
Mick   

Thanks for this.  I have been working on Archaic hoplite battle as a war of ranges, and find something like this based on published data or study of records, with the progression being Slings 200m+ but capable of more at extreme range, Bows effective to 175m, but capable of twice that at extreme range, Javelin/ankyle out to 66m, spear with (24m) or without ankyle (16m) depending on date, and hand thrown rocks at close range.

Along with maximum ranges, these missile type have minimum ranges if they have to shoot indirectly over men in front of them.  This means there is a big dead zone in front of Persian Sparabara for example, where only an archer moving up and shooting directly over the top of a Gerra could hit a man. The thing about rocks is that they do damage more by mass than velocity, so they can be lobbed over ranks of men who are actually engaged in combat.  We see hoplites use them even late in the period.

This makes me wonder two things about your passage above.  Either the "half-spears" are meant to be chucked over the top of them men in front who have already tossed their own extra spears and are moving to close, or the mass of these dart- throwers is specifically throwing to support the  men in front as they close. Or, perhaps it is the spearmen themselves throwing light darts in the way Franks threw axes or Roman's pila as they advanced. I would like to know more about hurlbat use.

[Patrick Waterson]

But was the thonged javelin more effective or did it just go further?  If range doesn't matter in the rule set, it is hard to rationalise a better combat factor.

The consistent and persistent use of the ankyle in the classical world suggests that it conferred a noticeable and desirable edge; this can be represented  in DB-whatever by using the S (superior) categorisation, which does not adjust the combat factor per se, but ameliorates the die roll added to it, making a poor result less likely.