This may have already be noted but I thought I would throw this out there.

In terms of war slinging I think we see the very light lead glandes in the more advanced "ancient cultures" because fairly short slings were being used. All other things being equal the shorter the sling the higher the dry fire speed. Higher maximum velocity, but at a cost of KE. In other words, the only way to maintain that potential for good velocity is with very light ammo that won't slow down a sling which otherwise doesn't produce that much leverage.

Light ammo doesn't go as far, but with lead you would still get decent range. Hence very light lead ammo seems to suggest shorter slings were used which suggests that the slingers were packed in tighter for greater damage.

Such small light ammo would be less lethal but the wounds it caused would greatly affect the opposing armies ability to fight. And create more wounded.  So the small, light lead glandes and short slings seem to signal more of a modern day small caliber assault rifle mentality.

I want to throw this out there because I believe the lighter lead glande shows a complete rethinking of sling warfare.

Unfortunately the sling's history is mostly lost so this is all conjecture.

What do you think?

NoThearos wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:


No, just the best tool for such light ammo. 25 grams is .8 ozs which in my experience isn't great with really long war slings. I agree that longer slings were probably suited for slinging very heavy ammo 100 meters or so.

Has anyone here used such light ammo in a normal style long sling? (i.e. not a sling made with fishing line for the cords.)

   Morphy, I think you hit the nail on the head with your statement about creating more wounded.  As an army M60 gunner (machine gun small enough for an individual soldier to carry but big enough to kick some serious arse)  I was trained to shoot at knee level.  Injured soldiers hinder an army much more than dead ones.

Rat Man wrote on Aug 12^th, 2014 at 1:42pm:


If that is indeed the case isn't it strange to consider that the original lead slingers went through the exact same evolution tactically as our modern lead slingers?

I've tried 30-40 gram glans with a 70cm sling (short by my definition).
I think,i was getting ~200-250m with that setup so still plenty,but much less than with a long sling.

I agree with the modern assault rifle  small caliber/ light glans  comparison.

Having a 30 gram lead gland in your shoulder is not deadly,but would seriously inhibit your sword/shield work,which is already a big advantage to the slingers army.
Sling bullets rarely inflicted deadly wounds IMO. Unlike 8 oz stones to the head or unarmoured chest.

Its still hard today, even when everyone has a headset and mic.
Once a battle is in full swing…C&C becomes the biggest problem…mountainous, heavily wooded, jungle and urban terrain all present their share of additional challenges. Since  war was the game of Kings, it was better to play it on an open playing field where control was the easier.
Cant have a bunch of conscripts all running around doing whatever they want!

I don't like to shoot under 50g myself.  There was real light ammunition, however.  They were called bees.  The weighted bullet says a lot about the sling.  This was certainly very easy.  I have one thing to consider.  The direct shot leaves little damage to light projectiles.  It looks different when they fall from a great height.

Light and durable cords could be made very early on.  There were already fishing lines in the neolitikum area.