This
article had its genesis in the production of one of
a series of five films made by the Royal Armouries and
Yorkshire Television in 1997–8 for the American
History Channel. The thrust of this series, as in so
much of what the Royal Armouries is trying to achieve
in its Leeds Museum, is to examine how arms and armour
really work, and to dispel the myths and legends that
have grown up around the subject. The film in question
tells the story of Slings and spears, two of the earliest
and simplest of weapons.
The bibliography of the sling is not extensive. Most
of the literature has been produced quite recently,
and comes from two very different approaches: the study
of braiding (e.g. Cahlander 1980) and the (largely American)
interest in survival skills and martial arts (e.g. Dohrenwend
1994). While the literature is thin, the extent of the
weapon’s use across the world is remarkable (Korfmann
1973).
My relationship with the sling goes back over 20 years
to archaeological excavation on Danebury hill fort under
the directorship of Barry Cunliffe. The volume of sling
stones excavated from the storage pits of the Celtic
fort was such that hundredweights of them were deposited
on the spoil heaps, providing an ideal opportunity to
manufacture slings from lengths of string and practice
using the weapon. It was there that I learned what is
now termed in the technical literature on the subject
the ‘whip’ technique of slinging, which
I still find the most comfortable to use and the most
effective.
The sling is formed of a length of cord with a loop
at one end, a knot (or sometimes a plain end) at the
other and a widened section, usually called a cradle,
but not necessarily concave, at the centre. In all the
techniques of slinging, the slingshot is placed at the
centre of the cradle, the loop placed over the second
finger of the right hand and the knot held between the
thumb and first finger of the same hand. There are three
techniques of casting the slingshot. In one, the ‘vertical
whirl’, the sling is whirled anticlockwise (from
the slinger’s viewpoint) and the knot released
when the slingshot has reached the top of its arc. Alternatively
the sling can be whirled clockwise, and the knot released
at the bottom of its arc. Neither version of the technique
is very effective, as it takes no advantage of the slinger’s
arm, and does not generate much power in the cast.
The second technique, the ‘horizontal whirl’,
is the most widely practised. The sling is held in the
right hand as before, but with the arm raised above
the right shoulder. The slingshot is placed in the cradle,
and the cords levelled, by the left hand, which is also
raised up above head level. The cradle is released by
the left hand and the sling allowed to drop backwards
over the head, then whirled around the head clockwise
(again from the slinger’s viewpoint) a number
of timed until sufficient momentum is built up. The
knot is then released perpendicular to the body so the
slingshot flies out straight ahead. This technique enables
the angle of elevation to be varied for range, from
an exactly horizontal arc for short range to an arc
dipping quite deeply during its travel round the back
of the body for long range.
Vegetius has a number of useful observations on the
sling. ‘Slingers (funditores) shoot stones from
slings made of flax or hair (the latter are said to
be better) by whirling the arm around the head’
(Epitome rei militaris III.14). ‘Recruits should
be thoroughly trained at throwing stones by hand and
with slings. The inhabitants of the Balearic Islands
are said to be the first to discover the use of slings,
and to have practised with such expertise that their
mothers did not let their small sons touch any food
unless they had hit it with a sling stone. Often, against
soldiers armoured with helmets, scale coats and mail
shirts, smooth stones shot from a sling or staff sling
are more dangerous than arrows, since while leaving
the limbs intact they inflict a lethal wound, and the
enemy dies from the blow of the stone without the loss
of any blood’ (I.16). ‘They should also
be accustomed to rotating the sling only once around
the head, when the stone is discharged from it’
(II.23).
The horizontal whirl, then, was the standard release
practised in the ancient west. While Vegetius, who had
presumably never cast a sling in his life, recommends
a single whirl round the head, presumably with a view
to economy of time rather than practicality, other passages
in classical literature give an idea of the normal release.
‘He drew tight a whistling slingshot on its thong,
swung it round his head three times, hit his opponent
in mid-temple with the now molten lead, and laid him
full-length upon the sand’ (Vergil Aeneid IX.586–9).
The third technique, the ‘whip’, is largely
practised in south east Asia and Oceania. The sling
is held in the right hand as before, but with the hand
held in front of the chest. The slingshot is placed
in the cradle as before, but again with the left hand
held low. When the cradle is released, the sling is
swung back and down past the right side, until at the
rear of the arc the slinger can feel the weight of the
slingshot pulling at the second finger (the one holding
the loop). It is then swung upwards and forwards, gathering
momentum rapidly, until it reaches the perpendicular
when the knot is released, often producing a whip-crack
in the sling. The action is similar to a side-arm throw,
or a baseball pitcher’s action. Lieutenant Baden-Powell
of the Scots Guards described the technique in New Guinea
in 1890, ‘ another primitive weapon of offence
… especially at the east end, is the sling. A
few stones are caried often nearly as big as one’s
fist, and these are hurled with a twist of the arm very
similar to the action of ordinary throwing (without
twirling the sling around the head as is done elsewhere).
The natives seem to vary a great deal in their ability
… some being both marvellously good in both accuracy
of aim and in great distance, perhaps 200 to 300 yards;
while, on the other hand, many others are very feeble
in their efforts (Ellis 1996). It is conceded by those
who are aware of the third technique that it ‘imparts
a greater acceleration to the projectile than the other
two techniques’ (Dohrenwend 1994: 88).
Most of the slingers interested in writing about the
subject come from the ‘survival’ school,
and are more interested in the practicalities of using
the weapon than in its history. Accordingly their slings
are made of leather cradles and boot laces (see, for
example, Blohm 1997) rather than being of braided construction.
The braiders, meanwhile, are interested only in the
slings as examples of techniques of braiding, and not
as weapons, contemporary or historical.
|
Figure
1 - Egyptian sling of about 700 BC, excavated
from El Lahun. University College, London, no.
UC6921 |
To
my knowledge only one sling survives from the ancient
world (Burgess 1958). It is preserved in the Petrie Museum
in University College London, no. UC.6921, and was excavated
from El Lahun in the Fayum in Egypt in 1914 (figure 1,
Petrie 1917: 36, V.14, pl. li). It was found alongside
the remains of an iron spearhead (Petrie 1917: 32, H.175,
pl. xl), and was thought by Petrie to date from about
800 bc. Only the loop end of the cord and the cradle survive,
but from these the remainder of the sling can be reconstructed.
The whole sling is braided from flax string. The main
part of the cords are braided in a square sinnet of ten
strands (see King 1960 for the easy way to do this), while
the loop is formed of an ‘ear of corn’ braid
of nine strands, one end of the loop being formed of a
smaller loop of a simple plait of five strands, which
is worked into the start of the cord at the other end
of the loop. Curiously the braiding is almost identical
to that used on type I braids worked downwards found on
Peruvian slings of the 19th and 20th centuries (Cahlander
1980: 34–6, fig 4.9). The cradle is woven from the
same material, and has a small fabric of a fine-weave
fabric adhering to one side, which is probably not original
to the sling. The cradle is 125 x 70 mm, and the remains
of the single cord 570 mm. The cord is about 6 mm square
in section. The original length of the sling, assuming
that no parts of the fragmentary cord are missing, would
have been 1270 mm.
Burgess reported that his reconstruction (also in the
Petrie Museum) was remarkably laborious, but experience
shows that the process becomes a great deal easier with
practice coupled with taught braiding techniques. Burgess’s
(and my) laborious frame-woven cradles were clearly not
made the easiest way, either. For the experiments described
below, I braided a number of slings copying the Egyptian
sling (figure 2). Each weighs 45 g, and is 1450 mm in
length.
Experiment shows that there is an optimum weight range
of slingshot for a given sling. The minimum weight seems
to be just under the weight of the sling itself; too light
a projectile and it will drop out of the cradle before
it is up to speed, or tend to hang in the cradle on release,
before shooting out at random (and usually to the slinger’s
left). Too heavy a slingshot will be very painful on the
release finger, and tends to be released at rather low
velocity.
Very few sling lengths have been published. One published
example from Tibet is 2800 mm in length, while another
from Yemen is recorded as 1600 mm (Collingwood 1987).
A Peruvian sling of alpaca wool, probably 19th-century,
is 1697 mm long, while a heavy (14 oz) llama wool example
from Bolivia is 2178 mm long (Bailey 1998).
|
Figure
2 - Reconstruction of the Egyptian sling |
The
potential range of the sling has been the subject, like
the potential range of the longbow, of considerable speculation.
To the best of my knowledge no scientific measurement
has previously been carried out. Part of the problem is
the passage from Xenophon in which the 10,000, in their
retreat from the disaster at Cunaxa, needed some light
troops to deal with the pursuing Persian army. ‘There
are some Rhodians, I hear, in our army, and they say that
most of them know how to use a sling. Their weapon, too,
has actually twice the range of the Persian sling. Persian
slings do not carry far because they use stones as big
as one’s fist for firing; but the Rhodians know
how to use leaden bullets (molybdisin) as well …
Then the Rhodians, who were posted in the Greek ranks,
used their slings and the archers shot their arrows, and
no one failed to hit a man … and Tissaphernes got
out of range with alacrity, as did the rest of his army
… The barbarians did no further damage by their
old methods of long-range fighting since the Rhodians
could sling further than the Persian slingers and their
archers.’ (Anabasis III.3–4)
This has inspired remarkable claims for the maximum range
of the sling. The more conservative estimates are around
the 200 m mark (Ferrill 1985: 25), Connolly suggests 350
m (1981: 49), Korfmann estimates 400 m (1973: 37) while
Demmin and Hogg go to 500 m (1893: 876; 1968: 30). The
few accurately recorded observations are rather different.
Reid records 55 m with a 227 g stone, and 91 m with 85
and 113 g balls (1976: 21). Burgess threw stones with
his reconstructed Lahun sling between 50 and 100 yds,
but admits to being unskilled at the art (1958: 230).
Korfmann observed Turkish shepherds sling ordinary pebbles,
‘in 5 out of 11 trials the pebbles reached 200 m,
and the three best casts were between 230 and 240 m (1973),
while Dohrenwend has himself thrown beach pebbles over
200 yds (1994: 86).
I set out, therefore, to measure accurately a set of casts
from a replica of the Egyptian sling, with a variety of
ammunition. The results are recorded in table 1. Casts
of lead slingshot tend to be very consistent, while those
of stones of the same mass vary widely. Oval stones always
travel furthest, and can go very well indeed, at best
equalling the performance of lead balls (but not lead
slingshot). However, on average lead slingshot outrange
stones by about 50 %.
Table
1: sling ranges
slingshot |
average |
best |
lead
slingshot 40 g |
145
m |
150
m |
lead
slingshot 85 g |
120
m |
130
m |
lead
ball 38 g |
114
m |
115
m |
lead
ball 100 g |
107
m |
120
m |
stones
45-75 g |
90
m |
106
m |
stones
80-85 g |
84
m |
105
m |
stones
85-160 g |
82
m |
115
m |
|
Hellenistic
almond-shaped lead projectile |
Lead
slingshot are almond-shaped (sometimes called biconical,
though this hardly expresses the subtlety of their shape).
Two examples obtained by the writer were copied for testing.
Both are Hellenistic, and from the Lebanon. The smaller,
cast with a thunderbolt in relief, weighs 35 g, and measures
29 x 18 x 13 mm (copies taken from a mould of this and
used for testing weighed an average of 40 g). The larger,
plain, weighs 86 g, and measures 39 x 22 x 16 mm. Lead
slingshot of this type appear in the 5th century bc, and
continue throughout the Hellenistic period. The best known
find is the group of some 500 from Olynthus excavated
in the 1930s. These varied in weight from 18 to 35 g (see
Korfmann 1973). Many of the Greek examples are cast with
raised symbols or inscriptions, such as the ‘phaine’
example presented by Hawkins to the Society of Antiquaries
(1847: 96). The lightness of these slingshot suggest to
the author that they may have been designed to be cast
in groups or pairs, which produces a shotgun effect. Although
this has never been suggested in the scholarly literature
on the subject, it works well by experiment, and is well
known to the ‘survival’ school of slingers
(Blohm 1997). The effectiveness of lead slingshot was
well known in the classical world. Celsus includes instructions
for extracting lead and stone slingshot from the bodies
of wounded soldiers (De Medicina, cited by Korfmann 1973).
In Latin the word glans is used for the slingshot, and
funda for the sling. Republican Roman examples are found
at Perugia (Griffiths 1989: 267–9), early Imperial
examples from St Albans, Antonine examples from Burnswark,
and late Imperial examples from Vindolanda (Greep 1987).
From the Republic onwards they are joined by baked clay
slingshot, the earliest examples coming from Numantia,
the latest from the 4th century at Lambaesis. Shaped stone
missiles, such as those from Buciumi, and others from
Lambaensis, are found from the 3rd century onwards (Bishop
& Coulston 1993: 55, 79, 115, 139,165–6). No
systematic study of ancient lead slingshot has ever been
carried out, however.
My range tests indicate a much shorter range than has
been previously asserted. This may because I have not
learned to sling within a sling-using culture, or because
I am inept at it. Alternately, claims for the range of
the sling may have been exaggerated. The difficulties
of measuring the range of a sling are not insignificant.
Having cast a stone a considerable distance, you then
have to find it. One (dangerous) solution to the problem
is to post a spotter down the range. This works very well
for stones, whose flight can be followed. The problem
comes with lead slingshot, whose flight can usually not
be followed, and whose arrival can only be heard. It is
certain that more controlled testing is needed, and I
would be very pleased to hear from slingers who have scientific
data on the subject.
The making of the films by Yorkshire Television also enabled
the Museum to use the facilities of Vickers Defence Systems
at Ridsdale. The ballistic testing undertaken there forms
the subject of the following article, but the sling tests
are discussed in more detail here (Table 2). The slingshot
speeds recorded were extremely consistent. Stones performed
consistently worse than any kind of lead shot, using exactly
the same slinging action. Cast lead slingshot performed
better than spherical lead balls or stones, but only slightly
better; in terms of velocity alone, an improvement in
performance of about 3%. Their lower drag is responsible
for the far larger differential in ranges noted above.
Table
2: sling velocity
slingshot
type |
lowest
V (m/s) |
average
V (m/s) |
highest
V (m/s) |
85
g lead slingshot |
29.9 |
31.2 |
32.6 |
40
g lead slingshot |
29.3 |
30.6 |
32.5 |
100g
lead ball |
29.5 |
30.5 |
31.4 |
80-100
g stones |
29.1 |
30.3 |
32.2 |
staff
sling |
29.4 |
33.1 |
38.3 |
It is noteworthy that even using the sophisticated skyscreen
at Ridsdale, considerable accuracy was required to enable
the slingshot to pass through the 1 m wide arc which
was set at 3 m from the release point. This, as other
testers have found, tends to a reduction in velocity.
A simple calculation (or observation) shows that a slingshot
travelling over a range of 90 m at a velocity of 30
m/s takes about 3 seconds to reach its target, while
a slingshot travelling over a range of 145 m at the
same speed takes 5 seconds. A good cast is usually accompanied
by a whirring noise, from all types of projectile, as
it spins through the air.
The staff sling or fustibalus is interesting. It is
first described by Vegetius in his Epitoma Rei Militaris
‘Staff slingers are those who cast stones from
a staff sling. The staff sling is a pole (fustis) four
feet (1180 mm) long, attached to the middle of which
is a sling of leather, which, operated with both hands,
it discharges stones almost like a mangonel (onager)’
(III.14). Vegetius is also responsible for the only
mention of the range of a sling in the entire corpus
of ancient literature, and although this is often quoted
of the sling, it clearly refers to the staff sling:
‘archers and slingers used to put up bundles of
straw as targets, and moving back to a range of 600
ft (= 177 m), practise hitting them frequently with
arrows and stones shot from staff slings’ (II.23;
Millner 1993: 91, 57). For the continued use of the
sling and staff sling in the Byzantine period, see Kolias
(1988: 254–9).
The staff sling continued to be popular in Spain until
the late 14th century, being used to considerable effect
at the battle of Aljubarota in 1382. Olaus Magnus illustrates
and discusses staff slings throwing red-hot chunks of
iron during the siege of King Christian II of Denmark
at Vasterås in 1521. From what he says it appears
to have been a common weapon of the Dalecarlians (from
Dalarna, north west of Stockholm; Foote 1998: 332–3).
He also says that ‘pole slings’ were used
by the Finns to drive back preliminary assaults, ‘then,
when they are about to contend at close quarters they
defend themselves with the sling stones they keep knotted
at their belts’ (Foote 1998: 536).
Although the staff sling discharges the stone faster
than the sling, and consistently outranges it, it has
the disadvantage that it can only be used at long range,
discharging the stone in a high arc. The sling can be
used at short range as well, simply by adjusting the
angle of the arm at release, in exactly the same way
as throwing. Using the ‘whip’ release rather
than the ‘horizontal whirl’, a slinger can
match shots almost exactly with an archer, casting five
or six a minute at full speed.
Another version of the sling, the kestros or kestrosphendone,
was invented at the time of the Third Macedonian war
of 168 bc. It is described by Polybius, ‘the missile
was like this: it was two palms long, with a socket
and head of equal length. Into the former was fitted
a wooden haft a span in length and a finger’s
breadth in thickness. To the middle of this were attached
three flights of wood, quite short. This, its sling
having two unequal cords (kolon), was fitted in the
centre of the cords in such a way that it was easy to
loose. There it remained while the sling was whirled
round, but at the moment of discharge, when one of the
cords was released, it left the cradle (agkules) like
a lead slingshot from a sling and striking with great
force severely injured those who were hit by it’
(XXVII.11). Livy’s translation adds little; ‘
In this war a new type of missile was invented. A head
two palms long was fixed to a haft half a cubit long
and the diameter of a finger; the latter was fitted
with three pine flights, as arrows are; the sling had
two unequal loops at its centre. When the slinger rotated
the cords, it remained poised, and when released flew
off like a lead slingshot’ (XLII.65.9). To the
best of my knowledge the cestrosphendone has never been
reconstructed, and I cannot see quite how the unequal
length cords work. Possibly the cradle is divided like
those of Peruvian slings, but formed of two unequal
loops so that the head of the cestros points forward
during rotation, and starts off its flight in a head-forward
attitude, rather than tumbling until it finds equilibrium.
Or, perhaps, the butt of the cestros is lodged in one
loop of an unequal cradle, the side of the head resting
against the other. Again, I would be interested to hear
from anyone who has experimented with a reconstruction.
The sling and the bow have much in common, and it is
remarkable that in the West archery has continued to
become the popular sport that it is, while slinging
is the preserve of a few strange enthusiasts. It is
to be hoped that the articles that have appeared over
the last few years are the beginning of a revival in
the study of the sling and its use. A cautionary note,
however, to end on; slinging is not an occupation which
can be undertaken safely, especially by a beginner,
as the missile must be heavy enough to extend the sling,
and can go almost anywhere on release. The job of sling
instructor must have been one of the most dangerous
in history.
-
Thom Richardson
Copied
with permission from:
Thom
Richardson, "The ballistics of the sling,"
Royal Armouries Yearbook, 3, 1998, p. 44.
Royal
Armouries, Leeds, UK
Acknowledgements
I am indebted to various people for help with the research
that went into this article. Thanks to Peter Smithurst
of the Royal Armouries for casting the slingshot used
in the testing; Graeme Rimer, Mark Murray-Flutter and
Martin Pegler, all of the Royal Armouries, for bravery
beyond the call of duty during the range testing; Paula
Turner, for helping with months of sling braiding; Guy
Wilson, for consultation on matters Scandinavian; and
to Michael Elliot and Phil Breckons of Royal Ordnance
for the ballistic data.
References
• Bailey, T 1998 The sling. www.crl.com/~mjr/tbailey/sling.html
• Blohm, B 1997 Slings as hunting weapons. Primitive-skills-group,
www.uqac.uquebec.ca/PleinAir/huntisl1.htm
• Burgess, E M 1958 An ancient Egyptian sling
reconstructed. Journal of the Arms and Armour Society
2.10 June: 226–30
• Cahlander A 1980 Sling braiding of the Andes.
Colorado Fiber Center, Boulder
• Collingwood, P 1987 The maker’s hand.
Lark Books and Interweave Press
• Connolly, P 1981 Greece and Rome at war.
• Demmin, A 1893 Die Kriegswaffen im ihren Geschichtlichen
Entwickelungen von den Ältesten Zeiten bis auf
den Gegenwart. Leipzig, P Friesenhahn
• Dohrenwend, R E 1994 The sling: forgotten firepower
of antiquity. Canadian Journal of Arms Collecting 32.3
August: 85–91
• Ferrill, A 1985 The origins of war. London,
Thames and Hudson
• Foote, P G (ed.) 1998 Olaus magnus, a description
of the Northern peoples 1555. The Hakluyt Society, second
series no. 187, vol. 2
• Greep, S J 1987 Lead sling shot from Windridge
farm, St Albans and the use of the sling by the Roman
army in Britain. Britannia 18: 183–200
• Griffiths, WB 1989 The sling and its place in
the Roman Imperial army. In C van Driel-Murray, Roman
military equipment: the sources of evidence. Proceedings
of the fifth • • Roman Military Equipment
Conference, BAR International Series 476, Oxford:255–79
• Hawkins, W 1847 Observations on the use of the
sling, as a warlike weapon, among the ancients. Archaeologia
32: 96–107
• Hogg, O F 1968 Clubs to cannon. London
• King, F H 1960 A note on the square sinnet.
Journal of the Arms and Armour Society 3.7 September:
187
• Knight, E H 1880 A study of savage weapons at
the Centennial Exhibition, Philadelphia, 1876. Smithsonian
Institute Report 1879: 213–97
• Korfmann, M 1973 The sling as a weapon. Scientific
American 229.4 October: 34–42
• Millner, N P 1993 Vegetius: Epitome of Military
Science. Liverpool University Press
• O’Leary, S 1975 More about the sling.
Slingshot 57 January: 23–8
• Petrie, W M F 1917 Tools and weapons. London,
British School of Archaeology in Egypt
• Reid. W 1976 Arms through the ages. Harper &
Row, New York & London
• Willis, B F 1996 Military sling-shot in 1890.
Canadian Journal of Arms Collecting 34.4 November: 127
Captions
1 Egyptian sling of about 700 bc, excavated from El
Lahun. University College, London, no. UC.6921.
2 Reconstruction of the Egyptian sling, by the author.
3 Hellenistic lead slingshot, weighing 35 and 86 g,
in the possession of the author.
4 Sling stone weighing 112 g.
5 The ‘horizontal whirl’ technique.
6 The ‘whip’ technique.
7 The staff sling technique.
|