Paskal  | 29 Nov 2019 3:02 a.m. PST |
@ MajorB : Yes in History, there are the first sources who have seen the events and the second sources, those who have spoken to those who have seen the events, historians will tell you that the rest is worthless … But I think that the first sources and second sources are valid only if we have many and dice then they will be different, so even there I do not trust, more like it comes from human beings, I do not do not think so much …
So what you say is also your opinion.
In any case, as there were no regulations, it was impossible to know the truth … And if there had been one, everyone knows that the theoretical numbers are never respected … All is speculation but at least it's distracting to discuss it. @ Warspite1: What would confirm what I wrote last, the longbowmen were less numerous than the billmen? |
| GamesPoet | 30 Nov 2019 6:19 a.m. PST |
@ Warspite1: What would confirm what I wrote last, the longbowmen were less numerous than the billmen? @ Paskal … What proof do you have or what brings you to your conclusion regarding numbers of archers vs. billmen? |
| Warspite1 | 30 Nov 2019 4:26 p.m. PST |
@GamesPoet I think Paskal has formed an opinion and just wants confirmation of that opinion. I have outlined the few facts or little evidence that we have and he keeps coming back to a spurious set of figures of uncertain source. B |
| Warspite1 | 30 Nov 2019 4:27 p.m. PST |
@Paskal I have given you what we know. Barry |
| Paskal | 01 Dec 2019 3:07 a.m. PST |
@ Warspite1: Thank you for all your information, but in fact, we do not know and it will always be so … Me I went from 68% of longbowmen to 20%/30%, it is a progress, no? LOL. |
| GamesPoet | 01 Dec 2019 5:17 p.m. PST |
How was such progress arrived at? Going from your "trust" of Ian Heath to your most recent figures posted here, that's quite the flip and stretch in your statistics, even if it is only an opinion. ; ) |
| Paskal | 02 Dec 2019 2:22 a.m. PST |
GamesPoet : Yes, but I believe that without having said it, Ian Heath spoke of an ideal English army for a campaign in France as in 1475. On the other hand, I like Ian Heath's books too much to deny him. |
| GamesPoet | 02 Dec 2019 10:35 a.m. PST |
That doesn't answer the question, nor was my previous question answered, and avoidance can reduce credibility while making for a less than constructive conversation. |
| Paskal | 03 Dec 2019 4:20 a.m. PST |
@ GamesPoet : It happened by simply informing me elsewhere, but it is out of the question to deny Ian Heath. And I think that the idea that an army of the WOTR is of a different constitution in % of types of troops than those that would have been raised for a war on the continent is well seen. |
| GamesPoet | 03 Dec 2019 8:11 a.m. PST |
Ok, and where was elsewhere? It seems like where ever that was, you've switched your opinion again, if I understand what you're attempting to explain. |
| Paskal | 03 Dec 2019 11:34 p.m. PST |
@ GamesPoet : I have not changed my mind yet and I think that the % of types of troops donated by Ian Heath were perhaps for an army on the continent … |
| GamesPoet | 04 Dec 2019 5:51 p.m. PST |
Ok, then we're back around to my original question regarding your numbers for WotRs … @ Warspite1: What would confirm what I wrote last, the longbowmen were less numerous than the billmen?
@ Paskal … What proof do you have or what brings you to your conclusion regarding numbers of archers vs. billmen?
|
| Paskal | 05 Dec 2019 1:08 a.m. PST |
@ GamesPoet : No evidence, but in any case all that has been said about this topic is only speculation, and the troop fighters of the time did not themselves know exactly what were the exact numbers of their armies, these numbers being obviously always very fluctuating. Everyone gets their ideas and I think that a WOTR army has less longbowmen than an English army in a foreign war, that's all and it's like that. |
| dapeters | 09 Dec 2019 10:55 a.m. PST |
Why would you think that? England is where they were "grown" so to speak, and while I don't think they were as easy to come by as MajorB, I am content with the 50% of an army being LBs. |
| Paskal | 11 Dec 2019 12:52 a.m. PST |
@dapeters : I think that 30% of an army is LB seems more cautious. |
| Warspite1 | 11 Dec 2019 3:44 p.m. PST |
Paskal said: "No evidence" Warspite repeats:
The Walter Strickland indenture (shows a detailed 50/50)
The Bridport Muster Roll, the Ewelme Muster roll
Odd references such as Warwick reported in London with 200 MAA and 400 mounted longbow
Tudor writers suggesting 50/50. Later figures for Henry VIII showing 60% bill and 40% bow. All this has been quoted by me before and is hardly "no evidence". [close to head butting my keyboard at this point] Barry |
| Warspite1 | 11 Dec 2019 3:47 p.m. PST |
@dapeters: My Bills Bows and Bloodshed army list is pitched around 50% LB with a wobble factor of about 10% each way to account for regional differences or personal taste. Barry |
| dapeters | 12 Dec 2019 9:51 a.m. PST |
Sounds right to me. When I said that they were not as easy to come by, I meant replacements. |
| GamesPoet | 12 Dec 2019 5:46 p.m. PST |
Warspite is providing evidence, Paskal seems to have yet provided evidence for the lesser numbers. Additionally, it seems to make sense that the numbers could vary from one Retinue to another. |
| Paskal | 13 Dec 2019 2:14 a.m. PST |
@ Warspite1: LOL, avoid hitting your computer which has nothing to do with it … If there were 50% longbowmen, like that at least, we are certain that they were 30% …LOL |
| Paskal | 31 Oct 2020 7:59 a.m. PST |
Oh dear !: Damn! Damn ! Damn it! The WOTR "specialist" of this forum has not yet told us what is in general the% of retinue troops in the purely English troops of a WOTR army? ;-) |
looks at some new terrain products, which use space age technology!