Call me a wimp if you will (everyone else does) but whilst I appreciate getting close enough to make sure the shot hits your enemy, being close enough to let him hit you in the head with his spear in return seems a tad too close for comfort – especially considering the result for St Leger.
My very thought Guy. It would seem that cavalry fighting got a lot more deadly. For the Irish they had to get close enough to risk a deadly wound to have any hope of killing their enemy. For the English they had to let their enemy get close to kill them before firing. I’d imagine a lot of fellows found it expedient to shoot or throw a dart or two at a safe(ish) distance. Leaders couldn’t do that. It does make you think.
“..darts, which they cast with a wonderful facility and nearness, a weapon more noisome to the enemy, especially horsemen, than it is deadly”
I wonder if the feathers on the darts (see your illustration on your previous thread) is being referred to here, as fletched weapons would usually produce a noise (eg the English medieval “arrow-storm”)?
It could be but ‘noisome’ means annoying rather than noisy in the context of the quote. The view is that darts would produce non lethal wounds rather than deadly ones. Mind you Captain Fuller would disagree he was killed by one at the Battle of the Ford of Biscuits.