Talk:Mangonel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Durova (talk • contribs) Revision as of 17:19, 6 March 2006
Contents |
[edit] Propose merge
- Please, everyone,
- even if you have no wiki account, sign your post before saving with four tilde characters like:'~~~~' and then save.
I propose that we merge the Onager (siege weapon) article into this one. Onager and Mangonel are functionally the same. Some authors say onager is a sort of nick-name for the mangonel, so the latter should remain. DonSiano 15:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree. That would make sense.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.176.149 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 24 February 2006
They are not the same try looking at other sites —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.93.81 (talk • contribs) Revision as of 10:32, 21 March 2006
I would oppose the merger, though the belief that they are the same weapon is encouraged by some sloppy writing in the articles. The onager was a Roman weapon, while the mangonel was a much later (and simpler, and probably less effective) medieval weapon of similar construction. That medieval users believed the mangonel to be equivalent to a Roman onager doesn't make it so. --Llewdor 21:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Onager means "wild ass" and was the Roman nickname for a mangonel. True, Later medieval weapons were probably badly made and less efficient but both had the same working principles - 5 April 2007
I couldn't agree more with Llewdor here.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.56.9.29 (talk • contribs) Revision as of 23:23, 28 March 2006
I would have to disagree with merging them because the Onager was a small short to medium range (relatively speaking) artilery weapon. Llewdeor is correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.233.71 (talk • contribs) Revision as of 01:00, 6 April 2006
If the mangonel and onager are claimed to be essentially different devices, then it must be known what that difference is. I claim that no one knows a difference in the action of the two devices (I don't mean range, name or when used) that is supported by historical evidence. They both appear to have a single arm with a sling and pouch, powered by a single bundle of twisted ropes, with a stopping beam to stop the rotation of the arm. They seem to me to be essentially the same device, and I stand by the proposal to merge. DonSiano 11:35, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Llewdor is correct, the onager was Roman artillery/siege weapon commonly used as a support weapon on the battlefield. The mangonel was a medieval weapon commonly used as a defensive weapon in seiges because its small size allowed it to easily be placed on towers.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.174.125.2 (talk • contribs) Revision as of 12:55, 11 April 2006
Mangonels and onagers are as different as catapults are from trebuchets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.174.124.64 (talk • contribs) Revision as of 13:01, 26 April 2006
Excuse my saying so but that is the rongest thing I have heard... There are no "catapults" as you call them, there are only the names of each catapult, which *can* be described as catapults, so you could say that which you said as: "they are as difrent as trebuchets from trebuchets... I say that they are besicly the same, though mangonels usually use slings and onagers usually use a scoop like ammunition throer... Nathaniel 20:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)nathaniel749Nathaniel 20:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I concur with DonSiano. I poked through some other references, and cannot find any major discrepancies between the two. If you could explain how mangonels and onagers are as different as catapults are from trebuchets, that would shed some light on this issue. I think it would serve the users best if the two articles were merged into one, and a section added to explain the minor differences. Spamman272 16:54, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
I completely agree with spamman... It seems that the majority think that they are the same, with the same opinion in my case. If anyone can not tell the difference between the two, I believe that they should not tell that they are different. They both have the same frame, have a single firing arm with a sling, powered by a single bundle of twisted ropes. So if anyone can tell the difference between the two I will be budged if when I do research on your reason that it is true. Medieval Master 20:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)Nathaniel749Medieval Master 20:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree. The mangonel and onager rely totally on the same rope tortion power, and both have a buttress and sling. Generaly the mangonel would have a different frame, but this is very similar to the different types of trebuchet. IE: the da vici and the norman varieties.
[edit] Oppose
Although alike, the onager came after the mangonel, they are different. Mushrooms777 00:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
They are different things, should we merge chedder cheese with cheez whiz because they are both cheese? I think not. Braden 00:54 may 11th 2006
Surely there must have been some significant alterations to the original onager design before it came to the field as the mangonel over 1000 years of use...So, unless we can be absolutely sure that they were precisely the same design and were used in the exactly same way, they should be on separate pages. My resources are limited, so I hope someone else will be able to do the necessary research here. Antimatter 00:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
The Onager was a Roman siege weapon, having it's very name being Latin (language of the Romans, if I'm not mistaken) and that should be enough to end this. However, I would like to point out that the Mangonel (or the portable Mangoneau) came much later, and the name is French. --64.90.77.75 05:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Nick
"the onager and mangonel are the same weapon because they both throw ammunition using a single arm and twisted ropes"? that's like saying because two pistols both have four-inch barrels, have a hammer that strikes the firing pin, and use a delayed-blowback recoil feature, they're both the same weapon--but no mention is made if one has a barrel made of plastic and the other has a barrel made of steel, thus ensuring you blow your face off when firing it. half of you are saying that without conclusive evidence it can't be said they're different--what happened to the spirit of science? if it's not proven they're different, it's equally true they're not proven to be the same, and thus should be researched in full before anything is decided lest everyone look like retards when the proof is, in fact, shown.--216.12.107.254 05:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)erik
Although the onager is similar to the mangonel, they have differences, therefore they should not be combined and viewed as the same thing. These two weapons should only be combined if EVERY detail about them is the exact same, which they are not. You wouldn't combine a page about plastic with a page about glass because they are both used for drinking cups. It would be possible to provide a link of the page on the other's page, but it is not alright to say these two weapons are the same, they are only SIMILAR at most.--Bert
[edit] Waiting to Grok
Needs Careful Researching—initial reaction—This would obfusticate the time distinction, which is historically important. If we want to do a half-assed job, we can go edit 'Encarta' or 'Grolier' (written for grade four to six). The Romans and the Byzantines certainly used 'Onagers' from shipboard — so the one term is Roman, one is much later, obviously French— and Merging, if different, imho, is against the purpose of the encyclopedia, basic education. So, both are torsion engines, iirc, the Onager was wheeled. The guideline, WP:Btw doesn't say anything about combining two articles operating using similar principles, it says to connect them. Another Foundation Goal, you know, those unimportant guys paying the bills <G>, is to have an article for every article in ALL other major encyclopedia's.
I'd been all set against the merge the above, but my in house library doesn't run to seige machines. I want to look in some library books, as online has really slowed down, and I prefer to check this sort of 'split hair' via vetted authoritative sources, not some web enthusiasts understanding. If anyone can cite a link or three from good university papers and such research resources, that would help. This kind of page, has no authority. Best regards, FrankB 20:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] CONTRADICTION
the first lines state than a mangonel had less range than a trebuchet, however the range of a mangonel is listed as 'up to 400 meters', whereas the range of a trebuchet (on its page trebuchet is listed as 300 meters. :þ clsours ¡Æ! 01:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Additionally, the article states "The mangonel had better accuracy than a trebuchet" but also "Its unpredictable, yet powerful strikes were best suited to hitting broad, non-moving targets such as buildings or walls."68.219.14.171 20:02, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Picture?
I might be totally wrong, however the picture which is present for the Mangonel looks a lot like a form of a Trebuchet (with the counterweights on the outside). I know that the differences where small, however i did some looking around and mangonels are usaly more closely associated with siege weapons of the onager discription then they are with trebuchets, sometimes the two terms (mangonel and onager) are used interchangeably. Could we say that a mangonel is a generic name for a certain type of siege weapon? Or if it is something different then the rest, it should then be stated as such. Thanks. Sirtrebuchet 04:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- i'm in total agreement with you and am taking the picture down--Manwithbrisk 03:29, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
the french wiki article, which is VERY detailed seems to list the mangonel as a counterweight weapon very close to the trebuchet (main difference, if I read correctly, is the way the sling is attached and the projectile released), while the onagre is a torsion weapon very close to the traditional image of a "catapult". Just follow the link on the page and see...206.248.174.52 (talk) 00:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
heeeey kunne jullie geen nederlands sukkels..
Xx mIii anoniempje:D:D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.60.192 (talk) 15:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)