The DBMM Byzantine lists allow for catapults mounted on wagons. I know that they are possibly rather spurious - there is a lot of debate about what the original Greek actually means, but what sort of catapults might they have been? Would they still ahve been using Roman style torsion catapults up to the 10th century, or would they have been replaced by trebuchets or would there have been a mix of all sorts? And does anyone know if anyone does 15mm models for them?
Toby
Mantua Models do a 1:17 scale model (http://www.cornwallmodelboats.co.uk/acatalog/mantua_byzantine_catapult.html?oo=0) which at least shows what the standard field (or ocean wave) issue looks like.
Another pic here (http://www.historicships.com/Ancient%20Weapons/Byzanatine%20Catapult/ByzantineCatapultMA814.htm).
This is billed as a 10th century catapult 'from an original Byzantine 10th century drawing' so is presumably accurate for period.
While on the subject, or at least not too far off it, here is an interesting rendering of a scorpion (http://www.modelshipyard.com.au/product.asp?id=112&pid=17). The three bow arms per side would add a bit of punch to the missile.
A quick look through 15mm figure manufacturers has found none so far for Byzantine catapults of the period - if anyone knows of any (or in a pinch any other models that might be acceptable/convertible) please say.
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 15, 2014, 10:41:51 AM
This is billed as a 10th century catapult 'from an original Byzantine 10th century drawing' so is presumably accurate for period.
Or it could be from a tenth century copy of an ancient treatise and not reflect contemporary artillery at all.
A quick google turned up an article by John Haldon in the Oxford Handbook of Byzantine studies (Chapter II.8.8 ) which discusses artillery (pp.478-80). Haldon believes torsion-powered artillery was gone by 6th century, although he quotes the existence of images of torsion-powered artillery in a 10th century copy of the works of Hero of Alexandria, which may the origin of the model. He does take seriously the idea of wagon mounted artillery in the 10th century though.
As described in this article here
http://deremilitari.org/2014/03/byzantine-heavy-artillery-the-helepolis/
Roy
Yes - I saw the Mantua model, and instinctively thought of it as being too classical looking - I was under the impression that torsion artillery had gone, which certainly seems to be the received wisdom.
Thanks for the link to the Dennis article - reading that seems to make a persuasive case for them being rope-pull trebuchets - probably quite small ones to be mounted on wagons for tactical mobility. I shall model them as such and defy my opponents to produce a case for them being unhistorical...
Dennis changed his mind from 'bolt shooters mounted on wagons' to 'trebuchets carried on wagons'.
If you want to use them as Art use the bolt shooters.
So what does this 'bolt shooter' look like?
Clearly tenth century Franks had engines that threw missiles. What do these look like?
Roy
Quote from: tadamson on March 18, 2014, 12:19:32 AM
Dennis changed his mind from 'bolt shooters mounted on wagons' to 'trebuchets carried on wagons'.
If you want to use them as Art use the bolt shooters.
Here (http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/htt/ttspot.html) is a quick rope-pull-trebuchet orientation page for those interested. Selection of contemporary illustrations starting here (http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/histrac.html).
The challenge is seeing how any of these could be worked on a wagon. Like Tom, I would suggest using the bolt-shooters. Does the received wisdom about torsion artillery having disappeared actually rest on anything other than opinions?
Some of the Chinese rope-pull trebuchets are wheeled - the "wheeled whirlwind" in Patrick's selection of illustrations - and I would imagine a wagon-mounted version could be similar to those. As the notes to that illustration suggest, you'd need to fix the wheeld carriage firmly in position, but otherwise I don't see a problem. The pulling crew would presumably be stood on the ground, not in the wagon.
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 18, 2014, 11:07:17 AM
Does the received wisdom about torsion artillery having disappeared actually rest on anything other than opinions?
Checking the Haldon piece mentioned above, it does appear to be speculation that torsion artillery went out of use. The argument appears to be that the bolt-throwers go first, as they are more complicated, to be replaced by tension bolt shooters. Onagers last longer but lose out to the traction trebuchets.
Haldon isn't convinced by the idea that the cart mounted artillery are trebuchets - he notes references to them shooting bolts and having windlasses and sliders. So tension bolt shooters would be a possible option.
OK, so what does a torsion powered bolt shooter look like? Apart that is from the unlikely looking crossed bows effort shown earlier.
Roy
Quote from: Duncan Head on March 18, 2014, 11:19:30 AM
Some of the Chinese rope-pull trebuchets are wheeled - the "wheeled whirlwind" in Patrick's selection of illustrations - and I would imagine a wagon-mounted version could be similar to those. As the notes to that illustration suggest, you'd need to fix the wheeld carriage firmly in position, but otherwise I don't see a problem. The pulling crew would presumably be stood on the ground, not in the wagon.
I'd have thought the wagon mounted version would work well. Fastened firmly to the wagon it should be solid enough, more solid than just four legs on the ground. With the pullers on the ground, effectively you've just got a taller trebuchet with a longer pull without having to find longer timbers for the uprights, so I'd have thought it was more powerful on the wagon than the same weapon would be stood on the ground
Jim
Quote from: aligern on March 18, 2014, 02:11:46 PM
OK, so what does a torsion powered bolt shooter look like? Apart that is from the unlikely looking crossed bows effort shown earlier.
Roy
The obvious answer would be a large crossbow, however there are a number of weird contraptions that come under the medieval term
espringal or
springald which one might look at.
Yes a giant crossbow makes sense. That too would use pulleys and a ratchet to draw back the arms.
Roy
Quote from: Erpingham on March 18, 2014, 02:30:57 PMThe obvious answer would be a large crossbow, however there are a number of weird contraptions that come under the medieval term espringal or springald which one might look at.
I haven't got Liebel's book(*), but isn't the Springald thought to involve a revival of the torsion concept? See http://www.grandhistorian.com/chinesesiegewarfare/siegeweapons-f-torsionspringald.html (http://www.grandhistorian.com/chinesesiegewarfare/siegeweapons-f-torsionspringald.html)
(*) Jean Liebel,
Springalds and Great Crossbows, Royal Armouries 1998
Like this then?
http://www.stormthecastle.com/catapult/tabletop-crossbow.htm
medieval tension catapault.
Roy
Interesting concept the square framed springald. However, i was puzzled by the author's claim that there was not enough sinew available in Medieval Europe!!
Roy
Yes - whether he gets that from Liebl or David Nicolle (I haven't looked at his Ospreys on medieval siege equipment yet) or just guessed at it, I do not know. Nor does it seem likely that the technique for making sinew rope would have been lost (http://ballista.wikia.com/wiki/Making_sinew_spring_cord (http://ballista.wikia.com/wiki/Making_sinew_spring_cord) is an interesting outline). I'd guess that hair rope is simpler and probably cheaper, though?
Quote from: Duncan Head on March 18, 2014, 03:17:03 PM
Yes - whether he gets that from Liebl or David Nicolle (I haven't looked at his Ospreys on medieval siege equipment yet) or just guessed at it, I do not know.
Looking at Nicolle on-line, he reckons that European torsion artillery was powered by horse or cattle hair ropes, rather than sinew.
Sinew looses much of its elasticity when wet or damp. This can be an issue in much of Europe. :)
Which Haldon is the reference to the sliders and windlasses in? And does he give a primary reference?
Quote from: tobypartridge on March 19, 2014, 09:25:21 AM
Which Haldon is the reference to the sliders and windlasses in? And does he give a primary reference?
John Haldon, Oxford Handbook of Byzantine studies , Chapter II.8.8 , pp.478-80. I think it is on p.479. I don't currently have access to it but I don't recall a specific reference in the text.
Checked and there is not a specific reference in the text to the other sources that jay be describing windlass or slider.
Roy
Hope you're going to turn this into some sort of article(s) for Slingshot Toby? You've got a classic start - 'I wanted to put some catapults in my army as per an army list and this is what else I discovered'. Give it a go and see what you come up with!
Yes Tobu, good idea
You might care to look at the debate on RAT: http://www.romanarmytalk.com/17-roman-military-history-a-archaeology/322178-roman-steel-bow-ballista.html
Though why would the Romans need a steel bow for a tension catapault when they could have a very effective composite bow made already.
Roy
Quote from: aligern on March 27, 2014, 07:41:36 PM
Though why would the Romans need a steel bow for a tension catapault when they could have a very effective composite bow made already.
Roy
Never seen the suggestion that Romans used sprung steel bows before - usually thought of as a medieval metalurgical advance in the West (doubtless the Chinese did it centuries earlier).
I'm sorry I can't remember the source off the top of my head. It described "tension", e.g. big crossbows, catapults with sliding fire proof holders so it could fire stones, bolts and incendiaries. Apparently there was a problem shooting flamming material through the frame of a traditional torsion weapon. One was mounted on either end of a wagon. If memory serves it was quoting a 9th century source. I am puzzling out how to model it in 15mm on a 40x40mm base.I'll keep looking for its origin.
Had a thought about modelling the tension catapault. They appear to be like a ballista, but with a different front end. The slide and windlass set up is the same, as is the base. So to make a. tension catapault just remove the box structure from the front of the ballista and replace it with a cuved piece of wiire, binding the bow onto the frame with some thread.
Roy