I am making up some house rules for my games so I would like to know how many pila a Roman in a cohort would carry or a Hastati or Principes? I am thinking of allowing them to fire only once but want to know if they carried more than one pila? The reason I'm asking this is because when facing a cavalry opponent the Romans where supposed to keep their pila to withstand the charge as spearmen. At least this is my understanding of it. This suggests only one pila but I am not sure so hence the question...
John
Polybios says that 2 were carried in his description.
Thank you so much, I will use a counter to mark the first volley and then the second will be the last...
John
That might be a false premise. Unless the enemy broke before or immediately on contact, quite possible, even likely, that both pila would have been thrown in quick succession. In wargames terms, a single round of combat. Especially if you are using line relief, where your initial intent with hastati is a really nasty initial shock knowing that if that fails, the principes can have another go.
There are various ways to construct Roman infantry combat - it seems a popular discussion point not just among wargamers but also professional historians. A quick search will find many of those ideas have been discussed before on the forum. One thing I picked up from these earlier discussions is the Roman army was not a one trick pony and how they fought one enemy might not be the same as how they fought the next.
I think David is right that, once a legionary unit has come to hand strokes, pila are no longer a part of the future of the fight. The Romans have either thrown them all or ditched any remaining to free them to focus on sword and shield work. So, you may not need two distinct pilum phases. However, if you have a missile exchange phase in the manner of the "pilum skirmishing" debate Zhmodikov started, you may wish to mark supplies separately.
An useful discussion by Brett Devereaux which post-dates our conversations on the forum about all this but summarises a lot of what we said in them is here (https://acoup.blog/2023/11/24/collections-roman-infantry-tactics-why-the-pilum-and-not-a-spear/). If you have the time search out some of the stuff on the forum - lots of papers were linked, sources were quoted and various opinions were expressed.
Nice site Anthony
I don't know if there's any evidence for or against it actually being done, but there's nothing forcing all men in a formation to throw their pila at the same time, so a unit of legionaries could launch three or more volleys if they weren't all full-strength.
(In early Byzantine times, doctrine called for rear ranks to throw their spears while the front rankers retain their for close combat while on the defensive. Perhaps not something you want to do with pila that are more dedicated missile weapons, but illustrates the potential for partial volleys.)
Actually, do we know pila were thrown in volleys at all, as opposed to each man throwing his when he thought best? I vaguely seem to recall Caesar implying that pila-throwing went on for some considerable time at at least one battle?
Of course, if you go for the later legionaries you also have to think about where the martiobarbuli and javelins come into the game mechanisms. WRG 6th Ed allowed legionaries to use everything they had; darts, javelins, pila, golf bag, a back rank of archers and they could fight in wedge and foam at the mouth like a berserker for good measure. People hold their own opinions on how historical or otherwise it might have been, but it was great fun watching one of these units plough through a pike phalanx frontally without breaking step.
This Ed Smith cartoon from the period sums things up nicely.
Legionary.jpg
Thank you for the discussion. I will give my units one round of pila throwing before contact as I think this is the most accurate. Pila are strong in the games I am thinking about. I don't want them to act as skirmishers and wear their opponents down before contact as that is not how they fought. At least not in Polybius, Livy or Caesar. Thank you for your comments...
John
Quote from: Nick Harbud on October 02, 2024, 03:33:30 PMOf course, if you go for the later legionaries you also have to think about where the martiobarbuli and javelins come into the game mechanisms. WRG 6th Ed allowed legionaries to use everything they had; darts, javelins, pila, golf bag, a back rank of archers and they could fight in wedge and foam at the mouth like a berserker for good measure. People hold their own opinions on how historical or otherwise it might have been, but it was great fun watching one of these units plough through a pike phalanx frontally without breaking step.
This Ed Smith cartoon from the period sums things up nicely.
Legionary.jpg
Ahhhhh...the heady memories
Are you actually attempting to model pila ?
Do you extend that to other non romans with similar recorded capability?
If you are considering ammunition (2), do you also consider the stated ammunition carried by velites (7) also?
There are very conflicting views on how pila were used - whole formation single volley, front row only as part of melee impact, rear rank overhead , alternate ranks one at a time, irregular individual, no doubt others too.
Might it not be safer to not give romans this written record only advantage?
Or declare just some mysterious bonus on first combat for certain viscous melee types - parallel to impact charges for hairy tweed wearing types?
Just checking out the rules I have on pila. I don't like to change them unless for a very good reason but some armies are too strong with multiple pila throws with high impact. Think I will limit them to one throw...
John
Yes but what and what does that represent?
Why don't other javelin or htw armed troops also get it, why only one?
Quote from: Aetius on October 03, 2024, 09:38:09 AMThank you for the discussion. I will give my units one round of pila throwing before contact as I think this is the most accurate. Pila are strong in the games I am thinking about. I don't want them to act as skirmishers and wear their opponents down before contact as that is not how they fought. At least not in Polybius, Livy or Caesar. Thank you for your comments...
John
Of course, Polybios, Livy, Caesar, etc. are what those who see a more extended missile exchange base their views on.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 04, 2024, 11:10:59 AMQuote from: Aetius on October 03, 2024, 09:38:09 AMThank you for the discussion. I will give my units one round of pila throwing before contact as I think this is the most accurate. Pila are strong in the games I am thinking about. I don't want them to act as skirmishers and wear their opponents down before contact as that is not how they fought. At least not in Polybius, Livy or Caesar. Thank you for your comments...
John
At the battle of Sentinum 295BC where the Romans fought Gauls and Samnites, in a pause in the battle where the Samnites had fled and the Romans reorganised to attack the Gauls, Livy mentions the Romans sending men out to pick up javelins etc off the battlefield
Whilst his account might be fanciful, I think we can assume that collecting missiles in gaps in the action seemed reasonable to his readers
Of course, Polybios, Livy, Caesar, etc. are what those who see a more extended missile exchange base their views on.
HTW aka horrible throwing weapons and by analogy HCW - horrible chopping weapons
WRG heaven...
I'm not saying it's wrong, btw. Just asking you to explain why it is.
Here's an idea for an alternative based on one of the differing interpretations of how Romans fought.
Instead of a free shot to kill. How about the enemy charged/ing has to test to receive pila, and avoid a penalty to its combat?
Just a question....is the pilum a super weapon and deserving of extra rules etc? Or is it just part of the Roman way of war...?
Quote from: Imperial Dave on October 05, 2024, 11:23:59 AMJust a question....is the pilum a super weapon and deserving of extra rules etc? Or is it just part of the Roman way of war...?
Do you mean it could simply be written into their stat line and not as a separate rule? Makes sense to me, a footnote would explain.
What do we then do with imitation legionaries? They had the kit but don't seem to have been as effective. So is the important thing the pilum or the whole package of training, organisation and, of course, Roman virtus?
The sources tell us some legions were exceptionally effective, and others subpar. So, if we believe imitation legionaries were worse than the real deal - I'm not sure we actually have the evidence to tell - treat them like you treat subpar legions.
(If your rules don't differentiate legions for efficiency, you probably don't need to differentiate imitation legions either. Think eg DBA.)
Quote from: Erpingham on October 05, 2024, 05:20:35 PMWhat do we then do with imitation legionaries? They had the kit but don't seem to have been as effective. So is the important thing the pilum or the whole package of training, organisation and, of course, Roman virtus?
I think it has to be the whole thing. Listening to Ben Kane at the conference a few years ago he was in no doubt but that they were very fit and strong through the constant working.
Not all imitation legionaries were so useless. I mean, the Galatians raised by King Deiotarus were incorporated as a body into the Roman army, becoming Legio XXII Deiotariana (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legio_XXII_Deiotariana).
8)
Not particular wanting to put John off here, but there are clearly many ways to skin a cat. It does depend a bit on how abstract you want to be and what distinct flavour you want. For massed combat, focus on weapon supply does have issues of record keeping/on table marking. And, as Nick (I think) said, what other ammunition supplies do you count? Looking at pila specifically, I wonder if you could adopt the system used in some 18th century rules of a bonus for first volley, which is marked off in the first round of fire combat, never to return?
Those enemies of Rome will be firing their missiles back, if they have them, but the Roman pila were high tech, they were designed to take out your shield, so the Roman follow up with sword would be more decisive. Do any of Rome's enemies have a weapon that would do the same thing besides the Samnites and the imitation legions of Mithridates IIRC?
John
All knowledge is welcome, I am not put off...
Various Spanish and, IIRC, there are pila like spears in the archaeological record of some Gallic areas. The Etruscans as well I believe.
Back in the good 'ol days of WRG rules, Frankish infantry hurling francisca heavy axes or angons were reckoned to be equivalent to pila. They were quite nasty and made regular appearances in wargames competitions. However according to the army lists, after several hundred years of trying to get these to work, the Franks dumped them for a simple javelin or short spear.
Not sure what the current perceived wisdom is on these guys.
:P
Quote from: Imperial Dave on October 05, 2024, 11:23:59 AMJust a question....is the pilum a super weapon and deserving of extra rules etc? Or is it just part of the Roman way of war...?
I think it is a bit of both. The pilum was probably never a super weapon, rather a quite good weapon that proved effective against Rome's early enemies, particularly those who fought in close formation: Etruscans, Greek cities in Magna Graeca, Carthaginians, Epirots, Macedonians, Seleucids. We do not really know how close the Italic Gauls and Samnites, Bruttians, Apulians, etc, fought, but perhaps close enough that the pilum was still useful. Perhaps not so great when it came to chasing assorted Iberian ethnicities up and down hills in Spain or against the Ligurians in their woodland.
The point is that we actually do not have very good information on how much the pilum was used after Caesar. We
assume that it is the universal legionary weapon of the early and middle Principate, but there are hints, eg in Arrian's text vs the Alans, that not all carried the pilum, at least against certain adversaries. Of course, after 69AD the most important Roman enemy, to be defeated at all costs, was an opposing Imperial claimant's legionaries, against whom the pilum is probably the best choice. But when your foreign enemies are increasingly of the hairy barbarian type, not necessarily favouring close order tactics, maybe it becomes less relevant. After all, if we are to believe Tacitus, Agricola managed to duff up the Caledonians without using his pilum armed legionaries, just auxiliaries with, we
assume, more conventional pointy sticks.
And of course, for some reason, by the late empire the pilum seems to have faded from the scene. If so, it suggests it was no longer the best weapon for most battlefields or enemies.
I think one thing to think of with the pilum is it is relatively expensive for a throw-away weapon (an oldie but still a goodie :) ). It takes a fair bit of iron and either some fancy metallurgy, some messing with pegs or even casting lead weights. So, for a well-equipped Roman army, feasible. For a bunch of Germanics, perhaps less so. IIRC, the angon is an elite weapon among Franks (and early Saxons), not a mass issue. I don't know how common the francisca was (though I do recall Roy opining it wasn't just, or even mainly, a throwing weapon.
As to how common the pilum was in the early Empire, it does seem very common in art, which, unless this was widespread antiquarian convention, suggests it was quite widespread.
IIRC the Roman pila would be bent in someone's shield if it worked correctly so it couldn't be thrown back.
Do you think the Romans would collect the enemies javelins and throw them back? In one ruleset I have the Romans have to move forward a bit to throw pila which keeps them from doing so when in melee!
John
On bendyness of pila, this topic contains a lot of evidence and discussion
http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=4298.0
Whether Romans ran forward to throw pila or stopped to throw then charged is, of course, one of our "known unknowns" about Roman battle. :)
Quote from: Erpingham on October 07, 2024, 09:47:50 AMWhether Romans ran forward to throw pila or stopped to throw then charged is, of course, one of our "known unknowns" about Roman battle. :)
As a very wise contributor to the forum once said, the Roman Army wasn't a one trick pony.
So it's easy to imagine against a phalanx that they would run forward, throw the pila, then draw swords and try and exploit any gaps.
But you can also imagine the front ranks forming something like a shield wall when facing a barbarian charge, and then the rear ranks lobbing all the pilas over their heads into the seething mass of barbarians.
Whether either of those imaginings is at all realistic, I'll leave to others to judge...
Quote from: Erpingham on October 07, 2024, 09:47:50 AMOn bendyness of pila, this topic contains a lot of evidence and discussion
http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=4298.0
Whether Romans ran forward to throw pila or stopped to throw then charged is, of course, one of our "known unknowns" about Roman battle. :)
Wow so the pila might not have been bendy, that would have come in handy against cavalry armies especially. Against infantry armies I would like the bendy pila to take out their shields so the follow up with sword and scutum would have been more deadly. Perhaps they carried one of each into battle depending on the enemy or two of one type or the other. Who knows..
Quote from: Aetius on October 07, 2024, 01:04:11 PMPerhaps they carried one of each into battle depending on the enemy or two of one type or the other. Who knows..
It's a good job the later legionaries were equipped with golf bags to carry all this gear...
"Ah, Grumio. The barbarians appear to be coming at us with their foot. Hand me my number 5 pilum."Can you imagine the ribald comments when the inexperienced legionary selects the wrong one to fight the particular enemy bearing down upon the cohort?
;D
Quote from: Cantabrigian on October 07, 2024, 10:52:17 AMAs a very wise contributor to the forum once said, the Roman Army wasn't a one trick pony.
This was rather the point I was trying to make.
Take Arrian's Ektaxis. If it is not simply a literary fiction to allow him to show off his mimicry of Xenophon, and if we accept that his legionaries with kontoi are in fact armed with pila, then even then only half his legionaries have pila, and only one eighth of them actually get to throw them (his fourth rank) as the front three ranks are using them as pointy sticks to hold off the Alans' charge. The other half (ranks five to eight) are throwing javelins over their heads from further up the hill. Of course, if one takes the alternative view that the kontoi are in fact hasta, then NONE of his legionaries have pila...
Now, yes, this is a special case, and literary conceits aside, dear Arrian obviously thinks that his military genius can be demonstrated by showing how he adapts and adopts his available forces to beat this rather unusual variant of hairy barbarian. But, it is certainly evidence that the Romans are indeed not a one trick pony, and also that legions have several thousand javelins on hand with which to equip 50% of the legionaries before setting off to thrash the dastardly foe, as they will not have been magicked up overnight.
We are getting to it now I think.
So back to the big question.
What have rules for this thing?
Do you want pila rules in your rules because you are convinced it was a super weapon advantage no one else ever had or copied until gunpowder weapons made the choice redundant.
Or because there is some evidence it existed so it must be worth adding rules for?
Or because you are convinced one of the many possible ways or warfare it could fit into is correct, worth modelling rules for, and unique to romans (for a period in time never to be repeated)
I think pila should come under the heading of javelins of which their enemies also had. I think the pila was bendy which made it a little better weapon but it was not a superweapon. I have yet to read that a serious foe was beaten strictly by the pila. On one site I was looking at the Romans were supposed to carry two pila, one light for throwing distances and the other heavy for penetrating armour, shields etc. as the opponent got closer. In the ruleset I am using now they are considered javelins but with their own hit/damage factor. First you need a hit and then you roll for damage and if this fails then nothing happens. With a successful damage roll you wound your opponent. Depending on the position of the units you can roll two or four dice. This is how my ruleset for Onus! deals with it. You can download the Onus! rules at DracoIdeas.com if you are interested...
Look, the bendy thing has been as comprehensively disproven as anything 2000 years old ever will be.
The narrow shaft was to penetrate the shield, not to bend on impact. Nothing to do with anything else, just penetration of shields immediately before the swordsman got in close.
Further, once you understand that, most of the common models of how it was used fall apart. Especially the ones assuming unaimed middle rank legionaries engaging in overhead volley throwing while keeping formation.
If you are keen on writing rules, you absolutely must start to explain why you want special rules for romans with pila, and how you believe they worked.
Because rolling more dice is fun, is a valid reason so long as you state it up front.
I want rules for those with javelins including the pila. If it wasn't bendy I suppose its modifiers would be different, that's all...
It seems some modern historians don't think the pila was bendy. Perhaps this was a incidental thing but wrought iron is much more bendy then modern steel. I think it did bend either when hitting the shield or when you attempted to pull it out. It is not a superweapon though and would come under the heading of a heavy javelin for the bigger pila. Perhaps the lighter pila wasn't as bendy...
Well if you want to count all javelins , you probably should look into the research on how effective they were.
Basically, shields and helmets work, and you have to get a pretty lucky shot to inflict any sort of wound.
Made much less likely if you cannot actually see the target or are throwing overhead and letting all the arm power fall off to rely on gravity alone.
You might also want to take a broom, stand with your back to the wall, step forward the 3 feet believed to be Roman fighting distance, and then see how well you can throw with someone behind you.
I'll keep asking this because all I am seeing here is unconsciously repeating discredited ideas from the Victorian era about Roman fighting.
If you can't say why you think pila should be treated in your rules, you probably are not aware how wrong your assumptions are.
If you can give a clear reason then we can look at whether there may be ways to tweak that interpretation a little to get a simpler result for the same idea.
And the bendy thing is just so much irrelevant horseshit. The point was penetration where other javelins bounced off.
Here's a well-known Vendel image perhaps showing warriors who have exchanged angones. One has the weapon through the shield and bent but the bending may just be compositional.
(https://dt5vp8kor0orz.cloudfront.net/4994d9cff397be904a8b76582b92e4535d4e8af6/44-Figure19-1.png)
Look carefully at the front of the helmet to the right. Another warrior has taken a spear through the shield, not bent. They all appear to continue in action without dropping shields but again this could just be composition.
It's fun to come back to a discussion still in full flow. Just a few parameters that have occurred to me.
We already had this but the Romans didn't use the pilum in the same way in every battle. For a start, we are talking a long period and the Roman army went through reorganisations during it. Second, opponents differed. Pilum design varied. Number of pila might have changed.
We cannot be certain all the terms for pilum, javelin and spear were the same thing. Was Arrian's kontos a pilum? Were the rear ranks throwing a different weapon or has A distinguished two uses by using different terms? And no, I don't know the answer.
Why would legionaries use pila in a "pilum skirmish"? It isn't a good ranged weapon. It's long and heavy. Why not give the lads the hasta velitaris, which is much more use for distance throwing and it less cumbersome - you can carry several. You can use an amentum with it to boost the range. And it has this cunning feature of a long iron head which bends on impact (allegedly). Of course, for much of the period that has interested us, legions contained integral light infantry with these javelins, so it's not clear why extended pilum skirmishing would make sense. An exchange of missiles before close combat seems to fit many circumstances better, with this truncated to "chuck and charge" occassionally or even just "chuck away and charge".
Now, unless I was playing a skirmish, I wouldn't count missiles. I'd abstract. Hence a first volley/first onset rule and then have done. Roman skill at sword and shield fighting, compared with their opponents, may be a better focus for skill uplifts in the stats.
Useful images .
Proving some points - bent or not bent makes no difference, if it's stuck through your shield, you have a serious problem. If it bounced off, who cares.
I keep coming back to the real point though- you have to explain how you think these guys fought, what combat model you favour.
Because until the starting point is clear, no one can be sure what you're talking about.
If you think they throw things at 100m or so, then bent points might matter as you're likely assuming some prolonged missile exchange.
If you think it's a flat throw at 25m as your swordsman charges in, it's a totally different conversation.
If you think the whole formation gave volley ala Rome total war, ammunition is important. If you think really only the front rank issued as they came in, then you have all those spare ammunition carriers behind to make it a null point.
If you think combat is continuous like the films of the 60s, totally different responses to the dynamic flow of combat model many of use are more convinced by.
And if you think throwing things is about killing, you'll get a completely different response than if you think this was about Disordering, Discomforting or Disrupting (with some tech having more effect than others)
It's not a given than pila should give an extra chance to kill. Many perfectly good rules don't even bother with them. It's equally good to subsume pila into an overall combat effectiveness, or reverse the rule entirely and make those contacting pila armed romans test to not lose a factor on the first round, or to not become disordered.(depending on that tech gradation effect)
There all valid interpretations - as is simply saying you like the chrome and the extra dice rolling.
What is less valid, is assuming something you cannot describe is true and needs no explanation.
And as is just giving a bonus to romans because they have more written evidence.
Don't forget - sources are clear Gauls were preceded by a shower of javelins, but no one is going to be happy playing rules that allow Gauls a missile advantage over Macedonians and hoplites. Not without a detailed rule evidence footnote, anyway
And opens a wider debate on weapons for all armies per se... was it weapon or training or something else that created the paradigm?
Re the pila thing. For me it comes back to viewing the Roman use of it holistically ie how and when it was used and how it married up with the organisation and tactics at the sharp end. Pila on their own don't win battles even if we assume they were somehow technologically superior to all other spears. They were used in conjunction with the total way the foot soldiers conducted their business. A part of the sum of the whole so to speak
Absolutely- which is why the model I favour works for me.
A thing to disable the other guys shield just as you get into his face with your killing sword .
Kill a couple, pull back a little, repeat.
You can consider the pila a heavy javelin if you wish. It's main purpose was to wound or kill the foe. Perhaps taking out the shield was a secondary function. It's up to you how this was done. This was against infantry. Against a cavalry army they would hold on to the heavy pila and use it as a spear to ward off attacks. This is how I understand the pila...
How was it thrown? Individually or the whole formation at once?
Quote from: Mark G on October 11, 2024, 01:34:40 PMHow was it thrown? Individually or the whole formation at once?
Or even by ranks
Gaius Sulpicius, the dictator, marched against them, and is said to have used the following stratagem. He commanded those who were in the front line to discharge their javelins, and immediately crouch low; then the second, third, and fourth lines to discharge theirs, each crouching in turn so that they should not be struck by the spears thrown from the rear; then when the last line had hurled their javelins, all were to rush forward suddenly with a shout and join battle at close quarters. The hurling of so many missiles, followed by an immediate charge, would throw the enemy into confusion. (from Appian's Gallic War)
We might note that this was a cunning plan, rather than routine, but it was clearly an option. Does this imply in normal circumstances, the Romans couldn't throw all their javelins at once? Certainly, the Gauls do not seem to be the screaming charge types - they sportingly sit at pilum range at let the Romans do their thing.