THERE are four types of hand-held missiles in the biblical rules in Neil Thomas's Ancient & Medieval Wargaming - javelins, slings, bows on foot and bows on horseback.
Their ranges are, respectively, 8cm, 16cm, 24cm and 16cm, which, presumably, are effective ranges rather than maximums.
The difference between bows on foot and on horseback is easily explained: "A mobile horse is inevitably not as stable a firing platform as the earth on which the footman stood."
Unfortunately Thomas does not specifically mention whether the range of bow-armed charioteers should be 16cm or 24cm.
On the one hand charioteers are standing upright, rather than on horseback, but cannot be regarded as "on foot" in the normal sense of the phrase as a chariot floor is not stable.
I think the shooting range of bow-armed charioteers should be the same as for horse archers, namely 16cm.
So far, so simple, and in accordance with the spirit of the rules, I believe.
But the question of the range of slings is another matter.
It might be thought obvious that a bow is more powerful and so will have a longer range.
But my reading of authorities on the subject suggests that the ranges of bows and slings were compatible, especially when it came to effective range, ie the range at which weapons were typically used.
Some bows had longer ranges than other bows, but the same was true for slings, whose ranges were strongly influenced by the size of shot.
There were times when slings considerably outranged bows.
The following speech from Xenophon's Anabasis is informative: "The enemy can shoot arrows and sling stones so far that neither our Cretan bowmen nor our javelinmen can reach them in reply.
"We need slingers ourselves at once, [and] I am told there are Rhodians in our army, that most of them understand the use of the sling, and that their missiles carry no less than twice as far as those from the Persian slings.
"The latter have only a short range, because the stones used in them are as large as the hand can hold. The Rhodians, however, are versed also in the art of slinging leaden bullets."
It might be wondered, if slingers were as good as good as archers, and at times better, why they were by medieval times more-or-less completely replaced by bowmen.
This was partly due to slingers requiring many years of habitual use and practice to become proficient, which was why slingers from certain areas, for example the Balearic islands, were especially sought after. Archery also required dedicated practice, but to a lesser extent.
Also, more widespread use of armour made archery less effective - so much so that in most of Europe traditional archery died out, with the crossbow replacing ordinary bows, until both were superseded by gunpowder weapons.
A further complication is that the sling was a concussion weapon, while the arrow was a piercing weapon, which again made their effectiveness vary.
However, the main point is that slingers should, in my opinion, have the same range as bows on foot, ie 24cm.