Panicked by Fire Attack

[antisocialmunky]

I'm just curious if anyone has any information on how often fire arrows were actually used in field battles and how effective they really were.

[Atraphoenix]

They were effective, but mainly fire arrows used in pillage missions to burn down houses, farms, etc.
for accuracy I do not think that generals favoured it. but in siege battles mainly to demotivate the defenders and also defenders used it to burn enemy's siege machines.
though it may be a fiction or a myth but there is a record that Syracusians used some unknown war machine that burned roman navy, I think they used mirrors to reflect the sunlight to burn the sails after sails burned so the navy was burned.
In roman records it is recorded like that but in the end they managed to capture the city.
but I think boiling oil must be more devastating effect on morale than fire arrows.
the famous general must be Edward, the Black Prince who was infamous for his "The Great Raid of 1355" on the Aquitaine–Languedoc Front, which crippled southern France economically, and provoked resentment of the French throne among French peasantry.

[Maion Maroneios]

there is a record that Syracusians used some unknown war machine that burned roman navy, I think they used mirrors to reflect the sunlight to burn the sails after sails burned so the navy was burned.
I've read that too, and they're called "Fire Mirrors" or something. Supposedly, the mechanism itself was just a collection of various mirrors encircling a big centered one in such a way, that all sun beams that reflected upon the smaller ones concentrated on the central and the concentrated beam hit the enemy ships and set them on fire... I don't really know, but this sounds way too much Sci-Fi to me. I don't even know if that is scientifically possible. I know that, according to the Physics part at least, in order to concentrate sunlight into a beam powerful enough to actually cause damage would require a series of very powerful (and preferably of parabolic shape) lenses that would in turn have to be placed in very specific places in order to get the desired effect.

That leaves me with no option other than dismiss the probability of that story actually holding any truth at all, since AFAIK the Greeks were not as advanced in Geometric Optics as we are today. Not only that, but even if they were they wouldn't be able to burn a ship of more than a few meters away. Why is that, you ask? Because even laser beams aren't as devastating as we believe from a long distance. This is why there can be no laser guns, and that is why the whole "Fire Mirror" story cannot possibly be correct. And why is that exactly? Because even if you concentrate a ray of photons for example (in the case of sunlight), it stays "compact" only for a few meters. After that, the small particles that make up the "beam" will go in different directions and so the energy delivered to a target will not cause any considerable damage like setting it on fire.

Maion

[Aemilius Paulus]

I don't even know if that is scientifically possible.
It is actually. They have done tests. My source is National Geographic here. The heat was enough to ignite the sails at no more than 300-400 metres.

[Mikhail Mengsk]

Another story from the Syracuse siege was a giant wooden machine who threw a giant "arm" to the sea and smashed roman ships. Another invention of Archimedes, who was later killed when the romans stormed the city.

[Reality=Chaos]

Why too Sci fi? I think the romans credited archimedes with this invention, and he had a great mind....so why shouldn't he have? but to make it work would probably have been very expensive and precise work.... If the syrakusans managed to build a working one i doubt it would have been duplicated. too unique and complicated to accurately replicate... not too mention very, very costly

[Aemilius Paulus]

Another story from the Syracuse siege was a giant wooden machine who threw a giant "arm" to the sea and smashed roman ships. .
From what I read it was an a long mechanical arm that tipped the ships over. Basically hit them on their side, right where the deck ends, and it destabilised the ship to the point where it simply flipped. Or as other sources state, the arm flipped them by acting as a lever, pushing from the bottom of the ship; or the keel.

[Cute Wolf]

Maybe the Syrakousans start their mirror burning as incidental, having created a concave mirror and accidentally burn some linens... no wonder, they start creating larger version for war...

[Ghaust the Moor]

They did a test of thet myth on a popular show called "Mythbuster" They said it was fake but they tested it very wrong. First they made a plywood boat, then a replitcation of the mirror. It heated the boat up to about three hundred degreess, but it only melted the tar on the boat. My problem with this is that they burnt the sails of the vessels, not the boats themselves. Plus the plywood obsorbed a ton of water and they couldn't even get it to lightafter they were done with testing. They need to to revisit that myth and test it correctly.

[Watchman]

Oh Christ. The Archimedes Death Ray. DO NOT WANT

Weirdo crane to mess up ships that wander too close, though, is certainly credible. And wouldn't even be close to the strangest contraptions people have came up with over the millenia in siege warfare...

[Mikhail Mengsk]

From what I read it was an a long mechanical arm that tipped the ships over. Basically hit them on their side, right where the deck ends, and it destabilised the ship to the point where it simply flipped. Or as other sources state, the arm flipped them by acting as a lever, pushing from the bottom of the ship; or the keel.

:yes:

[Caveira]

Even more impressive is that aleged steam powered cannon conceptulized by Archimedes.

I think it were some MIT students who succefully built a steam gun that fired a bullet at sonic speed from one. They kept the blueprints for themselves for being too dangerous.

[Fierro]

Oh Christ. The Archimedes Death Ray. DO NOT WANT

Weirdo crane to mess up ships that wander too close, though, is certainly credible. And wouldn't even be close to the strangest contraptions people have came up with over the millenia in siege warfare...
You can't just give a mention of strange contraptions and not give us any details:book:

[HunGeneral]

Like said before fire arrows were used primearly during raids or sieges.

I can remember a tail that while a large group of Hungarian warriors/raiders besieged the city of Augsburg they used burning arrows as a form of "greating" the besieged - they fired burning arrows into the town and many buildings went ablaze. It is also claimed that during this siege the Hungarians first tried using some form of siege equipment, but couldn't use it because they were defeated by Otto the Great and his relief army of heavely armoured knights....

If we have already mentioned the Siege of Syracusa and archemideses inventions, does anyone of you have any information on the "claw" - another mechanism used agaisnt the romans (I don't know much about it..)

[Celtic_Punk]

This is why there can be no laser guns
Maion

no laser guns? you make me sad :thumbsdown: I always wanted an E-11 blaster rifle.

[antisocialmunky]

Oh Christ. The Archimedes Death Ray. DO NOT WANT

Weirdo crane to mess up ships that wander too close, though, is certainly credible. And wouldn't even be close to the strangest contraptions people have came up with over the millenia in siege warfare...

Screw the Death Ray. Its crap. It would have been integrated into other coastal defense systems. There were tons of guys around that would have been able to use the idea sincei t wasn't that difficult. Archimedes didn't have a monopoly on intellegence back then you know. That being said, its not umpossible.

The claw is actually more plausible though. Mesopotamian cultures used large cranes to move ships around channels. If anything it was some sort of improvisation.

[Watchman]

Not dissimilar "hoists" were fairly widely used to foil rams, back in the day, and at least the Chinese and Medieval Europeans had a small one used to snatch individual soldiers...

[Urg]

There are some references to the use of flaming arrows here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_thermal_weapons#Flaming_arrows.2C_bolts.2C_spears_and_rockets).

I'll see if I can find some actual historical sources.

[Urg]

I'm really struggling to find any ancient Roman source which is definite about the use of flaming arrows.

Two web articles refer to the Romans using flaming arrows against elephants (a) at the battle of Beneventum against Pyrrhus, and (b) at the battle of Panormus against Hasdrubal, but when I checked the ancient sources I couldn't find any reference to flaming arrows at those battle.

I haven't checked the Greek sources.

Did anyone else find any ancient sources?

Is it possible that its just a myth. It certainly looks to be the (vary rare) exception rather than, as in TW, the rule.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I read that during Beneventum the velites used flaming javelins (vertum). :juggle2: No mention of flaming arrows. From a very trusted and renowned (in Russia) encyclopaedia.

[Urg]

I read that during Beneventum the velites used flaming javelins (vertum). :juggle2: No mention of flaming arrows. From a very trusted and renowned (in Russia) encyclopaedia.

What are the ancient sources the encyclopaedia relies on?

The only references to flaming "implements" used against Pyrrhus, that I could find, are these:

1. From Dionysius of Halicarnassus, XX, 1:6-7:

"Outside the line they stationed the light-armed troops and the waggons, three hundred in number, which they had got ready for the battle against the elephants. These waggons had upright beams on which were mounted movable traverse poles that could be swung round as quick as thought in any direction one might wish, and on the ends of the poles there were either tridents or swordlike spikes or scythes all of iron; or again they had cranes that hurled down heavy grappling-irons. Many of the poles had attached to them and projecting in front of the waggons fire-bearing grapnels wrapped in tow that had been liberally daubed with pitch, which men standing on the waggons were to set afire as soon as they came near the elephants and then rain blows with them upon the trunks and faces of the beasts."

2. From Cassius Dio / Zonoras, Book 10

The Romans, among other preparations, made ready, as a measure against the elephants, iron-pointed beams, mounted on waggons, and bristling in all directions. From these they intended to shoot fire and various missiles, in order to check the beasts.

(Nb. I have no idea why both translations spell wagon with a double 'g').

[Watchman]

"Waggon" is a perfectly valid, if rather archaic, word for the vehicle.

[Urg]

I finally found what looks like a reference to fire arrows, from Plutarch's life of Sulla, 9:6, concerning Sulla's entry into Rome with his army:

But by this time Sulla was at hand, and seeing what was going on, shouted orders to set fire to the houses, and seizing a blazing torch, led the way himself, and ordered his archers to use their fire-bolts and shoot them up at the roofs.

I can't read Greek so I have no idea whether the original Greek actually refers to fire-arrows, but the translation sounds like fire arrows.

Any other examples?

[Urg]

Also this, from Herodotus 8:52 (pre-EB period)

So the Persians taking their post upon the rising ground opposite the Acropolis, which the Athenians call the Hill of Ares, proceeded to besiege them in this fashion, that is they put tow round about their arrows and lighted it, and then shot them against the palisade.

[Urg]

I think there is something in the Aeneid, Book 10, Lines 130-132.

Overall conclusion: Arrows are mentioned regularly in the ancient sources. Fire arrows are the very rare exception.

Should this affect the way fire arrows are used in EB?

[Watchman]

...don't use them ?

[Maion Maroneios]

It is actually. They have done tests. My source is National Geographic here. The heat was enough to ignite the sails at no more than 300-400 metres.
OK, but I'd like to see some proof there.

Maion

[antisocialmunky]

I thought it was a large chunk of wood on a canoe or on land @ 300ft.

[Chris1959]

As for the use of fire arrows in battle we have to look at Holywood for the answer. Take the battle scene in "Gladiator", the Romans use fire arrows and to light them they have handy little trenches full of oil to start the ball rolling.
Problem 1; Things go horribly wrong oil goes everywhere and you have cremated archer auxilia.
Problem 2; It rains
Problem 3; The enemy turn up some where else or late and your fire goes out.
Problem 4; The enemy have archers don't use flamming arrows that reduce range and accuracy and shoot your archers to pieces.
Problem 5; You have a Steppe army.

Conclusion; Fire arrows look great and may be useful in attacking flammable buildings but in the fluid world of battle they are a not an easy light BBQ

[Ludens]

That's not the most stupid or plainly inaccurate feature of that battle, though.

[Watchman]

It seemed to have an unhealthy obsession with hairy men wrestling in mud...

[Xurr]

They did a test of thet myth on a popular show called "Mythbuster" They said it was fake but they tested it very wrong. First they made a plywood boat, then a replitcation of the mirror. It heated the boat up to about three hundred degreess, but it only melted the tar on the boat. My problem with this is that they burnt the sails of the vessels, not the boats themselves. Plus the plywood obsorbed a ton of water and they couldn't even get it to lightafter they were done with testing. They need to to revisit that myth and test it correctly.

Perhaps they were able to burn sails, but truthfully that wouldn't really slow down a ship primarily propelled by oars like roman triremes. Personally I think using mirrors as weapons while possible was completely impractical and a simple ballistae firing flaming bolts would be far more practical and effective.

[HunGeneral]

@Chris1959: I agree with most of your points exept:


Problem 5; You have a Steppe army

The use of fire arrows at Augsburg was used by a steppe army (consisiting primearly of light horse archers). They simply got of there horses and fired flaming arrows into the town at night - how effective it was I don't know...

[Watchman]

Perhaps they were able to burn sails, but truthfully that wouldn't really slow down a ship primarily propelled by oars like roman triremes. Personally I think using mirrors as weapons while possible was completely impractical and a simple ballistae firing flaming bolts would be far more practical and effective.Also on a practical note, war galleys would presumably have kept their sails furled in the circumstances... damn things aren't exactly agile under sail, and the *last* thing you want is the wind pushing a few somewhere you don't want to.
Like rocks or the teeth of enemy mural artillery.

[Chris1959]

War Galleys would if possible remove sails and masts before going into action.

[Maion Maroneios]

Exactly. Sails were not used AFAIK during naval battles, as oars were the best method of gaining considerabe velocity to ram an enemy ship. Don't forget that wind is unpredictable and, as Watchman correctly stated, may even work in the enemy's favour by blowing you in the wrong direction or slowing you down thus minimizing the damage caused by the impact.

Maion

[Watchman]

Sails are for travel, at least as long as the wind is good. But galleys fight under oars, that's kind of the whole point of the contraptions. Be it by ram, boarding or gun, oars let it be brought to bear on the enemy irrespective of the vagaries of the winds.

Also useful in dense archipelagos and the like; assorted oared gunships were the backbone of most Baltic coastal fleets until the 1800s (and steam)... but I digress.

[Joaquin the Rezanator]

Plus making a fire mirror would have been really expensive in this time period, as it need it aluminum or silver to make the reflection. Might as well use that silver to buy more mercenaries!

[Maion Maroneios]

Indeed, that's a good point as well. But you guys seem to neglect the scientific part. Has anyone followed any Optics courses? If you have, you'll probably know the Greeks (as clever as they may have been) probably didn't know things like Snell's Rule or general laws that are used in Geometric Optics. And I'm not even touching advanced Optics that include Quantum Physics theories that explain various phenomena that Geometric Optics simply cannot explain.

Maion

[Watchman]

Science aside (though now that you mention it, applied optics didn't reach even close to the required level of sophistication for quite a while did they ?), one wonders if a *besieged city* would have had the capability - or inclination - to spend time trying to craft sufficiently capable mirrors and whatnot for the purpose... ones, moreover, ultimately not terribly difficult to disable with good old catapults anyway, when you get down to it.

The practical hurdles already strike me as reducing the issue of prequisite theoretical know-how rather academic.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Plus making a fire mirror would have been really expensive in this time period, as it need it aluminum or silver to make the reflection. Might as well use that silver to buy more mercenaries!

No, actually both materials you mention would not work. Silver is not just too expensive: it also has the slightly unfortunate habit of reacting with HCl(aq), and more importantly: NO, and NO2. Especially with HNO3(aq) where the H+/H3O+ acts as catalyst to speed up the reaction with NO or NO2 depending on the concentration of HNO3(aq). Oh and of course, O3 (ozone: you mostly notice it as the odd smell in the air during a thunderstorm) and O2. Quicksilver on the other hand (Hg) might work rather better.

EDIT: As for Al it was quite possibly as expensive or even more expensive as silver back in the day (because `natural' Al deposits are quite rare: most Al is deposited in the form of bauxite and similar SiAl bindings), but Al will react very quickly with O2 at which point it is no longer useful for reflecting anything. You basically can't hope to complete a mirror made out of Al before your Al is covered in a thin layer of airthight Al2O3.

As for the optics required: the math behind it would have been well understood, and using multiple hexagons you can approximate a parabola relatively easily. (The main reason being that a hexagon can be constructed out of a circle with greate accuracy using the very simple rule that the length of each side is equal to the radius of the circle which encloses the whole; and it has angles of 120° at each corner)

The point is not so much of were they capable of doing it, but rather would they have done it? Considering that decent mural artillery would probably have outperformed any such `approximately a parabola but not quite', would've been readily available anyways, and that the shock of a mirror (not being able to see where you are sailing) could've been inflicted with a simpler mirror... Oh and of course that much simpler mechanic devices such as the `toppling device' or whatever the hook was will give plenty of that with greater accuracy too?

[Aemilius Paulus]

I read the mirrors were constructed from polished bronze...

[Urg]

Is this a theoretical discussion, or was there a historical account of an ancient battle involving the use of mirrors?

[Tellos Athenaios]

For my part it is purely hypothetical. To continue it...
IIRC polished bronze mainly reflects IR radiation which is a subset of the entire spectrum. It is also the on `low' end of the spectrum. So assuming my memory hasn't failed me, then the question of whether that material `could work' is one of whether or not the total amount of energy reflected by the mirror is (still) sufficient to ignite a ship. Of course this question is relative to the answer of.
How much area covered bronze do you need for the mirror compared to another material with `better' reflective properties. (Because if you need an order of magnitude more area with bronze for the same amount of energy to be reflected...)

[Cute Wolf]

Actually, IR radiation has lower energy compared to the visible lights ( E = h c v ) v = wavenumber ;
But that energy was mainly stored as vibrational energy, and it will be relased as thermal energy. And thermal energy burns, it's ok to look how this calculation is going to be happened, according to the blackbody radiation law... ; But instead of bronze (which was darker and reflect less light) they may use copper instead (easier to manufacture, and has brighter surface), copper also more effective since they reflect mostly red zone and IR zone radiation ( 3d10 4s1 absorbing a photon --> electron in the 4s1 will be excited easily into 4p, and then thrown bak to its former state, relasing red shift energy...)

And to made an optical burning - polished copper, you just need to arrange many mirrors in parabolical arrangement, it was really obvious that the greeks could do some simple math on parabolics and hyperbolics...

The only problem was they are too costly, but Syrakousai has more... money to do it... so they can do that if they want

BTW, for me, it was more logically false, why did u create some inefficient device against a really cruel enemy, when with the same money, you can hire many mercenaries to defend you... but Syrakousai is lost his war... and in the conclusion, they must ridiculously spent their money on that silly (but scientifically sophisticated) device...

:idea2:

[satalexton]

all that, and a prayer to the gods to not rain

[Tellos Athenaios]

Actually, IR radiation has lower energy compared to the visible lights ( E = h c v ) v = wavenumber ;

Yes that's what I said `low end' of the spectrum. But the main point why it could still work is that IR is relatively abundant.

[Watchman]

I remember once seeing a TV 'documentary' (and the term is used loosely here...) that blithely claimed the Syracusans used the bronze facings of their shields as the mirrors for the purpose...

Needless to say, there was much mirth in the audience.

[Maion Maroneios]

Actually, the method of polishing your aspis and fighting with the sun in front of you was widely practised by (at least) Greek hoplites, because the sun reflected on the surface and blinded the enemy line.

Maion

[Watchman]

Pretty far cry from setting ships on fire from afar with them, though. 'Sides, that's really just evening the odds since *you* will be fighting with the sun glaring in your face...

[Maion Maroneios]

Well, I'm not supporting the "Fire Mirrors" theory you know. If you read my initial post of the subject, you'll see I'm openly against it. Aimilios told me they actually re-created a "Fire Mirror" and managed to burn sails (which doesn't mean anything), but he still hasn't come up with the proof I requested.

Maion

[Xurr]

Pretty far cry from setting ships on fire from afar with them, though. 'Sides, that's really just evening the odds since *you* will be fighting with the sun glaring in your face...


That's why they had official Diadochi sunglasses. :beatnik2:

[Chris1959]

"Death Ray Bans" Invented by Archimides:laugh4:

[Mikhail Mengsk]

rotfl! XD

[antisocialmunky]

I don't think a single surprise fast death ray build would have really worked for the Syracuians. I mean, that would have given the Romans an uninterupted mineral line so they could fast tech and come out with an early Naval Port. Then they would have access to galleys to drop legionaires and strong throwers in the back of Syracuse's expansions and kill all their gatherers. Not to mention that they could drop ONTOP OF THE DEATH RAY ITSELF AFTER ITS BUILD and just out micro the thing with Velites while they deploy their onagers in range to take it down.

You really have to harass those Romans or you'll just be out built by them in the late game when they just Legion spam your butt and contain you in your city and eventually they'll just crawl forward with their onagers. Can't let them set up on the high ground and siege up your ramp...

Seriously you would just have better luck with a 4 barracks hoplite and apothecary!

[mountaingoat]

would of been something built as a last effort for defense of the island .. i doubt the cost of the parabolic array would of been the equivalent of lets say 5000 soldiers ... and even if this was the case , they were against rome (and finding highly skilled mercs willing to fight against rome , might of taken a bit of time to find.).. even if they had an extra 5000 soldiers and defeated an invasion ... rome would return, their funds would dwindle and the attrition rate would be high ...... so building a device like one of the two mentioned might seem like a more cost effective idea .