Also it talks about cutting off the middle finger only. To draw a bow you need both of the first 2 fingers on the hand (for a powerful bow anyway). If you were to capture a bowman (who they are right is no good for ransom) and remove both the fingers then they would NOT be able to fight with swords, battleaxes etc as stated in the article. I've done both archery and re-enactnment using a variety of weapons and you can't wield more than a dagger (and poorly at that) without the first two fingers.... to demonstrate... go home... pick up rolling pin in last 2 fingers and try waving it around.... pick up broken crockery and put rolling pin back in draw.... point proved. So cut the fingers off and release them and you've deprived the enemy of a highly trained bowman and they won't be able to use another weapon. As for going hand to hand.... the bowman would normally not be armed with more than a long dagger or short sword for this as anything bigger would get in the way. If you have a knight in plate armour then once you've pulled him off his horse the best way to dispatch him is a short blade in throat, armpit or groin. As for the moral code they talked about that was mainly applied to the noble ranks as they were the ones worth ransom. outeast said, Delster, it's possible you're misunderstanding the point of the