Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Thibaudborny t1_iqnnh3c wrote

Reply to comment by yeah_yeah_therabbit in Simple/Short/Silly History Questions Saturday! by AutoModerator

No, not at all, this is really peak hollywood fantasy to make things flashy. Fire arrows were seldom used, and only in specific contexts, certainly not in battle.

But cinematically it is ‘nice’.

12

yeah_yeah_therabbit t1_iqorr8f wrote

What would be a context flaming arrows would be used? To set fire to rooftops?

3

jrhooo t1_iqp9bxs wrote

That's my understanding. Basically a two part tactic.

Small benefit, you could hope the fire arrows actually start fires in the enemies area, but

Bigger benefit, when you're talking about siege warfare, you start shooting firestarters over the wall, someone has to go put them out before they actually do cause a real problem. So all the people having to run around dousing out these stupid arrows are people that AREN'T helping defend the wall.

4

Bashstash01 t1_iqr2lku wrote

It seems to me that fire arrows aren't very helpful, as you can't just take a regular arrow and light it on fire. You have to add things on there, usually a cage-like tip, to have any flames. This decreases range, accuracy, and rate of fire. I think your analysis is correct, just adding on.

7

jezreelite t1_iqryncx wrote

Incendiary weapons were most often used in three situations: naval battles, sieges, and pillaging.

I'm not an expert on medieval warfare by any means, but you generally don't see any type of fire weapon being used much in pitched battles.

2

skyblueandblack t1_iqoskc7 wrote

Incendiary birds work better, at least if you're Genghis Khan.

1

yeah_yeah_therabbit t1_iqowstn wrote

W-what? Was this a real thing?

1