Trying to worldbuild an all-female militia

I'm still going to stand by my observation re. crossbows versus self bows - a stirrup crossbow allows a two-handed draw with the weapon braced against your foot, whereas a conventional bow is a straight one-handed draw braced against the extended other arm. To a certain degree it will depend upon the materials available; wood versus composite versus metal - although the last would generally take it into the 'heavy crossbow' class with all its capstan/windlass add-ons.

However, a crossbow is a more technologically sophisticated weapon than a simple bow and generally requires a more developed urban base than a small village to support its production and/or use - even just in terms of producing ammunition rather than arrows.

If the local militia were being supported by central government (empowering communities under a bold new local defence initiative) then this could extend to weaponry and ammunition, and perhaps even small teams of instructors.

Brutal Mustang said:

Not to many people know how to ride a trot well these days. It takes hours and hours, month after month to learn.

Click to expand...

Oh, I had hours and hours of practice. But I'm probably pretty rusty right now.

(Are we talking posting or sitting?)

I posted English-style for several years. You couldn't pay me to go back.

SPMiller said:

I posted English-style for several years. You couldn't pay me to go back.

Click to expand...

I can do posting, but I don't prefer it. Of course, the places where I learned to ride were very western, and so were the horse shows that I went to. It's easy on the ass, but not as much fun. You also lose some control of the horse when you're up.

Brutal Mustang said:

Yes, the drafters were used to carry those heavy knights in armor. For a short period in history though, because it wasn't practical. If they fell off their horse, they became easy prey. Imagine wearing armor so heavy you needed a drafter to carry you ... you wouldn't be able to move!

Click to expand...

The armor wasn't really that heavy. Sixty pounds on average and it was well enough distributed that the knight could get up pretty quick. '

I'd be more worried about the hight of the fall.

Brutal Mustang said:

Not to many people know how to ride a trot well these days. It takes hours and hours, month after month to learn.

Click to expand...

I figured it out in a western saddle in less than a minute. Boy when the jewels are being smacked against a hard piece of leather you learn to keep em up. And quick too.

reiver33 said:

I'm still going to stand by my observation re. crossbows versus self bows - a stirrup crossbow allows a two-handed draw with the weapon braced against your foot, whereas a conventional bow is a straight one-handed draw braced against the extended other arm. To a certain degree it will depend upon the materials available; wood versus composite versus metal - although the last would generally take it into the 'heavy crossbow' class with all its capstan/windlass add-ons.

Click to expand...

That's the theory (or part of it) and you may stand by it, but historical fact simply disagrees with you. But theory is incomplete anyway. What mostly limits the kinetic energy bows and crossbows deliver is the amount that can be effectively transferred to the projectile. Crossbows with their more abrupt and significantly shorter draw do not reach higher projectile speeds than bows. Combined with a shorter and lighter projectile, they are noticeably weaker than a bow. Without modern materials for the arms and bolt, crossbows are worse than bows in pretty much every way. Even a really heavy, winched crossbow has that problem, though the bigger one with those is that medieval materials are not well suited to create arms which can deliver a very strong but very short draw.
Metal bolts aren't an easy solution either (and were not commonly used) because they tend to be either to short, or too heavy (for the string), or too thin. No aluminium without quite a sophisticated technological base.
On another note, whether a bow is drawn one-handed or two-handed depends on the technique use. European style is drawn one-handed usually, but human muscle power is not the limit on the power of a crossbow anyway. The quite impressive power of roman ballistae can make the crossbow design seem more powerful than it is, since ballistae are not actually crossbows, but torsion weapons.

However, a crossbow is a more technologically sophisticated weapon than a simple bow and generally requires a more developed urban base than a small village to support its production and/or use - even just in terms of producing ammunition rather than arrows.

Click to expand...

No, crossbows are actually easier to manufacture than a decent bow. And they're far older than the medieval times they're usually associated with. They're old enough that one cannot actually put a good date on their appearance, since the oldest found examples push the limit on the survivability of wood artifacts.

A crossbow is a less sophisticated weapon than a self bow? The kind of light crossbow I'm talking about is the Eastern composite wood/horn laminate type - the equivalent of a recursive bow as used by horse nomads. The simple (Western) self bow is essentially a curved piece of wood and while I admit that selecting that wood in the first place is a talent bordering on an art form, the actual 'production' of the weapon is surely more straightforward.

And going back to basics...a quote from 'How a Crossbow Works - An Educational Guide to Crossbows'

The nice feature of the crossbow when compared to other bows is there is less physical strength needed to draw the bow as compared to a traditional bow. The crossbow user can draw the string, cock it, and leave the string while taking aim. More traditional bows require the archer to hold the bow at full draw while aiming. In addition, to draw a crossbow requires the use of the archer's buttock and thigh muscles. These muscles are much stronger than the arm and chest muscles required of a standard bow user.

reiver33 said:

A crossbow is a less sophisticated weapon than a self bow?

Click to expand...

Yes.[/quote]The kind of light crossbow I'm talking about is the Eastern composite wood/horn laminate type - the equivalent of a recursive bow as used by horse nomads.[/quote]It is not an equivalent, as the kind of high-tension bow that was most famously used by northeastern nomads cannot be crafted into a crossbow. But anyway, if laminated wood is available, that will be used for bows as well. It is not well suited for any kind of milita though (neither in crossbows, simple laminated bows nor high-tension bows) as it is extremely sensitive to environmental conditions. Not something to leave lying around in a corner until needed.

The simple (Western) self bow is essentially a curved piece of wood and while I admit that selecting that wood in the first place is a talent bordering on an art form, the actual 'production' of the weapon is surely more straightforward.

Click to expand...

No, it's not. Try it yourself if you like. Creating a bow which has a strong but even and smooth draw, and neither deforms nor breaks is anything but easy. Selecting wood is only the very first step. Crossbows, because of the short but stronger draw are much easier to create. The mere presence of a few mechanical parts does not make something better, more sophisticated, or even more complicated. Another example of this are early gunpowder weapons. While pretty bad, a basic pistol, or even revolver, is much easier, cheaper, and faster to produce than a sword.

The nice feature of the crossbow when compared to other bows is there is less physical strength needed to draw the bow as compared to a traditional bow. The crossbow user can draw the string, cock it, and leave the string while taking aim. More traditional bows require the archer to hold the bow at full draw while aiming.

Click to expand...

While true, it's relevant for target shooting, not battle. Aiming is a matter of one or two seconds at the most.

In addition, to draw a crossbow requires the use of the archer's buttock and thigh muscles. These muscles are much stronger than the arm and chest muscles required of a standard bow user.

Click to expand...

As i said, muscle strength is not the limiting factor. And we can keep talking about the physics behind it for weeks, but the historical fact remains that until modern materials were available, crossbows had always had worse performance than bows.

Liosse de Velishaf said:

I can do posting, but I don't prefer it. Of course, the places where I learned to ride were very western, and so were the horse shows that I went to. It's easy on the ass, but not as much fun. You also lose some control of the horse when you're up.

Click to expand...

Same here. I only post when riding a young/tense/feisty horse that's trotting hollow-backed, because it's easier on the youngster's back. Not for long, though. I train them to go in a good frame pretty quick.

Brutal Mustang said:

Same here. I only post when riding a young/tense/feisty horse that's trotting hollow-backed, because it's easier on the youngster's back. Not for long, though. I train them to go in a good frame pretty quick.

Click to expand...

Training's a bit beyond my pay grade, but some of those younger horses can definitely be a handful.

Nivarion said:

The armor wasn't really that heavy. Sixty pounds on average and it was well enough distributed that the knight could get up pretty quick. '

I'd be more worried about the hight of the fall.

Click to expand...

A big horse is not fast. And it's not agile. Nor is it hot (responsive to a rider)--initially it was bred for farming. The only tactical advantage a big horse would ever have in battle is either to haul in supplies, or to carry massive weight, which 50-100 pounds of armor is, given the weight of the rider, weapons, canteens, saddle, et cetera. A horse that is packing all day shouldn't be toting around more 30% of it's body weight. The bigger the horse, the smaller percentage of its weight it can pack. For the average horse, that's 300 lbs. And no, you wouldn't get on an antsy draft horse (with a battle high) quick, wearing 60 lbs. At least not from the ground. Especially if you were exhausted and dehydrated. But golly, I'd sure like to see you give it a go! You'd be a YouTube star for sure! (And where is Write Knight? He knows more than me on this topic, and could have some excellent insight here [something tells me the armor he wears isn't 60lbs]).

I might mention that Medieval Europe was a cradle of cruel, impractical horsemanship, and remained so through the renaissance. Federico Grisone set up a riding school in Italy, in 1532. To punish a horse, he recommended tying a cat to a pole, and letting it scratch the horse's belly and between it's hind legs. The bits from medieval Europe were torture instruments. They also invented the horseshoe, because their horses' feet were falling apart from being kept in manure-filled stalls--the Roman empire, for the most part, did not shoe their horses, which traveled like demons over those horrible cobble roads. Shoeing became so ingrained in culture, and horses so dependent upon them, that it is still used to this day, even though few horses need them (mine aren't shod, and travel comfortably on gravel roads).

Other cultures and time periods provide better examples of horsemanship for fantasy writing. The Arabs, Mongolians, Chinese, and Greeks, had some good horsemanship in them. They all favored surprisingly small horses.

Oh, and the Scythians! Let's not forget them. They are the root of the Amazon legends. If I recall properly, archaeologists have found Scythian women buried with their war horses, with all the ceremonial relics a man would have. Also, the Scythian women were fabled to have cut off their right breast so they could draw a bow.

I figured it out in a western saddle in less than a minute. Boy when the jewels are being smacked against a hard piece of leather you learn to keep em up. And quick too.

Click to expand...

You have no idea what a good seat is, do you?

Brutal Mustang said:

You have no idea what a good seat is, do you?

Click to expand...

I have never met anyone who had this problem. What kind of saddle do you use, Niv, because it's definitely not "western"...

Liosse de Velishaf said:

I have never met anyone who had this problem. What kind of saddle do you use, Niv, because it's definitely not "western"...

Click to expand...

It was the saddle on my uncles horse the first time I rode. I'm pretty sure I was sitting wrong in it, cause I've never had the problem since, even in the same saddle.

Do wish I could ride more. I've enjoyed it every time.

I'm pretty sure it was a western saddle though.

Just to put it out there though, my longest ride was a couple of miles.