How many Pila did a Roman Soldier carry?

[Imperial Dave]

HTW aka horrible throwing weapons and by analogy HCW - horrible chopping weapons

WRG heaven...

[Mark G]

I'm not saying it's wrong, btw.  Just asking you to explain why it is.

[Mark G]

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?

[Imperial Dave]

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...?

[Ian61]

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...?

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.

[Erpingham]

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?

[Andreas Johansson]

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.)

[Ian61]

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?

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.

[Nick Harbud]

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.

[Erpingham]

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?

[Aetius]

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...

[nikgaukroger]

Various Spanish and, IIRC, there are pila like spears in the archaeological record of some Gallic areas. The Etruscans as well I believe.

[Nick Harbud]

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.

 

[DBS]

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...?

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.

[Erpingham]

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.