I wouldn’t be surprised if technology was pushed towards ranged weapons like bows, crossbows, catapults, and trebuchets
I mean I’m sure there would be a good amount of swords or other close quarters melee units the keep the enemy at bay while everyone else is relatively safe from getting stabbed firing from a distance
For trebuchets at least, they were only siege weapons, took a long time to both assemble and fire. Though I must concede they were better than melee weapons for knocking down walls.
In Monty Python and the Holy Grail, as the Frenchmen start raining animals at the knights and they all turn and run, Lancelot (being the brave one) takes one last whack at the stone castle wall with his sword before joining the rest in retreat. Always loved that little detail.
As far as my understanding, it was. Long bowmen were far more valuable because the costs associated with losing a knight was high. Infantry were given various polearms, and cavalry (or knights on horses) were given lances and spears. The kinetic energy from horseback functioned as good or better than trying to wind up swings of a weapon. Also human mobility is less than that of a horse before even accounting for armor, so being demounted from your horse mean almost certain death.
Swords were a last resort. A “running away is better” type of option. Being good with your sword is like being good with martial arts today - better to have it even if you may not use it.
The point wasn’t that ranged attacks or siege or cavalry weapons are more important than melee weapons, though depending on the battle or the century, that may well be true.
The point was that when it comes to melee, the weapons used by your infantry was never swords. Swords are prestige weapons, expensive and heavy, wielded by wealthy knights and nobility for ceremonial purposes, duels, or tournaments. The king cannot afford to equip a thousand infantry with swords (the way you see in movies like Braveheart or LotR), and even if he could, the infantrymen have neither the skill nor strength to wield them for an extended duration.
Swords weren’t the weapon of last resort. They just weren’t included in the loadout at all, of the soldiers engaging in melee combat. So what did they use? Spears. That’s probably why the OP says spears are king.
But take it with a grain of salt cause I don’t actually know anything about medieval warfare. It’s just a thing I heard.
No, swords were mostly civilian self defense weapons and backup weapons as pistols are nowadays (and, mind you, even nowadays where governments have the money to equip every soldier with a rifle and a pistol, they don’t).
The reason swords were not as widely used in battle as spears, axes, maces, polearms were is that these weapons are battlefield weapons and swords aren’t. Why depends on the situation and time period. Sometimes because they’re not as effective against armor, sometimes because they’re too expensive, sometimes because they required more training than a pointy stick.
Btw, there was an empire that widely equipped it’s armies with swords (through times) because it made sense with the rest of the kit, fighting style, enemies, etc. The roman legionnaires are most famously depicted with a gallius helmet, lorica segmentata, scutum pilum and gladius
Wow that’s a much more detailed reply than my un-coffeed brain can produce lol
Maybe I missed it but for long bows you said they delivery a lot of energy especially so on horse back but I remember reading archers would train for their entire life just because of the sheer upper body strength needed for the bow which I think is neat
An archer can hit a man 450-1000 feet away. What’s a man clad in 200lbs armor gonna do? All he can do is take it. So the armor was sloped and thickened. Relying on horse speed to make them harder to hit.
The sword was a sidearm. It was a trusty companion you had on you everyday to demonstrate your wealth and power and to be drawn in your defense if need be.
When it was time for battle, your sword would still be at your side, but in your hands would be some sort of polearm or perhaps an axe.
Also, commonly used but often forgotten about is a falchion. It was a sidearm that looked like a sword but did not require all the training in swordsmanship to be effective. Instead of being balanced like a sword to enhance the point control, a falchion was point heavy (like a machete) and swung like a hatchet.
It isn’t, the only bad thing of the Netherland are the drivers with caravans on the motorways and roads in the rest of the EU, ah, well, maybe their beer 🤢
Yup… dude also thinks abortion providers should be sentenced to hard labor. Republicans are going completely mask off. If they win big in the midterm election America is quite literally fucked.
If one day a single democrat is trying to storm the capitol, he will get shot 23 times and be called a terrorist. All his family will be persecuted by crazy hats. You accepted their crazy extremist behavior and the know it. These guys just hijacked democracy to forcepass one of their guy despite an internal vote. I will tell you from an outside perspective, you guys are going right into fascism next time Trump is elected. He won’t leave twice. You’re going to be the baddies.
I used to see them in the UK. Perhaps they’re making the boxes stronger to save needing the plastic, or maybe it’s just smaller pizzas/boxes don’t need them.
Internal Family System. A therapeutic approach based on system theory approaches child-like inner parts and gives them the affection and love they needed (and still need) when those parts formed.
I think I’d be the opposite. I’d be like, “It still sucks, and the loneliness hits harder than ever, fella. But when you’re 24, you’ll get something that’ll change your life.”
Just to leave this oit there for the concerned; I’m fine.
I am, but it’s a day-by-day affair. I recently found out I have bipolar along with anxiety, but even so, I came out 4 years ago and my life has vastly improved.
Hey, it’s better than it always being shit. I’m sorry about the bipolar though. However, hopefully, it’s been found out. You can get help more suited for that.
The anxiety is.hinestly such a bitch. And I’m so glad coming out has helped. I wish you all the best.
Cooking pasta correctly is an art, but there are some basic rules to follow if you want consistent results.
If you want to avoid this situation in particular, take the pasta out just before it’s done along with about 1/4 cup of the water and add both to your sauce and finish cooking the pasta there. You’ll end up with pasta that is cooked perfectly with a sauce that readily adheres to each noodle and no stickyness
The sauce itself should be quite thick before adding the pasta water. I let my bolognese reduce for at least an hour and a half before starting to boil water for the pasta.
Well, you only use a bit of the pasta water, it depends how much tomato sauce you’re making.
Pull out about a cup of the pasta water.
Dump the pasta. Don’t rinse the pasta, ever.
Now either slowly pour in a bit of the pasta water into the sauce, stir it, look at it, there should be a sheen. The pasta water makes the red sauce very silky.
Or, take a frying pan, turn the heat on. Add butter and olive oil. When the butter gets melted, dump diced veggies (or not) into the pan. Cook the vegetables to almost desired tenderness. Dump garlic in for no more than one minute.
Dump some pasta water in, just a little, and throw the pasta on top. Mix it up. After a short time, 15 seconds maybe, pour the red sauce on top of the spaghetti and veggies, stir.
After about a minute or so, add pasta water, just a bit. Stir. Taste. Is it shiny and silky? If not add a little more water. Repeat until it’s tasty.
Rinsing the pasta is fine for making a cold pasta salad or something like that, removing the free starch stops it from sticking. But for a dish with sauce, definitely don’t rinse.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.