4 ms·
I've only read the abstract, so I'm not sure if this is covered, but the longbow requires huge amounts of practice from a young age to be effective. You had to
by widdershins 11y ago
I've only read the abstract, so I'm not sure if this is covered, but the longbow requires huge amounts of practice from a young age to be effective. You had to be incredibly strong just to draw the string. A crossbow, by contrast, was easier to draw, and men could be trained to use it in a far shorter time. English Kings had constant problems with procuring enough men capable of using a longbow, passing all sorts of laws banning all sports except archery etc. Perhaps the French simply couldn't find enough trained men?
- masklinn 11y ago> I'm not sure if this is covered, but the longbow requires huge amounts of practice from a young age to be effective. It is covered, the paper lists a number of measure the English crown took to force people to train with the longbow in their spare time. > the French simply couldn't find enough trained men? The French could have taken the same measures of mandating longbow ownership and strongly "encouraging" longbow training (by setting up tournaments and forbidding other types of leisure)
- draven 11y agoIt's covered: "The longbow took years of continuous training to master. Not only was there the matter of the physical strength necessary to draw 120-plus pounds with one arm over and over again, but because the longbow arrow was drawn to the ear, aim was largely a matter intuition rather than sight. Thus, if war erupted, it was not possible to recruit a company of men untrained on the longbow and train them to use the weapon quickly. A stock of proficient archers had to already be in place, prepared to serve."