I was speaking in the context of bow vs. xbow as the subject of the original post stated, not bow vs. everything else.
“Everything else” includes Crossbow.
There’s no question about it, xbows take more time to fire – period.
Which is on it’s own meaningless parameter in the real combat. What matter is practical rate of fire, not the maximum one.
Your idea that if you fire more arrows/bolts faster than your opponent means you will lose the battle is utter nonsense
Utter nonsense which is taught in basic training in any half decent military force. It even have name: “fire discipline”.
Sorry to tell you this, but compound bows did not exist at that time
Sorry to tell you, but composite bows were already used by Romans in the Classical period in Europe.
“The normal weapon of Roman archers, both infantry and cavalry units, was the composite bow,” source
and if your referring to recurve bows
I am referring to any high power bows, including longbow.
those also did not exist within the European theater during that period.
Mongols came to Europe in 13th. ct. Which is exactly “that period”. Not that Mongols were the first to bring recurve bows to Europe. Recurve bows were used in Europe by Greeks, Romans, Scythians, Sarmathians, Huns, Avars, Magyars, Allans all before Mongols came.
Your explanation makes no sense. Clearly I must be wrong, please illuminate us on the “real” reason the pope tried to ban xbows.
I did. All you need is to read it.
Who said anything about hollyweird?
Your description of testudo matches that of the Hollywood.
Again your wrong, try researching the “Column of Trajan”
Try to show me picture of the text on the Trajan column which says “testudo”. You can’t, because there is none.
Also try to refrain from attempting to insult me, especially with your level of knowledge of the affairs you talk about.
