The myth of arrow quivers on the back

Combat system
#82

English tactics don’t match central European tactics. :wink:

The English archers were a central part of their army. Archers in the rest of Europe were supporting troops for skirmishing at the beginning of a battle or special tactics (or of course castle defense) with the mounted knights fighting in melee combat.

Beyond that the Englishmen at Agincourt had to fight against vastly superior forces (by numbers) so they couldn’t afford to split up their army in ranged and melee parts. To actually being able to overcome the superior forces of the Frenchmen they had to use their clever ranged+melee tactics which was both, an affront against the French coduct of chivalry and a new tactics not known before on the European mainland. It’s very unlikely that troops in Bohemia at 1400 used English tactics and warfare on a greater scale. Too deep was their cultural dependence from Germany and France with its chivalric values and traditional combat tactics.

But I agree on your statement that bow quivers were useful for mounted archers with smaller and curved bows originated in the Middle East (which the crusaders brought back in the centuries before) while it wasn’t very practical for longbows anyway.

#83

I think it is not a sword, but quiver with arrows (so he has two quivers). I don’t think they look uncommon for Europe. Also hes dressed like all others who are holding weapons for infantry and without armour, which I wouldn’t expect from cavalry.
Here’s more pictures from that book (can’t help myself…) showing a battle - archers looks similar to the one with quivers, but here they doesn’t have any (quiver) suddenly. Maybe it was just artists decision and he sometimes draw the quiver and sometime he did not.
Also image of a knight (I suppose) using a bow…

#84

Your post is broadly correct but Crecy, 1346, was the first time the French encountered England’s archer heavy fighting style. The whole English/Welsh army fought on foot, knights and all.

#85

Yeah, as I said, it’s not really 100% clear how archery in battle was seen in Bohemia at 1400. We can only try to connect and interpret the few pictures and written sources we have, not knowing exactly if they show the reality at the time and how much they don’t show. It’s already hard to find the truth in modern pictures and videos, how are we supposed to see the reality of a painting from 600 years ago? Maybe the Wenzel bible is a rather good display of the reality of weaponry of Bohemia maybe it’s based on other influences, maybe it’s based on dreams and “artistic freedom”. We just don’t know for sure I fear…

There is actually a lot of guessing and speculation involved here which isn’t a big surprise when talking about medieval history, a time in which only few people could write and paint (mostly monks) and so only very few sources are available. :wink:

1 Like
#86

if you don’t like historical accuracy, this game isn’t for you. sorry.

#87

You should learn to read before trying to troll.
One more time; “This-is-not-historically-accurate extremists.”

; )

#88

Some people simply tend to think that taking a millitant/extreme/aggressive stance is just by itself a good way to support an argument. It’s true that it’s always pretty noticeable, but that’s about it. Try to ignore it. Sometime it’s hard, but it’s possible.
Their arguments usually speak for themselves very well anyway… :wink:

#89

OFF-TOPIC: Well, we should differentiate a little bit here:

It’s absolutely ok and appreciated to discuss these matter on this board, isn’t it? I hope we could all agree on that. Before you can make ANY solid decision which systems and elements to put in the game you should have as much information as possible, based on different views and multiple input. A discussion like that both entertains us history nerds on the board and give Warhorse perhaps some new views and feedback they haven’t thought about themselves yet. IF they put anything of what is discussed here in the game is completely up to them and we shouldn’t demand anything imo. We can raise a wish but in the end the team at Warhorse has to decide how to develop the game. Realism is great but it’s still a video game and there will be certain compromises. We should just discuss topics without any anger or overwhelming expectations. KCD will be great anyway and I trust Warhorse that they will make the right decisions. :wink:

2 Likes
#90

there is no such thing as extremism when it comes to historicity. something either happened or it didn’t.

1 Like
#91

Problem is that in many many cases we simply don’t know.
We know back quivers was used.
We know that hip bags was used.

So what was most common? we don’t know. We have to make an educated guess based in written sources, pictures and so on.

Even when we do have a number of written sources about something, they often don’t agree. So agian we have to judge…

#92

Thanks. One person with common sense.

Of course there is. Trying to import and replicate the history with an accuracy of 100% is impossible and also it would be stupid if some things are not overlooked. Moreover considering that we can not be sure of all that we know about the past.

I’ve seen some of your posts and I can say that you are a troll, non a history fan. You want attention, isn’t it?

#93

lol drawing a sword from the back, especially the two handed that games ike to put on the back, isnt even physically possible, because a sword longer than your arm would not come out far enough of the scabbard. Also its unnessaseraly extra movement and exposing yourself to the enemy instead of drawing fromt the hip where the moment you have it halfway out of the scabbard its ready to defend blows.
see this very informative clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYiXEPHLeUY

Also for quivers, the above is quite right, they wore them on the hip when in combat or for longbows, put in front of them in the ground. What probably was used also in this region, meaning eastern europe and further still, were the horse archers that wield short strong recurve bows and had a saddle quiver to shoot from. Would be awesome if that was in the game too.

#94

For example here is the Polish king Jagiello, 1418.

How many images back quivers in medieval Europe we know - I know 2.
How many images quiver on a belt in medieval Europe we know - I know over a dozen (shown in this topic).
And a dozen images without any quiver - with arrows in hands or from the belt.

“This-is-not-historically-accurate extremists.”
:blush:
For me, back quiver is old game stamp. And it is convenient for the mechanics of the game. I understand that is impossible to realize all the historical details in the game. It is a game after all.
But for many people engaged in the study of history, the use of a quiver on his back is the certain “symbol”.

2 Likes
#95

So is there going to be both back and waist or only back?

#96

You are completely right!

There are HUNDRETs of Pictures showing quiver on belt or no quiver against those two … we could carry on nearly endless posting pictures!

But I confess I only know the WESTERN medieval pictures. In my understanding Bohemia was more western orientated. Is that right? There are many differences, but till now I thought It was more comparable to the west then to the east. Most of the Stuff in the game I saw on the screenshots were the same like in western Europe.

Back to the quivers on the back:
The problem for me is that they are one of those big Hollywood myths which are so frustrating to a historian or historic-reenactor. I would even count them to the" Negative-Top-Ten!"

2 Likes
#97

It’s a myth that quivers on the back are a Hollywood myth. In fact, there are so FEW realistic medieval movies made in Hollywood that you could hardly call it.

And quivers on the back were quite common in other cultures (like North American Indians and Chinese/Asian people). Most people have more the mounted archer in mind and not the medieval infantry soldier of a regular army when thinking about archery in the past… :wink:

It’s absolutely human that most people (not only Hollywood…) believe that it was the same with medieval Europe without further research or having a history degree studying painting and sources from the time in detail. It’s a fact that we don’t know that much about archery and quivers in Bohemia in 1400. We only have paintings (most from other countries not of the exactly same time) and written sources and both can only be believed to a certain extend without knowing the intentions of the author or artist. It’s not like we had a photograph or video or a massive amount of other resources…

To me the whole topic is far too overrated. We don’t even know if there will be regular archery troops in the game (e.g. in battle) on a greater number and we don’t know if other people will use bows and especially quivers. The only thing we know for sure is that the player character will be able to use a bow. I agree that the animation in first person to catch an arrow should be based on a quiver on the hip. It’s also easier to make such an animation (which also indicates that for the actual battle/hunting the position on the hip is the better on to reach an arrwo)… :wink:

#98

Hi, only a short form answer. I don*t want to be impolitely, but I am short on time.
I try to understand your posting.

First paragraph: Not the VERY few realistic Hollywood movies are the problem, but the many many unrealistic ones. Visitor on a museum-event: “But Robin Hood wears his quiver on the back!”

Second paragraph: I would bet here in Germany most people think of Robin Hood if they hear about archery in medieval Europe. Russel Crow or Cevin Costner or Errol Flynn

Third paragraph: Do I get you right? We know so little about medieval archery that we should ignore that little and instead of asking the experts we should believe what we want? Sorry, a little bit overstated.

Fourth paragraph: If you look at the latest movies from Warhorse Studios you can see archery with quivers on the back very clearly. And they say “archery is nearly finished”.

I don`t want to discuss every single buckle on a piece of armor… but like it was said before, there are some major critical issues which are not easy to ignore… especially if they come up again and again for years.
There is a big fight going on in Germany and other country between reenactors/living history people and renaissance-fair/middleage-market fans who want to have fun without doing much research.
And there are some archetypal issues like two handed swordfight, two meters high warhorses, horns on Viking helmets, 5kg swords, armour that makes you completely immobile… or quivers on the back.

1 Like
#99

Here the movie about archery. Sorry, embeded video didn’t work for me

#100

  1. Robin Hood is no example for medieval archery IN WAR. But yes, people connect medieval archery with Robin Hood, I agree. But Robin Hood isn’t even historical fiction…

  2. My point about Hollywood movies was that there are not many medieval movies after all which contain archery on a greater level. In most medieval movies archery isn’t even a big topic (apart from Robin Hood apparently). The “problem” might be fantasy, but that’s not an invention of Hollywood.

  3. No, I don’t want anyone to ignore historical sources, not at all. But I want them to be taken with the proper sense of doubt. Even “medieval archery” is a broad generalization built on the very little information we have about specific locations or periods of time. We tend (even historians) to speak about medieval topics on this broad scale without taking into account that things we seem to know from England for example don’t necessarily had to be the same in Bohemia. Things we know about from 1350 or 1450 don’t have to be the same as in 1400. That’s what I wanted to say. In fact, we know quite little about archery and the usage of quivers in Bohemia in 1400.

  4. Maybe you should read the whole thread here and not only my post. Dan from Warhorse already made a clear and understandable statement why they use quivers on the back…

To me the main reason why I called the whole issue a bit overrated is that this game shouldn’t be meant as “the historian’s revenge” to failures made in Hollywood movies. This game’s audience isn’t only the small bunch of reenactors who want to make every bit of medieval life right, no matter if big or small. Of course I welcome realism and stuff based on historical sources if possible. But imo it’s wrong to build up a dogmatic or almost religious expectation about the game for that very reason. I can already hear some “extremists” crying if there will be quivers on the back in the final game just because they think that they know it better. After all it’s still a game and despite the realisitc approach there should be space for creative interpretation and compromises if the result benefis gameplay or game design in general (as mentioned here by Dan)… :wink:

1 Like
#101

Correction … “A Gest of Robyn Hode” existed already in the middle ages.

© 2015 Warhorse Studios www.warhorsestudios.cz