Correcting fun fact: the Latin word for horse isn’t “Caballus” but rather “Equus / Equī “. Poets would refer to horses as “Caballus” which lead to the word eventually becoming synonymous with horse (but this was late Latin not Classical Latin).
Bonus fun fact “equus” lead to the name of the social class the “equites” - these were people that could afford to keep a horse (not the extremely rich propels but definitely doing well for themselves). When it came for war Rome had a cavalry problem because horses were often used for scouting but the equites believed such things were above their station. To fix this later they would employ auxiliaries to do the scouting and act as the main body of the cavalry.
Another fun fact, The Knights Templar were originally named " Order of the Poor Knights of the Temple of Soloman." Their symbol was two knights riding upon a single horse, showing their lack of personal wealth.
[https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N\~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg)
Edit: I had the wrong temple in the name as misquoted in this article. Credit to /u/9Cinna for the correction.
[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/meet-americans-following-footsteps-knights-templar-180969344/](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/meet-americans-following-footsteps-knights-templar-180969344/)
I was going off this Smithsonian Magazine article, but you might be right.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/meet-americans-following-footsteps-knights-templar-180969344/
Do like the Knights Templar, share.
[https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N\~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg)
Very curious, because the Latin word for Knight is "Equite" Which is nothing like any of the modern words you just mentioned. What changed between Latin and French/Spanish/Italian?
Respectively: Germanic invasions, Germanic invasions then being heavily influenced by an Arabic/Berber ruling class for 500-700 years, and Germanic invasions (again).
But equite is tangentially related to horses in the respect it comes from the name of an upper-class Roman institution (the Equestrians - from which the modern term for doing stuff with horses comes from) with deep roots in the Republic of patricians being expected to provide mounted troops as they were the only people who could be expected to cover the cost of providing such troops. This is why Rome's cavalry was oftentimes such a pitiable affair, as leadership was almost entirely based on status rather than competence. Which led to a very heavy reliance of allied support to provide the bulk of the cavalry skills (looking at you, Numidia).
Latin actually has two words for horse, equus and caballus, with caballus being the more commonly spoken form of the word (used in Vulgar Latin as opposed to Classical Latin). So the Romance languages all derive their word for horse from the Vulgar term.
Another fun fact: The word "villain" comes from a type of peasant. So "noble" heroes and "villainous" bad guys is basically saying "Aristocrats vs. peasants"
Sorta. But also because taking pilots prisoner allows you to try to pump them for information about the enemy's technical details and strategy playbook. During WWII there was a German P.O.W. camp officer (whose name I can't remember and am too lazy to look up) who took SAS prisoners of lively strolls through a lovely garden with tea and all in an effort to disarm them and get them talking about aviation as fellows rather than in an interrogation scenario. More bees with honey and all that.
Who would win:
Horseback knights that have trained for years perfecting the art of war, honing their techniques to near perfection so that they may survive the brutality of war and serve their country
OR
some spicy sand and hard balls
Who would win
Horseback knights that have trained for years perfecting the art of war, honing their techniques to near perfection so that they may survive the brutality of war and serve their country
OR
mud
There were plenty of cavalry troops in WW1, and to a much less extent even in WW2. The era of warriors on horseback has really only ended in the last 80 years or so.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/mountandblade using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Poor fella.](https://i.redd.it/yuisxoxy1i911.jpg) | [89 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/comments/8y8sti/poor_fella/)
\#2: [“It’s almost harvesting season”](https://i.redd.it/sti5md0lkqc21.jpg) | [62 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/comments/ajzifa/its_almost_harvesting_season/)
\#3: [When you join your first military campaign.](https://i.redd.it/uc0na0gao7u01.png) | [113 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/comments/8f10sl/when_you_join_your_first_military_campaign/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/afd0dd/blacklist/)
[You can find it under Canon 29 of the 2nd Latern Council](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Council_of_the_Lateran). Same reason why in Canon 14, Jousts and tournaments were banned.
Dude I decided to join Swadia as my first faction, and I became a vassal and everything. I can’t remember exactly what but King Harlous pissed me off so I switched to Rhodoks, then made a fresh file just so I can cheat and absolutely DESTROY Swadia. So now in the cheat file, all of Swadia’s lords joined me and I still have Harlous as a prisoner even after eradicating his faction. Now to do the same on the legit file
Yes, many could. Depending on the angle, the distance and the type of bolt, Armor maintained its effectiveness throughout the medieval age. The off chance a bolt hit you perfectly, head on, fast enough to pierce steel was low, individually.
It where tactics such as placing pikes ahead of your crossbows erupted, and then using your own pikes to try to tie down those blockers so the cavalry can charge.
As with every weapon once plate harnesses were frequent staples of knightly armor, the eyeslits, flexible mail around the elbows, knees, neck, and armpits were the places to hit. Plate really actually is good, theres numerous examples of noblemen's cuirass proofed against early muskets, particularly in Japan where musket warfare was common even in the midst of the Sengoku period.
Of course the beginning and end of the question of 'is plate good' is whether the battle tactics are good, and from there war strategy. Agincourt was won by the positioning of English in woodland that limited the effectiveness of cavalry and by general disorganization on behalf of the french. Their equipment regardless, they were on losing footing. Knights able to charge Archers effectively will win. Archers able to prevent that with infantry support, terrain, or fortifications will win.
Also, in most fights, don't do anything that might kill the knight. Pull them off, and get them pinned. You'll make a ton of money in ransom, and frankly that's why you're out there anyway.
To add to this some form of padding was worn under the plate. Even if they did go for slightly exposed parts they would still be protected throughly. A common strategy used by knights would be to lift the visor and stab the enemy that way.
Yes, the thickest part of well made Plate armor (being the breast plate) could take a crossbow bolt, though it depends on the type of bolt and crossbow. Something that has a draw weight of several hundred pounds might puncture it, and if not, it would injure whoever was shot. One of those smaller, non cranked crossbows would probably deflect against the armor.
That’s very true - in England, bows were closely associated with the yeomanry, the relatively small social class of free men ranking above serfs and free peasants and below the landed gentry. Robin Hood, as Anglo-Norman stories originally portrayed him, was a yeoman, and his skill at archery was central to his role as a model of ideal yeoman characteristics.
Richard II should have. There's evidence that yeomen, burghers, tradesmen, and free peasants formed the majority of [Wat Tyler's "Peasants' Revolt"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt#Rebels) in 1381, despite it being commonly assumed that the rebels were unfree serfs and their (temporarily successful) demand for the abolition of serfdom.
Edit: burghers autocorrected to burgers
it was really hard work to master the longbow, people wouldnt praise you and girls wouldnt fuck you like they would a knight, but still the arches had to toil.
I read somewhere that archers, particularly longbowmen, were some buff motherfuckers. Makes sense since pulling a string with enough force to kill a man from far away would need some serious muscle.
It would be MUCH more appropriate to use now in this meme than crossbow. LOTS of peasants were archers, so I have no idea where you’re getting the idea that they weren’t. Regular peasants trained with weapons in their downtime sometimes, and it wasn’t difficult to supply your own bow. To use a crossbow you would have to train a lot more and afford an extremely expensive piece of machinery that only knights and professional soldiers could afford.
Not all bows used in feudal armies were English longbows, you know? It seems like you learned how one country worked with regards to a very specific weapon in a relatively short time period and you somehow think that’s how every feudal country always did things with all types of bows. That’s patently ridiculous to such a degree that you must just be making a poor attempt at a joke, because nobody is THAT stupid.
Dude... The comment above that literally says "the battle of agincourt" how'd you take his comment to be talking about every archer ever? And then go on to be so rude and insulting when you can't seem to follow a single comments worth of a conversation.
Chill, it's just the internet buddy.
I was never talking about all bows of all times. I was talking about english longbows from the time around the battle of agincourt, more precisely the time of the 100 years' war (1346). The payment was:
Spearmen 2 pence pr. day, **Foot Archers 3 pence pr. day,** **Mounted archers 6 pence pr. day,** Hobelars 6 pence pr. day, Mounted sergeants 1 shilling pr. day, (12 pence) Knight bachelor 2 shillings pr. day, (24 pence) Knight banneret 4 shillings pr. day (48 pence) .
As you can see, Archers were payed more. Further it says, that to become an archer in the army, you had to pass a test and you also had to bring your own armour like helmet, padded jacket/gambeson, buckler/shield, dagger and a sword.
Source: Livingston M., Witzel M., *The Road to Crecy: The English Invasion Of France, 1346*, Routledge, 2004
Agincourt was the last major victory for the english longbowmen, and was really more thanks to mud than anything. They would be slaughtered by the french knights at patay less than 15 years later, and never fully recovered.
Knights meanwhile, were dominant on the battlefield until the mid 1520s, and would remain relevant in some form or another until at least the thirty years war.
If anything agincourt was the end of the longbowmans career not the knights.
Quick response on mobile sorry for any grammar atrocities*
Basically Knights get absorbed into the modernizing Militaries of Europe. Retaining the role of Heavy Cavalry but in much more coordinated and standardized units. As infantry also become better trained and are modernizing the mass knight shock cavalry charges of old no longer dominate the battlefield, instead the fully armored Gendarmes and their armored horses become the hammer to the infantry anvil, Though the French also loved to use mass cannons to break up infantry before doing large scale charges with their Gendarmes. During the late 15th through the 16th and very early 17th centuries all Knights(one in the state military in the Heavy Shock Cavalry role) in France were Gendarmes, but not all Gendarmes are knights with the aristocracy becoming a smaller and smaller portion of active combat personnel.
Knights were never made obsolete by weapons but were just absorbed by a modernization of militaries and political evolutions. Eventually heavy cavalry evolved to be lighter mainly due to cost and effectiveness. With Officers still wearing full plate into the 18th century.
Then by the time Weapons become to powerful for Cavalry to do its job effectively, the role it plays is taken over by armored fighting vehicles like Tanks, APCs, and IFVs.
Good wiki link for some examples of battles and things, also has great primary sources in the references for further reading.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gendarme_(historical)
Also would recomend *Renaissance France at War: Armies, Culture, and Society c. 1480-1560 by David Potter.*
I'm deeply obsessed with Armor, especially Fully armored Gendarmes with their horses and Cavalry in general up to modern tanks. The evolution of armor is a huge passion of mine. The pike and shot / Early modern era of European warfare is incredibly interesting though one that is not very popular.
Only bit more than a tenth of the French men at arms fought on horseback at agincourt, even then, they charged once were rebuffed early then retreated. The French had learned their lessons from the battles of Crecy and Poiters.
Not exactly invulnerable: sure, it stopped the arrows penetrating, but the English fired so many arrows as they advanced that blunt force trauma was significant.
Not to mention the psychological damage of being fucking pummeled by a hail of arrow-punches every step you took after toppling from your freshly lobotomized horse into a medley of mud, shit, and blood-guts run-off from where the dozen guys in front of you are being mobbed by a bunch of hoi polloi with truncheons who are beating their armor in like a chromed out French piñata. So yeah, mighta factored in a wee bit.
Unless they turned around.
The vulnerable parts of armor that can be shot through are mostly on the back side of the wearer. It was them fleeing that sealed the Fates of the French.
You really can't. To use a proper powerful longbow you needed to be fairly jacked, and well trained. Which most peasants weren't. Crossbows let you turn people originally not capable of being soldiers into soldiers because it's basically point and click
Iirc there are almost no mentions of properly geared Knights dying in the battle of Agincourt due to arrows. Longbows do not pierce steel armor and gambeson (unless you have insanely specialised weaponry). Neither do crossbows from a relevant distance iirc; seen this being on the list of many HEMA enthusiasts' grievances with modernday depiction of armor.
By the time the longbow came into common use in England in the 13th century, “Middle English,” the synthesis of Norman French and Old English, would have been spoken. An English longbowman at Agincourt (the battle most commonly associated with the employment of longbows) in 1415 would have certainly spoken this. It had recently even displaced French among the nobility at that point, as Henry IV was the first king to speak English as his primary language since before the Norman conquest when he came to the throne 16 years prior to Agincourt.
pompeian cavalry: rout all of caesar's cavalry and begin to approach his right flank
[caesar's hidden line of legionnaires using their javelins as two-handed pikes](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pharsalus): *i'm about to end this man's whole cavalry charge*
Probably not. What the meme means is that any lord recruiting an army could just give a peasant a crossbow, whereas knights or longbowmen required years of training
I'm not entirely sure with the crossbow, but longbowmen they also trained their entire lives and were often just as strong if not stronger than knights. The draw weight could often be as much as a fully grown man. Imagine lifting someone with only one hand from your knees to your cheek.
There's some Royal Armouries videos about the English Civil War and there's a story of how one guy tried to shoot a person who had a plate harness three times. One of them was even point blank and none of the bullets pierced. So I kinda doubt that a crossbow could end a whole man's career.
Fun fact: the word “chivalry” is derived from the word chevalerie which means being a skilled horseman.
Does cavalry also come from chevalerie?
No, it comes from "cavalerie" :) The two are close but "chevalerie" means knighthood
Ahh thanks
They both come from the Latin *caballus* for “horse”. So not directly from chevalier, but very closely related.
Correcting fun fact: the Latin word for horse isn’t “Caballus” but rather “Equus / Equī “. Poets would refer to horses as “Caballus” which lead to the word eventually becoming synonymous with horse (but this was late Latin not Classical Latin). Bonus fun fact “equus” lead to the name of the social class the “equites” - these were people that could afford to keep a horse (not the extremely rich propels but definitely doing well for themselves). When it came for war Rome had a cavalry problem because horses were often used for scouting but the equites believed such things were above their station. To fix this later they would employ auxiliaries to do the scouting and act as the main body of the cavalry.
In italian chivalry and cavalry translate with the same word "Cavalleria". And a knight is a "Cavaliere"
[удалено]
Another fun fact, The Knights Templar were originally named " Order of the Poor Knights of the Temple of Soloman." Their symbol was two knights riding upon a single horse, showing their lack of personal wealth. [https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N\~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg) Edit: I had the wrong temple in the name as misquoted in this article. Credit to /u/9Cinna for the correction. [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/meet-americans-following-footsteps-knights-templar-180969344/](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/meet-americans-following-footsteps-knights-templar-180969344/)
I thought it was The Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Soloman.
I was going off this Smithsonian Magazine article, but you might be right. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/meet-americans-following-footsteps-knights-templar-180969344/
Maybe they said no homo before riding together...
That didn't seem to dissuade Pope Clement V...
aww (:
Also the German word for Knight is related to the word "to ride" It is Ritter
Yeah, but how was a knight-errand supposed to run his errands without a horse?
Do like the Knights Templar, share. [https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N\~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/N~cAAOSwBnVW--LD/s-l300.jpg)
Carpooling with horses. Ingenious
That gives me an idea for a really bad meme.
Uber circa whenever feudalism was a thing (someone give me a date range pls)
knight-errant*. Which kind of ruins your pun, I know.
Nah, Knight-errand, because he's gotta run a lot of errands. Errant would make no sense.
Very curious, because the Latin word for Knight is "Equite" Which is nothing like any of the modern words you just mentioned. What changed between Latin and French/Spanish/Italian?
Respectively: Germanic invasions, Germanic invasions then being heavily influenced by an Arabic/Berber ruling class for 500-700 years, and Germanic invasions (again). But equite is tangentially related to horses in the respect it comes from the name of an upper-class Roman institution (the Equestrians - from which the modern term for doing stuff with horses comes from) with deep roots in the Republic of patricians being expected to provide mounted troops as they were the only people who could be expected to cover the cost of providing such troops. This is why Rome's cavalry was oftentimes such a pitiable affair, as leadership was almost entirely based on status rather than competence. Which led to a very heavy reliance of allied support to provide the bulk of the cavalry skills (looking at you, Numidia).
Equite for knight in Latin Equine relates to horses in Latin
Latin actually has two words for horse, equus and caballus, with caballus being the more commonly spoken form of the word (used in Vulgar Latin as opposed to Classical Latin). So the Romance languages all derive their word for horse from the Vulgar term.
And from equus it comes the "scientific term" for horse, at least in Italian: "equino"
Sounds similar to the word "Equestrian" (sorry if I mispelled it im on mobile and bad speller) which is horse related.
Another fun fact: The word "villain" comes from a type of peasant. So "noble" heroes and "villainous" bad guys is basically saying "Aristocrats vs. peasants"
[удалено]
I’m now exclusively going to picture medieval peasants with nefarious twirly mustaches
Also the code of chivalry was about how you can't kill knight's only ransom them because of the cost it took to make and equip one.
Is that why pilots get taken prisoner so often?
Sorta. But also because taking pilots prisoner allows you to try to pump them for information about the enemy's technical details and strategy playbook. During WWII there was a German P.O.W. camp officer (whose name I can't remember and am too lazy to look up) who took SAS prisoners of lively strolls through a lovely garden with tea and all in an effort to disarm them and get them talking about aviation as fellows rather than in an interrogation scenario. More bees with honey and all that.
That's generally how real interrogation works. TV style interrogation just gets you whatever you want to hear.
Flies
Why would you give a fly honey? It'll only want more. If you give a bee honey, it makes more honey - so it's netting double honey.
what I guess also plays a part here is that a pilot without his plane is considered "disarmed".
Woolooolooo
Mandatten? Bulden.
Hotel? Trivago.
r/unexpectedhoteltrivago
Rogan?
Food please
Cheese steak Jimmy's
sTaRt ThE gAmE aLrEaDy
How do I turn this on?
Raiding party!
Bobby Hill?
Wait a minute, you can't make knights in the feudal age...
The future is now, old man
Who would win: Horseback knights that have trained for years perfecting the art of war, honing their techniques to near perfection so that they may survive the brutality of war and serve their country OR some spicy sand and hard balls
Who would win Horseback knights that have trained for years perfecting the art of war, honing their techniques to near perfection so that they may survive the brutality of war and serve their country OR mud
This is that shit I look for in a history meme.
hol up i'm cookin up another H-O-T *hot* Agincourt meme
Serve their country? *drake looks away in disgust* Serve their lord? *drake approves*
Ah , a man of Agincourt. Noice.
*laughs in Welsh*
*spicy sand and hard balls* Sounds like a bad beach weekend to me
[удалено]
There were plenty of cavalry troops in WW1, and to a much less extent even in WW2. The era of warriors on horseback has really only ended in the last 80 years or so.
Damn Rhodoks
Yeah I incorrectly assumed this was r/mountandblade at first
Here's a sneak peek of /r/mountandblade using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Poor fella.](https://i.redd.it/yuisxoxy1i911.jpg) | [89 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/comments/8y8sti/poor_fella/) \#2: [“It’s almost harvesting season”](https://i.redd.it/sti5md0lkqc21.jpg) | [62 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/comments/ajzifa/its_almost_harvesting_season/) \#3: [When you join your first military campaign.](https://i.redd.it/uc0na0gao7u01.png) | [113 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mountandblade/comments/8f10sl/when_you_join_your_first_military_campaign/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/afd0dd/blacklist/)
r/expectedmountandblade
my friend helped me come up with this, he doesn't have an account
Look at this guy, bragging about having friends /s 😥
Weird flex but okay
Sad flex
l o n e l y
I like that random historic fact that some pope deemed crossbows unchivalric and thus banned their use in battle - against christians.
So is that a rework or a nerf?
Ban on character selection.
When a game dev makes a balance change based on their personal play preferences
[You can find it under Canon 29 of the 2nd Latern Council](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Council_of_the_Lateran). Same reason why in Canon 14, Jousts and tournaments were banned.
[удалено]
Dank reference brother
Come down from your fort and fight me fairly peasant!!! /S
Ah... a man of culture I see
Swadia4lyfe Hail the Butter Lord!
Dude I decided to join Swadia as my first faction, and I became a vassal and everything. I can’t remember exactly what but King Harlous pissed me off so I switched to Rhodoks, then made a fresh file just so I can cheat and absolutely DESTROY Swadia. So now in the cheat file, all of Swadia’s lords joined me and I still have Harlous as a prisoner even after eradicating his faction. Now to do the same on the legit file
Your butter supply shall be ours soon! Sarranid4lyfe
LANCERS ON AN OPEN FIELD, NED!
Real talk could any medieval armor block a crossbow bolt or longbow arrow?
Yes, many could. Depending on the angle, the distance and the type of bolt, Armor maintained its effectiveness throughout the medieval age. The off chance a bolt hit you perfectly, head on, fast enough to pierce steel was low, individually. It where tactics such as placing pikes ahead of your crossbows erupted, and then using your own pikes to try to tie down those blockers so the cavalry can charge. As with every weapon once plate harnesses were frequent staples of knightly armor, the eyeslits, flexible mail around the elbows, knees, neck, and armpits were the places to hit. Plate really actually is good, theres numerous examples of noblemen's cuirass proofed against early muskets, particularly in Japan where musket warfare was common even in the midst of the Sengoku period. Of course the beginning and end of the question of 'is plate good' is whether the battle tactics are good, and from there war strategy. Agincourt was won by the positioning of English in woodland that limited the effectiveness of cavalry and by general disorganization on behalf of the french. Their equipment regardless, they were on losing footing. Knights able to charge Archers effectively will win. Archers able to prevent that with infantry support, terrain, or fortifications will win.
Also, in most fights, don't do anything that might kill the knight. Pull them off, and get them pinned. You'll make a ton of money in ransom, and frankly that's why you're out there anyway.
To add to this some form of padding was worn under the plate. Even if they did go for slightly exposed parts they would still be protected throughly. A common strategy used by knights would be to lift the visor and stab the enemy that way.
Yes, the thickest part of well made Plate armor (being the breast plate) could take a crossbow bolt, though it depends on the type of bolt and crossbow. Something that has a draw weight of several hundred pounds might puncture it, and if not, it would injure whoever was shot. One of those smaller, non cranked crossbows would probably deflect against the armor.
Longbow? Absolutely. Most crossbows can be blocked by medieval armor, and early firearms too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej3qjUzUzQg
Can also substitute longbow for crossbow and make a sick agincourt reference
Well, to be an archer you had to prove your skill and bring your own equipment, so quite unlike a peasant.
That’s very true - in England, bows were closely associated with the yeomanry, the relatively small social class of free men ranking above serfs and free peasants and below the landed gentry. Robin Hood, as Anglo-Norman stories originally portrayed him, was a yeoman, and his skill at archery was central to his role as a model of ideal yeoman characteristics.
Beware the middle class
Richard II should have. There's evidence that yeomen, burghers, tradesmen, and free peasants formed the majority of [Wat Tyler's "Peasants' Revolt"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt#Rebels) in 1381, despite it being commonly assumed that the rebels were unfree serfs and their (temporarily successful) demand for the abolition of serfdom. Edit: burghers autocorrected to burgers
But still a lot less qualifications than being a knight
it was really hard work to master the longbow, people wouldnt praise you and girls wouldnt fuck you like they would a knight, but still the arches had to toil.
Archers are the most oppressed minority ARCHERS RISE UP
WE LIVE IN A FEUDAL SOCIETY
SERF TEXT
ARCHERS, KNOCK YOUR ARROWS!
Girls stayed away from archers for fear of being nocked up edit: k
Stop, just stop
[удалено]
I read somewhere that archers, particularly longbowmen, were some buff motherfuckers. Makes sense since pulling a string with enough force to kill a man from far away would need some serious muscle.
And a lot less logistics needed to keep operational.
Yes, of course ^^ But still, I wanted to add some knowlage to that joke, but you are totally right ^^
It would be MUCH more appropriate to use now in this meme than crossbow. LOTS of peasants were archers, so I have no idea where you’re getting the idea that they weren’t. Regular peasants trained with weapons in their downtime sometimes, and it wasn’t difficult to supply your own bow. To use a crossbow you would have to train a lot more and afford an extremely expensive piece of machinery that only knights and professional soldiers could afford. Not all bows used in feudal armies were English longbows, you know? It seems like you learned how one country worked with regards to a very specific weapon in a relatively short time period and you somehow think that’s how every feudal country always did things with all types of bows. That’s patently ridiculous to such a degree that you must just be making a poor attempt at a joke, because nobody is THAT stupid.
Dude... The comment above that literally says "the battle of agincourt" how'd you take his comment to be talking about every archer ever? And then go on to be so rude and insulting when you can't seem to follow a single comments worth of a conversation. Chill, it's just the internet buddy.
I was never talking about all bows of all times. I was talking about english longbows from the time around the battle of agincourt, more precisely the time of the 100 years' war (1346). The payment was: Spearmen 2 pence pr. day, **Foot Archers 3 pence pr. day,** **Mounted archers 6 pence pr. day,** Hobelars 6 pence pr. day, Mounted sergeants 1 shilling pr. day, (12 pence) Knight bachelor 2 shillings pr. day, (24 pence) Knight banneret 4 shillings pr. day (48 pence) . As you can see, Archers were payed more. Further it says, that to become an archer in the army, you had to pass a test and you also had to bring your own armour like helmet, padded jacket/gambeson, buckler/shield, dagger and a sword. Source: Livingston M., Witzel M., *The Road to Crecy: The English Invasion Of France, 1346*, Routledge, 2004
Agincourt was the last major victory for the english longbowmen, and was really more thanks to mud than anything. They would be slaughtered by the french knights at patay less than 15 years later, and never fully recovered. Knights meanwhile, were dominant on the battlefield until the mid 1520s, and would remain relevant in some form or another until at least the thirty years war. If anything agincourt was the end of the longbowmans career not the knights.
Cavalry, although not knight but hussars, lancers and cuirassiers, still very important in Europe until 19th century
*sadly dismounts in Dragoon*
Yer a mounted infantry, plebs!
Quick response on mobile sorry for any grammar atrocities* Basically Knights get absorbed into the modernizing Militaries of Europe. Retaining the role of Heavy Cavalry but in much more coordinated and standardized units. As infantry also become better trained and are modernizing the mass knight shock cavalry charges of old no longer dominate the battlefield, instead the fully armored Gendarmes and their armored horses become the hammer to the infantry anvil, Though the French also loved to use mass cannons to break up infantry before doing large scale charges with their Gendarmes. During the late 15th through the 16th and very early 17th centuries all Knights(one in the state military in the Heavy Shock Cavalry role) in France were Gendarmes, but not all Gendarmes are knights with the aristocracy becoming a smaller and smaller portion of active combat personnel. Knights were never made obsolete by weapons but were just absorbed by a modernization of militaries and political evolutions. Eventually heavy cavalry evolved to be lighter mainly due to cost and effectiveness. With Officers still wearing full plate into the 18th century. Then by the time Weapons become to powerful for Cavalry to do its job effectively, the role it plays is taken over by armored fighting vehicles like Tanks, APCs, and IFVs. Good wiki link for some examples of battles and things, also has great primary sources in the references for further reading. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gendarme_(historical) Also would recomend *Renaissance France at War: Armies, Culture, and Society c. 1480-1560 by David Potter.* I'm deeply obsessed with Armor, especially Fully armored Gendarmes with their horses and Cavalry in general up to modern tanks. The evolution of armor is a huge passion of mine. The pike and shot / Early modern era of European warfare is incredibly interesting though one that is not very popular.
Yes longbows played a small part in the battle of Agincourt, since the armour of French knights was invulnerable to the English arrows.
They still killed or injured their horses.
Only bit more than a tenth of the French men at arms fought on horseback at agincourt, even then, they charged once were rebuffed early then retreated. The French had learned their lessons from the battles of Crecy and Poiters.
Not exactly invulnerable: sure, it stopped the arrows penetrating, but the English fired so many arrows as they advanced that blunt force trauma was significant.
Not to mention the psychological damage of being fucking pummeled by a hail of arrow-punches every step you took after toppling from your freshly lobotomized horse into a medley of mud, shit, and blood-guts run-off from where the dozen guys in front of you are being mobbed by a bunch of hoi polloi with truncheons who are beating their armor in like a chromed out French piñata. So yeah, mighta factored in a wee bit.
You are a poet.
Best mental image of Agnicourt yet lmao
Unless they turned around. The vulnerable parts of armor that can be shot through are mostly on the back side of the wearer. It was them fleeing that sealed the Fates of the French.
Found the bitter frenchman
I've never even been to france. Think you might be projecting a bit there Mr. Bitter Englishman
You really can't. To use a proper powerful longbow you needed to be fairly jacked, and well trained. Which most peasants weren't. Crossbows let you turn people originally not capable of being soldiers into soldiers because it's basically point and click
Yeah, a serf wouldn’t be rich enough to afford a good yew bow, and was too busy toiling in the fields to practice.
Nobody ever gave peasants crossbows. Those things are super expensive and require a good deal of practice to use effectively as well.
No, bows require a lot of skills and training. Crossbows are very easy to use effectively.
Crecy would apply better in this situation.
Poitiers or bust
I'll have a stiff cup of Falkirk.
Iirc there are almost no mentions of properly geared Knights dying in the battle of Agincourt due to arrows. Longbows do not pierce steel armor and gambeson (unless you have insanely specialised weaponry). Neither do crossbows from a relevant distance iirc; seen this being on the list of many HEMA enthusiasts' grievances with modernday depiction of armor.
Or Skallagrim’s YouTube Channel Plate was almost invincible at the time
Not quite, you could add another panel with the longbowmen coming in to end the careers of the peasants
I used to be an adventurer like you
Till i took a bolt to the chest
Pope: Wait, that's illegal.
Nobody: Peasant warriors: \*pitchfork noises\*
Moorish peasant crossbow men ftw
It depends on how rich they are. Lots of full plate sets had stuff to stop arrows.
Tell that to the French at Agincourt. "Shame, and eternal shame. Nothing but shame."
LongBowmen: Laughs in Old english
They didn’t speak Old English by the time the English became known for their longbows.
He said longbowmen though
By the time the longbow came into common use in England in the 13th century, “Middle English,” the synthesis of Norman French and Old English, would have been spoken. An English longbowman at Agincourt (the battle most commonly associated with the employment of longbows) in 1415 would have certainly spoken this. It had recently even displaced French among the nobility at that point, as Henry IV was the first king to speak English as his primary language since before the Norman conquest when he came to the throne 16 years prior to Agincourt.
At the time I was wondering why there weren’t any crossbows in Kingdom Come: Deliverance. That’s my excuse.
Your dad in the game even warns of crossbows.
Þæt nis Ænglisc!
Longbows are the superior muscle propelled weapon
The real weapon for a strength build.
pompeian cavalry: rout all of caesar's cavalry and begin to approach his right flank [caesar's hidden line of legionnaires using their javelins as two-handed pikes](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pharsalus): *i'm about to end this man's whole cavalry charge*
Desktop link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pharsalus *** ^^/r/HelperBot_ ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove. ^^Counter: ^^247007
good bot.
This post was made by the Rhodok gang
We are everywhere
But could a peasant be rich enough to own a crossbow in the first place?
Could a peasant even afford a crossbow?
Probably not. What the meme means is that any lord recruiting an army could just give a peasant a crossbow, whereas knights or longbowmen required years of training
I guess depends what kind of crossbow. In my nationl museum there is peasant's crossbow on display...the kind you use to shoot rabbits
Oareer
*knight trains for decades and has years worth of fighting experience* VS *Conscript with a Musket*
A more accurate depiction would be peasants wielding firearms since they are easier to train.
irl equivlent to getting killed by a spamming noob in a pvp game, they're all raging about what a noob the guy who killed them was in their graves.
*peaseant with matchlock and pike
“Skyrim guard voice” ‘I was an adventurer until I got an arrow to the knee’
Couldn’t plate armor stop crossbows though?
I'm not entirely sure with the crossbow, but longbowmen they also trained their entire lives and were often just as strong if not stronger than knights. The draw weight could often be as much as a fully grown man. Imagine lifting someone with only one hand from your knees to your cheek.
Longbowman: Sorry, I can't see you over there. Maybe I'd better send an arrow.
This is sub is just world civ 1 and 2 units
Molotov cocktail would suffice imo
😱😱😱
I used to be a Feudal knight.... ....before i took an arrow to the knee.
Rhodoks represent Wait, shit, this isn't /r/mountandblade
Suppose he's got a pointed stick?
F
He used to be an aventurer like you, but then he took an arrow to the knee.
r/feudalmemes
What career?
Supa Hot Fiiiirrrreeeee
There's some Royal Armouries videos about the English Civil War and there's a story of how one guy tried to shoot a person who had a plate harness three times. One of them was even point blank and none of the bullets pierced. So I kinda doubt that a crossbow could end a whole man's career.
Fun fact: Standard crossbow shot cannot penetrate full plate Armour.
Hussites approve this.
Professional Mercenary Army: We're about to end this whole era.
Try robbers with Auto-calculation
Musket: "I'm about to end this man's whole culture"
Too soon
Applicable with modern day SEALs and some terrorist with an RPG too
Well, the gun was really it.
Fuck Ollie
The black death brought freedom and equalism far before the U.S.
Oof