3 ms·

I don't know, maybe because bow is a peasants' weapon, and France had knigts? Western Europe had its share of stupidity, like kings leading charges instead of

• louhike 11y ago
  "I don't know, maybe because bow is a peasants' weapon, and France had knigts?" If you read the abstract (I'm not saying you didn't), you'll see that this is what they are saying. The TL;DR version is that using longbows meant training peasants, which will pose internal security problems. England was more stable at this time so it was less dangerous for them to train peasants to fight.
• dest 11y ago
  from the abstract: Rulers choosing between missile technologies thus confronted a trade-off with respect to internal and external security. England alone in late medieval Europe was sufficiently politically stable to allow its rulers the first-best technology option. In France and Scotland political instability prevailed, constraining rulers in these nations to the crossbow.
• arethuza 11y ago
  Not sure there was much option at that time - to get to be a King, or keep your position, quite often required being a direct hands-on stupendous badass.
• vacri 11y ago
  > stupidity, like kings leading charges instead of commanding battles on a tactical level. Why exchange one form of stupidity for another? If you're going to ping medieval Europe for military stupidity, then instead suggest that the people commanding the battles should be trained military specialists, as they are today. There's nothing magical about kings that make them better at battle tactics.
  • dozzie 11y ago
    The problem with kings leading charges is that there's nobody to command the battlefield, not that they were skilled or not. Eastern Europe had that much better.