3 ms·
The intro still assumes that the battles won by the English in the Hundred Years War were due the longbow (alone), which AFAIK is quite debatable (at least outs
by mhd 11y ago
The intro still assumes that the battles won by the English in the Hundred Years War were due the longbow (alone), which AFAIK is quite debatable (at least outside of England, where Agincourt is a bit of a national myth, even more than e.g. the Black Legend).
And never mind instability, the French also weren't as geographically isolated as the English and thus it was easier to hire mercenaries. Genoese crossbowman being a particular example.
The penetrative ability of the longbow is also greatly exaggerated, citing a book that did some pretty shoddy testing (flat sheets of poor quality metal used as targets, but hardened bodkins as penetrators, 10m distance, no padding).
- afterburner 11y agoFrance won the Hundred Years War.
- mcv 11y agoExactly. The longbow alone doesn't win anything. It has to be used in the right situation, preferably on defensive terrain, on a hill, with dismounted knights protecting the longbowmen. Dismounted knights was a no-go for the French nobility, who loved their glorious cavalry charge. If you're going to charge, the longbow is a lot less useful. And in battles where the French charge succeeded (because the English lacked a good defensive position, for example), the French were a lot more likely to win.