Slingers vs Javelinmen

[GiveWarAchance]

This is one of the longest debates I've ever seen online.
What is the debate about? I skimmed through a bit of it but can't figure it out.

[JorgenCAB]

Stupid question becasue it is easier to shoot from a distance that sneak close to a prey so has nothing to do with the skill of the weapon.

It would certainly be easier to learn how to hit a target at 30m with a Javelin than 100m with a Bow. We all know bows was notoriously difficult to use on the battlefields and the training to become an archer fit for war took a very long time. Romans eventually trained their own archers which were extensive training programs unlike that from regular legionaries.

No, you are basing this on experience of Medieval archers which are totally different thing to ancient archers.. Medieval English archers were specialist troops. they used a lot heavier bows than any ancient archer had, most of them would be unable even use it.. their technique was different, arrows used were a lot heavier than anything used in ancient times... typical English war-arrow was at least 2x heavier than ancient arrows.. some ancient archers used just 40-50g arrows, which were lighter than flight arrows, therefore were completely useless against armor or shields.. Using English Warbow required extensive training, because you had to build body mass, muscles etc..

With javelins, its the very same.. to use them effectively, you had to have developed body mass... ancient times give plenty of examples that Javelin throwing was practiced from youth, every single citizen Hoplite was trained to use javelin.. There were many sport competition where Javelin throw was one of important disciplines, not just Olympic games..
Skilled javelinmen were extremely accurate with their throws. you dont believe it possible? look at baseball players and their throw accuracy. or just rewatch the video with those kids doing those trickshots i posted yesterday.. Go ask university trainers who train athletes javelin throwing how "easy" is to master a javelin...

No... not even remotely true.. Creatan archers trained for decades just like medieval archers same with eastern archers that had incorporated the art of the bow into their culture. Archers came from these cultures and were expensive to hire, that is proof enough.

Roman soldiers trained with javeline for basic training for a few month and that was all that was needed. Even I can throw a spear decently enough to hit a formation at 30m, hitting the same thing with a bow at much further range is much harder. There are NO debates about this what so ever that I know of among historians, this is all your conjecture.

[JorgenCAB]

believe or not, but skirmishers usually didnt aimed at some particular men in the formation... they tried to hit the formation..

Skilled javelinmen were extremely accurate with their throws. you dont believe it possible? look at baseball players and their throw accuracy. or just rewatch the video with those kids doing those trickshots i posted yesterday.. Go ask university trainers who train athletes javelin throwing how "easy" is to master a javelin...

But i think that the point is that you don’t have to “master” a javelin to hit a formation—I've never thrown a javelin but I'm reasonably sure i could go outside right now and chuck a javelin 30 meters into a house-sized object like a phalanx...

you don't need to master it, anyway javelin throwing had strong tradition in both Greek and Roman society, young boys compete against each other in javelin throwing to show their prowess.. Whole point of youngsters joining the Velites was to prove themselves in front of others.. Originally, not all Velites were wearing the wolf skin - wolf has a special place in Roman mythology - typically, only those Velites who did something exceptional deserved the right to wear it - like for example challenge enemy into one on one combat and defeat him.. (but eventually animal skin wearing got wide spreaded)


Anyway both Romans and Greeks used archers as well - in their NAVY. Each Athenian Trireme carried 3-4 archers, while Romans typically had similar number of archers on their ships too (more on quinquerems) Important fact here is, that Romans considered naval service as less prominent, even lower class citizens that couldn't join the legions were allowed to serve in navy...

This say it all, it was tradition to use javelins therefore it was easy for Romans to incorporate them with relatively little effort which incidentally was the same with other cultures that used the bow. It sure took long practice to master any weapon but javelin certainly didn't need high mastery to be reasonably accurate at 30m while slings and bows needed extensive practice to hit targets at greater ranges.

[JorgenCAB]

This is one of the longest debates I've ever seen online.
What is the debate about? I skimmed through a bit of it but can't figure it out.

It is about how light javelins are portrayed in the game and according to JaM2013 they are a far superior weapon to both slings and bow and should be more effective against armoured targets because they had individually better armour penetration capacity, which is true. The argument is that the weight of fire from other weapon types help to offset the limited ammunition and rate of fire from javelin armed infantry thus in game terms they have roughly the same impact.

I also think he said at some point that skirmishing javeline troops should essentially have the ability to rout heavy infantry on their own, even highly disciplined troops. I might agree that missile weapons of the time might do that with raw or untrained troops but not anything above that on their own... at least it would have to be a rather rare thing.

[GiveWarAchance]

I wonder why they slingshots they used back then were those awkward type you have to swing around in a circle and hope it releases in the direction of the enemy. Modern slingshots seem much more simple and easy to use and are very accurate even for a beginner to soon learn. Ancient slingshots had heavier shot but I can tell from a modern slingshot with steel rounds that one hit would finish off most people if not wearing armor.

[JorgenCAB]

I have read that ancient slingshots would often result in serious concussions even if hit in the helmets properly and if hit on the body (even with mail) could cause fatal internal bleeding. Even arrow wounds was generally thought of as easier to treat as long as you did not die from infections. The only thing that properly protected you was some form of plate that could distribute the blunt force impact properly if hit straight on at any hard part of the body.

[JaM2013]

what targets? formations of infantry? please... that could be done with ease with just few hours of training.. you don't need to be expert on that..

and btw, Cretans were not just archers. they were also using javelins. and why they were used? because they had nothing better to do, so they went to the world and sold themselves into service as mercenaries... same as Greek Hoplites did and many of them fought against Alexander at Gaugamela..

and i'm not sure why you still use that 30m.. when its well known that both Greek and Roman skirmishers used amentum/ankyle by default... which is portrayed on every vase or tomb where javelins are shown..

I also think he said at some point that skirmishing javeline troops should essentially have the ability to rout heavy infantry on their own, even highly disciplined troops. I might agree that missile weapons of the time might do that with raw or untrained troops but not anything above that on their own... at least it would have to be a rather rare thing.

i've never said that...

[JorgenCAB]

what targets? formations of infantry? please... that could be done with ease with just few hours of training.. you don't need to be expert on that..

and btw, Cretans were not just archers. they were also using javelins. and why they were used? because they had nothing better to do, so they went to the world and sold themselves into service as mercenaries... same as Greek Hoplites did and many of them fought against Alexander at Gaugamela..

and i'm not sure why you still use that 30m.. when its well known that both Greek and Roman skirmishers used amentum/ankyle by default... which is portrayed on every vase or tomb where javelins are shown..

You are living in a fantasy land and have not even tried to shoot with a bow that way, it is hard to do and take allot of training. I have done it and know people who practice it regularly who will tell you that it is hard to learn.

I only used 30m as a placeholder, I don't know at what distance they would normally throw at. Archers usually shot effectively at 50-100m even if they could shoot further but accuracy dropped rapidly after that, i believe the same is true for javelins but I don't know at what realistic distance they usually engaged.

[JaM2013]

I wonder why they slingshots they used back then were those awkward type you have to swing around in a circle and hope it releases in the direction of the enemy. Modern slingshots seem much more simple and easy to use and are very accurate even for a beginner to soon learn. Ancient slingshots had heavier shot but I can tell from a modern slingshot with steel rounds that one hit would finish off most people if not wearing armor.

slingers usually used various types of stones and lead projectiles.. some Balearic slingers were known for being able to throw quite heavy rocks at short range, while being quite accurate with it.. sling requires a lot of skill to use, its probably the simplest weapon of all, but the most complicated to learn how to use effectively... you can take a bow and in one hour you will hit the target at decent distance.. good luck doing this with sling.

You are living in a fantasy land and have not even tried to shoot with a bow that way, it is hard to do and take allot of training. I have done it and know people who practice it regularly who will tell you that it is hard to learn.

except i have, i own reflex bow, and go shooting with friends few times a month... kids can learn how to shoot in one hour... but of course, you will tell me that Reflex is too easy to use, and i will reply that i actually tried all kinds of bows some even hand made historical replicas..

Roman soldiers trained with javeline for basic training for a few month and that was all that was needed. Even I can throw a spear decently enough to hit a formation at 30m, hitting the same thing with a bow at much further range is much harder. There are NO debates about this what so ever that I know of among historians, this is all your conjecture.

they were not soldiers... they were citizens and no, Republican legionaries did not train for months... they were levied for campaigns and were send where needed... there was no time to train them in combat for months when they were supposed to return before winter..., and whenever there was such thing mentioned, it was something exceptional, like when Cimbrians and Teutons wiped out Consular legions... every citizen eligible for service trained with weapons on its own.. they were typically farmers... Late republican reforms changed that, but it was not sudden change but series of changes actually. (but thats besides the point, as Velites were no longer part of the legion at that point)

[GiveWarAchance]

I wouldn't want to live in a hovel next to an army slinger ranger. Those ancient slings must have flung rocks in all 360 degrees when used by beginners. Like if you had a barbeque party in front of your hovel, probably a few party goers would be hit by errant rocks.

[JorgenCAB]

except i have, i own reflex bow, and go shooting with friends few times a month... kids can learn how to shoot in one hour... but of course, you will tell me that Reflex is too easy to use, and i will reply that i actually tried all kinds of bows some even hand made historical replicas..

Well it is not... draw a line at 80m then try to hit that line within roughly 3-4m and imagine the line moving at a steady pace against you... also imagine doing it under stress.

I train both martial arts and weapons training for five to six hours a week and know how stress will make things ten time more difficult. You need real experience and skill to pull it off. It is far easier to hit a closer target no matter what weapon you use.

If you own a bow and shoot with it that often you know that it is not as easy as you let on, especially bows with a draw weight of 70+lbs. Ancient recurve bows had somewhere between 70-100lbs in draw weight, roughly.

[JaM2013]

except i have, i own reflex bow, and go shooting with friends few times a month... kids can learn how to shoot in one hour... but of course, you will tell me that Reflex is too easy to use, and i will reply that i actually tried all kinds of bows some even hand made historical replicas..

Well it is not... draw a line at 80m then try to hit that line within roughly 3-4m and imagine the line moving at a steady pace against you... also imagine doing it under stress.

I train both martial arts and weapons training for five to six hours a week and know how stress will make things ten time more difficult. You need real experience and skill to pull it off. It is far easier to hit a closer target no matter what weapon you use.

If you own a bow and shoot with it that often you know that it is not as easy as you let on, especially bows with a draw weight of 70+lbs. Ancient recurve bows had somewhere between 70-100lbs in draw weight, roughly.

Stress factor would be a lot worse with javelin.. if anything, you are at least 2x closer to enemy... you rush forward, release and run back.. and if they are throwing javelins back at you, stress would be even higher... and i cant even imagine what it would be like hunting let say boar with a javelin... which was quite common thing back then, or even in medieval times.... just recently saw a video with african tribesmen training with their Iklwa javelins.. they use them against lions... one of them claimed to kill 5 lions with it.. you would need another level of bravery to do that...

[JorgenCAB]

except i have, i own reflex bow, and go shooting with friends few times a month... kids can learn how to shoot in one hour... but of course, you will tell me that Reflex is too easy to use, and i will reply that i actually tried all kinds of bows some even hand made historical replicas..

Well it is not... draw a line at 80m then try to hit that line within roughly 3-4m and imagine the line moving at a steady pace against you... also imagine doing it under stress.

I train both martial arts and weapons training for five to six hours a week and know how stress will make things ten time more difficult. You need real experience and skill to pull it off. It is far easier to hit a closer target no matter what weapon you use.

If you own a bow and shoot with it that often you know that it is not as easy as you let on, especially bows with a draw weight of 70+lbs. Ancient recurve bows had somewhere between 70-100lbs in draw weight, roughly.

Stress factor would be a lot worse with javelin.. if anything, you are at least 2x closer to enemy... you rush forward, release and run back.. and if they are throwing javelins back at you, stress would be even higher... and i cant even imagine what it would be like hunting let say boar with a javelin... which was quite common thing back then, or even in medieval times.... just recently saw a video with african tribesmen training with their assegai javelins.. they use them against lions... one of them claimed to kill 5 lions with it.. you would need another level of bravery to do that...

The thing is that with range come increasing difficulty almost exponentially. But sure... go against every historical resource that tells us over and over that archery required extensive training to be effective on the battlefield. I know that javelin training was not trivial either but most sources say it was far easier than using slings or bows. But you are entitled to your own opinions but not facts.

[JaM2013]

javelin throw requires the most of movement synchronization, proper angle or release, etc... it is the most technique intensive of those three. throwing is easy to do, but very hard to master.. with bow, you get into decent level of effectivity faster. with archery, you train your aim (and strength to some degree), with javelin throwing, you must train your body movement and coordination, dynamics,your muscles must be built for speed not just strength... its way harder to stay in shape for it.. you really don't need to be that fast with bows.. (unless you practice reflexive shooting, but that's for different discussion)

its also one of the reasons why Triarii were not using Pilum, but thrusting Hasta... at 40+ years old, they were no longer considered in prime strength.. they could not match youger guys, most of them being farmers, would start to feel their backs... (thats why i dont think they deserve to be marked as Elite in FoG2.)

look at it this way - you live in society where your combat prowess as young guy let say 16-17 years old, depends on your ability to throw javelin best you can... because that was how you could get into Velites, make up your name mean something and maybe eventually climb a step on the social ladder of Roman society... it was not uncommon to reward those who fought well, Velites fought in front of their legions so everybody could see how good or bad they are... (it was not that uncommon to adopt a guy from lesser family back then, and many Patricians did that)

[JaM2013]

also, forgot to mentioned one interesting thing - Gallic famous naked warriors - Gaesatae - were named after heavy javelin they used - Gaesum.. so their name practically was "Javelin throwers"...

[JorgenCAB]

I don't question Roman culture, just your view of sources saying otherwise.

[SnuggleBunnies]

I was going to just let this thread die, but seeing as it's still going and I'm feeling masochistic today:

JaM, I think many of the examples you use are misleading, or can be interpreted in multiple ways.

1) Let's get the easy one out of the way first. You mentioned the fact that the Zulus used javelins. This fact is irrelevant for two reasons. First of all, the Zulus were so effective in battle precisely because they moved away from the previous emphasis on throwing spears to tactics based on a rapid close to shock action. Second, you know what else was being used, somewhere in the world, in 1879? Matchlocks, crossbows, bows, spears, and swords. The fact that they were in use doesn't make any of these weapons state of the art for the time, they were simply the best that some people could get their hands on.

2) Kerns and Jinetes. Yes, both used javelins into the Renaissance. Yet neither were particularly valued for their efficacy in battle. Instead, they excelled in skirmishing and raiding, which is no surprise as both came into being in geographical areas that were continually beset by what we would call guerrilla warfare. Also Irish fighters were noted for being very lightly armored by the standards of the time. Finally, it's not a coincidence that javelins were largely relegated to skirmishers and outriders by this time - the primary missile weapons being, respectively, the longbow in England, the crossbow on the continent (the real armor piercer), and the recurve bow to the east. In any case, I don't think armament was central to the role they played - Stradiots and Border Horse were armed with a variety of weapons, and were used quite similarly to jinetes.

3) Athenian peltasts. The famous victories of light troops over hoplites were Lechaeum and Sphacteria. Yet looking closely at these battles shows that the javelin as a weapons was not really important to the result. For one thing, hoplites of this time mostly wore open faced helmets, carried shields, and... that was it for protection. A minority wore the linthorax. More important than armament was the tactical situation. At Lechaeum, the Spartans neglected to bring their own light troops, failed to unleash their cavalry, and suffered accordingly. If the Athenians had brought other missile troops instead, the result likely would have been similar. At Sphacteria, the Spartans had either no or very few light troops (in the form of helot attendants) and were vastly outnumbered (around 20-1). The Athenian light infantry included not just javelinmen, but archers and the rowers of the fleet throwing stones. These used their mobility to avoid contact. Again, armament seems of secondary importance.

Both battles were long, grinding, attritional affairs. They are a strong indication that heavy troops would have little to fear from a short barrage of missiles during a pitched battle; prolonged missile fire was needed to dishearten even heavy infantry who were unable to strike back at all.

And if javelinmen were so effective, why don't we hear about them in the great pitched battles? Likely because, skirmishing with their counterparts, they achieved little of note, lacking the time to damage heavy infantry formations. Demosthenes' Aetolian campaign gives us a clue - the Athenian force held out against a superior force of javelinmen as long as their archers had arrows. Once these ran out, they were overrun. This isn't to say that archers were more effective than javelinmen, only to say that a small number of skirmishers could tie down more numerous enemy skirmishers for a surprisingly long time. Because any army of appreciable size was bound to have its own light troops, we don't hear of javelins (or arrows, or sling stones) having any great effect at battles like Delium, Mantinea, etc, as the skirmishers fought each other and seemed to have done little else.

4) You mention both javelins used by skirmishers, and by heavy infantry. In game, the javelins hurled before contact by heavy infantry are represented by Light Spear and Impact Foot traits, the latter especially being quite powerful.

[GiveWarAchance]

You should keep this thread going to get a world record for non-political topic debate length.
I will add some fuel to the fire....

So which are better after all this talk: javelins or slings?

[SnuggleBunnies]

Trollolol. Well done. I will douse the flames with: it depends. On who is using them, and who they are using them against.

[grumblefish]

Why do archers outrange slingers in this game, considering that Xenophon says slingers outranged archers and could effectively keep them at bay?

Which archers (using which bows) Is the question though... Greek, Persian , Cretan?


Pretty interesting article on somewhat recent finds in Britain, link below....

they estimate 200 meters with a 50 gram bullet....

https://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/ ... nswark.htm

Well, the quote I'm referring to is from the Anabasis:

"...for the Rhodian slingers carried farther with their missiles than the Persians, farther even than the Persian bowmen."

Xen. Anab. 3.4