MeG

i have a DBMM Etruscan League army that I have started to use with MEG as I love the rules. I must admit though to being a bit surprised to see that there is no option to upgrade Etruscan holpites to impact weapons from long spear. Certainly in DBMM up to 1/2 of the hoplites could be upgraded in this way. A similar option applies in Impetus where a you can take up to 2 - 6 units of pilum armed infantry and 6 - 18 units of long spear, giving you between 1/3 to 1/2 of the infantry being upgraded in this way. And, of course, several figure manufacturers (including Forged in Battle) make Etruscan infantry with pilum figures.

Are there any plans, or could there be, to include this upgrade in the Etruscan lists?

I fear you will have to negociate it with some historical sources available .

I would want to see some evidence that Etruscan armies used the pilum before I changed the lists.  I have seen pilum heads attributed to the Etruscans, but when you look at the context in which they were excavated (Telamon) they all date from the period when Etruria was part of Republican Rome = latter half of the 3rd century... 

There is enough uncertainty that if you fielded a Camillan Roman list but called it an Etruscan army, I wouldn't have a problem with that.  The figures would also be valid as an Italian allied hastati and principes in a mid-Republican Roman army.

Richard

I also see the Field of Glory rules allow Etruscans to use impact weapons at the time of the Etruscan League. The issue with the Camillan Roman list is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Etruscans used the manipular system - they fought in a single line - so the mixed TUG doesn't represent their method of warfare.

Of course actual historical evidence from so far back that would prove this one way or the other is practically non-existant - rust stains in the earth, suggesting a pilum shape etc.

Interestingly since posting this I have found a post from earlier in the year when lionheartrjc said "I think there is a general consensus that the Etruscans adopted a heavy javelin (pilum) in the 4th century.  Wall paintings from Etruria show these alongside a hoplite shield and sword. Whether the Romans adopted the pilum from the Etruscans or the Samnites is less certain. How the Etruscans fought is guesswork (similar to the Camillan Roman).  There is a case for allowing an Etruscan army from 400 BCE to have 1/3 of the infantry 1st to 3rd classes adding Charge Only javelin (similar to the Camillan Roman)."

The best 'evidence' I can find after a cursory search is a published article reference pila finds in tombs & Pliny the Elder attributing the pila to the Etruscans. See the extract below from a paper by Juliusz Tomczak called "Roman military equipment in the 4th century BC: pilum, scutum and the introduction of manipular tactics"

"In Northern Italy weapons similar to light (socketed) pilum appeared at least as early as the 5th century BC. From the first half of this century comes the 45 cm long haft (including a 6 cm head) from Montericco in the Po Valley. It is possible that this weapon was of Etruscan provenance, like the light pilum haft 120 cm long held in Vatican Museum, and supposedly yielding fromEtruscan tomb of the 5th century BC at Vulci. If in fact a weapon of this type appeared first in Etruria, it would confirm the account of Plinius the Elder, who attributed the invention of pilum (and hasta velitaris) to Tyrrhenians (Etruscans) (Plinius, 7.201)."

To make things muddier you have Sallust 51.38 (Conspiracy of Sallust ) and it seems Caesar wrote something in the same idea ...so what is the inspiration for the roman Pilum ... The lain word used is TELA wich can be translated as spear, javelin, weapon

Our ancestors, Conscript Fathers, were never deficient in conduct or courage; nor did pride prevent them from imitating the customs of other nations, if they appeared deserving of regard. Their armor, and weapons of war, they borrowed from the Samnites; their ensigns of authority,15 for the most part, from the Etrurians; and, in short, whatever appeared eligible to them, whether among allies or among enemies, they adopted at home with the greatest readiness, being more inclined to emulate merit than to be jealous of it

Bishop in his book on the Pilum :

QuoteThe problem is that the classical sources disagree about the
ultimate origin of the weapon. As Schulten pointed out, Livy (History of
Rome 28.45.16) seems to have favoured the Etruscans, as did Pliny the
Elder (Natural History 7.201), Plutarch (Romulus 21) and Propertius
(Elegies 4.4.11) the Sabines, the so-called Ineditum Vaticanum the
Samnites, and Athenaeus opted for the Iberians (Deipnosophistae 6.106F).
What this confusion of opinions all too clearly indicates is that the Romans
(and contemporary Greeks) did not know the true origin of the pilum.

So as even the romans seem to have been in doubt ...but we are sure someone is at the origin ...a choice mist be made

QuoteVarious peoples around the Mediterranean used a javelin similar to
what the Roman Army came to adopt during the 3rd century BC. The
possibility that one or more types of javelin may have served as the prototype
for the Roman weapon does not allow a clear resolution to the problem.
However, it is worth reviewing the evidence to demonstrate the complexity
of the questions involved

QuoteA weapon resembling the pilum was certainly being used by Samnite
warriors in the 6th and 5th centuries BC (Cowan 2012). Similarly, Gallic
cemeteries in the north of Italy, such as that at Monte Bibele, have
produced socketed pilum-like weapons with 500mm- to 950mm-long
irons, with both leaf-shaped and barbed heads between 40mm and
170mm long, which dated to the 4th century BC (Lejars 2008). Similar
weapons of the same date are known from the Celtic cemetery at
Montefortino in Italy and (from the late 4th or early 3rd centuries) at La
Tène in Switzerland. Etruscan evidence is also relevant here. A socketed
pilum 1.2m long, from a grave at Vulci in Italy, has been variously dated
to the 5th or 4th century BC and its form closely resembles the Gallic
weapons just described. A decorated Etruscan copper-alloy vessel (situla)
was found in Tomb 68 at Certosa, Italy. Generally held to date to the 6th
century BC, the decoration on the vessel included warriors equipped with
rectangular shields and pairs of spears, sometimes interpreted as pila
(normally only one thrusting spear was carried, but two or more depicted
suggests javelins for throwing). Additionally, a fresco in the 4th-century
Giglioli Tomb at Tarquinia, Italy, depicts what have in the past been
interpreted as pila alongside circular hoplite shields and a sheathed
xiphos-type sword.

and so it ends :

QuoteUltimately, all that can be said is that a type of weapon closely resembling
the pilum was common in the 4th century BC among peoples the Romans
encountered and, by the end of the 3rd century BC, the Roman Army had
adopted it as both their light and heavy legionary javelin.

Thanks for the contributions. It seems to me that it is very likely, from the limited evidence available, that the Etruscans used the pilum - which was possibly later adopted from them by the Romans (maybe at the same time they adopted the 5 classes of infantry organisation from the Etruscans). So in my opinion it seems that the Etruscan list does need to be updated - maybe even for the Etruscan League to have its own lists including the option for the CinC to have Devotio bodyguard units - I would be happy to have a go at this if required.

I have added an Etruscan list to the 2021 lists.

Richard

The comes next question if the etruscan, why not the samnites ? The question will arise so let us have the answer now  8) ( I did not ask for the spanish )

Samnites get Javelin shooting and the option for Shoot & Charge and their Unskilled is going to be pretty much the same as the Camillan single rank of Javelin. Suspect the effect is going to be about right as things stand. In the Mid-Republican period the Romans then further develop its use and so justify Impact Weapon. My take of the progression anyway.

Of course there is then the Zhmodikov, etc. interpretation that suggests that missile combat was more prevalent for much longer and that the Romans should be more like how we classify the Samnites for more of the republican period  8)

Interpreting things is not easy and we will never know for sure but decisions have to be made.