"hand-thrown missile range?" Topic

What's the real combat range of a thrown javelin, spear, pilum, dart, heck – rock?

I'm guessing in a decent-sized battle about 50y max, with something more like 30y as effective.

Anyone know better?

The world record javelin throw is roughly 100 meters, and the javelin they use has been tweaked to not go as far, for safety's sake. Given that woman's record is about 70 meters, I'd guess you're looking at 50 yards easily, and probably more.

Also, baseballs are regularly thrown 100 yards, so rocks about the same size and weight could probably reach that neighborhood.

I'm guessing in a decent-sized battle about 50y max

Why would the size of the battle make any difference to the range?

It's not so much the size of battle but the formation that you need to maintain (or not). The Saxons at Hastings apparently put down a heavy shower of hand-thrown missiles, but I don't imagine they had any sort of run-up – or much space – to throw, so I would espcet the range to have been fairly short. Roman legionaries throwing a pilum would be similarly hampered. Of course for these types missiles were just a preliminary to close combat – so the range was not such an issue as for best effect they would want to make contact immediately after the missiles.
Groups of skirmishers would have the space an opportunity to throw things further – and would have more of an incentive to keep further from their targets.

Throwing a javelin is a tiring business. I would put the effective range around 30 metres. I am not sure if they tried to get maximum range, more effective range.
More power and a flatter trajectory trying to clear the first ranks but not over shooting.

It's not so much the size of battle but the formation that you need to maintain (or not).

Formation surely depends on the type of troops doing the throwing then?

My understanding is that small groups of skirmishers would dart forward, throw and then run back so "range" in a battle wargame should include some extra distance from the main body. Unfortunately I have no 1st hand estimation of that run up distance.

A lot depends on the missile too. There are athletes who can't throw a football (15oz) 50 yards and I'm guessing that weighs less than a rock (well, less than a rock that would hurt, even I can throw a pebble 50 yards but to what effect?).

A lot depends on the missile too.

I'd take a look at shotput and discus numbers, too.

Also, keep in mind that a football is not very dense, and shaped kind of awkwardly, which is why I mentioned a baseball. People have died from being hit by a baseball. I'm not sure a football has done more than broken fingers.

Formation surely depends on the type of troops doing the throwing then?

Why does the Formation depend on the type of troops doing the throwing?
The earlier 50yards sounds good.

The size of the fight has an impact in that if it's a small skirmish of 10-20 guys, and we're paying attention, a low-velocity missile like a thrown spear or javelin, and most arrows, are easy to watch and dodge. If you're packed into a formation that you are attempting to maintain, then you don't dodge you shield yourself. Also, you're a lot more distracted in a bigger battle, so I see thrown missiles being a lot more useful.

Once missiles are smaller and faster, it's hard to see it coming. When you watch archers now, the arrow is so slow you can see it fly. But can you see a slingshot stone / lead missile?

So my thought is that effective range in a small battle is closer than a bigger battle. When you read about late Roman forces and their Germanic opponents, there's tight formations and a hail of thrown missiles (and thrown back no doubt) so I assume they relied on shields more than dodging. And it must still be painful to have a small throwing axe land on your shield, even if you aren't cut by a penetration.

The Irish love of javelins and shields and large numbers of skirmishing troops as a style of warfare leads me to think that they must have been effective enough to warrant their use even in a small skirmish.

So in game terms, I'm inclined to think 50y for a formation battle, and 25y for a skirmish.

As an aside, my understanding is that the pilum was thrown in waves on the attack, if not the defense. That might be Goldworthy's book talking.

Why does the Formation depend on the type of troops doing the throwing?

Light troops (for example) tend not to operate in close order.

formation depends on troop type because different troop types use different formations which will affect their ability to use different missile weapons.

if you are a velite skirmishing about, you will have a lot more space – formation – and the ability to get a good run up without fear of jabbing someone with your pull back before you throw.

if you are in a heavy infantry formation you are not able to make a run up out of formation, and you are required to wait for an order of command, so that the men behind you are not in the way of your pull back, although there is an option of the front rank throwing as they lead off the unit in a charge, with the rest following a little slower until the release point.

its quite likely that sheildwalls, which are reported as also issuing missiles overhead, did so from the back ranks only, whilst the front ranks remained in formation keeping the shields overlapping and ready for combat.

some formations cannot use missile weapons at all because they are so densly packed.

and don't forget, after a few men, you will not be able to see your target – which severely handicaps any missile effectiveness.

things like that have an effect.

from memory,

a Pila had an achievable range of around 30m and a penetrative range of around 10-15m
(i.e. at around 15m it could go through a shield if well aimed and thrown.)

Connelly did a famous experiement on Pila and concluded they would penetrate a shield at 6m – but he wsa simply dropping them down a tube, not exerting any force greater than gravity.

How Pila were used we simply do not know.
There are records of the entire maniple / cohort discharging at one volley.
there are also records of them dropping them so they would not get in the way and they could get stuck in properly (against an opponent they particulary wnated revenge on).
There are records of Pila being thrown hours after the battle was joined.
Its just not supportable to argue one or the other for a definative use, and the onyly safe conclusion, i think, is that they were used on a case by case basis, but were largely a preparatory or secondary weapon to the sword.

Anyway, a normal javelin range of around 50m seems reasonable – although it too would have an effective range of much less than that.

could you throw a stone further and do any damage? why bother, you have slings for that.

shot put discus etc are siege weapons, they are pretty pointless on battlefield – too heavy to carry around in reasonable numbers, and not easy to use in a combat situation.

So really, this is all about javelins, and throwing axes or Pila and the like – light or heavy throwing weapons.

50 m
30 m
and an effective range of about half that seems reasonable.
plus a bit for a run up for a light jav.

A little off topic, but perhaps not. As regards skirmishers; I can understand slingers having a purse of lead shot or picking up random stones. Archers would have a quiver of several arrows. But what about so called javelinmen ? Assume they are harrasing an advancing enemy 40-50 yards away, how many pointy sticks could they realistically carry ? Would there be a re supply to the rear ?

Pila had an achievable range of around 30m and a penetrative range of around 10-15m
(i.e. at around 15m it could go through a shield if well aimed and thrown.)

I wouldn't think penetrative power would reduce much (if at all) with range. To reach a longer range you need a higher trajectory, so the missile will have added momentum due to gravity as it come down and hits the target.

Re: number of pointy sticks – according to Livy (26.4), Roman velites could carry seven javelins…

sorry marshall, you think wrong.

it has been proven repeatedly in experimental archeology, and is supported by the ancient sources themselves, who are quite clear that there is a close range at which javelins will penetrate armour and shields, and a longer 'effective' range which will not penetrate the standard shield.

gravity just does not cut it, nor trajectory – it is the man power which gives a javelin its bite, and that wears out quickly.

if you consider it as the difference between suppression fire and aimed fire, you may get a better idea of it.

longer range skirmishing is about testing a will to fight, and displaying such.

close range is where the actual threat comes to the individual.

Pila don't have that much casualty causing effect. When two Roman armies clash both sides throw pile and thus the casualties from them should be roughly equal. Then they close with swords. Even so, the casualty figures for the winner are often very light. This indicates that
1) Pila do not cause many casualties, they mainly unshield an opponent
2) Even sword strokes do not cause high casualties, rather they kill significant individuals and enable the 'winners to break into and disrupt an opponent.
3) Most casualties are caused in pursuit.

Unarmoured barbarians with poor shields are going to lose rather more men, especially if they keep on fighting rather than running and especially if they are trapped and encircled .
When an opponent is trapped and disrupted casualties are very high.
There was a good article on this in a recent Slingshot.

think about a cricket ball .

if the same bloke throws it at your head and hits bank on,

there is a disance at which he is going to knock you out

and a distance at which it is going to hurt a lot

and a distance that it is just going to elicit swearing.

same idea – its the human energy, not gravity that matters.

And then we look at WRG 7th… Javelins, 80 paces. Slings, 120 paces (which is very low IMO)

Formations do hamper throwing. Above measures are EFFECTIVE range, not extreme range. You can probably at least double these ranges for extreme measures.

Another thing to note is that sling bullets and javelins don't lose as much power at longer ranges IMO. Javelins still have some mass behind them, ditto with sling rocks and bullets. Arrows and bolts tend to lose quite a bit of power since speed is a large part of their ballistic strength.

My general thought is that people who spend a lot of resources (bucks, denarii, talents, personal effort, whatever) on a missile won't throw it away casually. They'll expect some sort of effect, preferably to kill or wound an opponent. So generally speaking I think in a smaller battle they'll hold until a close range. In a big battle where there's less personal accountability and an empire provided the weapon, they'll throw from farther away. Also, they'll count on throwing BACK the enemy's missiles (unless special like pilum).

So the bigger the formation, the longer the range.

This makes me think that rules should have a "minimum effective roll" before one is even allowed to loose a missile. So sure, you can heave at long range, but only if they are unarmored and counting as unshielded b/c you're on their right flank.

Or something to that effect.

like a fire discipline roll.

interesting idea to apply to ancients.

Shields are very effective against missile weapons. One of Caesar's Centurions at Dyrrhachium had 100 arrows in his shield. Teias, the king of the Ostrogoths had several javelins in his shield but was killed when he was being handed a new one.

Casualties from missiles are generally not that high, it is the disruptive effect that is most important. Yes, Ceraunos is right, that from the unshielded side missiles are more effective, but I believe that is because the targeted soldiers feel much more insecure.

Our arrows will blot out the sun. Then we shall fight in the shade.

50 m
30 m
and an effective range of about half that seems reasonable.
plus a bit for a run up for a light jav.

So we are saying "effective" range is armor/shield penetrating range? Javelins can be thrown far beyond 50 meters. Pila, the heavy kind, are not going further than 50 meters. Romans carried a light and heavy pila, for long and immediate combat range. All javelins or throwing axes require a "run up" to achieve the kind of energy required to be "effective". If you more or less stand there and throw then the effect should be seriously compromised. At Hastings, A-S hand missiles ranged into bows and crossbows, indicating both the close range established by the Norman marksmen, and the "effective" range of the A-S hand missiles, even the rocks lashed to the end of sticks and used like throwing axes….

You just would not throw pila at 50yards. The reason for this is that we can be fairly certain that Romans threw the pilum and then advanced quickly into hand to hand combat. This is apparent from Caesar 's battle against Pompey at Pharsalus, where the Pompeians are ordered to halt before throwing pila so that Caesar's men will throw their pila before contact and thus waste them. Caesar,s troops recognise the trick, halt and advance to contact. There are also examples where Romans advanced too quickly to throw pila, dropped them and went straight in with the sword.
The above instances o not accord with a 50 yard throw. The Roman legionaries are moving forward at a pace no faster than a jog. They throw pila at 20 yards or so and close with the sword more or less immediately because they want to catch their opponents unshielded and in difficulties and yet be in good order themselves. What they don't want to do is throw t long range and give the opponent any chance of recovering before impact.

So we are saying "effective" range is armor/shield penetrating range?

yes.

if it cannot penetrate the armour or shield in an age of armour and shields, then throwing further has little primary purpose.

long range missile is disordering but ineffective – the sort of thing you do to improve your morale or test the enemies, to delay an attack perhaps, but which will not actually achieve much more than that.

in the case if Pila, the dynamic is different, as that specific weapon was clearly designed with a preparatory to immediate sword follow up in mind.

Interestingly, it is worth noting that the evidence for the two pila IN BATTLE is limited at best.
In the imperial period, Goldsworthy notes that they only carry one pila into battle, and suggests that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it seems likely that they probably did the same thing in the republic as well.

reasons are multiple.
1. the scutum prevents skirmishing and the carrying of 'spare' pila in the shield hand – the grip specifically prevents it, the only way to hold such a javelin is with your thumb hooking it onto the side of the shield handle.
2 no evidence of the use of two pila by any source in combat.
3 they were primarily swordsmen (c.f. Ploybius)
4. you cannot fight with a sword while still carrying a spare 5 foot long javelin and a large heavy shield. you will die if you try.

which suggest that the long range pila was taken to the field on the morning of battle when thee was an expectation of needing to engage in long range missile duelling – such as when attacking up hill, or into defences or over bad terrain, or was used on patrol.
heavy pila was used in normal battle circumstances as a preparatory weapon to destabilise a shielded opponent before charging in with a sword.

its all very interesting stuff when you look at the mechanics of it all, much more interesting than the superficial ideas we have of maximum kit = maximum effectiveness.

I'd say that for any wargame, we should respect the "common sense" of the ancients and not allow our little lead-heads to do things they wouldn't do.

So unless a missile has a chance of having an effect in the eyes of the thrower, no shot should be allowed. If the purpose of the missile is casualties, then you need a likely chance of a casualty. If the missile's purpose is disruption, then you need a likely chance to cause a disruption change.

All very circumstantial in terms of how you game measures the effects of shooting.

So while the max range of a weapon might be able to take the "long shot" and cause a casualty, it's unlikely that someone with 2-3 expensive javelins will regard it as a good time to throw. I assume they'll throw when it matters to their personal survival or combat results.

So pretty close range in a skirmish game, longer in a battle game, but game results should be at least a 1/6 chance of a disruption or a result I'm thinking.

If we're in Japan, casualties from rocks are proven by Karl Friday to be the greatest, that is wounded and killed, by rocks thrown by hand. Battle joined is where necessity rules. If you survive by throwing rocks, you do that.
Be careful not to over-reach on the ranges (effective or maximum)of your missile weapons. very unrealistic result.
Look into detail. There is plenty of useful info for the time of the Samurai.

I know that much of the conventional wisdom is that pila were used to 'remove or damage a shield', but the 'soft tip' model does not entirely hold up with the modern archeological and metallurgical findings. Pila had the weight and construction to effectively pierce a shield at close range. If that shield was held close to and/or in front of the body, then a damaging or lethal hit was very possible from the punch through. If the Pila or javelin missed, and only stuck in the shield, there was a secondary effect of being stuck in the shield (which makes it unwieldy), which was not an easy task to remove on a chaotic battlefield. Javelins and other thrown missiles had an effective range much less than our modern sporting equivalents. Pila, javelins and even stones were less about range and much more about lethality. IMHO.

Socalhammer , you should read what the other posters have said. If you want to disagree then one with reasons nd examples.
We know that javelins/pila cause limited casualties because in Roman versus Roman bttles the winner Suffers low casualties, though thy must suffer the same pila attacks as the winner.
Hence pila or javelins do not cause many casualties.
Another example, the battle of Illerda (Caesar's Civil War) where two Roman orces throw javelins or five hours but only a charge ith the sword bings a result.
As to pila acting upon shields, Caesar epically says this in his description of the battle against the Helvetii (Gallic War book 1)
These texts are available in English translation on the web.

Interestingly, it is worth noting that the evidence for the two pila IN BATTLE is limited at best.
In the imperial period, Goldsworthy notes that they only carry one pila into battle, and suggests that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it seems likely that they probably did the same thing in the republic as well.

Good luck with that. I see no problem accepting the thus-far overwhelming view that legionaries threw twice, and if they didn't have time, they either used the second pila as a stabbing weapon or discarded it for the sword, upon command….

Is there any evidence at all for legionaries throwing twice??

I certainly cannot remember seeing any original source that has legionaries stabbing with a second plum I wonder if you are merely appling logic here. If so it is not supported by the sources which jave legionaries dropping their pile when both sides run together and going in with the sword. Let's face it when the prime purpose of a Roman legionary is to close to contact using a stabbing and slashing sword , protected by armour and a large wrap around shield then having an unbalanced spear instead of the sword would be less than optimal.

There is supposedly evidence of protracted javelin throwing, but then that would be the velites with their seven javelins or, later, cohgorts rotated into the line.
Polybus evidence is for carrying two pile. He does not, unfortunately, go on to say how they are used and the evidence of battle descriptions is all (where it is clear) that they throw a pilum and then go in with the sword.

Lewisgunner. I didn't think I had to list any sources for my general comment but I will do so. For example, Peter Connolly published an alternate view of the use and effectiveness of the pilum in ESG's Bulletin 'Exercitus'.

While I don't disagree that thrown missiles (of all varieties), will cause less damage over time (than in close fighting), I believe it to be more of an effect of shield, armor and discipline of formations.

We have numerous examples throughout history in which missiles were used to 'harass' a formation, such as the Persians archers against the Greek Phalanx or axes and javelins thrown at a Viking shieldwall.

But if a casualty or a few casualties could disrupt a formation, by killing a commander or panicking less disciplined troops, then missiles would have been shown to be very effective.

As per my previous comment, the range of the pilum would be commensurate with at what range it would be able to pierce an opponents shield and/or otherwise be potentially lethal. Against those with little or no protection, such as Germans, Gauls, etc. the effective range would be greater (and the amount of casualties also), against heavily armored troops in a dense formation, such as other Roman Legionnaires the effective range would be much shorter and possibly not effective at all (or only slightly). Many of these examples of the use against the Gauls are listed in 'The Gallic Wars'.

I do not think that thev pilum is released at different ranges according to the enemy, i.e. longer against Gauls, closer against other Romans. If the whole front line of a legion's cohorts is going forward it is far more likely that they start to quicken pace at a signal and then count paces to release.
Soldiers are simple souls and variety causes mistakes. The effect of pila would be mightily enhanced by all being released at once and crashing into the opposing ranks simultaneously.

If you are the Romans all shields are effectively the same to a pilum.
What the Romans did use against Galatians was velites and other missile troops, slingers, bowmen to shoot at Galatians who were fixed in position by legionaries. Given long enough the missile casualties told and the Glatians collapsed. However, that is specifically not legionaries throwing pile.
As to the Persians, they were singularly ineffective at harrassing any hoplite or phalangite force in the open, In the end they gave up and tried either hiring hoplites or using Cardakes as hoplites at Issus..
Romans did use archers against Germans, but again backed top by legionaries who no doubt were only too keen for the Germnas to come to swordstrokes where the Romans would have destroyed them (That's from Herodian) .
Carsar specifically says that the pile destroyed the shields of the Helvetii, not that many men were killed by pile.

IMHO, there was little central control of the training for the entire Roman army. You'd have Centurions that were certain of their experiences with the pilum, would assert that experience in training, and then command that the pilum be thrown when they felt that the optimal point had come for that event according to the training and circumstances.

the question is more about "who is in charge and gives the order and does the training". So my guess is that the centurions themselves had a variety of issues regarding the pilum that they would argue over when sitting around the camp fire or glugging wine, or in the revelries of Mithras, whatever.

To a certain extent, this continues today. Any of us who are military were all trained to do something a certain way in training. Then we get to the field and discover "that's not how we do it in the field, son", and we relearn it and do it as commanded by the people who call the shots in the field.

Note that this also will account for some difference between the ancient authors themselves, who may be honestly reporting that which they heard in the first place.

The bottom line is that the Romans were committed to using a javelin, and one of special manufacture, and therefore their training and use would reflect this.

All the rest is a mix of conjecture that is probably best informed by re-enactors, IMHO.

Do you really think that centurions are doing their own thing or that Romans do not train to a common system?

One thing that is absolutely cllear is that the Romans send lines into action as a whole, that is all the maniples or cohorts of the Hastati or Principes together. When the front lines are under pressure Publius Crassus sends the third line in, as a line.
When Caesar speaks of his men not throwing their pila because they and the Germans have closed too fast it is not a matter of some I'd, some did not, it is described as if it is the whole line. Given that the whole line starts as a line and moves forward on command and impacts together the only safe conclusion is that they throw together and go in together as a line. That's not to say that centurions do not boss the fighting once their men are engaged in melee, however they could only exercise control within a limited area because falling back and line relief was done by line, not by individual cohort or maniple.
As to re enactors, well there are only ever 23 of them so they are not really evidence for what 2000 Romans in a fighting line do.

Not a good basis for comment but it seems to me that a thrown weapon that can punch through legionary armour at(let's say) 35 paces will also make a mess of more lightly armoured enemies. So rather than mess about with different release ranges why not use a standard release range dictated by the range at which you are certain of causing casualties.

This topic always devolves into the incomprehensibility of figuring out heavy throwing weapons… ie pila or francisca or others… these have a very short range.

Others have much more variable flight range, and considerably more range based on open order. An open order slinger and archer has greater rangem but may be more static than a javelinman, OTOH a javelinman has the ability to run up, toss and retire, which in reality may have an advantage against some targets, which in game terms significantly increases their actual range and effectiveness.

Accurate archers and slingers would at times keep javelinmen at bay, but these types of troops are expensive, and the converse is also true, there are examples where javelinmen could keep large numbers of archers completely neutralized (such as Alexander' Agrianians on the mountain flank at Issus).

which thrown weapon were you thinking could punch through legionary armour (and which armour) at 35 paces?

the only evidence I am aware of that any thrown weapon could penetrate anything, is of pila penetrating shields at 10-15 paces if well thrown.

Penetration isn't everything – ask Goliath. Being hit with the point of a pilum on any part of the body will put you out of the fight.
Take a 1lb or half kilo stone and try for yourself ? Actually, I can't see anything in the discussion that totally rubbishes your own initial estimates – considering this is for trained throwers. The point about 'large' versus 'small' battles is that a target who has seen you is almost invulnerable to your throw. A target in a mass who doesnt know you are aiming or throwing is a sitting duck. If he is one among a flock even better for your chances of a hit.