Re: Higher Education Is Overrated

On 9/1/2024 12:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 11:54:00 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
 

On 9/1/2024 11:25 AM, Jeff Liebermann 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.
>
"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.

 

Doesn't every schoolboy know about the muddy field of Agincourt?

 Yes, I knew the story about the muddy fields, but I don't recall
reading anything about how the mud affected the actions of both sides
or about the monetary motivations of those involved.  I was certainly
not presented with anything even close to the story offered in the
video.  Prior to reading, I just assumed that the longbow was some
kind of super-weapon that was directly responsible for defeating the
French.  In other words, I didn't get the details or the complete
picture.
 

Makes sense; me too.
The English firing arrows into slow/stuck cavalry is about as much as I knew until your helpful details.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971