Roman Catapults (1 Viewer)

katana

Command Sergeant Major
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
2,473
P1010833.JPGP1010835.JPGP1010839.JPGP1010838.JPG

Roman Catapults consisted primarily of the Ballista and the Onager; both of which were built in a range of sizes. The size was determined by the weight of the shot; which could be as large as 1 Talent or about 60 pounds. The BBC recently built and test fired a 1 talent Ballista of very impressive size. The Scorpion was a small Ballista firing bolts. Ballista can be designed to fire either shot or bolts. The Onager was effectively 1/2 of a Ballista and used one instead of two torsion springs. A sling was used to hold the shot and like the Medieval Trebuchet the sling extended the range.

The photos show working models of Roman Catapults utilizing torsion springs for power. Medieval catapults used a laminated wood bow for power typically and a cup or bowel to hold the shot rather than a sling. The Da Vinci catapult design is typical of the Medieval catapults. The model Onager and Ballista fire 6mm lead shot about 10 meters with considerable force and are quite accurate.

The first and second photo is a large Onager with 60mm figures. The third and fourth photos is a large Ballista with 60mm figures. The Roman Catapults shown would be typically used in seiges and would be built or assembled on site.
 
The fishing line has been cast. Anyone willing to take the bait?
 
Dang, so these guys got it wrong. 100s of these fellas dedicate a lot of time into getting it right. Can't believe all this time they were wrong. Who would have thought. They were wrong and you were right. You might want to get in touch with them. If you would like to set the record straight with them check out their reenactments along with several videos that they have done. I attached 1 of many videos that they have produced. I believe this group is out of Spain, Cohors III Lucensium.






https://youtu.be/0TTAUpLcBxs
 
Y'know something? You guys like to gretz about katana, and smart off about how smart he must think he is, how he thinks he's always right, etc, etc. But as I recall from the now-closed thread, he wasn't the one who took the discussion from one about accuracy to personal attacks. There was another forum member who got shrill and began to steer in the direction of ad hominem attacks, rather than focusing on the arguments.

Let's keep it civil. He's posted some photos of some nice models. If you disagree with their accuracy, then state the case, but let's not head down the road that sarcastic responses will likely lead to.

Or better, if you are tired of his posts, use the ignore feature, or just skip his posts altogether.
 
Here are some shots of mine- I had this painted and assembled some time ago- it is 54mm scale. I had a dilemma myself as I was putting my ballistae inside my Roman fortress rather than in a traditional siege role. I wrestled with this for sometime. (The reason being, my wife surprised me with a couple dozen JG Miniatures Roman fort pieces one Christmas :)) I made some inquiries of people much more learned than myself in the subject matter (ie academics lol) and they gave me written documentation and one gentleman even did his thesis on the role of Ballistae in defense rather than offense. So now, I feel I am vindicated in displaying the pieces in a defensive role.

 
That was a kit, Chris? Very cool, and a nice job on your finish. Who makes it?

Prost!
Brad
 
Dang, so these guys got it wrong. 100s of these fellas dedicate a lot of time into getting it right. Can't believe all this time they were wrong. Who would have thought. They were wrong and you were right. You might want to get in touch with them. If you would like to set the record straight with them check out their reenactments along with several videos that they have done. I attached 1 of many videos that they have produced. I believe this group is out of Spain, Cohors III Lucensium.https://youtu.be/0TTAUpLcBxs


I'd give anything to be in that group!! :eek: I should post some pictures of me in my Segmentata. I look pretty good in it, just the helmet is a bit small and doesn't quite fit right so I need to make some adjustments before it goes live. Giant dome of mine and all that.

Being a Legion of One in Central Pa feels a bit what it must have been like on some of the isolated outposts along the Wall in Britannia. {sm2}{sm4}
 
Y'know something? You guys like to gretz about katana, and smart off about how smart he must think he is, how he thinks he's always right, etc, etc. But as I recall from the now-closed thread, he wasn't the one who took the discussion from one about accuracy to personal attacks. There was another forum member who got shrill and began to steer in the direction of ad hominem attacks, rather than focusing on the arguments.

Let's keep it civil. He's posted some photos of some nice models. If you disagree with their accuracy, then state the case, but let's not head down the road that sarcastic responses will likely lead to.

Or better, if you are tired of his posts, use the ignore feature, or just skip his posts altogether.

Thanks Brad, I agree that there is no need for rudeness, even if there is a disagreement.
 
Very nice diorama Chris and excellent photos. Onagers and Ballista were used in both defence and offence by the Romans. The photos I posted show a Roman Gate and Artillery Tower. The arched windows each house a Scorpion for defence. The Artillery Tower has medium Ballista on the parapet to destroy approaching siege towers. The medium Ballista model was made by Elastolin in the 1960's and is probably one of the best models of a Ballista made to date. The Conte Ballista is also quite nice. Ballistas are complex weapons to build and maintain. The Onager was a simplification of the Ballista; lower cost and easier to use. The Ballista had a relatively flat trajectory. The Onager had a high arcing trajectory like a mortar.

The Concord book Imperial Rome at War by Martin Windrow and Angus McBride shows on page 40 a painting of an Onager being fired from an Artillery Tower on the Saxon Shore fortifications in the 4th century AD. Defensive use was common in the late Roman Empire.

Here are some shots of mine- I had this painted and assembled some time ago- it is 54mm scale. I had a dilemma myself as I was putting my ballistae inside my Roman fortress rather than in a traditional siege role. I wrestled with this for sometime. (The reason being, my wife surprised me with a couple dozen JG Miniatures Roman fort pieces one Christmas :)) I made some inquiries of people much more learned than myself in the subject matter (ie academics lol) and they gave me written documentation and one gentleman even did his thesis on the role of Ballistae in defense rather than offense. So now, I feel I am vindicated in displaying the pieces in a defensive role.

 
Defensive use was common in the late Roman Empire.

Thanks for the kind words. Yeah, I am starting to discover that! :) Admittedly, siege equipment isn't really my primary interest in Rome, being more of an infantry guy, so there are still gaps in my knowledge base, which I am gradually filling in.
 
...Admittedly, siege equipment isn't really my primary interest in Rome, being more of an infantry guy, so there are still gaps in my knowledge base, which I am gradually filling in.

That makes me think of a question, then, in this topic: How much specialization did Roman siegecraft require? That is, did they have dedicated combat engineers, or was any given legionary familiar enough, or expected to be familiar enough, with the tools of the trade and the work necessary to conduct a siege? Most certainly could provide the motive power to move earth, for example, the necessary basis for siege work. But were there specialist "gunners", for example, who trained with the ballista, the onager, etc, similar to the specialties that emerged in later times and armies?

Prost!
Brad
 
That makes me think of a question, then, in this topic: How much specialization did Roman siegecraft require? That is, did they have dedicated combat engineers, or was any given legionary familiar enough, or expected to be familiar enough, with the tools of the trade and the work necessary to conduct a siege? Most certainly could provide the motive power to move earth, for example, the necessary basis for siege work. But were there specialist "gunners", for example, who trained with the ballista, the onager, etc, similar to the specialties that emerged in later times and armies?

Prost!
Brad

Very good question my friend! :)

My understanding is that the "Engineer corps" would put the pieces of equipment into play- make sure they were properly assembled and what not- then the legionaires would have at them. If the equipment suffered damage, the engineers would/could repair it. They were also advisors to the Centurions and Legates as far as how and where to adequately deploy them. Roman engineers were very specialized and had to understand a host of combat difficulties- how to get running water, how and where to advise the Centurions to position the camps- temporary and permanent, how to mine and countermine during sieges of fixed positions. They were tremendous and not nearly enough credit is given them in my opinion.
 
Chris,
I love your Andrea catapult diorama!! It's a real beauty of a scene!
Thanks for the pic.

Joe
 
Re: Roman Catapults St Petersburg painted

Chris,
I love your Andrea catapult diorama!! It's a real beauty of a scene!
Thanks for the pic.

Joe

Here is one I purchased from Russia

all the best guys

d IMG_8213.JPG
 
Very good question my friend! :)

My understanding is that the "Engineer corps" would put the pieces of equipment into play- make sure they were properly assembled and what not- then the legionaires would have at them. If the equipment suffered damage, the engineers would/could repair it. They were also advisors to the Centurions and Legates as far as how and where to adequately deploy them. Roman engineers were very specialized and had to understand a host of combat difficulties- how to get running water, how and where to advise the Centurions to position the camps- temporary and permanent, how to mine and countermine during sieges of fixed positions. They were tremendous and not nearly enough credit is given them in my opinion.

Thanks for the explanation, Chris! That fits in with an observation that I've developed over time, as I learn more about the Romans, and that is that they were relatively more advanced, than we tend to learn about them in school, if anything is even taught about Rome in our schools anymore. That is, apart from discovering a source of power other than human and animal or wind power, they established a very sophisticated society, in terms of their technology and their systems. I think a lot of people don't realize that.

And so, that's not surprising, then, that they had specialists in combat and siege engineering. A Roman engineer transported to our time might be amazed at our powered machines, but I bet otherwise, he'd feel right at home.

Prost!
Brad
 
Andrea makes great models. The Scorpio is excellent and historically accurate. The War Elephants are also great; very dynamic poses and size compatible with the figures IMO. Andrea also provides both painted and unpainted figures.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top