On Mon Sep 2 08:05:19 2024 John B. wrote:

On Sun, 01 Sep 2024 09:25:54 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 10:10:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 8/31/2024 11:00 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 20:34:08 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>> wrote:

YouTube is crammed full of longbow related videos:
<https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=english+longbow>

Here's a short video of what it takes to shoot a 155 lb longbow:
<https://www.youtube.com/shorts/1X8WxFbKOJI>

More videos (by the same author) on shooting a 155 lb warbow (long
bow):
<https://www.youtube.com/@dashrendar5320/search?query=warbow>

"175 lb warbow vs shield"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Svi_FNNtnVA> (0:43)
14 gauge (0.072 in) steel shield. He also shoots a 165 lb and a 45 lb >>> recurve.

Spoiler: 175 lb penetrated the shield. 165 lbs was marginal. 45 lb
bounced off the shield.

Good choice against French mounted armor.

The long bow probably wasn't used against the armored French nights.
The long bow was probably used against their unarmored horses.

This discussion got me interested in the Battle of Agincourt, which >allegedly was won by the English longbow archers. I found a video on
the topic which suggests that wasn't quite true. The battle was won
by the English archers, but not so much by their use of the longbow.
The field of battle had turned to mud after several days of rain. The >French knights got bogged down and stuck in the mud. After targeting
the unarmored horses, the English archers saw the opportunity,
discarded their longbows and massacred the French knights using hand >weapons. As one might suspect, they were quite effective using hand >weapons because of the arm muscle strength required to be an archer.
There are also some interesting comments as to the knights profiting
from battles by ransoming their opponents while the lowly archers had
no such incentive to take prisoners.

Capturing and holding for ransom was a common, perhaps an overwhelming
factor in the warfare of the times. While a commoner would probably
not have the ability to do this most certainly his commander would
with the Bowman receiving some compensation.

At the Battle of Agincourt the English King ordered the execution of prisoners at one period in the battle as so many French had been
captures that the King feared the captured might attack his army from
the rear. It has been said that this was opposed by some English
nobles who anticipated "rich pickings" from their captives.

"How The Longbow Defeated The French At Agincourt" ><https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHdzoPUIJhc> 44:51

The story is somewhat substantiated by this article:
"9 Things You May Not Know About the Battle of Agincourt" ><https://www.history.com/news/9-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-battle-of-agincourt>
See item #5.

Incidentally, the video also shows some of the paperwork involved in >managing a for profit battle.

John, the trouble with your rather broad understanding of history is that too often "history" is instead opinion. So you really should get your view of history by reading several books written by actual experts on a particular subject.

Remember that everytime he ends his postings Steven Scharf adds that unless your an expert on a subnject your opinion is worth less than that of an expert. That is fine as far as it goes, but he often appends that to subjects on which he has just offered
a questionable opinion. As fzar as I can tell, his "expert" comments are not particularly sound but his OPINIONS are as worthy as that of anyone else.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)