alternatehistory.com

It strikes me as a little odd that neither the Greeks nor the Macedonians nor the Romans apparently ever developed crossbows.* I believe that the Chinese were using them extensively by the 4th or 3rd centuries BCE. The basic principle behind the crossbow was well-known in the classical Mediterranean - quite a few catapults, large and small, were built to operate essentially like giant crossbows. There were even small catapults that could probably be carried and operated by 1 man, at least in an emergency. Despite this, the transition to having large numbers of hand-held crossbows used by infantry was never made.

What if the crossbow had become a common weapon in the Greek, Macedonian, or Roman arsenals? Perhaps it could have been developed by the Seleucids or the later Romans as a way to have more infantry who could counteract Parthian horse-archers. Unlike composite bows or simple wooden bows, crossbows don't need much training to operate - you just need to be able to pull the string back in place, point, and shoot. It would have actually been an ideal way for nations without a strong archery tradition to develop a strong archery force quickly.


*There are some historians who believe that the crossbow first emerged in the late Roman Empire, but as a hunting weapon that was not converted into a major weapon of war until centuries later, perhaps in the 9th and 10th centuries. There are a few historians who think that some late Roman troops actually used crossbows, because a few units were referred to as carrying "manuballistae". The majority opinion, though, seems to be that "manuballistae" refers to small catapults that worked on a similar principle as a crossbow, but that were pretty heavy and usually had 2 men operating them.
Top