Anonymous comments allowed.
31 comments displayed.
#186 to #25
-
thesovereigngrave (01/05/2016) [-] Why do you think English has such a major French influence? Because it was conquered by Frenchmen in 1066.
#64 to #25
-
trollmobile (01/05/2016) [-] us norwegians owned half your country.
then our king walked into an ambush he thought was a surrender, and we all buggered off.
since he was the only one that wanted to be there anyway.
then our king walked into an ambush he thought was a surrender, and we all buggered off.
since he was the only one that wanted to be there anyway.
#242
-
cryptowillster (01/05/2016) [-] Chainmail was nearly impervious to all attacks,
Especally grammar.
Especally grammar.
#142
-
wellimnotsure (01/05/2016) [-] Chainmail was useless against most attacks. It was useful against slashing attacks and that was about it. Thankfully those were the most common type of attacks especially from inexperienced soldiers. It was torn apart by any kind of hacking (axes). It was easily pierced by spears, swords and arrows, and while it useually wouldnt break under crushing blows the person underneath often would. Chainmail found its greatest effectiveness when it was layered with gambeson and leather.
#341
-
thunderfap (01/06/2016) [-] This is ******** . Hardened leather would be worn under chain, and it would be best used to defend against swords, axes, hammers etc. Chain is useless against arrows, because the point force easily breaks the links. Plate mail was better against arrows and crossbow bolts, right up until the invention of the bodkin arrow. Chain is weak against arrows.
#339
-
ogthegreat ONLINE (01/06/2016) [-] Don't let their seemingly harmless and cute exterior fool you. Potatoe knights have some of the highest recorded kills in all of history.
But the fact that ******* 95% of deaths occured from the losing team trampling over themselves and that archers miss more than they hit ruins my perception of medieval wars. The **** were they doing the whole time?
But the fact that ******* 95% of deaths occured from the losing team trampling over themselves and that archers miss more than they hit ruins my perception of medieval wars. The **** were they doing the whole time?
#314
-
alexanderh (01/05/2016) [-]
So much of this stuff is wrong...
First off, chainmail (actually maille hauberks, chainmail is not a historical term) was not even close to impervious to all attacks. Swords were basically turned into bludgeoning weapons, but that's about it. Getting hit by a baseball bat is still going to do some serious damage, but admittedly less than a sword.
Arrows fired from longbows were very effective, especially with the right arrow heads. source: www.currentmiddleages.org/artsci/docs/Champ_Bane_Archery-Testing.pdf
Secondly, there is no historical evidence that 95 % of casualties were inflicted during the rout. A large portion of it was, but most likely not 95 %.
What's defined as an average medieval bow? Most medieval english war bows (aka. longbows) had a draw weight of over 100 pounds, with some exceeding 150 pounds.
And it is possible to aim pretty well with them, some modern shooters can hit a coin thrown into the air. They were deployed en mass, because they were pretty good weapons to outfit a trained army with.
And no, a longbow could not fire like a machine gun. Not even close. Some historians have claimed that a trained longbowman could fire 8-10 arrows per minute (I think, not quite sure on the specific numbers), but the only historical source is one document that nobody is allowed to look at or read. But even this is not a realistic speed to fire arrows at. To fire that fast, you would be unable to fully draw the bow and aim, which made it useless against even light armour.
Longswords are not two-handed weapons. They are, by definition, hand-and-a-half swords, which means that you primarily use them in two hands, but it is possible to use them in one hand if you need to.
Greatswords WERE a thing. In germany they were called Zweihänders (literally two-handers). They weren't used against people, though, they were mostly used against pike formations. You would start swinging it in front of you, building momentum, and then walk towards the enemy. Your sword would knock aside the tips of the pikes, allowing you to advance to the enemy. Once you got to close range, you would drop the greatsword and switch to your longsword.
First off, chainmail (actually maille hauberks, chainmail is not a historical term) was not even close to impervious to all attacks. Swords were basically turned into bludgeoning weapons, but that's about it. Getting hit by a baseball bat is still going to do some serious damage, but admittedly less than a sword.
Arrows fired from longbows were very effective, especially with the right arrow heads. source: www.currentmiddleages.org/artsci/docs/Champ_Bane_Archery-Testing.pdf
Secondly, there is no historical evidence that 95 % of casualties were inflicted during the rout. A large portion of it was, but most likely not 95 %.
What's defined as an average medieval bow? Most medieval english war bows (aka. longbows) had a draw weight of over 100 pounds, with some exceeding 150 pounds.
And it is possible to aim pretty well with them, some modern shooters can hit a coin thrown into the air. They were deployed en mass, because they were pretty good weapons to outfit a trained army with.
And no, a longbow could not fire like a machine gun. Not even close. Some historians have claimed that a trained longbowman could fire 8-10 arrows per minute (I think, not quite sure on the specific numbers), but the only historical source is one document that nobody is allowed to look at or read. But even this is not a realistic speed to fire arrows at. To fire that fast, you would be unable to fully draw the bow and aim, which made it useless against even light armour.
Longswords are not two-handed weapons. They are, by definition, hand-and-a-half swords, which means that you primarily use them in two hands, but it is possible to use them in one hand if you need to.
Greatswords WERE a thing. In germany they were called Zweihänders (literally two-handers). They weren't used against people, though, they were mostly used against pike formations. You would start swinging it in front of you, building momentum, and then walk towards the enemy. Your sword would knock aside the tips of the pikes, allowing you to advance to the enemy. Once you got to close range, you would drop the greatsword and switch to your longsword.
#336 to #335
-
alexanderh (01/05/2016) [-]
Pretty much, they were designed specifically to break the links of mail armour.
#291
-
gmanonetwosixfive (01/05/2016) [-] op is definitely a bit uneducated about most of images here, especially that one about swords barely being used because plate armor. Hardly anyone had plate armor besides royalty to keep them from dying. In addition, using a mace or other kind of similar weapon took a lot of energy to try to bash into the armor to do any damage against a plate covered opponent. A lot of the time, soldiers simply grabbed the blade of the sword they were holding and positioned it between the plates to get a good stab in.
#280
-
WakaTakaBang (01/05/2016) [-] My ex girlfriend is Muslim while I'm a baptized Catholic. I called her Saracen sometimes for fun.
We had a lot of fights.
We had a lot of fights.
#243
-
wertologist (01/05/2016) [-] I got family history in the medieval era. My grandmother's name was Treffry. My last name isn't Treffry, but I'm still a Treffry by blood and pretty sure direct descent. Royalty, bitches. I remember reading one article about my ancestors that caught my eye. Apparently, the town they lived at came under attack while the king(pretty sure he was a king of the land) so the queen(my ancestor) herded all the people into the castle and then proceeded to command the people to defend and fought off the invaders.
#210
-
anon (01/05/2016) [-]
That one about archers being able to shoot arrows quickly is complete and utter bull **** . An archer would typically only be able to fire 7-12 arrows per minute, contrary to what you might think if you have ever watched that dumb ass Lars Anderson video. A decent bow has a draw weight of at least 100 lbs, and it wasn't unheard of for bows to have draw weights of 185 lbs., that is why archers had to be big and strong. Now imagine repeatedly drawing a bow string back from an almost completely outstretched arm to your ear (for decent power). Event the strongest men would tire from that easily. __
