4 ms·
One of the notes does actually address this point: 23 At the battle of Courtrai, for instance, the small principality of Flanders was able to muster an army of
by ezzaf 11y ago
One of the notes does actually address this point:
23 At the battle of Courtrai, for instance, the small principality of Flanders was able to muster an
army of archers larger than the army of the entire kingdom of France, which consisted of knights
and men-at-arms (Rogers 1993, p. 252). In this sense, a weapon like the longbow allows for the military
enfranchisement of commoners, which institutionally constrains the ruler
It doesn't go on to discuss this further, but it shows that while maintaining a large force of archers required a population widely practiced in archery, where a region could muster enough longbows it enabled them to effectively combat the central control of their country.
- mirod1 11y agoActually the descriptions of the battle I have seen do not mention archers. Rather it looks like a militia on foot was able to defeat a cavalry-based army by choosing (and preparing) the battlefield. It seems that both armies used crossbows, and that actually the French did better with them. References: http://www.liebaart.org/slag_e.htm http://www.liebaart.org/slag_e.htm http://www.military-history.org/articles/the-battle-of-courtrai-1302.htm http://www.military-history.org/articles/the-battle-of-court...