WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

Modern History TV

Jason Kingsley, the Modern Knight, investigates a medieval 1000lbs draw weight siege crossbow and finds out what can go very wrong!

Modern History TV Jason Kingsley, the Modern Knight, investigates a medieval 1000lbs draw weight siege crossbow and finds out what can go very wrong!

(post is archived)

[–] 2 pts

I was waiting for the catastrophic failure. When he was sitting on the hay bales his right hand kept closing on the pinch point between the limbs and the front of the bow. If the string had snapped his fingers might have got pinched and good luck trying to pull back 1000lb limbs without mechanical help.

It was very interesting, I assumed the crossbow was a formidable weapon, but when you can see it was only good for two shots at cavalry, it seems like a waste of resources compared to a longbow.

[–] 1 pt

What a piece of shit. No wonder the Welsh longbow was the superior war weapon. An English bowman could shoot a dozen arrows while a Frenchman was trying to load this cranky, dangerous machine.

[–] 0 pt

Imagine trying to reload that under the pressure of 100 men encased in steel charging at you with war lances upon destriers. Fire your first volley, oh shit that only put a handful of them down, now you and your unit are all fiddling around with your goofy ass ropes, and you're probably in pretty close quarters to each other.... oh the hilarity. Men getting their reloading tools tangled up together, meanwhile those horses are pretty fast and they're getting pretty close....

Big nasty longbow and a stake pounded into the ground turned out to be a more effective ranged anti-cavalry loadout than the fanciest of crossbows of that time period. Sometimes, less is more.

[–] 2 pts

You have to train your whole life to become good at a longbow. Anyone can pick up a crossbow and after a 10 minute instruction can kill knights..

[–] 1 pt

If they are in fact enased in steel the longbow isn"t much good. That was the whole point of the crossbow

[–] 0 pt

You had me up to the stake in the ground. What's that about?

[–] 1 pt

The Battle of Agincourt, the day chivalry died. The day the greatest, most heavily armored and armed French knights were defeated by an army they outnumbered vastly, about 7,000 British troops against 15,000-25,000 French forces (again, including their best knights)... by a bunch of peasants carrying longbows, mallets, and wooden stakes.

Not only were the numbers lop-sided, but the British troop "diversity" was not good- about 5/6 of those 7,000ish men were archers, the remainder being dismounted men-at-arms. The French had quite a nice mixture of crossbows, men-at-arms, cavalry- a balanced force. On paper, with just this info, how could the British have possibly stood a chance?

Firstly, they had defender's advantage- so they prepped the battlefield. King Henry ordered all of his longbowmen to each chop down a tree, and fashion it into a stake that's about 5 feet long. The archers would lay these stakes out on the ground in front of them, launch volleys into a charging cavalry/infantry formation, and upon orders they would lift the stakes and pound them into the ground with a mallet. You've just turned your vulnerable line of ranged troops into men covered by an improvised pike wall.

The British were able to taunt the French Knights into making a foolish charge. The taunt? The bowmen would hold up their two bowstring fingers and start shouting, like "I'll kill you noble faggots with my two fingers, come and get it". The French nobility present on the battlefield were incensed at this rabble levy conducting themselves like this. And so they charged. They charged right into the ground that had been rained upon recently, and tilled by the British the day before, leaving it a muddy mess. This is where most of the fighting would occur.

It's pretty horrifying- stories about men drowning in the mud and shit. Witnesses said the British men-at-arms would drag the heavily armored French to the ground, and 3-on-1 they would fucking drown the poor bastard in 2 inches of mud/blood/guts. The longbowmen (positioned in the treeline on high ground on either side of where the men-at-arms were engaging) eventually ran out of arrows... so Henry told them to drop their bows, and charge. The archers grabbed whatever melee weapons they had (lots of axes, maces, but a lot of them ended up using their mallets) and charged into the bloody mess. The French were butchered almost to-a-man.

The historical significance of this battle can't be understated- it actually revolutionized the way military service in Europe took shape. No longer was it levies being called up by their local lord, fighting because if they did not fight, they'd be hanged for treason- now the men would be paid a good wage to go on campaigns! See, these longbowmen at Agincourt were among the first to recieve this kind of treatment from the nobility, and it is theorized that they probably would not have been willing to face such odds without being treated well by young King Henry, and they were being paid- so while they were running around in France, they were happy that their families back home had some measure of security because they were being paid. This led to much higher morale, probably contributed majorly to victory.

[–] 0 pt

A charge into a pointed stake tends to end poorly for both horse and rider

[–] 0 pt

Check out the battle of Agincourt, famous for movable anti-cavalry-charge stakes and more.