I've always heard the same. I'm curious though, about the longbow training. I've done a bit of archery in the past and it didn't take me very long to be able to hit a target with reasonable accuracy. Probably a little longer than it took me to learn to use a rifle, true, but still not that long.
Plus, I would think that a longbow would have a lot of advantages. They must be cheaper and simpler to make than a gun, and you can shoot them over and over again without stocking up on bullets or gunpowder.
I wonder if the deciding factor was the draw weights of the longbows they used. I've usually heard that they had around a 200 pound draw, which is almost amazing. I think you'd have to spend far more time developing the strength than you would the skill for a longbow.
Definitely. The Samurai and Mongols were good at shooting bows on horseback. The peasants? Not so good. Turn on any western to see how easy it became with a handheld weapon.
Probably had something to do with cannons as well. Take up a lot less space than a Catapult type device, easier (lighter) to move around, and could throw the payload further.
With respect, I think you're confusing the longbow with either the native American bow or the modern competition archery bow. Both are a *lot* easier to use. The longbow (nearly the height of an average man) required a *great* deal of strength even to draw one arrow. And to be able to fire repeatedly for an hour or more takes years of practice. This was why in Ye Olde England (and Wales, where a lot of the best archers cames from) edicts were periodically issued against various sports if they became too popular - quite simply, they were distracting young men from their archery practice. This is also why in various English towns and cities even today you'll find districts called 'The Butts'. This has nothing to do with bottoms, but is where in medieval times the municipal archery butts (i.e. target ranges) were situated, and where every able-bodied man was expected to practice every week (more often than that if they were earmarked as archery troops in time of war).
If you're into wargames, it's an interesting exercise to have the army of Henry V's time (with its elite longbow archers) face e.g. the French forces at Waterloo. I've never tried this myself, but various chums who are into this sort of thing say that given decent initial positioning of forces, Henry V's army nearly always wins.
That makes sense. I'd like to actually try to draw one of the original bows. I've often heard that they can tell the skeletons of archers from that period by bone deformities caused by the training. Given that, I'd assume they were amazingly strong...
EDIT: On the topic of swords, it's a pity that people have caught onto Samurai swords. From what I've heard, 15 or 20 years ago, you could often get them at garage sales, where WWII vets brought them back as souvenirs from Japan. An old MA instructor of mine had several (5 or 6?) that were in decent condition. The originals were works of art. I hear that there are still some craftsmen in Japan keeping the tradition alive, but come with cash if you want something like that..
The estimated draw weights for the longbows found on board Henry VIII's sunken ship the "Mary Rose" range from 100 to 180 pounds which is monstrously powerful when you consider that these had to be held at full power, aimed and loosed without any of the relief to be found in a modern compound bow at full draw. I can't imagine doing that multiple times per minute for hours on end.
Yes, absolutely right. I don't know which usage came first, but the butt was often the shape of the end of a large wine cask, so there might be a link between the two.
One of the first pieces of training apprentice archers did was to stand holding the longbow in one arm outstretched - all day. The strength required to do that alone is phenomenal.
I poked around swordforum.com and came accross this thread: Guy was trying to sheathe his katana, somehow missed and it went right through the lenght of this forearm, coming out on the other side.
This is why I was a fencer, the worse I ever got was a metal splinter from a bit of swarf in one of my fingers.
Reading that guys surgical report, it looks like it could have been worse for him. I refuse to say people have been lucky in situations like this, cause that's not what I call lucky. I looks like he's going to get full use of his arm back eventually cause he only nicked the nerve. If he'd sliced through it, it would have been a whole other story.
I've heard of people injuring themselves quite badly with display or practice weapons too. Some of them can snap and cut you. Of course, you can hurt yourself with a rubber sword too if you try hard enough...