I got a laugh out of Michael B. and his analysis of the proper use of rocks. He got it right when he stated that one proper use of a rock was for dropping. When beseigers finally got impatient and decided enough was enough and attempted to go over the wall (escalade) of a castle or under it or through it with a battering ram the defenders used large rocks to drop on the attackers. As Michael correctly pointed out rocks were used by slingers to help keep defenders' heads down while attackers were approaching the walls or attacking the walls.

Large rocks were hurled at walls by seige engines such as trebuchets, onagers, and ballistas while being hurled back at the attackers by defenders own engines. Later, rocks were used as projectiles from cannon to attack walls (not mentioned by Michael B.)

In conclusion we can in all honestly with a straight face say that a rock was indeed a historical weapon of war! We can even go so far as to say in the words of Bob Dylan: "....everybody must get stoned...."

Although not an offensive weapon type of use, simply piling large amounts of rocks (castles, walls, etc.) between defensive positions and anticipated points of attack has been a long standing defense tactic. I would say they have been highly valuable in warfare for most of its history.

Does anyone currently make historically-accurate rocks? I would be very interested in a few for my collection; but only if they have the proper size, weight, and feel for my current time period of interest. :)

I am a big fan of the "rock in a sock". You can tell a master of this art because he fights barefoot- all his socks are lined up on a weapon rack, neatly tied off with the heavy ends down.

I use DIY rocks my self

=)

J.F.

Had one in my possession until just recently. It appeared to be very old, but there were a few things about it that made me suspicious, the point of impact varied considerably with every use, had little or no distal taper, the finish was incredibly crude, and most of all.... once launched it hooked to the right and had the glide ratio of a....stone.

Was hoping to do more study on it, but alas and alack, without thought, my wife pitched it toward a coyote chasing our cat. It is now about 300 feet down the mountain side and lost to me forever. Perhaps one day it will be rediscovered.

Dan

I for one have always appreciated the workmanship in the high end Czech imports. It's not that rocks of american provenance don't do the job, but it seems that these high end imports pay more attention to detail. Maybe it is because they have greater access to the real rocks which were used to repell attacks on castles, or shot via catapults and other siege weapons.
However, those rocks used by North American native tribes are always better represented by north american artisans. I know it seems like a no-brainer, but american stone tomahawks are smashing. Cheers, JC

A valid point. And the Rocky Mountains are a case in point. They are a much more recent result of tectonic plate movement and therefore much younger, and having been settled much later by migrating europeans, lack the historic significance of European rocks. However, as stated, our Native Americans may argue this point. I, myself, prefer igneous rocks rounded by erosion from water or soil because of their inherent aerodynamic and hydrodynamic properties. I've spent many insightful hours attempting to uncover their secrets. My wife on the other hand prefers those rocks that are compressed by the weight of the earth, developing clarity and brilliance that are unfortunately lost on me.

I volunteer to produce the Peters' Rock Typology, discussing the evolution of rock shape and form as applicable to medieval warfare from the 11th century through the 15th century.

Should we designate a small weapon of rock different from the larger version like say, a boulder? At what point does a rock become a boulder? If Craig does the typology, who will do the fechtbuch?

Posted: Wed 13 Jan, 2010 9:32 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a rock I picked up from the river. Very nice, fast especially when hurled from a sling. I have a slightly larger one from a construction site, mainly use it for dropping out of windows. Steer clear of Pumice, it tends not to have the weight to carry a punch.


In all seriousness, I don't own any personally, I have a friend with an obsidian knife which is wicked sharp, I have a glass knife that I really like though.
_________________
Michael B.

Above is the original reply posted by Michael B. in response to STONE WEAPONRY on the HistoricalArmsTalk forum.

I liked his post and thought I would have a laugh with it but it was moved from that forum to this forum although I don't know why since both deal with "historical weapons" or so I thought. Some stone age weapons are ok for discussion on that forum and others are not...oh well....! I think it is safe to say that "...people who live in glass houses should not throw stones..." or when searching for that perfect rock don't get chiseled.

One can say that all of us participating in this discussion have rocks in our head..... :\ :\ :\ :\ :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Harry

You are all crazy.

With that being said...

Boulder - "a detached rock mass, somewhat rounded or otherwise modified by abrasion in transport and larger than a cobble" with a minimum size of 256 mm (about 10 in).

Pebble - "a rock fragment larger than a sand grain or granule and smaller than a cobble, which has been rounded by the action of water wind or glacial ice. It is therefore between 4 mm (~0.15 in) and 64 mm (~2.5 in)".


A rock is mass of hard consolidated mineral matter of any size.

I like stones.










Historiska Museet, Stockholm.