Makes sense; most native cultures the Conqistadors fought against would not be using high powered bows (those only really develop in places that have heavy (metal) armor to protect against atrows) so the slings would be far more powerful than the bows.

I can only imagine what a giant human with a giant sling would look like in battlefield that's a horrifying sight to witness

Like arrow shots to the head are not dangerous!? Slingshot is not dangerous as an arrow.

@@ivanz6368 not only is a sling far beyond easier to make than a bow but the sling is also far more dangerous weapon than the bow I don't think u know but shepherd slings can outperform bows in terms of range of the projectile speaking of wich are extremely easy and cheap to produce for the sling while for the bow projectile Making is way harder not only to produce but to also maintain a wooden arrowshaft due to bad weather conditions can deform leading to unusable ammunition while the sling can use literally stones from the ground as projectiles but more effective ammunition were the lead bullets wich were more heavy and extremely easy to maintain Matter of fact u don't even need maintaining lead bullets because they will always work as projectile as long as u have them so not only the sling has more range than a bow the sling lead bullets are almost equal to a bullets shot from firearms so let's see u claimed that arrows are more dangerous than a sling to me that is kind of illogical statement because an arrow is a projectile while the sling is a weapon that shoots projectiles so I'm gonna assume that u meant that the sling ammunition is not as dangerous as arrows wich is the ammunition of bows to wich I will reply with the fact that it depends on the kind of projectile for example if u compare stone projectiles or ground picked projectiles with arrows of course that the arrow will be more deadly but if u compare the arrow to a lead bullet wich is specifically designed for slingshots than that's where ur wrong the lead bullets are more deadly than the arrows bows back at the day couldn't penetrate armor plates but slings could dent and sometimes break them due to their high power this shows to me that sling shot ammunition has the ability to outperform bow ammunition and sling shot in general is a far more effective and cheap to produce weapon than a bow where u can give the bow an advantage in comparison with slings however is the accuracy because shooting a bow takes less practice to be accurate with than shooting a sling because a sling requires daily practice and training since young age in order to be efficient but even though thats true when u equipp an army with slings against an army with bows due to more range the slingers will beat the bow army because it doesn't take any practice to shoot a sling at the enemy army it will eventually hit someone

@@ivanz6368 the arrowheads these people where using where obsidian, which is very sharp but fragile. They would shatter open impact with metal. The sling (not a slingshot) was noted by Spanish conquistadors to be able to kill a horse. Since the ammo was blunt for a sling they are a better choice than arrows as they would be able to inflict extreme blunt force trauma, even with a helmet on.

Ya. Made my own out of 550 cord and been slinging in my backyard with tennis balls for about a yr, I can hit relatively close to what I'm aiming at but rarely exactly.

Probably good enough for general warfare.

@@ArcanisUrriah if you had enough ppl slinging rocks or lead it becomes more of a saturation tactic. Though the berlaric slingers could supposedly actually snipe targets because they had training from almost the time they could walk.

@@dovahbear0 Absolutely. just saying that 20 hours of training is probably good enough for warfare, given that most warfare the target is groups of people. Obviously, it is a huge advantage to be able to aim well, so having specialists who can do that would be worthwhile, but for others, that training time could be better used on primary tasks for that troop type.

The rock: 90 kg The distance: 400++ gigameters The sling: Bigger Warwolf The sliger: The Rock The Target: Kevin Hart at lower than 2 meters tall The victim: gravity

Goliath had a shield, and other armor as well. And outweighed David by several times David's bodyweight. You throw differently when you are trying to hit a 350+ lb warrior than when you are aiming at birds. When you put more power into a shot you will have less accuracy. A single miss could have turned David into a puddle of Israelite.

@@musikSkool I think she was referring to the accuracy more than force, but don't forget that armies had entire sling regiments. I'm not intending to minimize God's hand, though.

@@musikSkool I believe David could outrun a weighed down Goliath

@@musikSkool well no, a sling is very quick to reload and launch. it's essentially throwing, just way better.

@@musikSkoolDavid’s aim was probably aided by God or something(and could probably get off one or 2 shots who knows)

The most deadly weapon of the Conquistadors was smallpox.

@@amanofnoreputation2164true.

Well said

Unless the other guy's weapon is a gun.

@@vonmilash823 even then. A gun in unskilled hands is more dangerous to bystanders than the actual target. I would rather be in a gun fight with my bow and crossbow and my opponent be a gangster kid with a glock.

i remember total war rome 2)

Slingers are an ideal weapon to have on hand concerning things such as adverse weather conditions, such as very wet and rainy weather. Rainy/wet weather can severely hamper or reduce the effectiveness or even negate the ability for Archers or crossbowmen to use their bows, especially if their strings become sodden. Wet flecthings can also sap further energy out of an arrow in flight as well, reducing their effectiveness even more. For archers or crossbowmen, ensuring that their ammunition and their strings are dry and free of damp is a very important consideration. Slings are not really affected by being damp/wet, and their projectiles (Rocks, clay/lead sling bullets et cetera) are not terribly effected by winds or rainy weather in flight, they are small and relatively dense in comparison to arrows, where it is hard for wind to affect their flight patterns. This is especially the case lead projectiles, being extremely dense in comparison to stones, which greatly reduces the overall surface area for a given mass. In short... Lead projectiles are pretty much the ideal slinging projectile where size and density are important factors... The downside of lead is largely down to it's relative softness as a material... It will bend or dent/deform much easier in comparison to other metals. Lead isn't so concerned when it meets puny human flesh, however. Hence why Celsus had to write a section in his medical treatise on how to remove lead sling bullets from the human body... A rather grisly affair for all concerned.

At least a reasonable text... You were the only one to remember the fantastic balearic slingers. I just disagree about range of the bows, the rate of fire and the amount of damage at long distance. Anyway, you gave us all a beautiful and solid information about the "Sling Universe" across the time. Thank you so much.

I sling and do archery. A bow is way more energy efficient than sling.

@@owenthomas9863 the bow is fantastic and that is why it is so prevalent in the art of ancient times but the sling has certain advantages such as, it is super portable and it’s ammunition is abundant everywhere. Also the staff sling is simple to make with no special materials and requires virtually no skill to shoot forward and far even with incendiaries, and that is why I think of the sling as a force magnifier because slingers can soften the enemy with cheap stones leaving the archers to concentrate on leaders and other high value targets

😮

000

That is why legionaires were taught to use them in their training.

The guns with ammunition: school 🏫

Only high powered crossbows are slow to reload; hunting crossbows (as well as most older crossbow designs) were generally not that slow to load. (though still slower than a bow) The big advantages of crossbows are easily overlooked but I'd say they are probably the most effective ranged weapons before the firearm really started to take off. The crossbow can be kept readied almost indefinitely and released at a moment's notice, tis combined with their accuracy makes them capable of reliably picking off enemies who are using cover while also making them excelent for using from behind cover. (you only need to reveal yourself for a very short moment between shots, further helped by how little of yourself you need to reveal to get a good shot off) they also require by far the least amount of space to be used effectively, which helps them a lot in cramped situations and their ability to be carried around while kept ready means they are valuable even in relatively close-in fighting (such as in an urban environment); in addition to all this the shooter can remain incredibly well hidden during ambushes and when fighting otehr ranged units. If we're talking two armies standing in an open field you might say a crossbow is the worst, but that's a kind of disingenuous way of looking at the crossbow as you are reducing the weapon to one of two only things it is not good at. (volume of fire) Add to that the fact that crossbowmen were far easier to train en-masse and could be equipped better for melee to the point where you could even have your heavy (melee) infantry using crossbows without problems and you've got a weapon that more than makes uo for it's downsides. All that being said, slings are still an excellent weapon; they probably went out of fashion more because of the shift away from massed infantry warfare and towards smaller professional armies in medieval times; these professional armies would favor the bow for a variety of reasons. (a big one being the bow, as it improved over time, just became more effective over-all in trained hands) I do still think the sling disappeared from warfare more because of societal developments than just being "outclassed" by the bow; it was a good weapon of war, but if you're a feudal lord and you can afford to feed 100 men you'd rather they train to be Archers than train to be Slingers. (as opposed to ancient times, where most military slingers were just farmers/hunters who already knew how to use their weapons. Cultural factors also play a large role; Balearics and Rhodians were renowed slingers because their cultures valued the sling and encouraged people to take pride in their skills with the weapon; meanwhile feudally organised societies are more likely to stigmatise using a "peasant's weapon" when a viable alternative exsists for it's military class. (as the distinction between social classes defined those systems)

That's fiction.

@@torreyintahoe the Romans who hired the Balearic slingers consistently would like a word with you.

@@velstadtvonausterlitz2338 What about?

Now imagine how big a rock would be tossed if Goliath had the sling

​@@torreyintahoeprobably over the lethality and effectiveness of a sling I assume

Are there any link for the said specific record? Would like what arrow did he used (might he have used flight arrow instead of an actual war arrow), what glue the bow being bind (is it traditional animal glue or a modern synthetic one), or the contraption (if any) being used to achieve such distances. Might cause a great read lol.

The problem with slinging as for now is that somewhat dedicated slingers for long throwing is second to none. Currently, poeple around the world are starting to form organizations of which tries promote its practice and to regain that the skill lost in order use such a weapon. (The fact that it flew that far by a random guy in utah is an achievement on its own, how much more the one who trained for not only thier whole life, but also intended for war, who knows). Perhaps in the future with a much larger population to pull from, and a much proper ammo is used (lead, or even tungsten) we can see the real distances ancient scholars like Xenophon are describing off.

Very impressive in their own right, if true, and definitely telling of the potential of the bow and arrow, but not respective of even the .001% of the use cases.

Wow, cool!

consider with mass fire of from lines of soldiers accuracy for from and individual need to be so important. Kind of like mass musket fire

@@luisromanlegionaire if you're trying to make 200m shots at an enemy formation accuracy still matters but it's a very different kind of aiming; Personally I think adjusting for distance is far easier with a sling than it is with a bow. Throwing rocks with a sling still feels much like natural throwing, you can feel the speed with which you're releasing the bullet and adjust the elevation accordingly; with a bow the projectile speed is far harder to judge and as such the elevation of shots must instead be learned through extensive practice. Hitting a bullseye at 20m is probably far easier with a bow (for the same amount of practice) but when making 200m shots against moving targets it's less about pinpoint accuracy and more about steering the projectile into the right general area; and at that, the sling is surprisingly good.

All of that is because it's a robot.

It's hard to say but probably not. You might send a stone that far but it would lose a lot of energy because a stone or even a lead shot just isn't as aerodynamic as an arrow. So it would hit you and would hurt but wouldn't do any disabling injury.

​​@@silverjohn6037 that's not how a sling or arching projectiles in general work. In the moment the stone (or any projectile) is launched in an arc rather than straight (which for sling stones would be done at a short range of 50 meters at most) it's gonna hit exactly as hard no manner the distance. Same with arrows. Being more or less aerodynamic makes you loose more or less energy when moving, but the moment you make an arc you are making the projectile go up and then come back down with gravity which is what powers the impact. Basically all factors reduce to how high you can send the projectile

@@Yumao420 When I first read your post I honestly thought that this was a troll to wind me up but then I realized you have a misunderstanding about how bows and slings were used. Probably because of Hollywood movies you seem to think bows and slings are lobbed high up into the air like a mortar round. This would be true when firing at extreme ranges but doesn't really apply in most circumstances precisely because they'd only have the effect of an object dropped from the height of a few dozen yards. I'm going to link a couple of videos of bows and arrows being used. You'll see that they're used at fairly flat trajectories . In that case the initial energy to launch them dissipates the further they travel due to air resistance. Because of it's the length an arrow has a higher weight to frontal cross section ratio than a stone or lead shot so it retains more energy at longer ranges. This will be offset to a certain extent by the added drag from the feathers used for it's fletching (which helps to keep the arrow pointed in the intended direction). If the arrows and slung stones were fired at a high angle at long ranges the weight to air resistance ratio would also affect how quickly they would be able to accelerate on it's downward arc (again due to air resistance making the 32 feet per second per second rule something that could only be achieved in a vacuum). Longbow kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eqiol7ecycqskXk.html Sling kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qKxhjNtmztGlZoE.html

@@silverjohn6037 these videos are good content and very recommendable, but as luck had it, I had already seen both. While not as effective as flat shooting, throwing in arcs is not "Hollywood crap", it is entirely valid if not outright necessary at long ranges. Air resistance sure takes some energy from the projectile, but it always does so. You severely seem to underestimate the amount of damage that a rock or arrow falling from 50 or so meters can do to a body. It's still can be lethal. And add to all of this that "long range" is were archers would prefer to stay for multiple reasons mainly being: you don't need 100% effectiveness (most of the time there will be shields preventing that anyway), what need is to scare the enemy, damage the integrity of their formations and put them on the defensive while taking as little risk as possible (and putting distance between your lightly armed forces and the enemy's infantry is a good way to achieve that). Al of this sounds illogical until you remember that 300 meters (the most extreme range of longbows) takes barely a minute of jogging to cover.

@@Yumao420 We may have to agree to disagree on this one. Nearly every image I've seen of bows and slings in period art shows them aiming in a fairly flat angle that wouldn't have arced more than 20 meters above the line of aim. The only exceptions I can remember is from art depicting a siege (where they're shooting up at the parapets of a castle) or Swiss crossbow competitions where they aim at a target at the top of a pole to simulate hunting birds in trees. As for tactics it's important to remember that archers formed in a battle line, like the English longbowman in the 100 years war, were exceptional in history and, even when it occurred it was mostly as a flanking unit to the main body of heavy infantry with polearms. Archers and slingers were most often deployed as skirmishers, in a loose formation, trying to harass and the enemy line not be the decisive force. I believe Xerxes did famously boast that his archers could blot out the sun with their arrows but this didn't keep him from using infantry for the bulk of his forces.

Yeah, Very high poundage war bows can hit 100-150J. I also don't see Bows hitting 300J... the Qing would have probably been the closest to getting that sort of KE out of a bow. Archaic Arms, who was featured in a Historical Archery video last year, was chronographed throwing a 50 gram stone at 73m/s, ~133J, shows that slings have the capability to perform at a Warbow level (In purely KE terms), if said piece of string is put in the arms of someone with some experience and is skilled. It would be highly interesting to see other tests with different slingers and different weights (Of projectiles). Though the chronograph results itself aren't really comprehensive yet (There is pretty much only a few chronographed slinging results that I know of), it does make me think about the sources in the Classical period and their tendency to emphasise that slings had a further 'range' than bows, in a context where the bows used in warfare at that time tended to hover around ~50-90lb range.

J Kre This is throwing some wack information toward the end of the video he says that an experience slinger can shoot over eight hundred shots a minute. That is nuts!

6:22

@@armandotesta2142 Yep. I honestly think it's an error and they meant 8-10 shots per minute, which is an achievable number.

810 shots a minute :D that's faster than an AK, maybe we should ditch the assault rifles and use slings again!

Interestingly, Slings were preferred for squirrel and waterfowl hunting. These are the two big places where losing your arrows in the brush or in the water are very prevalent... so stones were preferred. Besides, what stops you from carrying a sling in the pocket? That way, if your bowsting breaks or some other unforseen circumstance happens, you always have a back up. This has always been one of the strong points for the sling... you can always carry one with you and have it as a back up.

@@thejackinati2759 I seldom loose an arrow hunting pheasant, they end up in the bird. Let's be realistic, you can kill a grizzly bear with a bow and arrow which is impossible with a sling shot. Both have their place but the bow is far more deadly.

@@chaplainsoffice6907 You can kill Deer, Wolves and Lions with the sling (But definitely not Humanely). Bears have a bit too much 'Depth' to them to where Sling stones don't really work on them so well. Slings have also been used to kill people. This is unfortunately true to this day. There is an Israeli medical journal which shows how slings kill people. It is funnily enough though Not the first medical journal that talks about sling injuries. Celsus actually tells you how to remove lead sling bullets from people in the first century. "There is a third kind of missile which at times has to be extracted such as a lead ball,​ or a pebble, or such like, which has penetrated the skin and become fixed within unbroken. In all such cases the wound should be laid open freely, and the retained object pulled out by forceps the way it entered. But some difficulty is added in the case of any injury in which a missile has become fixed in bone, or in a joint between the ends of two bones. When in a bone, the missile is swayed until the place which grips the point yields, after which it is extracted by the hand, or by forceps; this is the method also used in extracting teeth. In this way the missile nearly always comes out, but if it resists, it can be dislodged by striking it with some instrument. The last resort when it cannot be pulled out, is to bore into the bone with a trepan close by the missile, and from that hole to cut away the bone in the shape of the letter V, so that the lines of the letter which diverge to either side face the missile; after that it is necessarily loosened and easily removed. If the missile has forced its way actually into a joint between the ends of two bones, the limbs above and below are encircled by bandages or straps, by means of which they are pulled in opposite directions, so that the sinews are put on the stretch; the space between the ends of the bone is widened by these extensions, so that the missile is without difficulty withdrawn. In doing this care must be taken, as mentioned elsewhere, to avoid injury to a sinew, vein or artery while the weapon is being extracted by the same method which was described above." - Celsus 'On Medicine' or 'De Medicina' Book VII

Swinging space is going to be a major reason for their being phased out of battlefields in the iron age as well. You can pack a lot of archers together in close proximity and loose some *very* heavy volleys. Alternatively, archers can shoot through arrow loops built into walls, mantlets, pavise, and improvised cover. Slings just can't do either one. I'm sure slings where probably popular items with the peasantry for hunting small game and sport and the like. While seemingly forgotten, they where probably pressed into service in *many* peasant revolts too. Probably any situation where you would find a peasant with a pitchfork or other farming implement pressed into battle would also see slings used.

​@@ColonelSandersLite If anything, the Iron age (1200-500 b.c) was really the 'Golden age' of slings. Much of the extant slingstone finds date to this period, or to the succeeding period. Furthermore, Me and another fellow have recently found a document that lead sling bullets were found and likely manufactured at a site near Hala Sultan Tekke dating from the late bronze age/early iron age, which if true, greatly predates the notion that lead sling bullets only emerged after ~500 B.C.E. Regarding the fact that slings can't shoot through 'arrow loops' or other such things. Indeed... though this comes with the caveat that you are largely remarking on a particular type of defensive structure. This is indeed the case for walled fortifications etcetera. But these were not the only type of fortifications in the Iron age. Consider Iron age 'Hill forts'. Hill-forts were pretty much the standard type of Gallic and British fortifications and they were built primarily with sling users in mind. Slings can do what you want them to do If you build your particular defensive structures with their usage in mind. If you would like some particularly good reading on the subject, I would highly recommend 'Iron age hillfort defences and the tactics of Sling Warfare' by Peter Robertson. One of the things that you haven't mentioned is that while Slings can be impeded by certain defensive structures... on the other hand slingers can use shields 'actively' in conjunction with slings, similar to javelin-equipped skirmishers etcetera. This is not really the case for archers or crossbowmen. This highly suggests to me that slingers were much more mobile and very likely employed as long-range skirmishers who probably worked in conjunction with shorter ranged peltasts. In this role, density and spacing of said slingers in a 'formation' is not really a concern. (Not that spacing should be much of an issue for slings anyway. People tend to dramatically over-estimate the amount of space you need for a sling. The only slings that take up a lot of room are 'Long' slings which rely on horizontal 'helicopter' releases to work. This problem can be greatly alleviated by the simple expedient of using short/medium slings and a vertical release style... which practically reduces all of the space issues.)

Yeah, I feel like people are far too obsessed with the question of how long it takes to become accurate enough to hit a bird-sized target; a couple of days of practice is enough for accurately hitting a body of men from closer range while at long ranges they were neverbmeant to deal massive casualties; they're harassing the enemy and just seeing how many they can wound/kill before the enemy get close enough to force them to retreat; it is infinitely easier to aim a sling "intuitively" in my experience (because you can visualise the sling as an extension of the arm and feel the projectile) making it actually relatively easy to hit semi-accurately at longer ranges (once you get to 20deg+ shots with a bow, it is actually really hard to be accurate without extensive practice)

I think it's a computer generated voice. Hence "Bau" and some other irritating details.

James Addington A 50 # draw weight bow and arrow can kill a grizzly bear with one arrow, no sling can make that claim.🎯🏹

@@chaplainsoffice6907 I was joking, I am an avid archer sir. I shoot bows up to 85llb at 28"

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/d8Bdm8l90tzdf6M.html

​@@adders45 While I know you are being sarcastic, At the time of Crecy it would not have been without precedent for the English to have used slingers. Prior to Crecy, The English did hire slingers. The earliest mention of slingers for England goes back to Henry II, where 'Irish slingers' are mentioned on a pay roll (12th Century). Slingers were also present in Edward I's army at Falkirk. Later on in 1303, Edward requested for more slingers to be hired from Sherwood/Nottingham. I don't know if he actually received them or not, but the letter survived. In some sources slingers are mentioned as being present at Bannockburn, but they don't mention which side used them, but it is highly likely they would have been on the English side. [1303], April 25 Letter from [John de Droxford and John de Banstead] to [William de Greenfield, chancellor]. The king has ordered them to ordain that 120 slingers (lengatores) should come from the forest of Sherwood in co. Nottingham to the war in Scotland, in addition to the footmen who will come from that county. They request the addressee to assign the sheriff and William de Dogmaresfeld, keeper of that forest, by letters patent under the great seal, to chose the slingers from the forest and elsewhere in the county, and to assign the bearer of this letter [Raymond de Ryuncio] to lead them to Roxburgh, so that they are there at the term assigned for the arrival of the other footmen from that county. For this, and for paying the slingers' wages, the writers send the bearer to whom they have specially enjoined this matter, which the king has much at heart. York. Source: Calendar of documents relating to Scotland preserved in Her Majesty's Public Record Office, London (Published 1888) As to Whether England could field enough skilled slingers to be a useful force by the time of Crecy is an entirely different matter. England began to 'forbid' the practice of other sports but Warbow archery at some point during the latter part of the 13th century, which would have likely had a negative impact regarding sling 'practice'. Matthew Paris wrote that slings were commonly used at target matches just outside the city of London (Alongside bows and crossbows), but this was likely before the 'ban'. By 1340, there probably was not a great deal of 'experienced' slingers in all of England to recruit from. By the time of Agincourt, I highly doubt that England would have had more than a handful of 'decent' slingers and I haven't yet found an English source mentioning slings that date to the 15th century. If you had told me that England actually used slingers in the High/Late medieval period several years ago, I would not have believed it. The fact that they did is surprisingly not well known.

@@thejackinati2759 thank you sir, this is something I will research now. I wonder what weight projectile was preferred in combat? An heavy stone shot at great speed could be effective. Thanks again 👍

they werent. you had to make them each yourself.

If we are talking high-powered warbows, the training amd physical conditioing required to effectively use those is it's own problem; if we're talking lower powered bows; you are absolutely right but those can't match the effective range of slings. (or their damage to well-armored opponents)

​@@captainnyet9855 most war bows are around 70 pounds. That was the bare minimum for the regular archer, but talking about England long bowmen they can go to 80 and 90 pounds or 100. Depending. But even then 70 pounds were for most. However know that bows around the world are different. Check out shadiversity. He uses both a long bow and composite bow. Composite bows of the east has a different feel when pulling the bow compared to the longbow.

@@koreancowboy42 English longbowman were known to draw 120 pounds +. The bows found in the maryrose were all 100 pounds + and most were 140. The heaviest bow on the Maryrose was 180

That is not really true for any but the lightest bows.

Buy a slingshot. It's almost the same. Use stones instead of metal balls and you will be amaze by the impact. I have a simple wooden slingshot and it's amazing

I'd have thought the slingshot was most like the bow. but more convenient. Also wondering why it's not an ancient weapon. Answer is materials, by the time good elastic is available so are firearms.

Agreed.

For hunting, throwing sticks should be included in your comparison. Very underrated.

Bows were more effective. Can be prepared more quietly, the animal will hear and listen hearing that rock being swung and winding up to be thrown

@@koreancowboy42 You are correct, l have been using slings and archery equipment since 1960. In 1968 I used a 50# Bear Grizzly with hand built arrows to bag pheasant on the wing. I can't bag a flying pheasant at 40 yards a sling but take them with a bow.

He did exist

@@BucketExperience Prove it.

Brave, perhaps, but also quite arrogant.

Many scholars believe that Elhannan killed Golyad but it was attributed to David long after he had died to bolster his legend

Interesting thing about the Conquistadors is that we have an autobiographical account from Bernal Diaz who not only encountered slings, but personally used them himself on two occasions, though this is concerning the Aztecs and not the Incas. One event was when Bernal Diaz and a few of his men were throwing 'lances' and slingstones towards several canoes to deter them from landing nearby. This was at Tenochitlan Later on in the text, at night time, Bernal Diaz and one of his companions, who were apparently guarding a small, enclosed place, were alerted by several rushing horsemen. Bernal Diaz shouted out to the horsemen to tell them to stop and to give them their names. When the horsemen refused to answer back to Cortez, Bernal Diaz and his companion started throwing slingstones at them. It turned out that the person that they were slinging towards was actually Hernan Cortez, who was not enthused at this! :P Though the fact that several Spanish peoples were using the sling during that period shouldn't be overly surprising, Spain had a large shepherding populace and somewhat commonly fielded slingers in their armies in Spain circa the time of the end of the Reconquista. Interestingly, the last time that Spanish soldiers faced off against slings (on the Mainland) was in the revolt of the Alpujarras, which was in Spain, as Luis del Mármol recounts. "Although there were few escopeteros and crossbowers among them, they had many slingers, and they threw so much stone, that a cloud of hail seemed to be over our people; and the crack of the slings was so great that it resembled a beautiful arquebus volley." There are other Spanish sources that mention Guamanian slingers, though that dates to a later period. Suffice it to say that the Guamanians also made an impression on the Spanish (And other powers) with their slings.

@@thejackinati2759 thank you very much for your info about the use of the slings in Spain that I never heard it, and yes, it is Atzec, not the Inca but I often confused them swapping them. Much appreciated...

Well when you look at technology growing stone became completely useless especially against armored knights

Yes thank you ! A great coverage of an interesting and rarely covered subject. But "ex ex century" or "one hundred cee em" makes it hard to understand ! Is it a robot ?

In the heyday of slings, bows, and javelins where, in warfare, you faced massed infantry and/or calvary and ranged weapons were generally employed in volleys to inconvenience the maximal number of opponents, the shotgun might be the better weapon. Think of cannon loaded with grapeshot.

@@MrHaighahatta no, it's not shotguns are not even used I war anymore, damn low grande, accuracy and loading time, they are a waste. Slings were used mostly because they were cheap but they are nothing compared to a bow and some good arrows. So rocks ain't gonna surpass some flying solid sharp arrows fired at a rapid rate from afar. You could try but I ain't gonna be the one with the slinger.

​@@eu29lex16slings can be as effective as bows, its just that becoming an archer takes more experience, than becoming a slinger

@@Someone-lr6gu archers have more range and arrows are just better and with better aim. Slings are just barely moderately useful weapons which have a closer range and smaller damage and are only used cuz they are cheaper. .

​@@eu29lex16 archers and slings generally have the same range with proficient slingers sometimes are able to outrange archers a sling can cause A LOT of damage even against armor slings are great weapons, the problem is - while the sling itself is cheap, slingers need to be trained MUCH more than an average archer to be as proficient

Loo 9 m h hi 8 😮 Us hoping team

2.5km?

@@rustybrand8103 woah my bad, it was supposed to say 250.5 m........sorry, turbo typer. Need to check my work before posting.

@@RizztrainingOrder Unofficial world record is a bit above 500m. Official is 477m. I've gotten only to 350m.

@@TamasMateffy dang, I dabble but am nowhere even near half of a half of that distance, very underappreciated weapon.

That's because the script is being read by a text to speech program. It's not smart enough to pick up the context difference between the thing you do at the end of a performance and the thing you use to lob arrows. It's also not smart enough to read the year 1981 as 'nineteen eighty one' and says 'one thousand nine hundred and eighty one. Still, interesting how good the program is. Has some major pacing issues. Almost realistically sounds like a bad narrator.