It's all very well to do the math, but the arrow's impact is affected by lots of things that are hard to factor in without actual tests. Like air resistance -- arrows without fletching can travel two or three times as far as fletched ones, but of course can't be aimed worth a damn. The shape and composition of the arrow head is vital, too.
Anyway, the actual tests done with bows vs. armor indicate that longbows failed to pierce breastplates.
>But I've seen it alleged that the arrows from one of the
>indian tribes in the everglades pierced Spanish breastplates.
I can only assume that these tales are (a) in error, (b) talking about finding cracks in the armor -- at hinges, etc., or (c) everything else done to date on arrows vs. armor is wrong.
I have also read that Aztec flint arrowheads were superior to steel arrowheads at penetrating mail. Makes sense, actually.
Even chain armor was hard to penetrate. The tests done to prove this, by Peter Jones, show that the only certainty of chain penetration was at direct angle (90 degrees) which almost never happened. At 45 degrees angle penetration was small and not very deep. At 60 degrees the arrow made a hole but bending stresses broke the arrow tip and it ricocheted without penetrating the skin. At 70 degrees the arrow ricocheted without penetration. None of these tests were done with leather or quilt armor below the chain.
The major problem with any arrow penetrating plate is that the arrow never hits the plate at 90 degrees. (What never? Well, hardly ever.) So even if the arrow is going fast, with a sturdy well-designed arrowhead,it's probably going to glance off when it hits, since the armor is curved, and the armor-wearer standing at some random angle, etc.
Knights looking like porcupines probably got that way because the arrows got caught in the chain or stuck in the jerkin below. A quilt or felt undergarment was _always_ worn with chain. Even cloth can provide a significant protection against a blow, as was evidenced by the trouble the British cavalry had in the Crimean war, in which Russian greatcoats proved almost impervious to their sabers. Of course the Russians have traditionally had excellent cavalry, and this might have been part of the problem, too. (I.e., the greatcoats might have been an excuse by the Brit. horsemen to explain failures on their part.)
me:
> I don't think any Pentan group has yet reached the social
>sophistication of the Mongols. Even Sheng Seleris at his peak I view
>as more of a mega-Hun.
Peter M., always politically correct, springs to the defence of the
notoriously benevolent Huns, pointing out helpfully that he, himself,
would have been _less_ gentle than the actual Huns.
>Excuse me? The Huns _spared_ Rome. If I were some short stinking
>uncultured Savage Lord of Terror upon horseback in front of some
>defenseless city and some wretched decadent milksop of a spiritual
>leader jabbering in the name of some weird concept like 'pity' or
>'compassion' to spare the city, I would run him through with my
>sword! I would consider the Huns to be more 'socially
>sophisticated' than contemporary records make out.
(A) the Huns were paid an enormous sum of money to spare Rome. (B) How does less "social sophistication" make the Huns out to be inferior than the Mongols? You'll get no argument from _me_ that the Mongols were crueler than the Huns, more ruthless, etc. etc. The Mongols were an _awful_ people. And in addition to their harsh ways, they were more socially sophisticated than the Huns.
This sophistication sure as hell didn't make them nice guys.
Peter then tells the tale of a Crusader shot with a dozen arrows, but yet living.
The fact that the tale is still told today indicates the exceptional nature of his experience, does it not? In addition, it's debatable about whether he would have been an effective warrior after the first couple of arrows stuck in him.
On the other hand, U.S. military records indicate that the average U.S. cavalry man killed by Indian bows suffered 14 arrow wounds (and he was unarmored!). It is possible, however, that some of these injuries were inflicted after death (perhaps a response to the fact that they knew it took more than one shot to kill a man -- they were just making sure the fallen foe was dead). This does not include cases in which the Indians were simply mutilating the dead.
Indian bows were, of course, pretty poor quality, at least those used by the mounted plains tribes. For buffalo-hunting, the hunter had to ride right up next to the buffalo, and fire his arrow into its side from only a couple of feet away.
I believe that Praxian bows are superior to Amerind bows. Praxians certainly know how to make composite bows, and they have plenty of horn, bone, and sinew to do so. Naturally, the bows made by the Impala riders are the best, and I expect that most of the other tribes (those that use bows, anyway), try to obtain Impala bows by theft or trade or ransom.
LONGBOWS IN GLORANTHA
I believe that the classic longbow is found in only two
regions in all Glorantha: Fronela, and Umathela. In Peloria, Maniria,
and Kralorela, the influence of the composite bow (from Pent and
Prax) I feel would be paramount.
In Fronela, the longbow is used primarily by the Uncolings and Rathori, and maybe some rural folk. The major military powers of the region (Loskalm, KoW, Jonatings) all rely on mounted forces for their oomph, and probably only have missile troops as auxiliary/irregulars. When well-trained missile troops are thought useful, they hire Maidstone Archers.
The city-states of Fronela doubtless use crossbows to equip their people. Crossbows don't take a lifetime of training to use, and are perfectly good weapons for sieges, which is what most city-state warfare boils down to.
The Umathelan Orlanthi I believe use longbows. They're close allies of the local elves, and no doubt have picked up some archery skills. They have plenty of suitable wood, and pretty tough foes. The classic comparison to make here is, of course, Robin Hood. The Orlanthi here are often oppressed by Fonritians, Vadeli, or Malkioni, and their standard response nowadays is not formal battle, but generally elf-style raids and guerrilla war.
Powered by hypermail