The Hunga Munga/Kpinga/Mambele follows one of my absolute favourite design philosophies: If you keep adding blades and spikes to something, eventually you will reach a point where it is physically impossible NOT to stab someone.
My take on the list: 10: Self Bow 9: Crossbow 8: Sling 7: Throwing Ax 6: Spear/Javelin 5: Staff Sling 4: Dart/Plumbata 3: Arbalest Crossbow 2: Longbow 1: Composite Recurve Bow The self bow is pervasive, but often lacks power, being adopted from hunting weapons rather than designed for war. The basic crossbow is easier to learn and use than a bow, and is a specialized battlefield weapon, but the slow pace of shooting and low comparative power put it lower on the list. The sling is a severely under-rated weapon, though it takes a very skilled user to make it truly dangerous. It's also one of the longest-lasting ranged options, being incredibly ancient while still recommended in military manuals through the medieval period. The throwing ax was so notably effective (specifically the francisca) that it was mentioned by several contemporaneous historians as a frightening weapon that was defining to the style of combat of the Franks. The spear and javelin I rolled into one because there were so many varieties and options that were used in so many contexts that it's difficult to say if one variety is significantly better than another, and even the though the Romans eventually moved away from the pilum (though I don't know why) they still used javelins and thrown spears until the end of the empire. The staff sling is another under-rated option, being a more powerful variant of the sling that could be scaled up to an artillery piece (the trebuchet) and which was used by the Romans throughout their history but especially in Late Antiquity and into the early medieval period. The dart, specifically the plumbata, gets a higher rating from me than the spear/javelin because it is a more specialized weapon that is specifically recommended in the military manuals as an alternative to the bow for those who lack talent or who are fighting in broken terrain (mountains and forests), and for being smaller and more portable, allowing for more to be carried by each soldier. The arbalest variant of the crossbow gets a high placement due to its sheer power. It was best in relatively static engagements where you could find or prepare cover, being even slower to reload than a more basic crossbow, but if you put a guy with one of those on a battlement he'd be among the most dangerous men on the field (IIRC an arbalest loosed from a battlement did for Richard of England, among many other famous casualties). The longbow gets my number 2 slot because, while very effective, it was a regionally specific weapon system that only had a few centuries of limelight. Its main competitor is the composite recurve bow, which has similar performance using a superior mechanical design which was far more broadly distributed and has been linked to the success of militaries from the Huns to the Romans to the Turks to the Mongols and more. Being both more widely used and linked to many of the greatest military success stories in history, the composite recurve bow has to get my nomination for the number 1 spot.
great list!. im dont know a lot about long range weaponry (aside from D&D) so i need to ask about something: does a difference between light and heavy crossbow exist? or is it just something role playing games made up?
@@magistermagus1211 There are a wide variety of crossbows, from basic ones to ones with composite recurve bowstaves, to arbalests with steel bow staves, and draw weights that vary wildly to the point where some can be cocked by hand, others require a tool, and some require a full-on rope-and-pulley crank system. There isn't really a clean light or heavy distinction.
@@matthewneuendorf5763 thank you. i think the light ones are meant to be the basic ones that can be cocked in hand and the heavy ones are meant to be the composite, hard to reload kind.
The most effective throwing weapon is a latin (south america) mother/grandmother shoe/chancla, a simple yet effective projectile able to dodge obstacles mid-flight and hit you either in-between your eyes or in the back of your head. Never misses a shoot.
Ejem, hispanic. Every country from Mexico to the south has that weapon knowledge as it appears to be (And if Brazil has it too then every country from Iberic America).
Skirmishing javelins: Used by countless cultures for thousands of years. Composite/"horse" bows: Conquered and killed people in ways never before imagined. Atlatl: One of the largest technological leaps in ranged weapon technology. Staff slings: A powerful tool that could launch much heavier projectiles further than the common sling (which is in its self already underrated). All of these weapons are well proven in their effectiveness, yet axes, knives, sticks and repeating crossbows (that rely on potent venom/poison as their lethal factor) are on the list while the above mentioned weapons are not. How did this happen? I was honestly expecting the zulu "poison spit" to appear on this list at some point. I think you can do better than this Metatron. I still love your videos though.
If his top ten was mostly based on historic popularity, then a bunch of the, underrated weapons you mentioned, then makes sense :( However, he should have put crossbows and bows in the same spots. I mean Crossbows, and talk about the chinese automatic, then Bow and mention the long bow and composite.
@@draconisthewyvern3664 Good point. But didnt breechloaders really prove their effectivenes until well after the start of the modern period? All the famous ones i can think of are from the 1800s and beyond ie the sharps, martini henry, remington 1867, chassepot and so on.
@@McAppleWar there are early 15th century breech loading hand cannons on display in a stockholm musuem from 15th to 16th , there is a three shot breech loading cannon from 1540-1543 we also have examples of breech loading weapons dating to the 14th century and Henry VIII had a breech loading hunting rifle in the 16th century. Philip V in 1715 also had a personal breech loading rifle. Che Dian Chong a breech loading flintlock, 16th century. there was a wheellock breech loading rifle from 1625 featured on forgotten weapons youtube channel that’s all from assuming your cut off point for modern is the 1800s.
-#1 composite recurve bow (scythian, hun, mongol, turkish etc.). -Also capable of heavy draw weight, longer draw with thumb draw, not as long / cumbersome, so it can effectively used for horse archers. -oldest projectile launcher was the spear-thrower (like the atlatl) a very effective ranged weapon, which you have missed in your list.
@@nottoday3817 spear is shitty ranged weapon - and atlatl (spear thrower) don't use spears as ammunition, but javelins (or darts) - whose are shitty close combat weapon, but are pretty good ranged weapon.
@@jonajo9757 most likely northern Italien yew. There are recounts of drawweights being over 150 lbs during Chinggis' time. The bow itself is compact enough to be wielded on horseback, yet powerful enough to pierce the armour of its time! Plus because of the construction the bow accelerates over two axes, which launches the arrows faster compared to an ordinary self bow of the same draw weight.
The compound bow was used longer than any other bow in European warfare. The Polish hussars (not to be confused with the winged hussars) defeated the Swedes and German black riders with compound bows, lances and sabres.
@@kingsarues1586 the composite bow changed in its desing and evolved just like self bows, so all the composite bows cannot be put in one category if other type bows are separated. But if we put just composite bow vs self bow, then self bow has been used longer. Comparing all types of composite bows used in europe against single desing of other bow like elb, then it is not a fair comparison. But if compared single desing of composite bow to single desing of self bows, then it is more fair. For examble witch was in use for longer elb or magyar composite bow.
@@historygeek2437 they are well documented in warfare though, Aztecs for example that showered arrows onto the Spaniards. I'm not quite sure it's fair to say it wasn't one of the most dangerous tools of it's era pre modern, since everything advances and I'm pretty sure it's more effective than a pure throwing weapon.
The #3 repeating crossbow was a niche weapon because it saw very limited use on the battlefield for very specific situations. The ancient Chinese preferred the regular more powerful crossbows and bows, both of which were also used from the Warring States era all the way to the Qing era/1800s. For example, the most common/median draw weight for a Han Dynasty era crossbow was supposed to be ~379lbs, and a few elites could supposedly draw up to 750lbs with the laid down leg press method. Above that, mechanical aides such as winches had to be used and were for field artillery. #1 should be "the bow" in general, because other types of bows such as composite recurve bows, laminated bows, etc were also widely used and can achieve similar heavy draw weights to the English [Welsh] longbow.
I myself im Cherokee Native American And I can tell you with 100% certainty, that our tomahawks were made not only to be used in melee combat, but to be used as ranged weapons as well.
@Toxic Anonymity So a whole country, France, is named after the tribal weapon [ the throwing axe ] their ancestors used. Another people named after their tribal weapon were the Saxons. The Seaxe was essentially a giant knife.
@Not Today, @ Toxic Anonymity Don't forget training. If you want to be able to reliably use a technique in combat, you have to practice it hundreds or thousands of times. If every practice risks an expensive and hard to replace item, practice isn't feasible. If practice isn't done, then the technique isn't feasible as a core component of a combat style.
Obvious: the repeating crossbow is good because rate of fire. Less obvious: rate of fire was more important than power of the shot in China because they often had to fight mounted nomads. Missing moving targets happened, so you wanted another shot.
Yea I dont know why he didnt just say xbows as an overall thing and bows as an overall thing becouse if he would list all the difrent kind of bows and xbows that would be the only thing on the list
True Asiatic composite bows were both "easier to use" and more powerful than the longbow which largely used brute strength (with training still devastating)
TBH I was kinda expecting this list to be, in now particular order: -Sling -Some sort of javelin or other throwing spear -At least one crossbow -3+ different types of bows
The long bow was not as effective as the Turkish composite/recurve bow, which has the record for distance and was noted for its accuracy. Also, I would have to disagree with placing the plumbata ahead of the sling. The sling was used for a much longer period of time and one must also include the sling staff. The Baloric slingers (for instance) were infamous for their skills and the sling is still used today. The sling kills at a much longer distance, with great accuracy and with a tremendous force, as opposed to the plumbata whose use is limited.
The funny thing about that was the Turkish bow was really good, but Turkish archers used ~30 g arrows for war because they didn't want to give up arrow speed, which makes it rather accurate but hobbles the efficiency (so we're looking at 240+ fps arrow speeds but only mid 60s for % efficiency, versus around 200 fps but with similar efficiency for the longbow). Just looking at tests I've seen, I'd say that the Turkish weapon system (i.e. Turkish bow and Turkish arrow combination) would be better for accuracy, horseback use, and about the same for getting through soft armor, whereas the longbow's heavier arrows are going to be superior against tougher armor, given their lower likelihood of breaking on impact. If they both used heavy arrows, I think that the Turkish bow would edge out the win in terms of performance, although the longbow is less expensive, more durable, and more forgiving in the shot (as in, potential accuracy is better with the Turkish bow due to arrow speed, but once you start to get fatigued you get minor mistakes in form that such a short bow is not forgiving of; it's for this reason that Olympic archers favor longer bows, despite the sacrificing some arrow speed for that). If you want the objectively best historical archery setup for getting through armor, Manchu bows beat everything else by a considerable margin. They had short range compared to both longbows and Turkish bows, but you just can't beat shooting half inch diameter, 120 g arrows reinforced with rayskin and a steel shank to prevent breakage from a monster of a bow with 36" draw length and a draw force curve more aggressive than anything short of a compound bow. Of course, those weren't around until the 17th Century or so, after the Ottomans and English had both pretty much shifted to firearms.
Yeah but they're also the most inaccurate weapon ever made. I've watched rebels, imperials and bounty hunters unload 20 rounds from 10 feet away and never manage to land a single shot.
I think pilum could be replaced by javelins in general, i know the pilum is a more specialized version, but javelins in general were quite popular and effective.
I am a bit surprised that horse archery did not get mention. Considering how important and effective it was for many cultures. For example with Parthians, Mongols and Japanese Samurai. Horse archery often played a vital role. Other thing I miss a mention of is the Atlatl. Sure the Atlatl is a tool to assist in throw a spear further. But hay the sling is mention as it is a tool to assist in throwing a rock further. ;) And throwing sticks could have been categorized a bit more I think. Since the most well know kind is also in that camp. Being the Boomerang and is heavier cousin the Kylie. And throwing sticks that try to take advantage of aerodynamic properties have been found on other cultures as well. I also think the blowgun should be mentioned. Not the greatest of warfare weapons and more of a hunting tool. But can be deadly. But then again I am not a big fan of top 10 lists. I know they tend to get clicks, but they always seem so shallow. Always missing out a lot of detail. Always forgetting to mention interesting aspects. And almost never goes in what goes in to such a ranking. Why is a throwing stick at 10 and the longbow at 1 for example? I mean I guess is because the longbow is simply a more effective and deadly weapon most of the kind. But some could argue that the throwing stick should be at position 1 as it has had the greatest impact being likely the first designed throwing weapon. And I do not say this to say the listing order is wrong. Just to illustrate that without and proper metric for what make a weapon great, how shall we rank them?
IIRC, one of Shaka's military reforms that led to the Zulu dominance in Africa during his reign was switching from a throwing spear to a shorter, broader, stabbing spear as their primary weapon. They would throw the longer spear initially and then quickly close the distance into melee combat using the shorter one.
Yep. Shaka's military reforms included the use of larger shields, broad bladed short-spears and the adoption of strict regimental systems. He defeated larger forces by outmaneuvering them, pinning them down with throwing spears, and then overrunning them. At the height of its power, the Zulu Empire they could essentially just steamroll anyone. After Shaka's assassination these tactics became less effective with the introduction of firearms. The Zulu were relatively slow in their adoption of firearms compared to many other indigenous armies. In comparison, the Xhosa kingdom was going head-to-head with the British despite inferior firepower, and the Sotho had developed quite an affinity for cavalry gunners by this time.
@@drsch they didn't hit nearly as hard as longbows or crossbows, but they weee ideal for cavalry and harassing the enemy. I've shot both longbow and composite bow and I very much prefer the latter.
@@edi9892 thats incorrect, longbows are known for their high draw weights, but the reason for that is that they need that high draw weight to be effective. Composite bows are much more efficient bows and they outperforms same draw weight longbows any day. They have been tested many times and the results are that 80 pound manchu bow shoots heavy arrow with more kinetic energy and momentum than 130 pound longbow, and 135 pound turkish bow outperformed 150 pound longbow. Btw composite bows can reash eaven higher draw weights than wooden bows, but they are rare, cus it is unnesessary to be so high. Manchu bow was considered enough for war with 80 pounds of draw weight, but manchu bows up to 240 pounds existed, but they were most likely used only for strenght training, and lighter bows for warfare, cus its more beneficial to be able to shoot accurate and all day long than just few arrows with poor accurace cus of too high draw weight bow
I have some very strong reserves on the idea of keeping a crossbow loaded. Do you have some historical sources on this? As mentioned several times by Tod from Tod's Workshop, the steel quality of the time made the possibility of the crossbow snapping not that impossible. Not to mention that the releasing mechanism was not really something that you could lock into position, meaning an accidental release while carrying it quite possible. And given the drawweight of these beasts...
I'm surprised that you didn't mention the innovative design of the Pilum: The heavy iron tip was held onto the wooden shaft with an iron pin and a wooden dowel. Because the iron pin was set into a slot and the wooden pin would sheer-off upon impact with a shield, this meant that the wooden shaft would be allowed to swing down and catch on the ground or tangle in the shield holders legs. Additionally, once the wooden dowel had sheered and the iron head and shaft were no longer held straight the Pilum couldn't be thrown back or even used as a melee weapon. Quite an obscure but clever design and one more thing that proves the martial genius of the Roman military.
Pole sling @4:30. I've made a few and have become proficiant with them over the years. I used to have a border collie x who was tennis ball obsessed so we volunteered in the city we lived in to chase the Canadian Geese off the local sport fields. I could get a tennis ball to fly about 100 meters using my pole sling. 🙂
I would also include hornbows here- they could've been made as strong as selfbows (longbows), while also being significantly smaller, lighter, and, what is perhaps the most important point, strung at all times (while keeping a selfbow strung even for a few hours could've decreased its strength)
Is there any chance for a colaboration with some Age of Empires TH-camr? There is this man named "Spirit of the law". He mostly talks about statistics, analyses gamemechanics, things with math AND compares the campains with the real history. I always wondered if there is some reason for unit counters in actually history. It would be a dream come true. :-)
i think the Short Bow deserved to be on the list. The ability to be fired from horseback was a large part of the reason that the Mongols were so successful.
I once read that the pelum was designed to be thrown at shields, the idea being that, because they were so huge, they would make the enemy soldier’s shield unwieldy when it stuck inside it, causing the enemy to abandon the shield altogether. I don’t know if it’s true but I found it brilliant.
I saw a documentary once about the Hunga Munga. They theorize about the capacity of the Hunga Munga to use any of those curvy tips as lever when hiting the border of a shield. It would allow the weapon to be deflected towards the enemy, overcoming the shield.
The main feature of the pilum was a long iron part. Pilums were specifically designed to leave opponents with no shield - if you block a standard javelin with your shield, you can chop the wooden part immediately with your sword/axe. With the pilum, you can't really reach the wooden part without exposing yourself or even dropping the shield.
If it can be used for hunting, it can be used as a weapon of war. If it can be used for farming, it can be used as a weapon of war. If it can be used in construction, it can be used as a weapon of war. As history shows, if something can be weaponized, it will be weaponized by someone. On a more serious note, slings were really effective weapons, especially if lead shots are used. Most other thrown weapons (including bows) limit the total energy of a throw to what you can provide by your arm with one swing. But you can swing a sling multiple times to a much more powerful shot (at the cost of you projectile being blunt). Its drawback is that it takes even more training to shoot them accurately than a bow, and that's a pretty serious concern.
I mostly agree with anything BUT. The mongolian composite bow has conquered a pretty big empire and was basically identical to modern bow UNTIL the emerge of compound ones. Agincourt was an incredible episode. You have to consider that to "produce" Agincourt you need: -a soldier trained since young age, able to do that and basically nothing more -a bow made from a very specific wood. Not easy to make, not easy to draw nor to trasport -an enemy that charges you on a rainy day against a steep hill Mongolian Bows are just a better design.
I think an honorable mention to the spear thrower is in need. used in a lot of cultures for thousands of years. The australian aboriginal version known as a Woomera is believed to have been used as a shield as well in close combat while also when used correctly could produce 4 times the force of that of a modern compound bow.
The latchet crossbow used by border reivers and Irish fletched javelins are my favorite ranged weapons. Also goats foot lever crossbows and Welsh longbows. Those are good as well.
Top ranged weapons 1. The gun - Variants of both the Matchlock and the Wheellock mechanisms, including those on the tanegashima, first appear towards the end of the medieval era, so it does fit into the time period. 2. To be patriotic I've got to put The Boomerang in here, but it is also the most enduring ranged weapon, even outlasting the long bow. 3. Long Bow 4. The Repeating Crossbow 5. For versatility, it's hard to overlook the chakram. 6. The Hunga Munga 7. I know that it's not strictly a weapon per say, but the Woomera really needs some representation. Besides, it serves the same function as a sling. 8. Bolas 9. Tomohawk 10. Throwing Knife - for being the most uninspired.
The compound bow and woomera should've made the list. The compound bow allowed for horse archers to flourish in the old world and was still a serviceable bow when dismounted. The woomera amplified the lethality of javelins as it allowed the user to throw them with more range and velocity than the human body could allow.
I'd argue that the Mongol composite bow deserves at least a mention in this list. A draw strength comparable to the longbows used at Agincourt, ideally treated with fish glue to prevent any decomposition to the animal matter used in it's construction, and designed to be used from horseback as opposed to on foot
I have a style suggestion for future videos. The scope is so broad that choosing weapon families makes more sense than choosing specific weapons. Choosing the pilum doesn't make sense as it excludes other effective throwing spears. The longbow excludes weapons like Yumi or Mongolian bows. I'd prefer to see general families of weapons and then stand out examples. You did this with throwing axes (francesca). I'd rather see javelin (pilum) and bow (english longbow) as well.
*Spoiler warning for number 1* As a staunch fan of the British longbow(men) I must say the one thing that really surprised me in this list is that the number one spot went to longbows specifically. As much as I love the longbow, I wouldn't consider it more effective than say, the recurve bows used by the Mongols or the Japanese Yumi (nor the other way around mind you). I honestly expected number one to go to warbows in general with specific mentions to any 2-3 particularly effective examples. Including, but not limited to, the British longbow.
pre-watch: This is going to be odd. Are there 10 truly effective pre-modern ranged weapons? There's the longbow, the central asian composite bow, the crossbow, the sling, the javelin, the scorpion, the torsion catapult, and the trebuchet. That's eight. Other than weird throwing weapons what' am I missing? I guess depending on where he draws the line between renaissance and early modern the cannon and arquebus cross into properly effective weapons at some point. post-watch: Okay, obviously we're only looking at weapons for individual soldiers here. You're missing the central asian composite bow, which definitely should have made the list either directly above or below the chu-ko-nu or however they want us to transliterate it this week. The Mediterranean composite bow could go right below it. Those along with the chariot defined warfare for a very long time. There are also somethings here that I don't think belong on a list of effective ranged weapons. When you throw a knife at a target if you get the rate of spin wrong for the distance it just bounces off. With a great deal of practice this can be overcome in static target throwing, but considering how little a throwing knife would do to someone with a shield I can't imagine it's worth the time. I haven't thrown axes, but they should have the same problem. In a fight distances will be changing. I expect half of hits may as well be with throwing sticks. The very asymmetrical throwing sticks also have this problem: if the light end hits it absorbs the force in bending. Fine for killing an animal that isn't aware of you, not fine for a person that is aware and hostile. The Hunga-Munga is just massively inconvenient to carry. You can carry small axes in loops on a belt. You can carry a bunch of knives in scabbards. Even javelins you should be able to fit a couple in your off-hand even also holding a vertical center grip shield and the Romans supposedly put clips on their horizontal center grip shields for pila or plumbata. How, though, are you planning to carry more than one hunga-munga? Even just one is an inconvenient spiky thing in your hand you have to worry about in contrast to say a spear you can rest on your shoulder on the march. I could grudgingly put the throwing axe at the bottom of the list because an axe handle is still a stout piece of wood and even a fraction of axes thrown hitting shields blade first might genuinely inconvenience the enemy and it's not impossible to carry more than one not in hand. If the other non-spear throwing things make the list the list is too long. Plumbata I forgot about in my speculative list. I've never handled or seen tests of them but I wouldn't rate them high on looks. They don't have the long shield penetrating shank of a pilum or a narrow armor piercing point. They look like a downgrade against shields and no better than (and possibly even slightly worse than) just a blunt lead tipped dart against helmets if you throw them in high arcs. Maybe useful if by their adoption the Romans are mostly fighting unarmored barbarians, but not what I'd want to throw at a peer opponent. Could be better than a throwing axe since at least they fly towards the enemy point first rather than spinning. I think I'd rate European crossbows above the longbow on the grounds that it does not take a lifetime of training to get a useful crossbowman. Longbows rate above central asian composite bows because of the lack of effect of Turkish archery at the Battle of Dorylaeum compared to the effectiveness of longbows at Crecy against more advanced armor. Being able to either side from horseback is not worth the lower armor penetration in my view as to take advantage of it you have to put in as much riding practice as longbows require strength training. I'm inclined to put composite bows above the Cho-Ko-Nu. You could deliver poison with any bow and the range and armor penetration of unfletched bolts fired from a crossbow with a low mechanical advantage spanning lever does not impress. I think the power is down in the vicinity of the partial draws Lars Anderson used for his early speed shooting demonstrations, which achieve similar rates of "fire" without the heavy magazine and with better accuracy. Might even fall below the Pilum. Slings are great, but training needed penalizes them while only needing one hand brings up the pilum and other javelins. You can use a sling with a small strapped forearm shield that wouldn't work so well with a bow, but you can use a javelin with any shield. Also, they can't be used in anything remotely like a tight formation. I think staff slings are a bit better on needing open space to swing and less minimum training to get the projectile going vaguely towards the enemy on a consistent basis and effective range. Less convenient to carry, but not unacceptable for a battlefield weapon. 1: European Crossbow 2: Longbow 3: Composite Bow 4: Pilum 5: Spear 6: Sling 7: Chu-ko-nu 8: plumbata 9: throwing axe 10: now leaving weapons I'd call effective
Why wasn’t the chakram on this list? It has a way higher chance of cutting than a throwing knife and it’s frisbee shape makes it more accurate and easier to throw
A few more that deserve a place on the list: Asian composite bow, perhaps most commonly associated with the Huns and Mongols, but used to good effect across the Eurasian Steppe and into China, Japan, and Korea. The javalin. Could be combined with Pilum as it's a javalin, or not because the Pilum probably was the most effective Javalin design. The dart. Should probably be combined with Plubum which is the Roman implementation, but darts were used elsewhere - most notably Ireland.
Thanks for sharing great video and it was really interesting information. I´m new to your channel and i have hit your red button and rang the bell for you.
Its a yard dart, yeah they can kill and have good range and was a kid toy back in the seventies, We had a set of 4 if i remember right and they looked just like the picture you showed except the fletching was pastic, the head was steel, and weighted. We used them in a game like horse shoes.
Let's be honest, if we really are going to give multiple subdivision a place on a top ten list of pre-gunpowder weapons, the list will be 10 different bows and nothing else.
I enjoyed this video. I knew what number one would be the second I clicked, but I don't care about that. I like watching your videos in general as well :y
Really, I wouldn’t have thought that someone so into weapons would have the crossbow as their favorite. I def like the crossbow, just in ingenuity and design it’s amazingly cool, I just always liked how you have to work and practice to be worth anything with a longbow, or any bow for that matter, crossbows I’m sure take some skill, but I imagine there were a lot more ransoms hired as crossbow men than your average archer, in any point in history really
Spears had various designs. The Celtic peoples carried several spears including ones designed to be thrown with the feet, sometimes from the platform of a moving chariot.
I'd go for a top 3 of 1. Composite bow, 2. Sling, & 3. Javelin. 1. because I'm biased as an archer, but for efectiveness & rate of "fire", 2. For being able to deliver a hammer/mace blow at range from a v simple to make weapon & 3. For it's ease to make & use & its great penetration of shields & armour. But that's just my opinion.
Top3: A sling, it's easy to maintain & to get the projectiles. Logistics matter! The crossbow, a decent chance to hit the target seems like a good idea to me. 3rd pick: a bow with a draw weight I can manage. Rate of fire vs. hit probability seems like a workable compromise.
I'm pretty confused by the lack of composite bows on this list. They were arguably more effective than any of the items on this list. The Egyptians used them in ancient times to dominate, the Parthians gave the Romans all kinds of trouble, Byzantium used them to hold their lands for centuries, the Huns & Cumans made good use of them and last but not least some might say the Mongols were slightly successful using them :D
Number one is long bow? And the other types of bow? The longbow is one of the most rough and brutal type of primitive bows... a composite recurve bow is superior next to the longbow. It handle better (due to the lack of vibration) and it has a better performance (it shoot as hard as a longbow in lower pountage). The only downside next to the longbow, it's complicated to manufacture.
Atlatl (called a woomera by Australian aborigines) adds extra leverage but is not really a weapon unto itself. But it seems worth including along with the sling-staff.
I'd say the throwing stick probably predates even the stone age. The concept of "That guy wants to take something from me, I think I'll hit him in the head with this stick/rock" was likely know to even the apes.
Sorry to bother you with this! I do not want to offent anyone! I interpreted that the BOW as a concept that you find perfect for ranged warfare, and among all your choice would be the longbow. But.... The recurve bow was way more efficent in many ways. The poundage range is close or equal I think (this is why these to types got used at the very end of their age). The manufacturing is way off balance for the composite recurve bows. I know the fact that england is more moist and that is why they do not even think about glued material compositions. The longbow is bigger with longer draw length. This is a trade off, usability vs power. Even as a Hungarian I do not think that we got the perfect bow. But We got bettar than the longbow, and the mongols are better than ours. I hope that no one got offended. If I was wrong PLEASE correct me! I may got some things wrong, or you got some information that I have never heard of.
I dunno about specifying longbow rather than bows in general, but I guess it makes sense since the longbow tends to be the most effective in all climates and scenarios, except horseback or cramped quarters I suppose.
One other advantage of the crossbow over the bow is that it requires a lot less training : to use a strong war bow you need to train for years to build up your tecnique and muscles, while the crossbow is much simpler to use and requires no muscles at all.
I would like to counter that. A fundamental principle of physics: energy is neither created, nor destroyed. This means you cannot just create energy to move a projectile out of thin air. A gunpowder weapon uses the energy from atoms engaged in chamical reactions. A bow 'stores' the energy used to draw it in the wood. A crosbow is no different from a bow in this regard. You would still need to use a massive ammount of force to manually draw back a crossbow. The advantage lies in the tricks you can use. Because the chord is locked in place at the end, crossbows could be reloaded by shoving them into the ground, holding it still with your feet and pulling the string/chord with both hands and the back muscles (or even the feet as well), whereas a bow would use one hand to draw and the other to keep it in place.
Quick question: since pilum don't seem to have all that much range, what would be the advantage of using those in place of let's say a long spear with the same tip attached? I can see how the spear would be unwieldy compared to them due to the massive length and the distribution of weight differences, but I would think having rows of them would tactically offset that. They just look quite heavy, especially when compared to the lances also used.
BS, everyone know that Gimli son of Glóin is the deadliest throwing weapon.
You're gonna have to toss me!
It's a tossing weapon
Can't be, nobody tosses a dwarf!
I thought Wolverine was!
@Patrick Brennan Legolas:" l know what you did at Helms Deep. What do you think my pointy ears are for?"
The fact that spears have been used since prehistoric times means that “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it”.
I say that in my intro when I get a new class for wushu spear.
"Every culture figured out 'long stick, pointy end, good weapon.' "
Top 10 most effective ranged weapons
1. The pommel
Unless it's peened to the tang. Then it's useless.
@@trapperscout2046 nah mate just chuck the whole sword at them
Pommel first ofcourse
Top ten ways to end your opponent rightly.
Yup
The Hunga Munga/Kpinga/Mambele follows one of my absolute favourite design philosophies: If you keep adding blades and spikes to something, eventually you will reach a point where it is physically impossible NOT to stab someone.
"Moar dakka" before gunpowder was a thing ^^
Tbf the more spikes the harder to throw lol
My take on the list:
10: Self Bow
9: Crossbow
8: Sling
7: Throwing Ax
6: Spear/Javelin
5: Staff Sling
4: Dart/Plumbata
3: Arbalest Crossbow
2: Longbow
1: Composite Recurve Bow
The self bow is pervasive, but often lacks power, being adopted from hunting weapons rather than designed for war.
The basic crossbow is easier to learn and use than a bow, and is a specialized battlefield weapon, but the slow pace of shooting and low comparative power put it lower on the list.
The sling is a severely under-rated weapon, though it takes a very skilled user to make it truly dangerous. It's also one of the longest-lasting ranged options, being incredibly ancient while still recommended in military manuals through the medieval period.
The throwing ax was so notably effective (specifically the francisca) that it was mentioned by several contemporaneous historians as a frightening weapon that was defining to the style of combat of the Franks.
The spear and javelin I rolled into one because there were so many varieties and options that were used in so many contexts that it's difficult to say if one variety is significantly better than another, and even the though the Romans eventually moved away from the pilum (though I don't know why) they still used javelins and thrown spears until the end of the empire.
The staff sling is another under-rated option, being a more powerful variant of the sling that could be scaled up to an artillery piece (the trebuchet) and which was used by the Romans throughout their history but especially in Late Antiquity and into the early medieval period.
The dart, specifically the plumbata, gets a higher rating from me than the spear/javelin because it is a more specialized weapon that is specifically recommended in the military manuals as an alternative to the bow for those who lack talent or who are fighting in broken terrain (mountains and forests), and for being smaller and more portable, allowing for more to be carried by each soldier.
The arbalest variant of the crossbow gets a high placement due to its sheer power. It was best in relatively static engagements where you could find or prepare cover, being even slower to reload than a more basic crossbow, but if you put a guy with one of those on a battlement he'd be among the most dangerous men on the field (IIRC an arbalest loosed from a battlement did for Richard of England, among many other famous casualties).
The longbow gets my number 2 slot because, while very effective, it was a regionally specific weapon system that only had a few centuries of limelight.
Its main competitor is the composite recurve bow, which has similar performance using a superior mechanical design which was far more broadly distributed and has been linked to the success of militaries from the Huns to the Romans to the Turks to the Mongols and more. Being both more widely used and linked to many of the greatest military success stories in history, the composite recurve bow has to get my nomination for the number 1 spot.
Very interesting comment, thanks
great list!. im dont know a lot about long range weaponry (aside from D&D) so i need to ask about something: does a difference between light and heavy crossbow exist? or is it just something role playing games made up?
@@magistermagus1211 There are a wide variety of crossbows, from basic ones to ones with composite recurve bowstaves, to arbalests with steel bow staves, and draw weights that vary wildly to the point where some can be cocked by hand, others require a tool, and some require a full-on rope-and-pulley crank system. There isn't really a clean light or heavy distinction.
@@matthewneuendorf5763 thank you. i think the light ones are meant to be the basic ones that can be cocked in hand and the heavy ones are meant to be the composite, hard to reload kind.
@abis10 alpha10 thanks, i didnt know that customizable crosbows existed at all (i only knew about the european ones)
The most effective throwing weapon is a latin (south america) mother/grandmother shoe/chancla, a simple yet effective projectile able to dodge obstacles mid-flight and hit you either in-between your eyes or in the back of your head. Never misses a shoot.
Ejem, hispanic. Every country from Mexico to the south has that weapon knowledge as it appears to be (And if Brazil has it too then every country from Iberic America).
@@doomtrooper3184 Those chanclas are OP
@@inakinahuelsantosangel3460 It seems to though (I admit it, I didn't suffered that weapon, but I suffered the whip-like ones).
The traduction would be a flip flop not a shoe
@@yesindeedyourmama2623 *Chanclas*
Skirmishing javelins: Used by countless cultures for thousands of years.
Composite/"horse" bows: Conquered and killed people in ways never before imagined.
Atlatl: One of the largest technological leaps in ranged weapon technology.
Staff slings: A powerful tool that could launch much heavier projectiles further than the common sling (which is in its self already underrated).
All of these weapons are well proven in their effectiveness, yet axes, knives, sticks and repeating crossbows (that rely on potent venom/poison as their lethal factor) are on the list while the above mentioned weapons are not. How did this happen? I was honestly expecting the zulu "poison spit" to appear on this list at some point. I think you can do better than this Metatron. I still love your videos though.
You don't even need to say atlatl you can always say spear thrower and cover the entire range of spear throwers.
If his top ten was mostly based on historic popularity, then a bunch of the, underrated weapons you mentioned, then makes sense :(
However, he should have put crossbows and bows in the same spots. I mean Crossbows, and talk about the chinese automatic, then Bow and mention the long bow and composite.
the best ranged weapon pre-modern is the breech loading rifle, change my mind
@@draconisthewyvern3664 Good point. But didnt breechloaders really prove their effectivenes until well after the start of the modern period? All the famous ones i can think of are from the 1800s and beyond ie the sharps, martini henry, remington 1867, chassepot and so on.
@@McAppleWar there are early 15th century breech loading hand cannons on display in a stockholm musuem from 15th to 16th , there is a three shot breech loading cannon from 1540-1543
we also have examples of breech loading weapons dating to the 14th century and Henry VIII had a breech loading hunting rifle in the 16th century.
Philip V in 1715 also had a personal breech loading rifle.
Che Dian Chong a breech loading flintlock, 16th century.
there was a wheellock breech loading rifle from 1625 featured on forgotten weapons youtube channel
that’s all from assuming your cut off point for modern is the 1800s.
-#1 composite recurve bow (scythian, hun, mongol, turkish etc.). -Also capable of heavy draw weight, longer draw with thumb draw, not as long / cumbersome, so it can effectively used for horse archers.
-oldest projectile launcher was the spear-thrower (like the atlatl) a very effective ranged weapon, which you have missed in your list.
Well, he mentioned spears.
@@nottoday3817
spear is shitty ranged weapon - and atlatl (spear thrower) don't use spears as ammunition, but javelins (or darts) - whose are shitty close combat weapon, but are pretty good ranged weapon.
B-BUT BUH MARY QUEEN LONGBOW MADE OF SUPERIOR ENGLISH YEW AND OVER 200LBS!!! THOSE WONT COMPARE TO THOSE "*light weight"* ASIAN BOWS!!
@@jonajo9757 most likely northern Italien yew. There are recounts of drawweights being over 150 lbs during Chinggis' time. The bow itself is compact enough to be wielded on horseback, yet powerful enough to pierce the armour of its time! Plus because of the construction the bow accelerates over two axes, which launches the arrows faster compared to an ordinary self bow of the same draw weight.
@@HeiniSauerkraut I barely remember this, but didn't outsiders use yew bow staves for taxations from England?
*ANGRY MONGOLIAN THROAT NOISES*
*the composite bow:*
*Am I a joke to you?!*
Aims M1 Grand yeph! Buddy goes "How is this" Cocks M2 Mg.
@Mister Albanian noncence, it's mostly used on horse back, but that doesn't mean that it cannot, or is not good when used on foot.
@Mister Albanian If you can use a bow on horseback, then you can also use it on foot because foot archery is easier than horseback archery.
The compound bow was used longer than any other bow in European warfare. The Polish hussars (not to be confused with the winged hussars) defeated the Swedes and German black riders with compound bows, lances and sabres.
@@kingsarues1586 the composite bow changed in its desing and evolved just like self bows, so all the composite bows cannot be put in one category if other type bows are separated. But if we put just composite bow vs self bow, then self bow has been used longer. Comparing all types of composite bows used in europe against single desing of other bow like elb, then it is not a fair comparison. But if compared single desing of composite bow to single desing of self bows, then it is more fair. For examble witch was in use for longer elb or magyar composite bow.
No atlatl, but lawn darts got a mention? hrmm.
I was hoping to see the atlatl on the list as well.
@@RedmarKerkhof it was apparently extremely accurate and would of dominated the Spanish is they didn’t have plate armour 😂
To be fair he did mention spears, though I definitely think it should feature due the clever use of physics.
The Atlatle is too ancient and was barely used for warfare it was but people stopped using it due to everyone else using slings bows and more
@@historygeek2437 they are well documented in warfare though, Aztecs for example that showered arrows onto the Spaniards. I'm not quite sure it's fair to say it wasn't one of the most dangerous tools of it's era pre modern, since everything advances and I'm pretty sure it's more effective than a pure throwing weapon.
The #3 repeating crossbow was a niche weapon because it saw very limited use on the battlefield for very specific situations. The ancient Chinese preferred the regular more powerful crossbows and bows, both of which were also used from the Warring States era all the way to the Qing era/1800s. For example, the most common/median draw weight for a Han Dynasty era crossbow was supposed to be ~379lbs, and a few elites could supposedly draw up to 750lbs with the laid down leg press method. Above that, mechanical aides such as winches had to be used and were for field artillery. #1 should be "the bow" in general, because other types of bows such as composite recurve bows, laminated bows, etc were also widely used and can achieve similar heavy draw weights to the English [Welsh] longbow.
I myself im Cherokee Native American And I can tell you with 100% certainty, that our tomahawks were made not only to be used in melee combat, but to be used as ranged weapons as well.
@Toxic Anonymity Well, I mean you are throwing your weapon, would you really care if you ruined it?
@Toxic Anonymity So a whole country, France, is named after the tribal weapon [ the throwing axe ] their ancestors used. Another people named after their tribal weapon were the Saxons. The Seaxe was essentially a giant knife.
@Not Today, @ Toxic Anonymity Don't forget training. If you want to be able to reliably use a technique in combat, you have to practice it hundreds or thousands of times. If every practice risks an expensive and hard to replace item, practice isn't feasible. If practice isn't done, then the technique isn't feasible as a core component of a combat style.
Obvious: the repeating crossbow is good because rate of fire.
Less obvious: rate of fire was more important than power of the shot in China because they often had to fight mounted nomads. Missing moving targets happened, so you wanted another shot.
Please keep making videos like this. I can’t get enough of this quality content. You have a real gift for teaching things and making them interesting.
I'm glad to hear thanks!
@@metatronyt would be cool to get a look at the first black powder weapons. Top 10 early firearms.
@@metatronyt top 10 best medieval/early modern European armour?
@@metatronyt the best ranged weapon pre-modern is the breech loading rifle, change my mind
Asiatic bow user here, feeling a little triggered. lol
Yea I dont know why he didnt just say xbows as an overall thing and bows as an overall thing becouse if he would list all the difrent kind of bows and xbows that would be the only thing on the list
Maybe a video explaining only the major the different kinds of bows in the world. After all the bow is as old as throwing sticks.
Asiatic bow user feeling triggered. That has a ring to it. 😉😉
True Asiatic composite bows were both "easier to use" and more powerful than the longbow which largely used brute strength (with training still devastating)
I concur there should be equal rights for all bows and their users
TBH I was kinda expecting this list to be, in now particular order:
-Sling
-Some sort of javelin or other throwing spear
-At least one crossbow
-3+ different types of bows
I loved the AoE2 mention :D It led me to love history as mutch as I do
The long bow was not as effective as the Turkish composite/recurve bow, which has the record for distance and was noted for its accuracy. Also, I would have to disagree with placing the plumbata ahead of the sling. The sling was used for a much longer period of time and one must also include the sling staff. The Baloric slingers (for instance) were infamous for their skills and the sling is still used today. The sling kills at a much longer distance, with great accuracy and with a tremendous force, as opposed to the plumbata whose use is limited.
The funny thing about that was the Turkish bow was really good, but Turkish archers used ~30 g arrows for war because they didn't want to give up arrow speed, which makes it rather accurate but hobbles the efficiency (so we're looking at 240+ fps arrow speeds but only mid 60s for % efficiency, versus around 200 fps but with similar efficiency for the longbow). Just looking at tests I've seen, I'd say that the Turkish weapon system (i.e. Turkish bow and Turkish arrow combination) would be better for accuracy, horseback use, and about the same for getting through soft armor, whereas the longbow's heavier arrows are going to be superior against tougher armor, given their lower likelihood of breaking on impact. If they both used heavy arrows, I think that the Turkish bow would edge out the win in terms of performance, although the longbow is less expensive, more durable, and more forgiving in the shot (as in, potential accuracy is better with the Turkish bow due to arrow speed, but once you start to get fatigued you get minor mistakes in form that such a short bow is not forgiving of; it's for this reason that Olympic archers favor longer bows, despite the sacrificing some arrow speed for that).
If you want the objectively best historical archery setup for getting through armor, Manchu bows beat everything else by a considerable margin. They had short range compared to both longbows and Turkish bows, but you just can't beat shooting half inch diameter, 120 g arrows reinforced with rayskin and a steel shank to prevent breakage from a monster of a bow with 36" draw length and a draw force curve more aggressive than anything short of a compound bow. Of course, those weren't around until the 17th Century or so, after the Ottomans and English had both pretty much shifted to firearms.
Just use a blaster. They were used long long time ago, right?
in a galaxy far away
How uncivilized
@@Borissh89 An elegant weapon for more civilized times, eh? Well, guess what? Times have changed!
I hear blasters are clumsy and random.
Yeah but they're also the most inaccurate weapon ever made. I've watched rebels, imperials and bounty hunters unload 20 rounds from 10 feet away and never manage to land a single shot.
I think pilum could be replaced by javelins in general, i know the pilum is a more specialized version, but javelins in general were quite popular and effective.
I am a bit surprised that horse archery did not get mention. Considering how important and effective it was for many cultures. For example with Parthians, Mongols and Japanese Samurai. Horse archery often played a vital role.
Other thing I miss a mention of is the Atlatl. Sure the Atlatl is a tool to assist in throw a spear further. But hay the sling is mention as it is a tool to assist in throwing a rock further. ;)
And throwing sticks could have been categorized a bit more I think. Since the most well know kind is also in that camp. Being the Boomerang and is heavier cousin the Kylie. And throwing sticks that try to take advantage of aerodynamic properties have been found on other cultures as well.
I also think the blowgun should be mentioned. Not the greatest of warfare weapons and more of a hunting tool. But can be deadly.
But then again I am not a big fan of top 10 lists. I know they tend to get clicks, but they always seem so shallow. Always missing out a lot of detail. Always forgetting to mention interesting aspects. And almost never goes in what goes in to such a ranking. Why is a throwing stick at 10 and the longbow at 1 for example? I mean I guess is because the longbow is simply a more effective and deadly weapon most of the kind. But some could argue that the throwing stick should be at position 1 as it has had the greatest impact being likely the first designed throwing weapon. And I do not say this to say the listing order is wrong. Just to illustrate that without and proper metric for what make a weapon great, how shall we rank them?
"if I can chop wood, I can chop his arm" 😂 legendary.
IIRC, one of Shaka's military reforms that led to the Zulu dominance in Africa during his reign was switching from a throwing spear to a shorter, broader, stabbing spear as their primary weapon. They would throw the longer spear initially and then quickly close the distance into melee combat using the shorter one.
Yep. Shaka's military reforms included the use of larger shields, broad bladed short-spears and the adoption of strict regimental systems. He defeated larger forces by outmaneuvering them, pinning them down with throwing spears, and then overrunning them. At the height of its power, the Zulu Empire they could essentially just steamroll anyone.
After Shaka's assassination these tactics became less effective with the introduction of firearms. The Zulu were relatively slow in their adoption of firearms compared to many other indigenous armies. In comparison, the Xhosa kingdom was going head-to-head with the British despite inferior firepower, and the Sotho had developed quite an affinity for cavalry gunners by this time.
*Incoherent Mongolian Short Bow Screaming*
I know, right? Composite bows should probably be number 1 considering their extended use throughout history and, you know, the Mongols?
@@drsch they didn't hit nearly as hard as longbows or crossbows, but they weee ideal for cavalry and harassing the enemy. I've shot both longbow and composite bow and I very much prefer the latter.
It's not incoherent screaming so much as it is melodic throat singing
@@drsch composite recurve bows simply outperformed longbows in every way.
@@edi9892 thats incorrect, longbows are known for their high draw weights, but the reason for that is that they need that high draw weight to be effective. Composite bows are much more efficient bows and they outperforms same draw weight longbows any day. They have been tested many times and the results are that 80 pound manchu bow shoots heavy arrow with more kinetic energy and momentum than 130 pound longbow, and 135 pound turkish bow outperformed 150 pound longbow. Btw composite bows can reash eaven higher draw weights than wooden bows, but they are rare, cus it is unnesessary to be so high. Manchu bow was considered enough for war with 80 pounds of draw weight, but manchu bows up to 240 pounds existed, but they were most likely used only for strenght training, and lighter bows for warfare, cus its more beneficial to be able to shoot accurate and all day long than just few arrows with poor accurace cus of too high draw weight bow
The Hunga Munga look like flying Chinese word reading 'Your dead'
I have some very strong reserves on the idea of keeping a crossbow loaded. Do you have some historical sources on this? As mentioned several times by Tod from Tod's Workshop, the steel quality of the time made the possibility of the crossbow snapping not that impossible. Not to mention that the releasing mechanism was not really something that you could lock into position, meaning an accidental release while carrying it quite possible. And given the drawweight of these beasts...
This epic editing is so over the top but I love it!
Great video, absolutely love it.I'm actually from Kenya land of the Maasai with the rungu.
6:35 german laugh intensifying...
What I wanna see next
- top 10 best 17th ceuntry swords
-top 10 best gunpowder weapons
top ten gunpower weapons : ar15 guys and ak guys *heavy breathing*
A look at the first black powder weapons would be interesting.
@@overlorddante The first black powder weapon was the fire lance. Done.
@@sethmadlad5573 I can never remember, does modern ammunition still use gunpowder? Or do they use newer forms of explosive propellant?
Niall Ireland they use nitrocellulose based smokeless powders. No more charcoal and saltpeter.
i feel like the hunga munga wouldn't really look out of place at the end of a pole, kinda looks like a funky halberd.
I like the Unlimited Blade Works background. On that vein, I consider "every magical sword ever" to be a rather effective ranged weapon.
I'm surprised that you didn't mention the innovative design of the Pilum: The heavy iron tip was held onto the wooden shaft with an iron pin and a wooden dowel. Because the iron pin was set into a slot and the wooden pin would sheer-off upon impact with a shield, this meant that the wooden shaft would be allowed to swing down and catch on the ground or tangle in the shield holders legs. Additionally, once the wooden dowel had sheered and the iron head and shaft were no longer held straight the Pilum couldn't be thrown back or even used as a melee weapon. Quite an obscure but clever design and one more thing that proves the martial genius of the Roman military.
Pole sling @4:30. I've made a few and have become proficiant with them over the years. I used to have a border collie x who was tennis ball obsessed so we volunteered in the city we lived in to chase the Canadian Geese off the local sport fields. I could get a tennis ball to fly about 100 meters using my pole sling. 🙂
You should do a podcast like video like this with Shad discussing different eras, that would be interesting
I agree!
Might as well bring Skalligram in
@@Zeboki Don't forget Lindybeige! Or Matt Easton lol
It could have rotating guest lol
Or all of them together in a big virtual room all dressed in armor or uniform discussing different topics
Was kind of expecting the soliferrum iberian metal javelin or the alt alt aztec javelin weapon system.
I would also include hornbows here- they could've been made as strong as selfbows (longbows), while also being significantly smaller, lighter, and, what is perhaps the most important point, strung at all times (while keeping a selfbow strung even for a few hours could've decreased its strength)
My personal favorite pre-modern ranged weapon is the sling. I have one that I made together with my mother, and it is my most prized possession.
Is there any chance for a colaboration with some Age of Empires TH-camr?
There is this man named "Spirit of the law". He mostly talks about statistics, analyses gamemechanics, things with math AND compares the campains with the real history.
I always wondered if there is some reason for unit counters in actually history.
It would be a dream come true. :-)
i think the Short Bow deserved to be on the list. The ability to be fired from horseback was a large part of the reason that the Mongols were so successful.
4:02 - such a missed opportunity to show a photo of Jörg Sprave
Interesting that you didn't include the recurve bow.
It seems that this allowed the mongols to get more firepower than other mounted archers.
I once read that the pelum was designed to be thrown at shields, the idea being that, because they were so huge, they would make the enemy soldier’s shield unwieldy when it stuck inside it, causing the enemy to abandon the shield altogether. I don’t know if it’s true but I found it brilliant.
I swear I've subscribed to you like three times now. I don't know what's going on. I still get recommended every new upload though lmao
I think the mongolian bow deserves a place on this list, because it was one of the deadliest weapons of the 13th century.
I saw a documentary once about the Hunga Munga. They theorize about the capacity of the Hunga Munga to use any of those curvy tips as lever when hiting the border of a shield. It would allow the weapon to be deflected towards the enemy, overcoming the shield.
The main feature of the pilum was a long iron part. Pilums were specifically designed to leave opponents with no shield - if you block a standard javelin with your shield, you can chop the wooden part immediately with your sword/axe. With the pilum, you can't really reach the wooden part without exposing yourself or even dropping the shield.
I wish these videos were longer with more detail and examples. It doesn't even feel like a whistle-stop tour when compared to people like Lindy!
If it can be used for hunting, it can be used as a weapon of war. If it can be used for farming, it can be used as a weapon of war. If it can be used in construction, it can be used as a weapon of war. As history shows, if something can be weaponized, it will be weaponized by someone.
On a more serious note, slings were really effective weapons, especially if lead shots are used. Most other thrown weapons (including bows) limit the total energy of a throw to what you can provide by your arm with one swing. But you can swing a sling multiple times to a much more powerful shot (at the cost of you projectile being blunt). Its drawback is that it takes even more training to shoot them accurately than a bow, and that's a pretty serious concern.
I mostly agree with anything BUT. The mongolian composite bow has conquered a pretty big empire and was basically identical to modern bow UNTIL the emerge of compound ones.
Agincourt was an incredible episode.
You have to consider that to "produce" Agincourt you need:
-a soldier trained since young age, able to do that and basically nothing more
-a bow made from a very specific wood. Not easy to make, not easy to draw nor to trasport
-an enemy that charges you on a rainy day against a steep hill
Mongolian Bows are just a better design.
I think an honorable mention to the spear thrower is in need. used in a lot of cultures for thousands of years. The australian aboriginal version known as a Woomera is believed to have been used as a shield as well in close combat while also when used correctly could produce 4 times the force of that of a modern compound bow.
The latchet crossbow used by border reivers and Irish fletched javelins are my favorite ranged weapons. Also goats foot lever crossbows and Welsh longbows. Those are good as well.
Top ranged weapons
1. The gun - Variants of both the Matchlock and the Wheellock mechanisms, including those on the tanegashima, first appear towards the end of the medieval era, so it does fit into the time period.
2. To be patriotic I've got to put The Boomerang in here, but it is also the most enduring ranged weapon, even outlasting the long bow.
3. Long Bow
4. The Repeating Crossbow
5. For versatility, it's hard to overlook the chakram.
6. The Hunga Munga
7. I know that it's not strictly a weapon per say, but the Woomera really needs some representation. Besides, it serves the same function as a sling.
8. Bolas
9. Tomohawk
10. Throwing Knife - for being the most uninspired.
The compound bow and woomera should've made the list. The compound bow allowed for horse archers to flourish in the old world and was still a serviceable bow when dismounted.
The woomera amplified the lethality of javelins as it allowed the user to throw them with more range and velocity than the human body could allow.
I'd argue that the Mongol composite bow deserves at least a mention in this list. A draw strength comparable to the longbows used at Agincourt, ideally treated with fish glue to prevent any decomposition to the animal matter used in it's construction, and designed to be used from horseback as opposed to on foot
I have a style suggestion for future videos. The scope is so broad that choosing weapon families makes more sense than choosing specific weapons. Choosing the pilum doesn't make sense as it excludes other effective throwing spears. The longbow excludes weapons like Yumi or Mongolian bows. I'd prefer to see general families of weapons and then stand out examples. You did this with throwing axes (francesca). I'd rather see javelin (pilum) and bow (english longbow) as well.
Excellent information and presented in an entertaining manner.
Bit surprised that the longbow is the only bow that got on the list even though there are two crossbows.
"If I can chop wood, I can chop his arm"
I'm not quite sure what I found so funny about that 😅
Love your work. Hope you keep it coming.
*Spoiler warning for number 1*
As a staunch fan of the British longbow(men) I must say the one thing that really surprised me in this list is that the number one spot went to longbows specifically. As much as I love the longbow, I wouldn't consider it more effective than say, the recurve bows used by the Mongols or the Japanese Yumi (nor the other way around mind you).
I honestly expected number one to go to warbows in general with specific mentions to any 2-3 particularly effective examples. Including, but not limited to, the British longbow.
pre-watch: This is going to be odd. Are there 10 truly effective pre-modern ranged weapons? There's the longbow, the central asian composite bow, the crossbow, the sling, the javelin, the scorpion, the torsion catapult, and the trebuchet. That's eight. Other than weird throwing weapons what' am I missing? I guess depending on where he draws the line between renaissance and early modern the cannon and arquebus cross into properly effective weapons at some point.
post-watch: Okay, obviously we're only looking at weapons for individual soldiers here. You're missing the central asian composite bow, which definitely should have made the list either directly above or below the chu-ko-nu or however they want us to transliterate it this week. The Mediterranean composite bow could go right below it. Those along with the chariot defined warfare for a very long time.
There are also somethings here that I don't think belong on a list of effective ranged weapons. When you throw a knife at a target if you get the rate of spin wrong for the distance it just bounces off. With a great deal of practice this can be overcome in static target throwing, but considering how little a throwing knife would do to someone with a shield I can't imagine it's worth the time. I haven't thrown axes, but they should have the same problem. In a fight distances will be changing. I expect half of hits may as well be with throwing sticks. The very asymmetrical throwing sticks also have this problem: if the light end hits it absorbs the force in bending. Fine for killing an animal that isn't aware of you, not fine for a person that is aware and hostile.
The Hunga-Munga is just massively inconvenient to carry. You can carry small axes in loops on a belt. You can carry a bunch of knives in scabbards. Even javelins you should be able to fit a couple in your off-hand even also holding a vertical center grip shield and the Romans supposedly put clips on their horizontal center grip shields for pila or plumbata. How, though, are you planning to carry more than one hunga-munga? Even just one is an inconvenient spiky thing in your hand you have to worry about in contrast to say a spear you can rest on your shoulder on the march.
I could grudgingly put the throwing axe at the bottom of the list because an axe handle is still a stout piece of wood and even a fraction of axes thrown hitting shields blade first might genuinely inconvenience the enemy and it's not impossible to carry more than one not in hand. If the other non-spear throwing things make the list the list is too long.
Plumbata I forgot about in my speculative list. I've never handled or seen tests of them but I wouldn't rate them high on looks. They don't have the long shield penetrating shank of a pilum or a narrow armor piercing point. They look like a downgrade against shields and no better than (and possibly even slightly worse than) just a blunt lead tipped dart against helmets if you throw them in high arcs. Maybe useful if by their adoption the Romans are mostly fighting unarmored barbarians, but not what I'd want to throw at a peer opponent. Could be better than a throwing axe since at least they fly towards the enemy point first rather than spinning.
I think I'd rate European crossbows above the longbow on the grounds that it does not take a lifetime of training to get a useful crossbowman. Longbows rate above central asian composite bows because of the lack of effect of Turkish archery at the Battle of Dorylaeum compared to the effectiveness of longbows at Crecy against more advanced armor. Being able to either side from horseback is not worth the lower armor penetration in my view as to take advantage of it you have to put in as much riding practice as longbows require strength training. I'm inclined to put composite bows above the Cho-Ko-Nu. You could deliver poison with any bow and the range and armor penetration of unfletched bolts fired from a crossbow with a low mechanical advantage spanning lever does not impress. I think the power is down in the vicinity of the partial draws Lars Anderson used for his early speed shooting demonstrations, which achieve similar rates of "fire" without the heavy magazine and with better accuracy. Might even fall below the Pilum.
Slings are great, but training needed penalizes them while only needing one hand brings up the pilum and other javelins. You can use a sling with a small strapped forearm shield that wouldn't work so well with a bow, but you can use a javelin with any shield. Also, they can't be used in anything remotely like a tight formation. I think staff slings are a bit better on needing open space to swing and less minimum training to get the projectile going vaguely towards the enemy on a consistent basis and effective range. Less convenient to carry, but not unacceptable for a battlefield weapon.
1: European Crossbow
2: Longbow
3: Composite Bow
4: Pilum
5: Spear
6: Sling
7: Chu-ko-nu
8: plumbata
9: throwing axe
10: now leaving weapons I'd call effective
Personally, I would've thought that the catapult, ballista or trebuchet was more effective than the hunga munga or throwing knife.
Why wasn’t the chakram on this list? It has a way higher chance of cutting than a throwing knife and it’s frisbee shape makes it more accurate and easier to throw
Roman pilum, doesn't look sharp or scary. But it penetrates as strong as arrows and bolts
A few more that deserve a place on the list:
Asian composite bow, perhaps most commonly associated with the Huns and Mongols, but used to good effect across the Eurasian Steppe and into China, Japan, and Korea.
The javalin. Could be combined with Pilum as it's a javalin, or not because the Pilum probably was the most effective Javalin design.
The dart. Should probably be combined with Plubum which is the Roman implementation, but darts were used elsewhere - most notably Ireland.
Very nice video Metatron gj keep a good job, also you should mention the CHu ko nu from Age of Empire again
Thanks for sharing great video and it was really interesting information. I´m new to your channel and i have hit your red button and rang the bell for you.
When your friend Bunga tries to throw his club but the stranger from another tribe doesn't die:
*Confused unga bunga*
Its a yard dart, yeah they can kill and have good range and was a kid toy back in the seventies, We had a set of 4 if i remember right and they looked just like the picture you showed except the fletching was pastic, the head was steel, and weighted. We used them in a game like horse shoes.
How could you leave Mongol composite bows?
Let's be honest, if we really are going to give multiple subdivision a place on a top ten list of pre-gunpowder weapons, the list will be 10 different bows and nothing else.
He could say just bows .
Or Bow and Arrow .
@@killerkraut9179 he probably picked what he considered to be the best bow and arrow around for the time period.
@@Zouron I doubt that there is much difference between the bow and arrow Types .
Very cool of you to sponsor scholagladiatoria. For the vidoe. Looking forward to seeing it.
I enjoyed this video. I knew what number one would be the second I clicked, but I don't care about that. I like watching your videos in general as well :y
Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us.
Really, I wouldn’t have thought that someone so into weapons would have the crossbow as their favorite. I def like the crossbow, just in ingenuity and design it’s amazingly cool, I just always liked how you have to work and practice to be worth anything with a longbow, or any bow for that matter, crossbows I’m sure take some skill, but I imagine there were a lot more ransoms hired as crossbow men than your average archer, in any point in history really
Spears had various designs. The Celtic peoples carried several spears including ones designed to be thrown with the feet, sometimes from the platform of a moving chariot.
In addition to the atlatl mentioned by Beardshire. I would have put the Indian chakram on the list.
I'd go for a top 3 of 1. Composite bow, 2. Sling, & 3. Javelin. 1. because I'm biased as an archer, but for efectiveness & rate of "fire", 2. For being able to deliver a hammer/mace blow at range from a v simple to make weapon & 3. For it's ease to make & use & its great penetration of shields & armour. But that's just my opinion.
You forgot the throwing pommel.
Top3: A sling, it's easy to maintain & to get the projectiles. Logistics matter! The crossbow, a decent chance to hit the target seems like a good idea to me. 3rd pick: a bow with a draw weight I can manage. Rate of fire vs. hit probability seems like a workable compromise.
There's such powerful one called atlatl or spear thrower. It is a weapon tool that enhances the range and power of spear throwing.
I'm pretty confused by the lack of composite bows on this list. They were arguably more effective than any of the items on this list. The Egyptians used them in ancient times to dominate, the Parthians gave the Romans all kinds of trouble, Byzantium used them to hold their lands for centuries, the Huns & Cumans made good use of them and last but not least some might say the Mongols were slightly successful using them :D
Number one is long bow? And the other types of bow?
The longbow is one of the most rough and brutal type of primitive bows... a composite recurve bow is superior next to the longbow. It handle better (due to the lack of vibration) and it has a better performance (it shoot as hard as a longbow in lower pountage). The only downside next to the longbow, it's complicated to manufacture.
I didn't expect longbow to be #1
Also what about atlatl?
A top 10 best types of bow may be interesting too (maybe including crossbows and gastraphetes too).
The guy in the middle at 7:30 has a lot of confidence in that trigger mechanism, take note how he's holding the crossbow.
what about trap hunting range weapons like BOLAS & LASSO? it's very effective for its functions too. Also, ANCIENT GRENADES & GREEK FIRE ...
I'm suprised you didn't give atlatl spear thrower an honourable mention. :(
He did give the spear a mention, so technically he gave it a mention by association.
@@Santisima_Trinidad I disagree. An atlatl dart is as different from a hand thrown spear as an arrow is from a spear
@@Santisima_Trinidad An atlatl can be used to throw multiple different things spears being the prominent one
Any reason why the atlatl was not put on this list? I do think its more lethal than some of the weponds on here
Atlatl (called a woomera by Australian aborigines) adds extra leverage but is not really a weapon unto itself. But it seems worth including along with the sling-staff.
I'd say the throwing stick probably predates even the stone age. The concept of "That guy wants to take something from me, I think I'll hit him in the head with this stick/rock" was likely know to even the apes.
You have to make a video about the Cagayán battle in 1582, when spanish tercios fought with japaneses Ronin samuráis
Sorry to bother you with this!
I do not want to offent anyone!
I interpreted that the BOW as a concept that you find perfect for ranged warfare, and among all your choice would be the longbow.
But....
The recurve bow was way more efficent in many ways.
The poundage range is close or equal I think (this is why these to types got used at the very end of their age).
The manufacturing is way off balance for the composite recurve bows. I know the fact that england is more moist and that is why they do not even think about glued material compositions.
The longbow is bigger with longer draw length. This is a trade off, usability vs power.
Even as a Hungarian I do not think that we got the perfect bow. But We got bettar than the longbow, and the mongols are better than ours.
I hope that no one got offended. If I was wrong PLEASE correct me!
I may got some things wrong, or you got some information that I have never heard of.
I dunno about specifying longbow rather than bows in general, but I guess it makes sense since the longbow tends to be the most effective in all climates and scenarios, except horseback or cramped quarters I suppose.
One other advantage of the crossbow over the bow is that it requires a lot less training : to use a strong war bow you need to train for years to build up your tecnique and muscles, while the crossbow is much simpler to use and requires no muscles at all.
I would like to counter that. A fundamental principle of physics: energy is neither created, nor destroyed. This means you cannot just create energy to move a projectile out of thin air. A gunpowder weapon uses the energy from atoms engaged in chamical reactions. A bow 'stores' the energy used to draw it in the wood. A crosbow is no different from a bow in this regard. You would still need to use a massive ammount of force to manually draw back a crossbow. The advantage lies in the tricks you can use. Because the chord is locked in place at the end, crossbows could be reloaded by shoving them into the ground, holding it still with your feet and pulling the string/chord with both hands and the back muscles (or even the feet as well), whereas a bow would use one hand to draw and the other to keep it in place.
Yes! I made it here in the first minute! I've never seen such a small amount of views on his channel before. This is amazing! I'm gonna screenshot it
Ahahah
@@metatronyt yay! I made Metatron laugh! Thank you for your videos and replies! Can't wait till you reply to my message on Patreon 😂
You should've mentioned the Ovuevue Mamba, Kopunga Bunga, Kalamalawalabala and Dingodongokamongo too!
Finally someone mentioned the sling
Quick question: since pilum don't seem to have all that much range, what would be the advantage of using those in place of let's say a long spear with the same tip attached? I can see how the spear would be unwieldy compared to them due to the massive length and the distribution of weight differences, but I would think having rows of them would tactically offset that. They just look quite heavy, especially when compared to the lances also used.
What about the trebuchet??
I feel as if that deserves a spot on this list.
From the init screen I thought you might be talking about scifi melee weapons - the african weapon looks a lot like a Klingon weapon