Jump to content

Pilum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, seePilum (disambiguation).
Pilum

Thepilum(Latin:[ˈpiːɫʊ̃];pl.:pila) was ajavelincommonly used by theRoman armyin ancient times. It was generally about 2 m (6 ft 7 in) long overall, consisting of an iron shank about 7 mm (0.28 in) in diameter and 600 mm (24 in) long with a pyramidal head, attached to a wooden shaft by either a socket or a flattang.

History[edit]

Thepilummay have originated from an Italic tribe known as theSamnites.[1][2][3]It also may have been influenced byCeltiberianandEtruscanweapons.[4]Thepilummay have derived from a Celtiberian weapon known as thefalarica.[5][6]Archaeological excavationshave disclosedpilain tombs at the Etruscan city ofTarquinia.[7]The oldest finds of pila are from the Etruscan settlements ofVulciandTalamone.[8]The first identified written reference to thepilumcomes fromThe HistoriesofPolybius.According to Polybius, more heavily armed soldiers of the Roman military used a type of spear called thehyssoí.This may have been thepilum.The precursor to thepilumwas thehasta.[9][10]It is unclear how soon it was replaced by thepilum.[11]Polybius mentioned that it was an important contributor to the Roman victory at theBattle of Telamonin 225 BCE.[12]Use of thepilumwas discontinued by Roman military in the second century.[13]

Design[edit]

Apilumhad a total weight between 1 and 2.5 kg (2 and 5 lb),[citation needed]with the versions produced during the earlierRepublicbeing slightly heavier than those produced in the laterEmpire.

The weapon had a hard pyramidal tip, but the shank was sometimes made of softer iron. The softness could cause the shank to bend after impact, thus rendering the weapon useless to the enemy.[14][15]Some[who?]believe that thepilumwas not meant to bend on impact, but instead was meant to break.[16]If apilumstruck a shield, it might embed itself, and the bending of the shank would force the enemy to discard his shield as unusable without removing thepilum,or carry around the shield burdened by the weight of thepilum.[17]Even if the shank did not bend, the pyramidal tip still made it difficult to pull out. Many cases occurred, though, in which the whole shank was hardened, making thepilummore suitable as a close-quartersmelee weaponand also making it usable by enemy soldiers.[18]

Although the bending of its shank is commonly seen as an integral part of the weapon's design and as an intentional feature, little evidence suggests that. The most commonly found artifacts suggest that thepilumwas constructed to use the weight of the weapon to cause damage, most likely to be able to impale througharmourand reach the enemy soldier's body. The combination of the weapon's weight and the aforementioned pyramidal tip (the design of which was seen in theMiddle Agesin the form ofbodkin arrowtips), made thepiluma formidable armour-piercing weapon. If the weapon was meant to be used against armour and to use its mass (as opposed to its speed) to cause damage, the bending of the shank seems to be a beneficial result of its intended use, which is to pierce through layers of armour. That thepilumneeded to pierce layers of armour (through the shield, into body armour and past clothing) necessitated a lengthy shank, which was prone to bending. M.C. Bishop wrote that the momentum of thepilumcaused the shank to bend upon impact, and although unintended, that proved a useful characteristic of the weapon.[19]However, a newer work by M. C. Bishop states thatpilaare "unlikely to bend under their own weight when thrown and striking a target or ground"; rather, human intervention such as improper removal of apilumstuck in a target is responsible in some way, and Caesar's writings should be interpreted as thepilumbending when soldiers tried to remove them.[20]

Legionaries carryingpila,as depicted on theTropaeum Traiani

Since the pyramidal tip of apilumwas wider than the rest of the shank, once it had penetrated a shield, it left behind a hole larger than the rest of the shank, and it could move through the shield with little resistance, stabbing the soldier behind. The length of the shank and its depth of penetration also made pulling it out of a shield more difficult, even if it failed to bend. If the bearer of the shield was charging and apilumpenetrated the shield, the end of the heavy shaft of thepilumwould hit the ground, holding the shield in place. Somepilahad a spike on the end of the shaft, which made it easier to dig into the ground.[citation needed]

The two versions ofpilaare heavy and light. Pictorial evidence suggests that some versions of the weapon were weighted by a lead ball to increase penetrative power, but archaeological specimens of that design variant are not (so far) known.[21]Recent experiments have shownpilato have a range around 33 m (110 ft), although the effective range is up to 15–20 m (50–65 ft). The earliest known examples of heavypilahave barbed heads and their tangs have a figure-eight shape.[22]

Romans also used thepilumas a melee weapon in close-quarters combat.[20]Note pictorial depictions from theTropaeum Traianimonument, descriptions ofCaesar's troops using javelins aspikesagainst the Gauls in Caesar'sGallic War,Book VII, and descriptions of Caesar's men using javelins to stab at Pompey's cavalry inPlutarch'sLife of Caesar.

Theangonwas a similar weapon used in late Roman and post-Roman times.

The origin of the design of thepilumis a matter of contention. Arguments have been proposed which suggest that the design stemmed from ancient Italian tribes or from the Iberian Peninsula. Considering that two versions of thepilumare known (the heavy and the light), the Romanpilummay be descended two different weapons, perhaps from different cultural groups. The two weapons designs may have coalesced into the form of the typical Romanpilumas it is known today.[23]

Tactics[edit]

Main article:Roman infantry tactics

Legionariesof the lateRepublicand earlyEmpireoften carried twopila,with one sometimes being lighter than the other. Standard tactics called for Roman soldiers to throw one of them (both if time permitted) at the enemy, just before charging to engage with thegladius;[24]however,Alexander Zhmodikovhas argued that the Roman infantry could usepilaat any stage in the fighting.[25]Zhmodikov has also argued that Roman battle tactics sometimes consisted of exchanging projectile weapons such as the pilum.Sam Koonargues against the idea that Roman tactics primarily consisted of projectile combat.[24]

The effect of thepilumthrow was to disrupt the enemy formation by attrition and by causing gaps to appear in any protective shield wall.[18]The design of thepilum's tip is such that once wedged inside a shield, it is difficult to remove; a shield thus penetrated by apilumbecame very awkward to wield, and was usually discarded. This resulted in the aforementioned gaps in the protective shield wall, which could then favour the shortgladiusin tight hand-to-hand mêlées.

Pilacould also be used in hand-to-hand combat; onedocumented instanceof this occurred at theSiege of Alesia,and another duringMark Antony'sParthian campaign.[26]Additionally,pilacould be employed as a thrusting implement and a barrier against cavalry charges.[27]Somepilahad small hand-guards, to protect the wielder if he intended to use it as a mêlée weapon, but apparently this was common.[citation needed]

Vegetius' commentary[edit]

Bentpilumshank

TheRomanwriterVegetius,in his workDe re militari,wrote:

As to the missile weapons of the infantry, they were javelins headed with a triangular sharp iron, eleven inches [279 mm] or a foot long, and were called piles. When once fixed in the shield it was impossible to draw them out, and when thrown with force and skill, they penetrated the cuirass without difficulty.[28]

And later in the same work:

They had likewise two other javelins, the largest of which was composed of a staff five feet and a half long and a triangular head of iron nine inches [230 mm] long. This was formerly called the pilum, but now it is known by the name of spiculum. The soldiers were particularly exercised in the use of this weapon, because when thrown with force and skill it often penetrated the shields of the foot and the cuirasses of the horse.[29]

Arguably, a short iron shaft has very few confirmations from archaeology. Vegetius wrote about a one-foot iron shaft because at his time, thepilumhad disappeared and been replaced by similar shorter weapons such as theplumbataandspiculum.

Results of experimental archaeology[edit]

Due in part toexperimental archaeology,the design of thepilumis believed to have evolved to be armour-piercing; the pyramidal head would punch a small hole through an enemy shield, allowing the thin shank to pass through and penetrate far enough to wound the man behind it. The thick wooden shaft provided the weight behind the punch.

In one description, one of the two iron nails that held the iron shaft in place was replaced with a weak wooden pin that would break on impact, causing the shaft to twist sideways.Gaius Mariusis sometimes given credit for that modification.[30]Archaeological evidence from the 80s BC through to the early imperial era show that this redesign was not adopted.[31]

Gallery[edit]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^Erdkamp, Paul, ed. (2007).A Companion to the Roman Army.Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. p. 8.doi:10.1002/9780470996577.ISBN978-0-470-99657-7.
  2. ^Jeon, Jeong-hwan; Kim, Sung-kyu; Koh, Jin-hwan (2015-12-22)."Historical review on the patterns of open innovation at the national level: the case of the roman period".Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity.1(2): 20.doi:10.1186/s40852-015-0026-4.hdl:10419/176513.ISSN2199-8531.
  3. ^Марибор, IZUM-Институт информацијских знаности."Greco-Macedonian Influences in the Manipular Legion System:: COBISS+".Arheologija I Prirodne Nauke(in Serbian) (11): 145–154.Retrieved2023-03-15.
  4. ^Quesada Sanz, Fernando (2006)."Not so different: individual fighting techniques and small unit tactics of Roman and Iberian armies within the framework of warfare in the Hellenistic Age".Pallas(70): 245–263.ISSN0031-0387.JSTOR43684935.
  5. ^Nardo, Don (2004).The Roman Army: An Instrument of Power.Lucent Books. p. 34.ISBN978-1-59018-316-8.
  6. ^"Not so different: individual fighting techniques and battle tactics of Roman and Iberian armies within the framework of warfare in the Hellenistic Age".Actes du Colloque International de Toulouse.2006 – viaResearchGate.
  7. ^D’Amato, Raffaele; Salimbeti, Andrea (2018).The Etruscans: 9th–2nd Centuries BC.Bloomsbury Publishing.ISBN978-1-4728-2830-9.
  8. ^Bohec, Le; Yann (Lyon) (2006),"Pilum",Brill’s New Pauly,Brill,retrieved2023-03-15
  9. ^Petrocelli, Corrado (2015),"Tactics: Republic",in Le Bohec, Yann (ed.),The Encyclopedia of the Roman Army,Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp. 979–1028,doi:10.1002/9781118318140.wbra1478,ISBN978-1-118-31814-0,retrieved2023-03-15
  10. ^Meiklejohn, K. W. (1938)."Roman Strategy and Tactics from 509 to 202 b.c."Greece & Rome.7(21): 170–178.doi:10.1017/S0017383500005623.ISSN1477-4550.S2CID162206844.
  11. ^Elliott, Simon (2020).Romans at War: The Roman Military in the Republic and Empire.Casemate.ISBN978-1-61200-886-8.
  12. ^Nijboer, Albert (1991)."Funerary Symbols on the Temple Decorations from the Talamonaccio".Papers from the Institute of Archaeology.2:17–29.doi:10.5334/pia.19.ISSN2041-9015.
  13. ^Kerrigan, Michael (2001).Ancient Rome and the Roman Empire.DK Pub. p. 42.ISBN978-0-7894-8153-5.
  14. ^"The Pilum (Spear)".romanmilitary.net.Retrieved1 January2021.
  15. ^Weapon: a visual history of arms and armor.New York: DK Publishing. 2013. p. 8.ISBN978-5-00100-945-0– via Internet Archive.
  16. ^Secci, Davide Antonio (2012-01-01)."Priam's Spear and Pyrrhus' Shield (Verg. A. 2.544-6)1)".Mnemosyne.65(3): 413–424.doi:10.1163/156852511X547956.ISSN0026-7074.
  17. ^Anglim, Simon; Rice, Rob S.; Jestice, Phyllis; Rusch, Scott; Serrati, John (2003).Fighting Techniques of the Ancient World (3000 B.C. to 500 A.D.): Equipment, Combat Skills, and Tactics.Macmillan. p. 7.ISBN978-0-312-30932-9.
  18. ^abCowan, Ross (2003)."Equipment".Roman legionary: 58 BC - AD 69.Osprey Publishing. pp. 25–26.ISBN978-1-84176-600-3.Retrieved8 February2012.[permanent dead link]
  19. ^Bishop, M.C.; Coulston, J.C.N. (2009).Roman Military Equipment from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome(2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford Books. pp. 50–51.ISBN9781842171592.
  20. ^abBishop, M.C. (2017).The Pilum: The Roman Heavy Javelin.Osprey Publishing.ISBN978-1472815880.
  21. ^Connolly, 1998, p233.
  22. ^Bishop, M.C.; Coulston, J.C.N. (2009).Roman Military Equipment from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome(2nd ed.). Oxford Books. p. 52.ISBN9781842171592.
  23. ^Bishop, M. C.; Coulston, J. C. N. (2009).Roman Military Equipment from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome(2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford Books. p. 52.ISBN9781842171592.
  24. ^abSlavik, Jordan F. (2017)."Pilum and Telum: The Roman Infantryman's Style of Combat in the Middle Republic".Classical Journal.113(2): 151–171.doi:10.1353/tcj.2017.0032.ISSN2327-5812.
  25. ^Zhmodikov, Alexander, 2000, "Roman Republican Heavy Infantrymen in Battle (IV–II Centuries B.C.)," inHistoria: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte,vol. 49 no. 1.
  26. ^"tois yssois paiontes."Plutarch."Life of Mark Antony, 45.3".Retrieved2011-09-27.
  27. ^Arrian's Array against the Alans. "And the front four ranks of the formation must be of spearmen, whose spearpoints end in thin iron shanks. And the foremost of them should hold them at the ready, in order that when the enemies come near them, they can thrust the iron points of the spears at the breast of the horses in particular. Those standing in second, third and fourth rank of the formation must hold their spears ready for thrusting if possible, wounding the horses and killing the horsemen and put the rider out of action with the spear stuck in their heavy body armour and the iron point bent because of the softness. The following ranks should be of the javelineers."Dorst, Sander van."Arrian's Array against the Alans".Retrieved2010-10-03.
  28. ^Vegetius."Book I".De Re Militari.Archived fromthe originalon 2021-05-06.Retrieved2006-08-24.
  29. ^Vegetius."Book II".De Re Militari.Archived fromthe originalon 2021-05-06.Retrieved2006-08-24.
  30. ^Plutarch, "Gaius Marius", 25.2
  31. ^Taylor 2019,p. 78;Matthew 2010,pp. 65–66. Matthew believes the redesign was a one-time expedient and that Marius's rapid departure from active command in the immediate aftermath of victory over the Cimbri prevented the redesign from being fully adopted.

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related toPilums.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pilum&oldid=1222256834"