I often wonder if the issues with weapons like these is that they're too easy and intuitive to use, relative to the amount of damage they can inflict. The enemy being able to pick them up and throw them back at you with a reasonable degree of success might be why usage didn't persist as long as you might think it would at first. While you could argue the same holds true with other ranged weapons, the gap in effectiveness between trained and untrained use is likely much wider with those alternatives, particularly if those ranged alternatives require additional equipment to use that the enemy may not possess in large numbers (bows with appropriate draw length, slings, etc.)
Some very good points to think about here - thank you. I have been thinking about this over the last couple of days and I suspect you may have seen at least a large part of the reason. Spears, javelins, medieval fletched darts all require skill to throw back a significant distance. Arrows and bolts require compatible devices and skill. Sling stones require skill. These are so easy to throw, literally anyone can use them effectively or really effectively, making them a significant 'return hazard'.
The first thing I thought when I saw this video was "What's the point? Plumbata seem pretty idiot proof and I can't imagine the force difference being significant enough to make a difference.
@@tods_workshop They have a degree of return prevention via the barbs, but that requires that they penetrate far enough for the barbs to catch on something. I think what may have killed them off would be armor and shields. If you do any more experiments on hardened gambeson I'd encourage you to test out the plumbata against it.
I think it's necessary to bear in mind the overall tactic of using pila or plumbata when trying to assess the risk of them being thrown back at you. These weapons were used to soften up an enemy and to create gaps in his formation before closing to hand-to-hand combat, being thrown as part of the advance and at the appropriate distance. Unless the enemy formation is stationary (in which case they are sitting targets for another volley of pila, or several of plumbata), any of the enemy soldiers who pause to pick up a weapon will break their own formation; realistically it's only the front rank or two who might be able to pull a plumbata out of their shield (if one were even to stick there) and throw it back in a simple overarm throw without breaking step, and to do that they either have to transfer their weapon to their shield hand for a few seconds or sheath and then unsheathe a sword or tuck and draw an axe in a belt or belt loop. Unless that's a practiced manoeuvre they're causing problems for themselves, and yet meanwhile the Romans have had plenty of time to draw their gladii and close to fighting distance. Given also that Roman legionaries tended to be better armoured than their foes, and carry a larger shield, they were much less likely to be affected by any sporadic return fire. By the 3rd century CE, when there was significant turmoil in the Empire that adversely affected trade and the economy, leading to less money with which to maintain an army in the field, legionaries were more likely to be outfitted with a mail shirt and smaller shield much as the auxiliaries had been for centuries. Perhaps the introduction of plumbata was a response to this, a recognition that the move away from heavy armour meant a greater need to whittle away at the enemy before closing to fight. In any case, we can be sure that if the tactic had turned out to be disadvantageous it would have been dropped very quickly.
This is Thrand! love your videos and years ago I got the same results with my pilum test on my RUclips channel ThegnThrand, its awesome to see them done more in depth!
Kinda cool how the average height and strength was so much lower in the past, but the biggest, strongest people were about the same as they are now. Just imagine what it would have been like to be a 5'7" guy in the bronze age and have someone the size of Shaq throw a javelin at you.
Can imagine if you're in a group of 100 people and being attacked by another hundred and your side chucks 400 darts at the enemy they will do quite some damage and the aim isn't as much of a problem since you aim at the enemy group.
@@elgostineYep. At worst a deterrent, at best you hit all of them. On average against say a group of five I would expect one kill and put the rest in disarray as they attempt to dodge, then have to pick the things out of their shields and maille. Not an insignificant psychological weapon either. A lethal hit will probably not kill instantly- the victim will stagger, fall and cry out to his fellows before dying. A nonlethal hit in say an arm or leg will incapacitate with the victim basically getting in his fellows’ way. In either case the rest will be thinking about how much fun it won’t be when it’s their turn.
This was my thought as I watched as well. I can't really see throwing them an individual, trying to hit a specific place. But I can see a relatively short gap being filled with 50 or 100 or 400 of these things being rained into a group maybe killing men, maybe injuring men and horse but overall just causing chaos.
If you're being charged by a group and you're in a group this is what I call the golden window where you all have the opportunity to throw *something* and the thing is... It's literally free.... You can all throw something, they don't even have to be the same things, 50 guys throwing a rock.... 2 guys crumple to the floor? What have you lost? It's cost nothing and now your line has 2 less guys to deal with. There's really no reason at all for battlefield infantry to never not carry some kind of projectile for a group volley, 1 guy is something when its free and costs you nothing tactically.
Having Michael as a thrower is a fine addition for the channel. Especially considering that these, like the pilum before, were new to him. If you think about that, and how many months and years of training legionnaires would have for accuracy… it makes these weapons much more scary. Thank you! ❤
You're entirely right. It's also worth bearing in mind that Michael is both physically bigger, and has had more intensive general throwing practice, than the average legionary. How much that is counterweighted by familiarity with this particular weapon is anyone's guess.
@@QuantumHistorian not to mention if you've got 50 people throwing 50 of these at 50 other people then the slight misses left and right of the target dont matter as much
What is surprising is how much Michael was hindered by the armor and shields. Even though Michael is bigger and has more javelin practice than your average historical legionaire, his range while wearing armor, carrying a shield, etc was surprisingly short.
@@Intranetusa And I think that is where the practice must come in. For longer throws though, I expect the Legionnaires put the shield down , then threw, because you are quite right , Michael's entire performance was compromised by the armor and shield.
@@fredericrike5974 It doesn't need to be either-or, it's not like you do those things by the book always, just what needs to be done. I bet that only first lines could throw anyway, then if you had a chance, people from behind would give you more ammo or change places, and if the checker board formation was a real thing, then the guys in the second row could throw pila and the guys behind front unit that is engaging could give some pila to the second row to assist them in skirmish. In games the whole javelin/slinger unit uses it's ammo at the same time, but if the ranks were deep, the back rows would never be able to throw. I bet they were more scattered, slings need a bit of space anyway. These plumbata though, you can throw them from tighter space, and that could be handy even for some guys doing guard duty, trying to get a runner apprehended.
Hello, a historian of antiquity here. First of all thank you for doing this, such re-enactments are a great way of learning about ancient military art. Secondly, there are some great points being brought up in the comments already, but since late Roman military history being somewhat of my specialty, I may have some things to add. - You do wonder why plumbata was not used more widely - it was - in the late Roman legions it pretty much replaced other throwing weapons, pilum included. We are talking about a force that numbered about half a million troops in its heyday - that is a pretty wide use. - The reason why the Romans abandoned heavier javelins in favour of those darts seem to be the range, which you observed in the video. Late Roman army focused much more on its ability to fling various projectiles at its enemies - archers became far more common and so were the darts. The limited armour piercing capabilities were less of a concern because, as someone observed in the comments, many Roman enemies wore very little armour, but also, a lot of them were mounted (think Goths or Huns). Horses are large targets and they were unarmoured. I imagine the ability to throw quickly many of such projectiles at range could effectively break up an enemy cavalry charge. It was also a way for Roman infantry to get back at enemy horse archers - a classical Roman legionary could only hide behind a shield. - Telling why plumbata fell out of use is difficult. Late Roman army was a quite unique force, because it relied on conscripts who received weaponry from state arsenals (fabricae). For that reason plumbata are perfect - a weapon that is effective and requires next to no skill to use. It is a specialist weapon, it does one thing, but it does it well. It has a very limited use outside of pitched battles. So, while I can see plumbata being assigned as a part of uniform military kit, I cannot imagine a poor peasant who is getting conscripted into fyrd and has to supply his own weapons come up with crafting such darts. A regular javelin can be used in melee, and does not require lead weights, fletchings, etc., you can use it as a walking stick. But, if you are a trained man-at-arms, and you opt for a projectile weapon, why not choose a bow or crossbow instead - they have far superior range, ammunition is lighter and arguably more deadly. They require skill to use, but you are a trained soldier, so that is less of an issue. I personally doubt that 'return fire' was a consideration. In the heat of battle one probably focused more on staying alive and not getting hit by such a dart than running out of formation, grabbing one and chucking it at the enemy. History of warfare features 'returnable' weapons being very commonly used (regular javelins for example). Sometimes it probably happened that you got your own projectile thrown back at you, but the effect on the overall battle of that was likely neglegible.
I would imagine that in the case of horse archers, they would probably be less inclined to "return fire". At least not picking up plumbatae from the ground. (do I have the plural form correct?)
I remember reading in the 10th century byzantine treaty De velitatione bellica that thematic infantry was supposed to shoot stones (with sling ?) and missiles at the ennemy. I wonder if it was some kind of plumbata.
Return fire probably isn't a problem as long as you've gained ground and give your enemy no chance to organise, regroup, collect and have scattered them anyway. It strikes me that the Romans used psychology as much as technology. Deploying weapons that didn't necessarily kill but caused pain, injury, confusion, disorder and panic seemed as important. Then, if they maintained their own good order, they could advance and finish the enemy off. Clever and very brutal lot.
I see them being useful for sieges as well. Especially since a untrained peasant could learn to use them fast. I don't see why a lord of a castle wouldn't store some for a rainy day. I guess they favored other types of war darts we see from that period.
On return fire, the Romans spent alot of time fighting technologically inferior enemies right? If you're just chucking very nice, forged arrowheads and lead weights at people who might not have the industrial base to make that themselves. Could just be Roman propaganda as well
Great video as always! You've demonstrated how light, rapid-firing and armour piercing plumbata really were. I especially enjoyed the "whooshing" sounds you've captured in your helmet camera. This brings you to as real an experience as we can imagine facing these flying darts.
It'll sure make you raise your shield if you have one. Good luck if you dont. And if you make it through it you still have to deal with professional troops.
It's scary to us, for sure. But how does it compare to seeing a horde of men charge you, spears stabbing inches from your face? In comparison to how trouser-browning a pre-modern battle was generally, the ranged weapon phase might be relatively tranquil. It's really hard to get into the psychology of experiences so far removed from modern life. But we can note that accounts of formations breaking from receiving ranged weapons in antiquity is exceedingly rare (the few are from extended, hours long bombardment iirc), but charges broke men fairly often, and prolonged hand-to-hand fighting almost always ended with one side running away. That's a hint as to what scared warriors the most.
0:27 imagine this is the last thing you see before you meet your creators Reality for tens of thousands of warriors of the past. Fantastic throwing, great video, Tod
Yes, I wish 'ancient weapons testing' sort of content came back into fashion, even better when modern high speed cameras are involved, the trend seems to have died down about 10 years ago.
I would love to see Micheal try to use an atlatl, a war dart, a war dart with the leather finger hook. We also need a playlist of all of the videos with Micheal.
Doesn't really matter how accurate or damaging those are individually, it must have been pretty risky/unnerving to be in a body of troops trying to close with a cohort hurling plumbata at you, 6 of them per man.
I'd imagine fighting "barbarians" where they might not wear helmets of the highest quality if any at all, maybe some light armor etc. Clearly they used these for a reason, can you imagine standing 70+ meters away and these start raining down and you don't have a helmet. That's a bad day.
I imagine accuracy on those strong throws would be better with practice, but even when they weren't penetrating those things flying at you is going to make a person flinch. And flinching when you're 15 meters away is probably not going to go well.
Just imagine: you're attacking. The target has plumbatas, bows, rocks, hot oil, and dead animals. There isn't enough loot to make me run through that hail of debris. Scary.
@@huldu"barbarians" actually wore helmets. Celts, vikings, whatever. They were not stupid, and not barbarians either. That's just a fabrication of stories.
I think one thing to keep in mind is also that many of Rome's enemies regularly didn't even have armor as good as the mail shirt as a kind of standard level of armor, and even if they did there were often quite a few bits that were effectively unarmored like how leg armor was not nearly as comprehensive at the time. Just getting one of those stuck into an arm or leg would absolutely ruin your average person's day and cause them to either be a lot less effective or outright incapable of fighting, much less if some poor unarmored guy took one in the chest or abdomen.
Most of the mail shirts didn't even have sleeves or much padding under them either. Shields were of varying sizes but you toss two quick volleys, one high arching down one low. and straight Then the enemy have to choose where to put their shields..........that's a problem as well. Remember there isn't just one line of men carrying these........there are multiple lines and they can all do different things simultaneously.
It seems that chain mail was adopted by Romans from Celts...so some Barbarians must have had it. I doubt that it would have been all that strong seeing that late Iron age steel wasn't at the level that even the Romans got it to.
@@answeris4217 Some absolutely did, but many did not, and that seems to have been a pretty common thing for many of Rome's enemies. The better off Gauls, Celts, Caledonians, etc would usually have metal armor of one kind or another but many soldiers wouldn't have it - making big parts of the armies of many enemies Rome faced incredibly vulnerable to plumbata thrown both at a distance and point-blank.
It's really a measure of professional armies. Those cultures that had professional armies paid for training and equipment. Those which couldn't afford this or it just wasn't really possible, would have had less training and/or equipment. The roman armies didn't do so well against other nations with professional armies because they had similar technology, training and would learn to counter or defeat roman tactics. The roman approach was generally to trade with these nations rather than make war against them. Against non-professional armies though, the roman armies were very effective (but then so were the Greek, etc).
You can make boiled leather armor or gambeson that's just as good as chainmail and I'm sure every Celt or German warrior could afford it unless he WANTED to go into battle shirtless.
Your plugs are so fair you talk about yourself for 10-15 seconds back to the video i love it and this is exactly what is gonna make me check out your shop. Not interupting my video at all bravo for real
I love seeing Michael in these. In the first film with him it looked like he was pretty wary, but he's really gotten into it and it's fun to see the experimentation.
I think that it's important to remember that these might not have been intended as weapons against an individual target. Think of a formation, shoulder to shoulder, advancing to melee distance. It's not supremely important that you aim at one man and hit that one man. If you miss him, there are men beside him and behind him so you're going to hit somebody. From the target's perspective, you've got these things flying at you and maybe you duck your head and avoid getting it in the face, and maybe your duck puts your face right in the way! Also consider that a lot of the "barbarians" facing the Romans had swords, spears, shields, and maybe a helmet. The majority didn't have mail or other body armor. Those men could easily have taken disabling or fatal wounds. Again, well done!
Even if he missed the target a few times, in a battlefield situation, it's very likely he would have hit the guy standing in the second rank. When you are in a target rich environment, accuracy isn't quite as important as it is against a singular target.
That’s like saying that blackpowder pistols didn’t die out until the 80’s because you could still buy one for “recreation” purposes. Until they recalled them due to a few lost fingers amongst buyers…lol
Tod, your broadhead is limiting the penetration on target. If you change it to an harpoon design it will go right through shield and mail, and get stuck. On the forge, split an iron nail in one inch alongside, bend it back making 2 little barbs, and sharpen them into a small broadhead. It will act as a broad head till it meet resistence, like ribs, mail or a shield. Then it will bend, closing the barbs to the nail, passing through without effort, but get stuck and open the barbs if someone tries to pull it out. This also more accurate to archeological findings, as well as being called little barbs of Mars!
Agree completely. Also, the fletchings are much too large! Both in breadth and length. They are robbing the darts of their power and are highly unstable..which is obvious in your demo. And why not conform to the broadly held belief that the fletches were mounted above the hand, as described by Vegetius iirc. Good job on getting a competent thrower. Just need to tighten the darts up.
This is Thrand! love your videos and years ago I got the same results with my pilum test on my RUclips channel ThegnThrand, its awesome to see them done more in depth!
I love Todd's enthusiasm during these live tests with the javelin thrower guest. It really is always fun to see historical material science and weapon design in action.
Not even a minute in, and we're getting High Velocity Plubata? Tod, Michael, thank you both. I didn't know I needed to know anything about this, but I'm even more curious now!
Had a really cool experience one time with reenactors. I got assigned as a balearic slinger, along with a bunch of late roman army. They sent a volley of plumbata at a group of vikings,which held their shields up high to defend from the plumbatas raining down on them,coming from 50m. Me as a single slinger,got 4-5 of them in the thighs and knees with tomatoes,coming fast and flat,at 50. Tomatoes were sploding on their legs,and they were jumping from pain. So high arc range attack combined with flat shooting simultaneously must had been a killer combo. 100-150 gram stones of would have taken out those 4-5 vikings with broken legs,and that's under a minute by one slinger. Arrows would work too,combined with javelins,or plumbata.
Pretty clear use combined with your choice of direct fire weaponry. Give approaching soldiers the poor choice of lifting their shields to protect from falling plumbata or forward to stop the missiles coming at them from the front. The testudo formation is a clear direct response to this sort of tactic, and has its own weaknesses.
They might not have the stopping or penetrating power of other thrown weapons, but I can imagine them being very annoying and effective enough to break formations and create openings for the more devastating weapons
They dont have to be as good as a javelin on an individual basis, they just need to be as good as their weight in javelins, since they are going to be carried around a lot more than they are thrown.
@@contagioushavoc5794 They don't even need to be as good as their weight in javalin - being so small and easy to carry it becomes easy to carry way more than the equivalent weight of javalin. And as volume of fire and the ability to sustain fire are both in their favour I'd say they could be rather less combat effective than a javalin too - you don't actually have to kill, cripple or even dish out painful but shot lived wounds if you can win the psychological battle. A few hundred of these things raining down on you is certainly not going to be great for morale, even if that same weight of javalins would actually have killed many more of your friends.
I think throwing them like a dart at close range would help with your accuracy without sacrificing the power. They would definitely be a major threat to anyone fighting against the romans. They seem like a perfect weapon to stop mounted opponents. They would easily shred their horses.
Nice to see you "throw" another video together! You really got your "point" across! Seriously, through, I like these videos! My favorite has been the trebuchet tests!!!
Out of curiosity, the mail on the barbarian, is it butted or riveted? I'm assuming butted? EDIT: Closeup at 7:17 shows me that it's riveted. Question answered!
Awesome distance and lethal Edit: Also the massed volleys of these, starting at 70 meters out, would be very demoralising for the enemy. The number of injuries that would make troops innefective would be crippling to the ability of enemy formations to press home an attack. The weight of numbers to effectiveness ratio makes these an effective swap for the previous pilum.
As others have said I for one would not want to be advancing against a cohort throwing these in massive waves. I am sure they would be very useful against troops not wearing armor of any sort. Michael will sure have some stories to tell his friends and co-athletes at competition.
The penetration is terrifying, but I got a concussion once from a clump of clay that hit me in the back of the head. A squad of twenty blokes catching a barrage of these - even if they had no penetration and were simple kinetic impacts - would be brutal - and as a softener before closing to spear range? Absolutely worth the carry weight for the throwers.
I must admit, I used to see plumbata as one of the consequences of a deteriorating Roman empire, and the abandonment of pila as a sign a decay. That's the traditional view (of Gibbons and co) of late antiquity as a whole, and its hard to get away from that perspective. But really, it's a highly effective and well designed versatile weapon that can do almost everything a pilum can do, but also harass at long range. The slight loss of armour penetration might not be a major issue when battling the Goths, Franks, and Huns of the 4th century? I wonder if they only stopped being used (10:50) because the fall of the western Roman empire meant an ens to the industries that produced cheap lead (a by product of silver smelting that happened on a much larger scale in antiquity than in medieval Europe). When lead is a waste product they'd be dirt cheap to make, but setting up a supply chain to mass produce them otherwise might have been out of reach of the post Roman kingdoms. Because I struggle to think of any reason why anyone who carried a shield wouldn't want a few of these strapped on the inside other than cost.
They add quite a bit to holding up the shield. I would think that our legionnaire would like get rid of them before commiting to battle for an hour or two.
War darts were used in the medieval period but eventually archers and crossbowmen were more useful. You saw that they couldn't penetrate nether mail nor the shield. Armor outpaced the usefulness of the plumbata.
The Byzantine by the 800s have evolved to using archers in the backline for ranged support. The infantry is still excellent, but the prevalence of cavalry means that using missile weapons to soften targets is far less useful than forming a shield wall with spears to absorb a charge.
Gibbons is not a very good source, sadly, and his "why" is mostly rejected by modern historians. The quality of the Roman army over millennia is impossible to measure; Romes only proper rivals in antiquity was defeated by the peasant/citizen army, not the professionals. As for the collapse of the west, while the situation from ca. 405 - 415 was negative, it was not desperate, and not nearly as bad as it had been in the 250s-260s. The next fifteen years after 415 saw a steady improvement in the west, particularly under Constantius III. Then Carthage and Africa was lost to the Vandals in the 430s. North Africa was the most prosperous area in the west, and as the Vandals raided other rich and peaceful provinces like Sicily and southern Italy, and stopped all trade in the western Mediterranean, this caused a near collapse of the economy of the administration in Ravenna. The Roman army was expensive. Really expensive. Hugh Elton (iirc) estimates that the loss of the Cape Bon expedition cost the Romans ten times all the riches Attila ever got through raiding, tributes and "go away" money. So the loss of North Africa meant Ravenna could no longer afford to field the army needed to protect the land they still held. The solution should have been military reform (like they did in the 7th century), but there was not a proper division of the empire, only the administration. Both west and east followed the same laws and had the same civilian and military systems, and as the senior emperor in the 5th century always was in Constantinople, reform would have had to come from there. Only, Constantinople didn't need reform. They still held the rich areas of Egypt and Asia Minor. Roman military equipment is also no longer as set in stone as it was. An example: The Column of Trajan in Rome (recommend seeing the copy in the Victoria and Albert museum in London btw, as it is not weathered) depicts Roman soldiers during Trajans Dacian war wearing the Lorica Segmentata. The Tropaeum Traiani in Romania, built at the same time to commemorate the same events, does not depict a single Roman soldier wearing the Segmentata, only chain and scale. Why? Segmentata has also been found at forts we are confident were auxilia forts. Wasn't it supposed to be legionary armour? I don't have any answers here. I only wish to show that Roman military equipment is a lot more uncertain than we thought 50 years ago.
He might be missing the single target shots but that first person view from the dummy is pretty intimidating. A line of soldiers would be in trouble for sure.
From what I read the point of this weapon was never to kill the enemy outright but to wound enemy troops approaching (and esspecially their horses) so they would not be capable fighters anymore. This was also used in a "spam" of throws, 3-5 at minimum before the lines clashed. Not sure if this is an effective weapon, but the legions which actually used became very famous and succesful.
It embeds itself deeply into the flesh when dropped from arms height, as shown here, and the initial energy of a throw calculated here is 110J.... It will absolutely kill you outright if it hits you at ~100 J.
These would be especially effective against lightly armoured militia troops, the kind who might just have a shield and a small bronze chest plate. Showers of plumbata being flung into them would wreak havoc on any limbs not hidden behind the shield.
Time these were used, there was still plenty of people with no armour (woad is not armour!) very lightly armoured and if you're being harassed by skirmishers like slingers, archers and so on, they'd pay a bloody price for coming in range. Plus on even very heavy infantry there's places where they can slip in and you're not going to be loving life with one in your thigh, face or somewhere else hanging out of you. Mostly though, I think it would dissuade lighter infantry from having way too much of an easy time of it bothering the legionary forces
The Roman legionaries you wouldn't think they have projectiles such as darts and javelins but all of a sudden you get a surprise of hailes of javelins and darts on you out of the blue. That would be crazy. This is not including Roman bolt throwers & Javelin throwers as well archers, and slingers as well as field artillery like the Scorpion.
As kids, we used to notch a slit in the end behind the flights, just like a standard arrow, so that we could take a piece of string with a knot in the end and launch them in the same way as a woomera. They would go twice as far as you could by just a hand held throw.
I find it interesting how you mix the Metric and English measuring system together. 88 meters in 20 mph headwind! Is this common in your part of the world? wonderful video as always!
These things look like something that, in addition to being nasty for infantry, could also work well against light cavalry if it dares to get too close.
Honestly the more I learn about the plumbata the less I wonder "why did this overtake the pilum" and the more I wonder "why did this take so long to overtake the pilum". Fascinating weapon that is surprisingly (and somewhat baffling) scarce throughout history.
Probably because Pilum/javelins are a better weapon for skirmishing as it disables an enemy prior to the engagement as in it makes shields useless before an engagement which weakens overall unit defense. I also suspect that javelins are more effective against horses given the longer shaft which would be useful in taking out supply trains and softening up cavalry prior to an engagement. While plumbatae are great for a initial surprise during an engagement in creating gaps in the lines and disrupting unit cohesion during a fight.
@@CazadorSlayer More weight to carry. The scutum weighed about 10kg and fixing five plumbata in it adds another kilo. While you might get the opportunity to throw all five of them in a face-to-face battle, that's not going to happen in most skirmishes or ambushes (which are much more common). Eleven kilos is a lot of weight to carry on one arm, even with training and long practice, and just holding it still over your body is not as effective in open-order combat as being able to use it freely. I think that plumbata only began to be used when legionaries were equipped with the smaller auxiliary-style shields, not the classic larger rectangular shields.
Archery, especially with full war bows, is not an easy skill. You can just hand these to your standard line infantry to harass from half a football field away prior to an engagement.
I imagine with a head designed for penetrating armour they'd have been a bit more effective against maille. I am sure Tod would have made some like that if there had been any record indicating it was done.
I'm not sure they would make ones better suited to poking through armour even when facing much later period armours - have to test it of course but still relatively light, short and slow they won't be really going through armour with much reliability no matter the head profile I would suggest. In which case having pretty huge range while being really incapacitating and hard to remove thanks to the barbed heads for the few that do hit the softer armour/flesh I'd suggest would be more effective than poking through the armour a little bit more effectively. A pin prick through armour reliably won't take somebody out of the fight, and an easily removed deep but thin puncture wound is only going to disable a person when it hits a good spot so rapidly kills them - and those spots are the spots that are most armoured because of their importance. So in the fleshy bits that tend to be less armoured the barbed head aught to be better, painful, causes much more damage to remove and more damage to the muscle groups it will get stuck in. So I suspect you will have sacrificed a much more effective hit on the times one finds the gaps in the armour for the ability to cause minor irritating wounds through the armour a bit more often trying to make this an anti-armour weapon... Also even if they would prove really effective against armour with a tweaked head the Roman's probably wouldn't have wanted them - they tended to have the metallurgical, tactical and technological advantage in most of their conflicts it seems - so do you really want to be tossing a heap of weapons to the other side that are really able to harm your own better than what the locals already had?. These things are going to get thrown back!
Michael has the power and im sure after practice every day hed get very accurate. Love seeing these clips . Even if they don't pierce im sure it will still hurt
If you haven't already produced a video on the Frankish "Franchia throwing axe" it would be interesting to see just how effective this weapon was, considering its size, weight and thus throwing distance. Thanks.
I think I read from guys who had tried them that those that "Miss" bounce around erratically, a bit like a rugby ball does along the ground, but with a ruddy great axe head to worry the hell out of you.-Could go anywhere!
I used to love spears, javelins, atlatls ,stone throwing, hunting sticks, slings etc. Always pushing my accuracy and distance. 52years old now and arthritis has meant a good throw goes about 5m and the pain means i cant throw for weeks. I miss it
Re: Why they fell out of use It's probably for similar reasons that slings fell out of use. Difficulty getting through armor. It was getting through sometimes, but I wouldn't call any of those strikes incapacitating. During a time when some barbarians still went into battle naked and painted blue, pass out the giant dart things and aim for the mass of blue dudes. Later generations of people hostile to the Romans probably had fewer naked blue dudes in their demographic makeup.
Also, it seems like they don't have too much of a niche. For dedicated ranged troops, the bow is obviously the better weapon. For dedicated melee troops, the pilum is a better ranged weapon (mostly for the armor piercing properties you mention). At first glance, you might think that these have some use for civilian self-defense, or even hunting. They might still have some use in hunting, but for self-defense... Their accuracy (particularly at close range) is a problem. Pulmbata are *great* weapons, but there's just no niche for them to fill that isn't filled better by other weapons. I will say: In a fantasy setting, using plumbata instead of throwing knives could make a lot of sense.
and one of the biggest selling points of the plumbata is that those that embed themselves in the shield are dead weight and need time to remove, similar to the pila for that matter
For similar reasons that slings fell out of use, outside the dry regions around Mediterranean where stones can be picked from ground. And slings are still in use. Roman slings used lead bullets. With roman empire the trade networks and metal industry collapsed. Plumbata was replaced with light headed wood shafted javelins that could be made in the villages of Dark Ages.
I don't think the penetrative power of a plumbata comes from the force of the thrower but rather the height from which it falls on the enemy. You don't throw them _at_ the barbarians but toss them up _above_ the barbarians so they can rain down on them, indirect fire rather than direct fire, if you will. The lead pulling the points down almost immediately on direct throws just underlines that.
I love watching the practical application videos. Its safe to say if you practiced its possible to get more accurate. Needless to say, taking one of these to the face or throat would result in a VERY bad day indeed! Great stuff Tod!
I really liked the argument on a past video that you throw them up and use them to open a breach when the enemy lifts the shield to protect from the raining lead. Terrific weapon!
nice thing about those at close range is that if you miss the guy you are aiming for, the chances are good you will hit the guy behind or to the side of the intended target.
Hi Tod! I don't know if this has been already suggested, but you could line up 3-5 of these or similar targets instead of having only one. That way you could get more "bang for you buck" when you work with Michael. Love the collaboration with a pro athlete to demonstrate these aspects as well.
It’s important to remember that these weren’t meant to be used against individual targets,but rather mass infantry formations in order to soften up their ranks for the main engagement.
I often wonder if the issues with weapons like these is that they're too easy and intuitive to use, relative to the amount of damage they can inflict. The enemy being able to pick them up and throw them back at you with a reasonable degree of success might be why usage didn't persist as long as you might think it would at first.
While you could argue the same holds true with other ranged weapons, the gap in effectiveness between trained and untrained use is likely much wider with those alternatives, particularly if those ranged alternatives require additional equipment to use that the enemy may not possess in large numbers (bows with appropriate draw length, slings, etc.)
Some very good points to think about here - thank you. I have been thinking about this over the last couple of days and I suspect you may have seen at least a large part of the reason. Spears, javelins, medieval fletched darts all require skill to throw back a significant distance. Arrows and bolts require compatible devices and skill. Sling stones require skill. These are so easy to throw, literally anyone can use them effectively or really effectively, making them a significant 'return hazard'.
The first thing I thought when I saw this video was "What's the point? Plumbata seem pretty idiot proof and I can't imagine the force difference being significant enough to make a difference.
I don't understand why they weren't more widely used.
@@tods_workshop They have a degree of return prevention via the barbs, but that requires that they penetrate far enough for the barbs to catch on something. I think what may have killed them off would be armor and shields. If you do any more experiments on hardened gambeson I'd encourage you to test out the plumbata against it.
I think it's necessary to bear in mind the overall tactic of using pila or plumbata when trying to assess the risk of them being thrown back at you. These weapons were used to soften up an enemy and to create gaps in his formation before closing to hand-to-hand combat, being thrown as part of the advance and at the appropriate distance. Unless the enemy formation is stationary (in which case they are sitting targets for another volley of pila, or several of plumbata), any of the enemy soldiers who pause to pick up a weapon will break their own formation; realistically it's only the front rank or two who might be able to pull a plumbata out of their shield (if one were even to stick there) and throw it back in a simple overarm throw without breaking step, and to do that they either have to transfer their weapon to their shield hand for a few seconds or sheath and then unsheathe a sword or tuck and draw an axe in a belt or belt loop. Unless that's a practiced manoeuvre they're causing problems for themselves, and yet meanwhile the Romans have had plenty of time to draw their gladii and close to fighting distance. Given also that Roman legionaries tended to be better armoured than their foes, and carry a larger shield, they were much less likely to be affected by any sporadic return fire.
By the 3rd century CE, when there was significant turmoil in the Empire that adversely affected trade and the economy, leading to less money with which to maintain an army in the field, legionaries were more likely to be outfitted with a mail shirt and smaller shield much as the auxiliaries had been for centuries. Perhaps the introduction of plumbata was a response to this, a recognition that the move away from heavy armour meant a greater need to whittle away at the enemy before closing to fight. In any case, we can be sure that if the tactic had turned out to be disadvantageous it would have been dropped very quickly.
This javelin dude is awesome...i love seeing how weapons would work at an extremely high level!!!!
He's a really nice lad!
This is Thrand! love your videos and years ago I got the same results with my pilum test on my RUclips channel ThegnThrand, its awesome to see them done more in depth!
Kinda cool how the average height and strength was so much lower in the past, but the biggest, strongest people were about the same as they are now. Just imagine what it would have been like to be a 5'7" guy in the bronze age and have someone the size of Shaq throw a javelin at you.
HI Thrand, Good to see you here
shh.. Joe might hear you 😆
Can imagine if you're in a group of 100 people and being attacked by another hundred and your side chucks 400 darts at the enemy they will do quite some damage and the aim isn't as much of a problem since you aim at the enemy group.
perhaps but in sieges and smaller unit tactics i still matters
@@elgostineYep. At worst a deterrent, at best you hit all of them. On average against say a group of five I would expect one kill and put the rest in disarray as they attempt to dodge, then have to pick the things out of their shields and maille.
Not an insignificant psychological weapon either. A lethal hit will probably not kill instantly- the victim will stagger, fall and cry out to his fellows before dying. A nonlethal hit in say an arm or leg will incapacitate with the victim basically getting in his fellows’ way.
In either case the rest will be thinking about how much fun it won’t be when it’s their turn.
This was my thought as I watched as well. I can't really see throwing them an individual, trying to hit a specific place. But I can see a relatively short gap being filled with 50 or 100 or 400 of these things being rained into a group maybe killing men, maybe injuring men and horse but overall just causing chaos.
If you're being charged by a group and you're in a group this is what I call the golden window where you all have the opportunity to throw *something* and the thing is... It's literally free.... You can all throw something, they don't even have to be the same things, 50 guys throwing a rock.... 2 guys crumple to the floor? What have you lost? It's cost nothing and now your line has 2 less guys to deal with. There's really no reason at all for battlefield infantry to never not carry some kind of projectile for a group volley, 1 guy is something when its free and costs you nothing tactically.
War is a team sport, unless deflected, most will stick into a man or beast.
Having Michael as a thrower is a fine addition for the channel. Especially considering that these, like the pilum before, were new to him.
If you think about that, and how many months and years of training legionnaires would have for accuracy… it makes these weapons much more scary.
Thank you! ❤
You're entirely right. It's also worth bearing in mind that Michael is both physically bigger, and has had more intensive general throwing practice, than the average legionary. How much that is counterweighted by familiarity with this particular weapon is anyone's guess.
@@QuantumHistorian not to mention if you've got 50 people throwing 50 of these at 50 other people then the slight misses left and right of the target dont matter as much
What is surprising is how much Michael was hindered by the armor and shields. Even though Michael is bigger and has more javelin practice than your average historical legionaire, his range while wearing armor, carrying a shield, etc was surprisingly short.
@@Intranetusa And I think that is where the practice must come in. For longer throws though, I expect the Legionnaires put the shield down , then threw, because you are quite right , Michael's entire performance was compromised by the armor and shield.
@@fredericrike5974 It doesn't need to be either-or, it's not like you do those things by the book always, just what needs to be done. I bet that only first lines could throw anyway, then if you had a chance, people from behind would give you more ammo or change places, and if the checker board formation was a real thing, then the guys in the second row could throw pila and the guys behind front unit that is engaging could give some pila to the second row to assist them in skirmish. In games the whole javelin/slinger unit uses it's ammo at the same time, but if the ranks were deep, the back rows would never be able to throw. I bet they were more scattered, slings need a bit of space anyway. These plumbata though, you can throw them from tighter space, and that could be handy even for some guys doing guard duty, trying to get a runner apprehended.
Hello, a historian of antiquity here. First of all thank you for doing this, such re-enactments are a great way of learning about ancient military art. Secondly, there are some great points being brought up in the comments already, but since late Roman military history being somewhat of my specialty, I may have some things to add.
- You do wonder why plumbata was not used more widely - it was - in the late Roman legions it pretty much replaced other throwing weapons, pilum included. We are talking about a force that numbered about half a million troops in its heyday - that is a pretty wide use.
- The reason why the Romans abandoned heavier javelins in favour of those darts seem to be the range, which you observed in the video. Late Roman army focused much more on its ability to fling various projectiles at its enemies - archers became far more common and so were the darts. The limited armour piercing capabilities were less of a concern because, as someone observed in the comments, many Roman enemies wore very little armour, but also, a lot of them were mounted (think Goths or Huns). Horses are large targets and they were unarmoured. I imagine the ability to throw quickly many of such projectiles at range could effectively break up an enemy cavalry charge. It was also a way for Roman infantry to get back at enemy horse archers - a classical Roman legionary could only hide behind a shield.
- Telling why plumbata fell out of use is difficult. Late Roman army was a quite unique force, because it relied on conscripts who received weaponry from state arsenals (fabricae). For that reason plumbata are perfect - a weapon that is effective and requires next to no skill to use. It is a specialist weapon, it does one thing, but it does it well. It has a very limited use outside of pitched battles. So, while I can see plumbata being assigned as a part of uniform military kit, I cannot imagine a poor peasant who is getting conscripted into fyrd and has to supply his own weapons come up with crafting such darts. A regular javelin can be used in melee, and does not require lead weights, fletchings, etc., you can use it as a walking stick. But, if you are a trained man-at-arms, and you opt for a projectile weapon, why not choose a bow or crossbow instead - they have far superior range, ammunition is lighter and arguably more deadly. They require skill to use, but you are a trained soldier, so that is less of an issue.
I personally doubt that 'return fire' was a consideration. In the heat of battle one probably focused more on staying alive and not getting hit by such a dart than running out of formation, grabbing one and chucking it at the enemy. History of warfare features 'returnable' weapons being very commonly used (regular javelins for example). Sometimes it probably happened that you got your own projectile thrown back at you, but the effect on the overall battle of that was likely neglegible.
I would imagine that in the case of horse archers, they would probably be less inclined to "return fire". At least not picking up plumbatae from the ground. (do I have the plural form correct?)
I remember reading in the 10th century byzantine treaty De velitatione bellica that thematic infantry was supposed to shoot stones (with sling ?) and missiles at the ennemy. I wonder if it was some kind of plumbata.
Return fire probably isn't a problem as long as you've gained ground and give your enemy no chance to organise, regroup, collect and have scattered them anyway. It strikes me that the Romans used psychology as much as technology. Deploying weapons that didn't necessarily kill but caused pain, injury, confusion, disorder and panic seemed as important. Then, if they maintained their own good order, they could advance and finish the enemy off. Clever and very brutal lot.
I see them being useful for sieges as well. Especially since a untrained peasant could learn to use them fast. I don't see why a lord of a castle wouldn't store some for a rainy day. I guess they favored other types of war darts we see from that period.
On return fire, the Romans spent alot of time fighting technologically inferior enemies right? If you're just chucking very nice, forged arrowheads and lead weights at people who might not have the industrial base to make that themselves. Could just be Roman propaganda as well
The Plumbata idea was turned into a yard game in the 70s, called Lawn Darts. They were taken off the market due to the danger of getting hit.
Yes, but boy were they fun.
Tod has a video about those, a couple years old.
Kids were re-enacting Roman battles with them
m.ruclips.net/video/1EFAVGIylqE/видео.html&pp=ygUKbGF3biBkYXJ0cw%3D%3D
Try this film. ruclips.net/video/1EFAVGIylqE/видео.html
Great video as always! You've demonstrated how light, rapid-firing and armour piercing plumbata really were. I especially enjoyed the "whooshing" sounds you've captured in your helmet camera. This brings you to as real an experience as we can imagine facing these flying darts.
Yeah him and the bowman are perfect to get atrue idea what they can do
The helmet-cam really shows how horror inducing it must have felt when those were zipping right near you😅
Seriously so!
I'm not sure which is 'scarier' between a volley of these things and a flock of actual arrows ....
@@robertsmith4681 No matter what shape the incoming takes, it's all the ones addressed, "to whom it may concern" that make life terrifying.
It'll sure make you raise your shield if you have one. Good luck if you dont. And if you make it through it you still have to deal with professional troops.
It's scary to us, for sure. But how does it compare to seeing a horde of men charge you, spears stabbing inches from your face? In comparison to how trouser-browning a pre-modern battle was generally, the ranged weapon phase might be relatively tranquil. It's really hard to get into the psychology of experiences so far removed from modern life.
But we can note that accounts of formations breaking from receiving ranged weapons in antiquity is exceedingly rare (the few are from extended, hours long bombardment iirc), but charges broke men fairly often, and prolonged hand-to-hand fighting almost always ended with one side running away. That's a hint as to what scared warriors the most.
0:27 imagine this is the last thing you see before you meet your creators
Reality for tens of thousands of warriors of the past.
Fantastic throwing, great video, Tod
You can still hear it zing too. Scary stuff. Genuinely felt like a last moment.
I wish more channels did this! Great job in demonstrating ancient technology
Yes, I wish 'ancient weapons testing' sort of content came back into fashion, even better when modern high speed cameras are involved, the trend seems to have died down about 10 years ago.
There are a few channels that still do it if you search.
Usually Warbow tests and swords.
I would love to see Micheal try to use an atlatl, a war dart, a war dart with the leather finger hook. We also need a playlist of all of the videos with Micheal.
A mate of mine used use an atlatl with a normal archery arrow. It would go miles.
Doesn't really matter how accurate or damaging those are individually, it must have been pretty risky/unnerving to be in a body of troops trying to close with a cohort hurling plumbata at you, 6 of them per man.
I'd imagine fighting "barbarians" where they might not wear helmets of the highest quality if any at all, maybe some light armor etc. Clearly they used these for a reason, can you imagine standing 70+ meters away and these start raining down and you don't have a helmet. That's a bad day.
Yeah imagine throwing these from a wall or hill in a siege situation, must make it extremely scary to move up.
I imagine accuracy on those strong throws would be better with practice, but even when they weren't penetrating those things flying at you is going to make a person flinch. And flinching when you're 15 meters away is probably not going to go well.
Just imagine: you're attacking. The target has plumbatas, bows, rocks, hot oil, and dead animals. There isn't enough loot to make me run through that hail of debris. Scary.
@@huldu"barbarians" actually wore helmets. Celts, vikings, whatever. They were not stupid, and not barbarians either. That's just a fabrication of stories.
I think one thing to keep in mind is also that many of Rome's enemies regularly didn't even have armor as good as the mail shirt as a kind of standard level of armor, and even if they did there were often quite a few bits that were effectively unarmored like how leg armor was not nearly as comprehensive at the time. Just getting one of those stuck into an arm or leg would absolutely ruin your average person's day and cause them to either be a lot less effective or outright incapable of fighting, much less if some poor unarmored guy took one in the chest or abdomen.
Most of the mail shirts didn't even have sleeves or much padding under them either. Shields were of varying sizes but you toss two quick volleys, one high arching down one low. and straight Then the enemy have to choose where to put their shields..........that's a problem as well. Remember there isn't just one line of men carrying these........there are multiple lines and they can all do different things simultaneously.
It seems that chain mail was adopted by Romans from Celts...so some Barbarians must have had it.
I doubt that it would have been all that strong seeing that late Iron age steel wasn't at the level that even the Romans got it to.
@@answeris4217 Some absolutely did, but many did not, and that seems to have been a pretty common thing for many of Rome's enemies. The better off Gauls, Celts, Caledonians, etc would usually have metal armor of one kind or another but many soldiers wouldn't have it - making big parts of the armies of many enemies Rome faced incredibly vulnerable to plumbata thrown both at a distance and point-blank.
It's really a measure of professional armies. Those cultures that had professional armies paid for training and equipment. Those which couldn't afford this or it just wasn't really possible, would have had less training and/or equipment. The roman armies didn't do so well against other nations with professional armies because they had similar technology, training and would learn to counter or defeat roman tactics. The roman approach was generally to trade with these nations rather than make war against them. Against non-professional armies though, the roman armies were very effective (but then so were the Greek, etc).
You can make boiled leather armor or gambeson that's just as good as chainmail and I'm sure every Celt or German warrior could afford it unless he WANTED to go into battle shirtless.
Your plugs are so fair you talk about yourself for 10-15 seconds back to the video i love it and this is exactly what is gonna make me check out your shop. Not interupting my video at all bravo for real
I love seeing Michael in these. In the first film with him it looked like he was pretty wary, but he's really gotten into it and it's fun to see the experimentation.
I just looked him up on the athlete rankings and he's rank 122 in the world for men's javelin! Absolutely awesome to have him on!
I think that it's important to remember that these might not have been intended as weapons against an individual target. Think of a formation, shoulder to shoulder, advancing to melee distance. It's not supremely important that you aim at one man and hit that one man. If you miss him, there are men beside him and behind him so you're going to hit somebody. From the target's perspective, you've got these things flying at you and maybe you duck your head and avoid getting it in the face, and maybe your duck puts your face right in the way! Also consider that a lot of the "barbarians" facing the Romans had swords, spears, shields, and maybe a helmet. The majority didn't have mail or other body armor. Those men could easily have taken disabling or fatal wounds. Again, well done!
Even if he missed the target a few times, in a battlefield situation, it's very likely he would have hit the guy standing in the second rank. When you are in a target rich environment, accuracy isn't quite as important as it is against a singular target.
They never really fell out of use until about 20yrs ago. We had them growing up; they were called Lawn Jarts!
Who's up for a game of DIVE BOMB
Miss those things
I've still got a set of Jarts.
HAHAHA....we still have a set from the 70's.....shhhh.
That’s like saying that blackpowder pistols didn’t die out until the 80’s because you could still buy one for “recreation” purposes. Until they recalled them due to a few lost fingers amongst buyers…lol
Tod, your broadhead is limiting the penetration on target. If you change it to an harpoon design it will go right through shield and mail, and get stuck. On the forge, split an iron nail in one inch alongside, bend it back making 2 little barbs, and sharpen them into a small broadhead. It will act as a broad head till it meet resistence, like ribs, mail or a shield. Then it will bend, closing the barbs to the nail, passing through without effort, but get stuck and open the barbs if someone tries to pull it out. This also more accurate to archeological findings, as well as being called little barbs of Mars!
Agree completely. Also, the fletchings are much too large! Both in breadth and length. They are robbing the darts of their power and are highly unstable..which is obvious in your demo. And why not conform to the broadly held belief that the fletches were mounted above the hand, as described by Vegetius iirc.
Good job on getting a competent thrower. Just need to tighten the darts up.
This is Thrand! love your videos and years ago I got the same results with my pilum test on my RUclips channel ThegnThrand, its awesome to see them done more in depth!
Dude, I was looking for your channel not that long ago and couldn't find you. Thought you got banned or something. Good to see you're still around.
I love Todd's enthusiasm during these live tests with the javelin thrower guest. It really is always fun to see historical material science and weapon design in action.
Not even a minute in, and we're getting High Velocity Plubata?
Tod, Michael, thank you both. I didn't know I needed to know anything about this, but I'm even more curious now!
This dude is an absolute ATHLETE, just stumbled on the page have watched newer videos of him. Keep going young bull!
Had a really cool experience one time with reenactors. I got assigned as a balearic slinger, along with a bunch of late roman army. They sent a volley of plumbata at a group of vikings,which held their shields up high to defend from the plumbatas raining down on them,coming from 50m. Me as a single slinger,got 4-5 of them in the thighs and knees with tomatoes,coming fast and flat,at 50. Tomatoes were sploding on their legs,and they were jumping from pain. So high arc range attack combined with flat shooting simultaneously must had been a killer combo. 100-150 gram stones of would have taken out those 4-5 vikings with broken legs,and that's under a minute by one slinger. Arrows would work too,combined with javelins,or plumbata.
Pretty clear use combined with your choice of direct fire weaponry. Give approaching soldiers the poor choice of lifting their shields to protect from falling plumbata or forward to stop the missiles coming at them from the front.
The testudo formation is a clear direct response to this sort of tactic, and has its own weaknesses.
I love that FPV of having them thrown at us I can only imagine having hundreds of them thrown and basically just praying that I don’t get hit
They might not have the stopping or penetrating power of other thrown weapons, but I can imagine them being very annoying and effective enough to break formations and create openings for the more devastating weapons
They dont have to be as good as a javelin on an individual basis, they just need to be as good as their weight in javelins, since they are going to be carried around a lot more than they are thrown.
@@contagioushavoc5794 They don't even need to be as good as their weight in javalin - being so small and easy to carry it becomes easy to carry way more than the equivalent weight of javalin.
And as volume of fire and the ability to sustain fire are both in their favour I'd say they could be rather less combat effective than a javalin too - you don't actually have to kill, cripple or even dish out painful but shot lived wounds if you can win the psychological battle. A few hundred of these things raining down on you is certainly not going to be great for morale, even if that same weight of javalins would actually have killed many more of your friends.
What makes me happy is just seeing Tod's face when his creations are in someone's hands.
The hand speed on this man!
Good luck on your competition, Michael.
Yay Michael's back. Always an excellent video with him involved.
Loved the way several came straight at the eyes/face-Very daunting!
I think throwing them like a dart at close range would help with your accuracy without sacrificing the power. They would definitely be a major threat to anyone fighting against the romans. They seem like a perfect weapon to stop mounted opponents. They would easily shred their horses.
I have tried this in the past and I couldn't make them fly so well
Love it, not only talking about what might have happened but getting out there and trying it.
Nice to see you "throw" another video together!
You really got your "point" across!
Seriously, through, I like these videos!
My favorite has been the trebuchet tests!!!
Tough crowd !
I love this channel and the curious approach they make to understanding weapons. Very informative!
Thanks - appreciated
Out of curiosity, the mail on the barbarian, is it butted or riveted? I'm assuming butted? EDIT: Closeup at 7:17 shows me that it's riveted. Question answered!
Some real violence, speed and momentum right there.
I feel like these would be perfect for throwing large volleys at long range to goad enemies into attacking before they're really ready.
I love that you do these videos!
I love doing them
Awesome distance and lethal
Edit: Also the massed volleys of these, starting at 70 meters out, would be very demoralising for the enemy. The number of injuries that would make troops innefective would be crippling to the ability of enemy formations to press home an attack. The weight of numbers to effectiveness ratio makes these an effective swap for the previous pilum.
Wow he absolutely LAUNCHED those! Wouldn't want to be on the receiving end, nor of that Pilum throw. Ooft.
He certainly did
Great testing. I would loved to see them at a closer range with different handgrips. Well done Todd & Michael.
I always Appreciate your videos on roman related stuff.
As others have said I for one would not want to be advancing against a cohort throwing these in massive waves. I am sure they would be very useful against troops not wearing armor of any sort. Michael will sure have some stories to tell his friends and co-athletes at competition.
The penetration is terrifying, but I got a concussion once from a clump of clay that hit me in the back of the head. A squad of twenty blokes catching a barrage of these - even if they had no penetration and were simple kinetic impacts - would be brutal - and as a softener before closing to spear range? Absolutely worth the carry weight for the throwers.
I must admit, I used to see plumbata as one of the consequences of a deteriorating Roman empire, and the abandonment of pila as a sign a decay. That's the traditional view (of Gibbons and co) of late antiquity as a whole, and its hard to get away from that perspective. But really, it's a highly effective and well designed versatile weapon that can do almost everything a pilum can do, but also harass at long range. The slight loss of armour penetration might not be a major issue when battling the Goths, Franks, and Huns of the 4th century?
I wonder if they only stopped being used (10:50) because the fall of the western Roman empire meant an ens to the industries that produced cheap lead (a by product of silver smelting that happened on a much larger scale in antiquity than in medieval Europe). When lead is a waste product they'd be dirt cheap to make, but setting up a supply chain to mass produce them otherwise might have been out of reach of the post Roman kingdoms. Because I struggle to think of any reason why anyone who carried a shield wouldn't want a few of these strapped on the inside other than cost.
They add quite a bit to holding up the shield. I would think that our legionnaire would like get rid of them before commiting to battle for an hour or two.
@@chubbymoth5810 Good point. How much do they weight? If they're centered nicely it might not make such a big difference?
War darts were used in the medieval period but eventually archers and crossbowmen were more useful. You saw that they couldn't penetrate nether mail nor the shield. Armor outpaced the usefulness of the plumbata.
The Byzantine by the 800s have evolved to using archers in the backline for ranged support. The infantry is still excellent, but the prevalence of cavalry means that using missile weapons to soften targets is far less useful than forming a shield wall with spears to absorb a charge.
Gibbons is not a very good source, sadly, and his "why" is mostly rejected by modern historians. The quality of the Roman army over millennia is impossible to measure; Romes only proper rivals in antiquity was defeated by the peasant/citizen army, not the professionals.
As for the collapse of the west, while the situation from ca. 405 - 415 was negative, it was not desperate, and not nearly as bad as it had been in the 250s-260s. The next fifteen years after 415 saw a steady improvement in the west, particularly under Constantius III. Then Carthage and Africa was lost to the Vandals in the 430s. North Africa was the most prosperous area in the west, and as the Vandals raided other rich and peaceful provinces like Sicily and southern Italy, and stopped all trade in the western Mediterranean, this caused a near collapse of the economy of the administration in Ravenna. The Roman army was expensive. Really expensive. Hugh Elton (iirc) estimates that the loss of the Cape Bon expedition cost the Romans ten times all the riches Attila ever got through raiding, tributes and "go away" money. So the loss of North Africa meant Ravenna could no longer afford to field the army needed to protect the land they still held. The solution should have been military reform (like they did in the 7th century), but there was not a proper division of the empire, only the administration. Both west and east followed the same laws and had the same civilian and military systems, and as the senior emperor in the 5th century always was in Constantinople, reform would have had to come from there. Only, Constantinople didn't need reform. They still held the rich areas of Egypt and Asia Minor.
Roman military equipment is also no longer as set in stone as it was. An example: The Column of Trajan in Rome (recommend seeing the copy in the Victoria and Albert museum in London btw, as it is not weathered) depicts Roman soldiers during Trajans Dacian war wearing the Lorica Segmentata. The Tropaeum Traiani in Romania, built at the same time to commemorate the same events, does not depict a single Roman soldier wearing the Segmentata, only chain and scale. Why? Segmentata has also been found at forts we are confident were auxilia forts. Wasn't it supposed to be legionary armour? I don't have any answers here. I only wish to show that Roman military equipment is a lot more uncertain than we thought 50 years ago.
Seeing projectiles like this flying past your head would definitely make you rethink your life choices!
He might be missing the single target shots but that first person view from the dummy is pretty intimidating. A line of soldiers would be in trouble for sure.
From what I read the point of this weapon was never to kill the enemy outright but to wound enemy troops approaching (and esspecially their horses) so they would not be capable fighters anymore.
This was also used in a "spam" of throws, 3-5 at minimum before the lines clashed.
Not sure if this is an effective weapon, but the legions which actually used became very famous and succesful.
It embeds itself deeply into the flesh when dropped from arms height, as shown here, and the initial energy of a throw calculated here is 110J.... It will absolutely kill you outright if it hits you at ~100 J.
These would be especially effective against lightly armoured militia troops, the kind who might just have a shield and a small bronze chest plate. Showers of plumbata being flung into them would wreak havoc on any limbs not hidden behind the shield.
Time these were used, there was still plenty of people with no armour (woad is not armour!) very lightly armoured and if you're being harassed by skirmishers like slingers, archers and so on, they'd pay a bloody price for coming in range. Plus on even very heavy infantry there's places where they can slip in and you're not going to be loving life with one in your thigh, face or somewhere else hanging out of you.
Mostly though, I think it would dissuade lighter infantry from having way too much of an easy time of it bothering the legionary forces
They where apparently affective against Kavallerie soo
The Roman legionaries you wouldn't think they have projectiles such as darts and javelins but all of a sudden you get a surprise of hailes of javelins and darts on you out of the blue. That would be crazy.
This is not including Roman bolt throwers & Javelin throwers as well archers, and slingers as well as field artillery like the Scorpion.
Fantastic video again. Michael is awesome.
One guy throwing one dart isnt that impresive but still, imagine hundreds of guys throwing these, that's something else.
It was such a good idea to get a pro athlete to try those weapons. Always a pleasure to watch!
Now just imagine having two hundred guys who can throw like him who trained with this their entire life
200? lets try 2000 and that's not a complete legion
Excellent video. 👍
Good luck with the athletic season, Michael.
Great to see Michael back throwing stuff! Can't wait to see what you've got for him to launch next!
As kids, we used to notch a slit in the end behind the flights, just like a standard arrow, so that we could take a piece of string with a knot in the end and launch them in the same way as a woomera. They would go twice as far as you could by just a hand held throw.
I find it interesting how you mix the Metric and English measuring system together. 88 meters in 20 mph headwind! Is this common in your part of the world? wonderful video as always!
It's common for Britain, yeah. Miles per hour, horsepower, and knots are still used in various fields
Yes, we've been using these measurements for many squirrel-lives.
I really love the athlete's perspective on these videos.
These things look like something that, in addition to being nasty for infantry, could also work well against light cavalry if it dares to get too close.
Some roman cavalry used them, so I imagine they could be useful skirmish weapons in that use, ride up throw a plumbata, ride off.
That was what I was thinking. Plunking one of those into a horse will most likely end that soldiers/ riders attack.
Thank you Michael. These videos are a lot of fun.
Honestly the more I learn about the plumbata the less I wonder "why did this overtake the pilum" and the more I wonder "why did this take so long to overtake the pilum". Fascinating weapon that is surprisingly (and somewhat baffling) scarce throughout history.
Probably because Pilum/javelins are a better weapon for skirmishing as it disables an enemy prior to the engagement as in it makes shields useless before an engagement which weakens overall unit defense. I also suspect that javelins are more effective against horses given the longer shaft which would be useful in taking out supply trains and softening up cavalry prior to an engagement. While plumbatae are great for a initial surprise during an engagement in creating gaps in the lines and disrupting unit cohesion during a fight.
The real question is, why not both?
@@CazadorSlayer More weight to carry. The scutum weighed about 10kg and fixing five plumbata in it adds another kilo. While you might get the opportunity to throw all five of them in a face-to-face battle, that's not going to happen in most skirmishes or ambushes (which are much more common). Eleven kilos is a lot of weight to carry on one arm, even with training and long practice, and just holding it still over your body is not as effective in open-order combat as being able to use it freely. I think that plumbata only began to be used when legionaries were equipped with the smaller auxiliary-style shields, not the classic larger rectangular shields.
IIRC Roman military manuals into the medieval period were still recommending these for folks who were hopeless at archery.
Archery, especially with full war bows, is not an easy skill. You can just hand these to your standard line infantry to harass from half a football field away prior to an engagement.
I imagine with a head designed for penetrating armour they'd have been a bit more effective against maille. I am sure Tod would have made some like that if there had been any record indicating it was done.
I'm not sure they would make ones better suited to poking through armour even when facing much later period armours - have to test it of course but still relatively light, short and slow they won't be really going through armour with much reliability no matter the head profile I would suggest. In which case having pretty huge range while being really incapacitating and hard to remove thanks to the barbed heads for the few that do hit the softer armour/flesh I'd suggest would be more effective than poking through the armour a little bit more effectively.
A pin prick through armour reliably won't take somebody out of the fight, and an easily removed deep but thin puncture wound is only going to disable a person when it hits a good spot so rapidly kills them - and those spots are the spots that are most armoured because of their importance. So in the fleshy bits that tend to be less armoured the barbed head aught to be better, painful, causes much more damage to remove and more damage to the muscle groups it will get stuck in. So I suspect you will have sacrificed a much more effective hit on the times one finds the gaps in the armour for the ability to cause minor irritating wounds through the armour a bit more often trying to make this an anti-armour weapon...
Also even if they would prove really effective against armour with a tweaked head the Roman's probably wouldn't have wanted them - they tended to have the metallurgical, tactical and technological advantage in most of their conflicts it seems - so do you really want to be tossing a heap of weapons to the other side that are really able to harm your own better than what the locals already had?. These things are going to get thrown back!
i'm stoked that this kid is interested enough to keep trying new stuff he's doing experiments we all wish we could
I would think throwing underhand would be more accurate for close range (like throwing horse-shoes).
Michael has the power and im sure after practice every day hed get very accurate. Love seeing these clips . Even if they don't pierce im sure it will still hurt
The original "lawn darts", I can understand better why these things were banned in the 1970s now ....
Lawn darts were great underhand throw was the best way to make them go far or high
Always brilliant!
If you haven't already produced a video on the Frankish "Franchia throwing axe" it would be interesting to see just how effective this weapon was, considering its size, weight and thus throwing distance. Thanks.
I think I read from guys who had tried them that those that "Miss" bounce around erratically, a bit like a rugby ball does along the ground, but with a ruddy great axe head to worry the hell out of you.-Could go anywhere!
Are they difficult or expensive to make? At least for people at the time
Not so much I think
I used to love spears, javelins, atlatls ,stone throwing, hunting sticks, slings etc. Always pushing my accuracy and distance. 52years old now and arthritis has meant a good throw goes about 5m and the pain means i cant throw for weeks. I miss it
Re: Why they fell out of use
It's probably for similar reasons that slings fell out of use. Difficulty getting through armor. It was getting through sometimes, but I wouldn't call any of those strikes incapacitating. During a time when some barbarians still went into battle naked and painted blue, pass out the giant dart things and aim for the mass of blue dudes. Later generations of people hostile to the Romans probably had fewer naked blue dudes in their demographic makeup.
Also, it seems like they don't have too much of a niche. For dedicated ranged troops, the bow is obviously the better weapon. For dedicated melee troops, the pilum is a better ranged weapon (mostly for the armor piercing properties you mention).
At first glance, you might think that these have some use for civilian self-defense, or even hunting. They might still have some use in hunting, but for self-defense... Their accuracy (particularly at close range) is a problem.
Pulmbata are *great* weapons, but there's just no niche for them to fill that isn't filled better by other weapons. I will say: In a fantasy setting, using plumbata instead of throwing knives could make a lot of sense.
Metal armor and armor in general was not that common in soldiers that weren't part of a large empire. They mostly used shields and a helmet.
and one of the biggest selling points of the plumbata is that those that embed themselves in the shield are dead weight and need time to remove, similar to the pila for that matter
It's more than that I think. Considering weight issues on your kit going unto battle you may want to carry other things.
For similar reasons that slings fell out of use, outside the dry regions around Mediterranean where stones can be picked from ground. And slings are still in use.
Roman slings used lead bullets.
With roman empire the trade networks and metal industry collapsed. Plumbata was replaced with light headed wood shafted javelins that could be made in the villages of Dark Ages.
The way the trajectory changes when self correcting makes them terrifying. You can't predict where they will land.
I don't think the penetrative power of a plumbata comes from the force of the thrower but rather the height from which it falls on the enemy. You don't throw them _at_ the barbarians but toss them up _above_ the barbarians so they can rain down on them, indirect fire rather than direct fire, if you will. The lead pulling the points down almost immediately on direct throws just underlines that.
How is your perpetual mobile patent doing?
The height from which it falls would be governed by the strength of the thrower though.
@@Matt_Alaric Well true, but you know what I mean... It's designed to plumet on the enemy.
This guy is a beast with pointy projectiles
Since these things are relatively self stabalizing, could you throw multinle by the tail end at once?
Tod does it at 8:33
I love watching the practical application videos. Its safe to say if you practiced its possible to get more accurate. Needless to say, taking one of these to the face or throat would result in a VERY bad day indeed! Great stuff Tod!
I really liked the argument on a past video that you throw them up and use them to open a breach when the enemy lifts the shield to protect from the raining lead. Terrific weapon!
in hand to hand combat a slight wound is a plus. Great video sir Hephaistos
Seeing you two together again is very nice. Great video
Great video as always Tod 👍👍
nice thing about those at close range is that if you miss the guy you are aiming for, the chances are good you will hit the guy behind or to the side of the intended target.
Lovin it! Spear thrower next - it's so much fun, especially getting thrown at - been there done that!
Brilliant! I really love these videos with Michael!
It is insane how accurate he is!
You're much better with thrown weapons than you were when you started, Tod. Don't sell yourself short!
A brilliant video. Thank you both.
What I love is just how effective a passively "held" shield is 😂
Thank you , Tod and Micheal .
🐺 Loupis Canis .
Hi Tod! I don't know if this has been already suggested, but you could line up 3-5 of these or similar targets instead of having only one. That way you could get more "bang for you buck" when you work with Michael. Love the collaboration with a pro athlete to demonstrate these aspects as well.
Excellent! I've been waiting for this!
Yes! Great Video. I was really curious about plumbata performance.
I've seen online drawings of these with the shaft extending out behind the fletchings presumably to make throwing easier
These are videos always a treat
The sound of these whizzing past the head...magic and scary
Tod should add these to his shop. They look ridiculously fun.
It’s important to remember that these weren’t meant to be used against individual targets,but rather mass infantry formations in order to soften up their ranks for the main engagement.
It super interesting to se how this amazing athlete demonstrate the quality of these weapons.
I never really thought much of the plumbata as a weapon, but seeing Dude-face throwing them... They actually seem REALLY dangerous!!