Imagine finding yourself in the middle of a battlefield, ready to confront your adversaries, while countless arrows descend from the sky, accompanied by lead balls that crush both the soldiers and their horses. This is what our video is about today, we will explore the plumbata of the Roman army. Our story does not focus on the period of the early Roman empire, but on the late imperial Roman army.
To fully understand it, it is necessary to examine the evolution of the Roman army. During the Republic and the High Empire, the Roman army was characterized by large infantry engagements, where battles consisted of combats between legionaries and enemy soldiers. Although cavalry played a significant role, the heart of combat lay with the infantry.
This was also reflected in the legionary's equipment: the shields, which went from being elliptical to rectangular; the sword, the gladius, approximately 60 cm in length, designed to stab the opponent mainly with the tip, creating a wall of shields from which numerous blades emerged to pierce the enemy. In addition, there was the pilum, the classic javelin of the Roman legionary, which was thrown when the opponent was about 10 to 15 meters away. This is the equipment of an army that was accustomed to frontal infantry clashes in large decisive battles that often determined the fate of wars.
However, during the Late Empire period, especially from the 4th century AD, the strategy of the Roman army underwent a significant change. The extensive borders that needed to be guarded led to an evolution in the conduct of the Roman army. Although large infantry engagements continued to exist, the reality was that large units, especially heavy cavalry, were located in border cities at strategic points.
When barbarian tribes or enemies crossed the borders of the empire, these cavalry units were quickly mobilized to intercept the adversary. Thus, combats became mainly light or heavy cavalry engagements, with quick interventions and battles that took place at greater distances. This change in the nature of combat led to an adaptation of equipment to fit new battle tactics and concepts.
For example, the sword is considerably elongated, reaching about 70 to 80 centimeters and is known as a saber. Shields, mostly round, are designed this way to suit cavalry, as a rectangular shield would be uncomfortable for mounted soldiers. This design is also reflected in helmets.
In the context of this evolution of the Roman army during the late imperial period, the use of plumbata emerged. Now we will explore the details of these plumbata and what made them so deadly. Let's start from the fact, How is a plumbata made?
The plumbata is described mainly by three ancient sources, although in reality we have about twenty references to this projectile. This is a plumbata mamillata, the most common type. Basically, it is an arrow that is clearly distinguished by its design.
It has a metal tip, which is usually pierced or pierced. This tip is long and protruding, and from the tip to the central part it measures about nine centimeters. The arrow then continues in a regular manner, and in its tail it has a component known as pinning, which is a reconstruction of the pin used to stabilize its trajectory.
In the final part, we find an extension that acts as a handle. In total, the plumbata measures between 30 and 45 centimeters. The main characteristic of the plumbata is that, in the middle of the projectile, it has a lead weight that gives it greater mass and stability.
This weight is what makes the plumbata an effective and lethal dart. This is the structure of a plumbata, a dart with a lead core that provides the necessary weight to give it effectiveness. In addition, we have a very suggestive representation of this plumbata.
A drawing made by an anonymous author in the De Rebus Bellicis, the only one known from antiquity that illustrates what this plumbata looked like. This drawing, handcrafted by an ancient military expert, was passed down throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Now, where was this plumbata, or great arrow, stored?
According to ancient authors, who were manuals of military tactics, the main solution was to fix five plumbats on the back of the shield, ready to be taken and thrown. Alternatively, a leather enclosure was also used where the plumbates were placed, allowing them to be extracted and used when necessary. So how were these big darts thrown?
Experimental archeology has provided clear insight into the process. According to reconstructions, plumbata were supported by the extension of their tail. The dart was held from the rear, the arm moved vertically and from a low upward position the dart was released and thrown.
In this way, the enemy was hit by a shower of arrows and darts, which, due to their lead weight, provided a strong impact and maintained a stable trajectory. Throwing a plumbata offered two main advantages. Firstly, experimental archeology has shown that, when thrown correctly, a plumbata could reach up to 80 meters, allowing it to hit enemy infantry or cavalry at that distance.
So this was a significant advantage, the plumbata allowed the enemy to be hit while they were still at a considerable distance, unlike the javelin, which required being about 15 or 20 meters away to be effective. The plumbata could hit from afar and, when thrown correctly, fell from top to bottom, overcoming shields and causing direct damage to the enemy, whether to the head, body or even horses, which made it a very effective tool. to weaken and disorganize enemy lines before close combat.
Additionally, ancient sources mention another type of plumbata, known as tribollate plumbata. However, unfortunately, we do not have detailed descriptions or images of this type of plumbata, since ancient sources do not provide specific information about it. It is likely that, based on the name tribollate, the tribollate plumbata had a different structure than the common plumbata.
In addition to the arrowhead and the lead protrusion in the center, it may have had two additional protrusions. This would imply that, in addition to dealing damage on impact, the tribollate also functioned as a kind of trap when it fell to the ground. In this context, the tribollate plumbata not only hit the opponent, but when it fell, it became a dangerous obstacle for both foot soldiers and horses, creating a trap in the terrain.
This suggests that the tribollate had a significant defensive function, as it dispersed and remained scattered on the ground, making it difficult for the enemy to advance, making it an effective tactical tool to hinder and protect against enemy forces. These are the two main categories of plumbata, the plumbata mamillata and the plumbata tribollata. In addition to these, another interesting aspect has been investigated.
Ancient sources also refer to plumbata as marzio barbuli, which translates as "marbles of Mars. " The question arises as to why this name is attributed to him, and there are several theories about it. The leading scholar in this field, Eliot, suggests two possible explanations.
The first theory is that, when launched, the plumbata could have created a kind of rain of darts that looked like a divine rain, which would justify the reference to Mars, the god of war. The second theory suggests that the tips of the plumbata could be slightly inclined, making them difficult to extract from wounds, thus adding an additional characteristic to their lethality. It is important to note that these theories are speculative and there is no definitive certainty about why they were given the name Marzio Barbuli.
With this, we have covered the structure, use and launch of the plumbata. As for its use on the battlefield, we know for certain that the plumbata was used by infantry, both light and heavy, starting in the 4th century AD, during the Late Empire period. Ancient sources specifically mention two legions originating from the Illyricum region, which were notable for their training in the use of the plumbata.
These legions, composed of approximately 6,000 soldiers each, specialized in the use of the plumbata with great success, inflicting considerable damage on the enemy. According to Vegezio, these legions were so effective that, instead of needing additional archers, his legionaries could play the role of archers by using the plumbata before close combat. The effectiveness of these legions was such that the emperors Diocletian and Maximian preferred them and used them at key moments in their military campaigns.
These legions were also renamed with honorary names, Jovianos and Herculanos, in reference to divinities, which underlines their prestige and the importance given to them in the Roman army. The strategicon confirms that the plumbata was especially effective against troops in arid or wooded areas, where its use was very useful in disrupting the enemy. This versatility allowed it to be used against both infantry and light or heavy cavalry, making it a weapon adaptable to various units of the Roman army.
In addition, the plumbata could also be used in defense during a siege. According to ancient sources, launched from elevated positions, the combination of the force of gravity and the weight of the projectile made the plumbata very dangerous for the besiegers, thus increasing their effectiveness in protecting the fortifications. It has also been suggested, although without concrete evidence, that the plumbata could have been used during naval battles, throwing it from one ship to another.
However, there are no specific descriptions in ancient sources that confirm its use in these situations, so this remains in the realm of theory. To conclude our explanation, there is a small debate in the field of numismatics. Some scholars and numismatists have identified representations of the plumbata on coins from the late imperial period.
For example, in an aureus of Emperor Maximian, some experts believe that the emperor can be seen holding a plumbata. Another case is a bronze from Constantine, which could also represent a plumbata in its details. On coins from the late imperial period, such as the aureus of Constantine and the aureus of Diocletian, some scholars believe that depictions could show plumbata, especially considering Diocletian's appreciation of the legions who used this weapon.
These coins were important for imperial propaganda, and their possible inclusion of plumbata suggests the relevance and recognition of this weapon at the time. However, there is a debate in the field of numismatics. Sylvain Estiou strongly maintains that the images on the coins represent plumbata, arguing that the weapons depicted on these coins were recognized and popular among citizens, indicating the importance of plumbata.
However, other numismatists have raised objections, pointing out that the plumbata on the coins do not appear to be placed in the correct location on the final extension of the dart, but rather closer to the tip, suggesting that they may not be plumbata. In response to this objection, it is argued that the limited space on the coins may have led to a stylized representation rather than detailed accuracy. Therefore, although the depiction of plumbata on coins might not be exact, it is still possible that a plumbata is being depicted, considering the symbolic function and simplification of images in numismatic art.
Detractors of the theory that the coins represent plumbata argue that, given the relatively small size of the plumbata which ranged between 30 and 45 cm, it is not plausible. that is shown in the representations of the shields held by the emperors. According to this view, the images in question more likely represent javelins rather than plumbata, as javelins are seen in the right hand and a pair in the left hand of the figures on the coins.
From a purely numismatic point of view, the debate over the presence of plumbata on imperial coins continues. Despite this discussion, it is clear that the plumbata was used effectively during various periods of the Roman Empire until the early 6th century AD. However, from that moment on, it seems to have disappeared from legionary equipment, since no more archaeological finds have been found to indicate its later use.
Therefore, although the plumbata was a powerful and relevant weapon, it seems to have ceased to be part of the Roman arsenal over time. So, we hope we have told you well the story of the plumbata, a weapon that, although not well known, was truly lethal. As always, we invite you to subscribe to our channel, thank you for following us, and see you in the next video.
