The Arcuballista | Weapons of History

[@resonancebarracuda478]

One weapon not talked about in the internet is the Fustibalus (staff sling). It fires slightly bigger and heavier stones, it's quicker to learn than the hand sling, and it's also cheap and simple to construct. It was used during the last decades of the Western Roman Empire as a cost effective way to convert infantry to missle troops. Soldiers weilding slings and staff slings are known as Funditores (Casters)

[@ArmouredProductions]

I quite like Tod's Workshop interpretation of the Arcuballista. It spans with a belly draw, and he says it could be made up to 100+lbs with that spanning method.

[@ramtin5152]

Make a video about the Sassanid weapon Panjagan too

[@AncientHistoryGuy]

I have a load of Sassanid videos coming out at the end of the year!

[@SB-qm5wg]

The gastraphetes was a pretty cool design

[@Christian-dd2qm]

We also got the hand-held torsion catapult from Xanten. Unfortunately, we have no idea how this would have been classified by Vegetius - the authors of the Xantener Berichte call it manuballista, though. We can assume that these early crossbows were popular because Vegetius describes them as so well known to everybody that there was really no need to go into any detail

[@followernumber1]

How’s it different from the crossbow

[@gorillaguerillaDK]

But what would be the benefit of using this instead of a bow? If I had to guess, the benefit is that using both hands and feet, it requires less energy and less arm strength, but the downside would be that it takes longer to load, than a bow. I guess another benefit might be that it can be loaded in advance? Has it been described how it was used tactically? Was it by units specialized in using this weapon, and ongoing during battle - or was it used by regular infantry when initiating battle, before reaching melee range?

[@shadowhawk-pf3vs]

It could have been used for the same reason medieval Europe used them, which was easier to train men to use them, which might have been a possibility due to the constant warfare of the late Roman empire.

[@badfoody]

it's easier to learn how to use a crossbow then it is to learn how to use a bow.

[@gorillaguerillaDK]

@@shadowhawk-pf3vs Yes, I forgot to mention that this is why I ask about how they were used tactically! It could of course be a very possible benefit, especially if the weapon primarily was used by infantry men before the reached melee range, in a similar manner as the Pilum was used. However, as the Roman Army wasn't made up of peasants, but highly trained soldiers, where in medieval Europe, a lot of the soldiers were not professionals, I'm not sure how much influence the part about it being a bit easier to learn to use had if it was used by archer units. It would also be interesting to know if it was mostly being used in small skirmishes, by protective details, as a direct fire weapon, or if it was used in a similar manner as most bows were used, in indirect fire just like we use artillery today... It being referenced as a form of "hand catapult" surely suggests the latter, but I would have loved it if the video had explained a bit more.

[@gorillaguerillaDK]

@@badfoody Yes, it is, you're absolutely right, and that is highly beneficial if your soldiers are mostly poorly trained peasants. But the Roman Army was a top professional army. So a possible explanation could be that it wasn't used by dedicated archer units, but by infantry men, similar to how they used the Pilum, to attack the enemy before reaching melee range. That's why I wanted to know if anything is known about the tactically use of the weapon.

[@cal2127]

if its anything like the gastraphates. seige weapon, you cant hold a bow string indefinitely, but this can. so you can shelter behind a shield and wait for an opening to take your shot at wall defenders