Hi everyone and welcome to another episode of ancient warfare answers with me Murray.

It's chilly here in Australia as opposed to getting warmer in the northern hemisphere, so

that's why I'm all rugged up.

So today we have a question from Robert.

I'm going to read it.

It's a long one.

But I quite like what he said and food for thought.

And then, of course, you can also ask us a question as you now know.

You can send us an email, send us a telegram, post, postcard letter.

However, send us a message on Facebook,

comment on one of the other podcasts or videos,

and ask us a question for your 10-minute weekly

ancient warfare fix with me saying something about ancient warfare,

hopefully relevant and useful,

not provocative, provocative, but perhaps provocative. Anyway, you, of course, can also back us on the Patreon, forward slash ancient warfare podcast and back us at a level of optio, legionary, or indeed Centurion.

Today's question is from Robert. I've been a subscriber to a couple to your publication for, as well as a fan of your ancient warfare podcast for a number of years.

So I feel I've earned the right to ask question. You have to write. Of course you do.

Even if you're a new subscriber. And the hive mind. Well, the hive mind is me. If the hive mind have

more answers, I'll ask them at the bigger podcast. Why javelins? Robert asks. It seems that a bow would be a much better weapon for skirmish in the ancient world, but it seems that the javelin armed light troops may have been the most common type in Europe, at least. Additionally, if using jablins, why not an attle-attel to throw them with? I know about the leather thing wrapped around the shaft to impart spin,

which Plainty would make a difference in hitting a target,

but one has to believe that range would be an important factor while skirmishing.

So, fabulous.

...