Peasants weapon

Peasants weapon.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ej3qjUzUzQg
youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk
youtube.com/watch?v=eRXwk4Kdbic
youtube.com/watch?v=q-Xp56uVyxs
youtube.com/watch?v=q2lbB3OMNns
youtube.com/watch?v=KCE40J93m5c
youtube.com/watch?v=jAJPoFL6fLw
youtube.com/watch?v=xw3lcgIAwLk
youtube.com/watch?v=ttBwv0n33dE
youtube.com/watch?v=mWRWRXenRXc
youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk
myarmoury.com/feature_mail.php
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Patay
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe
youtube.com/watch?v=Mur-c5IiWJI
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Does that make it less effective? Pikes were a thing until the 1700s.

I present to you the weapon fit for a true master of the blade.

>ashigaru weapons

Get on my level.

Interesting historic weapons thread?

India had some dank weapons

How would a spear unit deal with superior English Longbowmen?

Attack in the rain?

Why did it take people so long to figure out that really big bows defeat plate?

Gå på was a great idea. Charles did nothing wrong.

Run up to them and stick in the pointy end.

>really big bows defeat plate
They don't, stop wasting dubs you philistine.

>really big bows defeat plate?

Not really...

>This meme again

Come at me, bro

is this one up to par?

youtube.com/watch?v=Ej3qjUzUzQg

They don't

>shot single arrow at breastplate
>itdoesnothing
therefore
>showers of arrows against plate are useless
xD

You know they never pierced right? That was never the point? They pierce Chainmail, which was usually used by the peasantry. But against a Knight pic related was the goal. The arrows hit with such force they morphed the armor to a point where it couldn't be worn and damaged the individual inside. Pic related isn't a good example, but you can imagine the damage those dents would do on your helmet (unable to take helmet off as it continually crushes your skull) or in the joints so you can no longer move your arms or legs, knights would then get captured and ransomed. If you think Knights were often killed in the battlefield by the peasantry, you're an idiot.

While the video doesn't shoot enough arrows, of course a singular shot is going to do fucking nothing. Arrows were not aimed like that, arrows were not fired like that, they were fired in clusters. But even still, give the archer more shots he would do more damage to the armor.

>Pikes were a thing until the 1700s.
You mean from pre-history untill ww2. Bayonets are essentially spears and they have been used during every conflict for a reason.

Bayonets are still used today user.

Of course, but with the rise of assault weapons the use of bayonets have decreased quite a lot compared to how te use of them during ww2. but still they're extremely useful weapons.

I don't think they'll ever fall out of fashion. You never know when some crazy fuck just charges at you and you run out of bullets or pulse whatever the fucks and you need to just stab him.

>assault weapons
Liberal detected

Your pics shows bulley holes. Just google the image. Armour does not warp from fucking arrows.

AFAIK, the Welsh used the Longbow very effectively against English knights at point blank range. Though they never aimed for the torso and went for the legs which were not as well protected, then probably bludgeoned the sorry bastard to death or stabbed him through the gaps.

>Armour does not warp from fucking arrows
xD

You watched a singular video and came to that conclusion, didn't you? Warping armour was the whole fucking point. But yeah - old armies were so fucking dumb they shot arrows, risked their soldiers against individuals who they knew at the time would have literally no effect.

Even though a historicall accepted facts, longbows didn't lead to the decline of plate, because it doesn't fit into the sensibilities of a Veeky Forums shit poster.

youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk
youtube.com/watch?v=eRXwk4Kdbic
youtube.com/watch?v=q-Xp56uVyxs
youtube.com/watch?v=q2lbB3OMNns
youtube.com/watch?v=KCE40J93m5c

>Arrows
>Pierce chainmail
Get out of here you meme loving retard.

Well you would have to be pretty close to pierce the torso
They can pierce the weaker plate on the limbs though, at a fairly far distance

Remember that horses would get wrecked by a shower of arrows would be more injurious to a knight.

I'm talking about Crecy specifically

youtube.com/watch?v=jAJPoFL6fLw

Chain mail are a series of links were very, very vulnerable to arrows, spears and pretty much anything pointy which could easily break the links.

>Well you would have to be pretty close to pierce the torso
Did you read anything in that post? It's not about piercing, it's about fucking warping.

>Butten mail
>Not riveted that anyone sane actually used
Yeah get the fuck out of there.
youtube.com/watch?v=xw3lcgIAwLk

>muh romanticized swords!

Very impressive! they can shoot through paper thin larp armour! Meanwhile that other video had a proper longbow and a proper breastplate made by someone who have studied actual medieval breastplates.
youtube.com/watch?v=ttBwv0n33dE
Here is someone who knows more about armour than anyone on this board talk about why the the test in is more legit than anything you posted.

Can you imagine going on a war expedition as a slinger alongside fully geared hoplites and decked-out Hippeis? I bet it must've felt like shit.

Thanks, I was talking about piercing.
Youre talking about blunt force trauma.
Also 20m is very, very close, and I believe warping range is generally agreed to be about 30-40 m

>that video as anything but a LARPERS wet dream
Kek. COuldn't even sit through the video, but did they even shoot an arrow at it? Lost it when he bought out the Katana.

Here is another video by those same two retards. Actually shooting arrows at riveted chainmail.

>youtube.com/watch?v=mWRWRXenRXc

Surprise surprise, it STILL gets through. These guys are probably the most retarded people I have seen in this aspect of utter Autism. These tests do not even show the true power of a bow, even half the videos I post do the same thing. THey totally disregard the fact that arrows are shot in clusters and almost would have never been hit by a singular arrow and that is it. Even if only one arrows of 10 gets through, units and soldiers would get showered with many more than just 10 arrows.

Also, see this

Get fuckewd, those guys got to sit back run around and throw rocks at the people engaged in the melee.

Hoplite warfare would have been proper hell. two sides meet and stab each other while people throw rocks at them until one side gives up.

>Cant even pay attention for longer than 3 minutes
No wonder you know jackshit about anything.

Kek. WAtch the video. Until the end. This cunt STILL goes on about one singular arrow hitting a piece of armor. This is pretty much the only video which comes close to a true test in this field.

youtube.com/watch?v=q-Xp56uVyxs

>The bows we are shooting are at the lower end of the poundage medieval archers would have used during the period that concerns us.

>The heads on the arrows we are shooting have not been sharpened nor hardened, as was often the case in medieval times.

>The carbon content of the steel we are shooting at is higher than the average medieval armour, and therefore tougher.

>There are only 3 of us shooting here and we are shooting directly from the front. In a medieval battle the front line would have stretched for many hundreds or thousands of yards. The front at Agincourt was 3/4 of a mile long. With thousands of archers shooting at once into the massed ranks of approaching knights and men at arms it is natural to suppose that not every archer would have shot at a target directly to his front. Hits to the sides of the armour would have been common.
>With thousands of archers shooting at once into the massed ranks of approaching knights and men at arms
>With thousands of archers shooting at once into the massed ranks of approaching knights and men at arms
>With thousands of archers shooting at once into the massed ranks of approaching knights and men at arms

Basically all ancient warfare would be hell as long as it consists of phalanx on phalanx action.
Niggas fight for hours and then when one side decides it's time to retreat they get run down and slaughtered lmao

So no, in that video they didn't even shoot an arrow at the chain mail like they did in the video I post to you, which you probably neglected to watch - as it's evidence which directly contradicts what you are trying to say. Using the exact same people as source against you.

I would neglect it too, desu.

>A completely flat plate of steel

Again this shit only happens at very close range

Sounded like it had a bunch downsides tho
>getting chased down by skirmishers and cavarly while the hoplites in a phalanx can't do anything to help you
>getting caught alive would probably get you tortured and your corpse consecrated by enemy hoplites for being such an annoying cowardly faggot
>the lack of glory and social value that goes along with being a slinger. Anyone can be one with enough practice given how cheap it is, but it's cheaper for a polis to pay some poor mercenary from some buttfuck tribal land to do it than to send their own citizens as the role, and risk them dying and losing their economic contribution.

Yeah, after being peppered with arrows. The armour warps.

xD

Kek. 50 yards is not 'close range' in ancient times.

The fact that the video did test riveted chainmail with an arrow makes you seem like a retarded troll begging for (you)s or a complete moron.

>What is a galloping horse

Gee, it's almost like one singular test about something as iffy as armour penetration and arrows cannot be used and blanketed over the entirety of the subject.

xD

Try using a better source next time. And not a couple of redneck LARPERS.

>arrows were useless at penetrating armour at range because every single armoured man had a horse
Kay'.

Do you even understand what the dominant European tactics were until Crecy?

Kek. So yes, your argument now is literally archers were useless because horses.

Kek.

What the fuck?
I've been agreeing with you but with the stipulation was that it was at relatively close range.
Also my guess is that don't know what the main tactic was, because it revolved around horses you dimwit

>because it revolved around horses you dimwit
Kek. You only bought this up when you referred to 50 yards as 'close range' which is now 'relatively close range'.

You can stop at any time.

>because it revolved around horses you dimwit
;^)

Gunna same-fag here.

>Tests conducted by Mark Stretton circa 2006 focussed on heavier war shafts (as opposed to lighter hunting or distance-shooting 'flights') mated to a variety of heads indicate that the adoption of the heavy bodkin head - similar in form to contemporaneous crossbow warheads - was not merely fashionable imitation: Stretton's findings (based on experimentation using a variety of bows, arrows and heads based on historical examples but the results interpreted in the light of modern knowledge of the effects of blunt force trauma, via the good offices of Cranfield university) show the quarrel-like armour piercing shaft from a yew 'self bow' (with a draw weight of 144lbs at 32 inches) while travelling at 134 feet per second achieved 90% of the range of lighter broad heads while being 45% heavier and thus delivering more kinetic energy.

>When translated these figures (102 grams moving at 47.23 metres per second) yield 113.76 joules, comfortably surpassing the 80 joule threshold at which a strike to a vital area is hazardous. (In fact all of the test arrows, fired from test bows, surpassed this potentially mortal limit). In tests Stretton addressed not merely depth of penetration against representative targets but strike angle and discovered that the short, heavy quarrel-form bodkin could penetrate a replica brigandine at up to 40° from perpendicular, and further, when fired at such a target mounted on a travelling rig at 20 miles per hour and thus appropriate to a war horse at the charge, the added forward momentum of the target added a full inch of penetration.

>doesnt even have a fucking proper arrowhead

Are you fucking retarded?

4:45 in video, they begin showing clips the the very video you posted, you raging autist.

Not only that, but in BOTH videos, the only mail that was penetrated by any arrows was very clearly the butted. Neither the 45 nor the 60 pound bows with bodkin arrows managed to do jack shit to the riveted mail. Granted, the 60 pound is a bit weak for a proper warbow, but it doesn't make your factual claims any less wrong.

Now go to bed, You have school in the morning.

please tell me this is ironic, too many keks and xDDDDDDDDDs

Yea a Peasant weapon that can penetrate your fag body.

Winners* weapon

spanish ultimate peasant weapon
rarely killed except at close range but the wounds were horrible

the best slingers actually got paid very well, and could in several cases out-range bow shot.

The flat plate isn't a proper test, notice how medieval breast plates are curved? It's not to accommodate a beer-belly, but rather so that shots will glance off instead of hitting straight on.

Not to mention the average knight would have padding and often a layer of mail underneath his plate.

In most circumstances, the archers wouldn't have the opportunity to plant stakes, they wouldn't be in a freshly-tilled farmer's field after heavy rains and wouldn't be facing such a disorganized enemy as the one at Agincourt.

Believe it or not, English longbowmen were absolutely massacred at Orléans, Castillon, Formigny, Patay and Jargeau

slings are the shit. Best weapon ever.

>Assault weapons

Confirmed for knowing fuckall about modern small arms

Literally only in the rarest exceptions.

I bet you're not coming from the Balearic Islands or Rhodes... Good slingers with lead balls can outrange bows and still inflict some pretty serious injuries. Look at Xenophon's Anabasis about those.

Plus you can found ammo everywhere.

>Plus you can found ammo everywhere.
i've never seen piles of lead bullets just lying around

Here, one more video for your retarder collection. Who cares about quality of armor, if clown with bow will prove your point.
youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk
About 4:30

whose ready for tactical marine archer memes?

Spears>Swords

Pikes made a major resurgence in importance in the post-Renaissance period because
A) everyone was even more of a Rome/Hellaboo than they had been previously, which is saying something, and
B) the infrastructure of the time was capable of fielding at the time gigantic armies which went well with phalanx-esque tactics, as basically all you had to do was teach them parade formations along with your gunners.

why didn't ninja archers run around shooting 100s of knights in the eyes

The English used their longbowmen in conjunction with heavy pike units during the Hundred Years War. That was what made them such a pain to fight: they'd pick a hill, deploy their pikemen and bowmen and, if they had time, dig some trenches with stakes in them, and then just sit there. Half the battles in the Hundred Years War start with "they maneuvered for position, and then stared at each other all day because nobody wanted to make the first move".

Really didn't go well with the French obsession with manly cavalry charges. Look at the battle of Poitiers for how badly that could go.

>Chainmail, which was usually used by the peasantry
No, no, no. Mail was one of the most labor-intensive armor designs in history, quite expensive stuff used by either nobles, professional soldiers or well-paid mercenaries. In fact, one of the advantages of later plate armor was its lower production cost when compared to mail.

Also mail was tougher against longbows than many give it credit for: myarmoury.com/feature_mail.php

Whether a mail reproduction is or isn't historically faithful goes beyond just a riveted build. There are a lot of other factors going on.

>Chain mail are a series of links were very, very vulnerable to arrows, spears and pretty much anything pointy which could easily break the links.

you do realise that those arrow head wouldent prick the skin becuse of gambenson/aketon and eventely mail thats underneath

meant to write maybe mail underneath sorry bout that

More likely a lamellar kind of thing than chain for the average joe, really.

nobleman, swerve

Spears have always been knightly weapons. In the Germanic Holmgang tradition as well as in the judicial combat of the middle ages it was common to fight with three weapons: spears, swords and daggers.

If a peasant was going to fight it wouldn't be with a pitchfork. Militias kept armories for times of need. Most pitchforks were made out of wood anyway.

Utter nonsense. Mail armour protected quite well against arrows and there are plenty of historical examples of it in text. Most famous people who were injured or killed by arrows died in freak accidents, e.g. when they weren't wearing their helmets.

>germanics call Slavs subhuman
>meanwhile they were ''settling'' disputes by violent means

Plate armour was around much longer than longbows and nobody on the continent bothered with longbows. The idea that the purpose of longbows was warping armour is complete bullshit that isn't backed by a single historical source.

Were there any armories in villages or only in towns? Were villages completly fucked if someone raided them?

This is what happens when archers aren't protected by men-at-arms and other types of reinforcements:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Patay

They get all murdered because heavy cavalry doesn't give a single shit about being showered in arrows.

Only when firearms came up it was possible to stop a cavalry charge with ranged weapons.

Heavy cavalry, depending on just how heavy we're talking, tends not to give a fuck about arrow spam--from the front.

A cavalry charge unsupported by the rest of the army spelled the beginning of a disaster for the French at Poitiers, because all the archers around the unit that weren't being charged at were able to shoot at the flanks and rear of the cavalry and unhorse the knights in what George Minois describes as a massacre.

It should be noted that this was an uphill charge in a spot that had a lot of vines and hedges to hamper cavalry movement, and obviously amounts of armor are going to vary depending on wealth and such. However, this happened multiple times in the same battle, one where the French king was present along with his family, high nobility and overall retinue, so some of those had to be top of the line troops.

What is jokes...

Pitchforks were more of a revolt kind of thing, or they'd use these

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe

No no no, you get it wrong. Before battle each English memebowman would carve in his bow "infinite ammo" cheat code, then would process to use his medieval machine gun against knights. And then every single one of them would die thanks to effect of blunt trauma when being hit by thousand of arrows. That how it worked. Or, some guy imagines that, I believe.

youtube.com/watch?v=Mur-c5IiWJI

>Being a weeaboo when you can have a much better weapon that was actually used for striking fear into its enemies

...

Don't lump high-class pointy sticks with peasant pointy sticks. I'm sure OP also wouldn't call a Lance a peasant's weapon either. So Pikes are not in the equation. STRICTLY spears.

Peasents of the world, unite.

FTFY
-The spear is the soldiers weapon
-The sword is the knights weapon
-The pike is the peasants weapon

Pikes were not used by peasants. Try again.

why do people on Veeky Forums post about shit they know nothing about? is it to troll others?