Introduction
Before the invention of the gunpowder, the catapult had changed the course of history and politics. The science of catapult is as old as the account of humankind with history detailing its use from as early as 399 B.C in Sicily. The invention took many shapes, as it changed throughout the generations, which used it with the Romans being the people who explored its use to the fullest.
The device won many wars besides leading to the invention of more deadly weapons with the invention of new ways of defense from this ruthless machine including fortification of buildings. However, of all the machines used in wars, the catapult stands out asthe most remembered for its use by the Roman army in the conquest of large areas of the civilized world. Their success can be attributed to machines and people who specialized in its manufacture and use.
With the transformation of the Republic into an Empire under the leadership of an Emperor, the catapult started changing into a weapon of choice and designs. According to Cuomo, the basic design started changing with the new catapults, “boasting a metal frame and, in some cases, in-swinging arms” (Cuomo, 2008, p.4).
With the Roman Empire, there was peace in the vast areas it controlled. These included the Mediterranean areas formerly under the rule of Greece and other areas such as the Great Britain and Spain. Of the weapons feared during this time, the catapult was the one that wreaked havoc in the minds of generals.
With these highlights about the catapult, the paper presents a detailed history of the weapon right from its origin. Further, it provides comprehensive argument that the catapult is as powerful as the current weapons based on how the Roman army won several wars and to conquer other kingdoms using the weapon.
The Origin of the Catapult
Tracey Rihll gives a detailed history of the origin, transformation, and the use of the device in ancient times focusing on the Hellenistic world as well as the Roman Empire (2007, p. 34).
Most of the other literatures detailing the use of the catapult claim that the inspiration came from the bow and sling, which is well known to be a popular weapon in the ancient times. The first account of the use of the catapult is recorded by Oldfatherto be in Sicily.
He states that the ruler of Syracuse “gathered skilled craftsmen with the command to make weapons of every kind in great numbers, and every type of projectile” (Oldfather, 1933, p. 54). This marked the entry of the catapult as a choice of weapon to aid in the author’s desired conquest of his neighbors and the world as a whole.
Oldfather goes on to give a statement that is more likely true by revealing that it was during this period that the catapult was invented (1933, p. 56). He claims, “The catapult was invented at this time since the best craftsmen had been collected from everywhere into one place” (1933, p. 56).
It is quite interesting to see that the motivation behind the invention of the catapult was the conquest and desire for power. The inventors who built it were also lured by the large wages being paid for the assembly of the same (Cuomo, 2004, p. 771). Dionysius is said to have exploited the vast wealth of the kingdom and the poor living standards to fund this machine to achieve cheap labor at the same time (Cuomo, 2004, p. 771).
It was important to include labor in the manufacture of the weapon, as more of the machines were needed to convincingly win a war to outmatch the enemy. The belopoietics had not been invented at the time. Most of the technicians worked out of experience and or trial and error.
This led to the production of devices that were poor in functionality and accuracy, which endangered the lives of those who used them in the battlefield. There are therefore various recorded accounts of changes to the original weapon with experience in battle. Even though this is the first detailed use of the catapult, there are speculations that the device could have been in use much earlier. The 9th century Iraq is a possible candidate for the use of the catapult, as it was evident with the existing civilization there.
In close proximity to this civilization was the Mediterranean area, which is thought to have used the catapult in the 4th century B.C (Cuomo, 2004, p. 771). The Greeks are credited with the use of this technology too. Their characteristic design of the catapult was the ‘belly-bow’.
This, according to Cuomo, was “a large bow mounted on a case, one end of which rested on the belly of the person using it. When the demands of war required a faster and stronger weapon, the device was enlarged” (2004, p. 771). In a chronological manner, Cuomo states that the use of the catapult after ancient Greece was taken up by the Macedonians whose ruler at the time was Philip the second (Cuomo, 2004, p. 771).
The use here saw brilliant modification to the device while still maintaining the basic structure besides improving accuracy and range. In the original catapult, there was a limitation for load that could be used as a projectile, which reduced its efficacy especially in close conflicts.
The modifications accorded to the device by the Macedonians however allowed a heavier load to be used as a projectile while still maintaining the accuracy besides improving on range. With the introduction of the theories of belopoietics, which involved the invention of stone-throwing devices (Cuomo 2004, p. 771) and mathematics, the manufacture of catapults was made easier since the measurements of the various components could be calculated, standardized, recorded to achieve proportionality, and used for future reference.
The original designs and those that followed have been discovered in archeological digs. This correlates with the times recorded to have used the catapult. These are on display in various museums in the world with most retaining the original structure and framework. Archimedes, a very famous engineer in history and a pioneer in military engineering, is said to have influenced the designs of the catapult.
During his time, the king of Syracuse is said to have inspired him into the creation of the catapults, which were effective in the defense of his city from the highly trained and armed Roman army (Collins, & Pinch, 1998, p. 23). The independence of the city however did not last for long, as the determination of the army led to its capture in the year 212 B.C (Cuomo, 2004, p. 772).
The Roman Empire is said to have expanded very fast besides growing in mechanization with an army so vast and well armed. The most precious weapon in its large arsenal was the catapult, which destroyed the walls of so many enemies and kingdoms, which resisted its rule.
The device increased in size and versatility with the soldiers using it for shelter and personal protection in battlefields (Echard, 1707, p. 23).
This growth in superiority and power made them have so much confidence in their expertise. In the wake of this confidence, Frontinus wrote about the Roman Empire stating, “The invention of the machines of war has long been completed and I do not see anything surpassing the state of the art” (Frontinus et al., 1969, p. 54) despite the great inventions of the time, which have revolutionized the warfare.
The Roman army is known to be one of the most violent and vicious occupying force in the history of war engagements. Many authors agree that the catapult was instrumental to their success (Echard, 1707, p. 23). In all the battles that they fought, this device is said to have taken the center stage.
It is therefore correct to say that it was the main inspiration of war for them alongside their hunger for power and land. For any army during their time, winning depended on the number of catapults one could make to destroy those of the enemy. Different authors however claim that the catapult was an engineering prototype of the land of Syracuse.
The main proponent of this theory is Marsden who claimed that, despite the popular belief held by Rehll that the precursor of the catapult was the bow and sling, only the bow inspired it (Marsden, 1969, p. 34). This was around the year 399BC. There is a similarity in the chronology of events leading to the transition of the bow and sling to the catapult. However, both authors agree on the transition from the non-torsion type to the torsion type, which could be used to hurl larger objects farther (Cuomo, 2007, p. 138).
The Romans and the Catapult
Of all the armies before the year 1850, the Roman army is described as the most successful and efficient at war in many instances. It was through its expertise and professionalism that many armies that it faced either surrendered or declared peace with it for a ransom.
Its success has been studied by historians and war experts alike with many military academies around the world teaching their tactics based on the Roman way of fighting. They are rumored to have used some of the most current states of the art weapons during their time. The catapult is described to be one of them. It is because of these considerations that the Roman army and the empire at large form a good case study in the use of the catapult before the year 1850.
The Roman Republic is thought to have started sometimes in the years following 500 B.C. The original inhabitants have been thought to be the Etruscan people from the Alps who came and settled in the south of Italy (Hooke, 1770, p. 23). The Greeks before them had been less talented in governance despite their talent in the fields of art and science. It is a well-known fact that the Romans had an appetite for land.
To achieve this, they had to conquer the surrounding areas to satisfy this urge. This called upon the most advanced and strongest army at the time. Being in use at around this time, the catapult served as a very important tool to achieve this dominion over the other kingdoms. As a device, the catapult is commonly referred in the present age with a different name in the Roman army.
These were borrowed from the Greek. The mongonel was the name used in battle to refer to it. It meant a war machine. The other term that was borrowed from the Greek was the Onager, which compared the catapult to the donkey in the way it kicked when being fired. The Romans employed this tool in the many wars that they fought.
The only war that the Romans are recorded to have lost is that with the Gauls in the year 390 BC. This went on until their fall hundreds of years later (Doud, n.d, p. 3). Their success can largely be attributed to the use of the catapult, which had just won the wars in other areas of the world. Warren Doud states, “As with Persia, the success of the political institutions of Rome lay in its ability to wage war and or to put down revolts…The Roman army was the most successful military organization in history” (n.d, p. 3).
Like the listing of the youth in the United States’ military during the Second World War, the Roman Empire had a way of making the army larger by ensuring that the citizens had a military training to be could be called upon at any time if war was declared. Being a basic weapon in the military back then, the catapult had to be easily operated by the citizens (Echard, 1707, p. 23).
Alongside the catapult, other weapons used by the Roman army included the javelin, the bows and arrows, the Machaira, and stones (Gurstelle, 2004, p. 45). Since Rome began as a small city-state surrounded by vicious enemies, Romans had to develop the art of defense from the very weapon with which they were good. This bore fruits in the year 496 BC when they won the battle and joined the Latin League initially consisting of her enemies meant to destroy her.
The events that followed made the popularity of the catapult increase, as Rome became the leader of the league. It had to attack her neighbors as a defensive move to increase her dominance (MacKenzie, &Wajcman, 1999, p. 233). During the origin of the Roman Empire, which began as the Roman Republic, the catapult was not put into considerable use.
The wars won here were mainly won based on the number of personnel involved in the war for each side and or how long the opponents would hold their defenses and not on the superiority of weapons. The catapult therefore did not feature a lot here. The emperor Claudius is credited with the annexing of several kingdoms into the Roman Empire especially in the East and most notably Southern Britannia, currently Britain.
It is during his time that the catapult was used regularly to bring down the highly fortified cities in these areas to force others into submission. The catapult was also his weapon of choice in the various battles he fought. The emperor would make new ones in the captured cities to help in defense of the positions occupied. His tactics became well known. His predecessors used the same tactics to continue with the rule of the kingdom.
When Vespasian introduced the coliseum and the gladiators, the catapult did not feature in the sport. It seemed to have been abandoned for some time. It featured again during his reign after the Jewish revolt, which led to the temple in Jerusalem being destroyed using the same weaponry.
It was after his rule that Trajan came into power. Using the expertise learnt from Vespasian, Claudius expanded the empire to its largest territory. Without doubt, he went back on the reliance of the catapult as one of the weapons, which helped him achieve this goal. In the light of the threatposed by the pictures in the north, Hadrian, his successor, put up a wall meant to separate the kingdom from them and their catapults.
It was under his rule too that the second Jewish Revolt took place, but he was successful. The fall of the Roman Empire “began with its division into east and west” (Freese, & Church, 2009, p. 35) that caused enmity between the two sides.
The catapult is therefore used to great lengths in the success of the Roman Empire, and is one of their success stories. As seen above, it formed a central part of the Roman army that defined the results of its encounters with its enemies. The catapult has since taken many shapes and can be accurately described as one of the predecessors of modern warfare.
Conclusion
In conclusion, based on the expositions made in the paper, it is evident that the catapult has had a significant effect in the history of humankind especially in warfare. Before the invention of the gunpowder, there is no weapon in history that was suggested to be as powerful as the catapult.
There have been many modifications in design and functionality of the weapon with the original design remaining unchanged for long. Many of the famous wars are described as eliciting the services of the catapult with the side having more powerful and efficient catapults carrying the day.
The Roman Empire as stated above is described as the largest single force that made and popularized the use of the catapult. However, with the death of the Roman Empire, the catapult remained a weapon of choice for the armies that followed. The catapult has also had a great impact on the weapons of war invented throughout history with some of them being displayed in museums worldwide (Edgerton, 2007, p. 87).
From the wars described above that they fought in, the catapult is thought to have played a large part in winning them. The defense of the territories under their control was also made possible by the use of walls that the enemy’s catapults could not penetrate. For instance, for about two hundred years, people living around the Mediterranean Sea knew nothing less of peace because of Roman rule.
The military played an important role in determining the leaders of the empire, and any one chosen was most likely to be a member of the army or with military experience.The catapult therefore changed the course of history and the rules of engagement in war.It stands out as a histological marvel that altered history by marking the beginning of civilization.
Reference List
Collins, H., & Pinch, T. (1998). The golem at large what you should know about technology. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Cuomo, S. (2007). Technology and culture in Greek and Roman antiquity. Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cuomo, S. (2004). The Sinews of War: Ancient Catapult, Science, New Series. Mathematics in Biology,303 (5659), 771-772.
Doud, W. (n.d.). The Roman Empire. Web.
Echard, L. (1707). The Roman history. London: Printed for Jacob Tonson.
Edgerton, D. (2007). The shock of the old: technology and global history since 1900. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freese, J., & Church, A. (2009). Roman history. Waiheke Island: Floating Press.
Frontinus, S., Bennett, C., Herschel, C., & McElwain, M. B. (1969). The Stratagems and the Aqueducts of Rome. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Gurstelle, W. (2004). The art of the catapult: build Greek ballistae, Roman onagers, English trebuchets, and more ancient artillery. Chicago, Ill.: Chicago Review Press.
Hooke, N. (1770). The Roman history. London: Longman Publishers.
MacKenzie, D., & Wajcman, J. (1999). The social shaping of technology. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Marsden, E. (1969). Greek and roman artillery: historical development. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Oldfather, C. (1933). Diodorus of Sicily. London: Heinemann.
Rihll, T. (2007). The catapult: a history. Yardley, PA: Westholme Publishing.