The effectiveness of medieval English archery

[admin]

My thoughts, taken from: http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic ... 438#249438

I agree with Dan, more or less (though we disagree slightly on the effects of types of arrows against types of armoured targets).

I believe that the obvious effectiveness of English/Welsh archers from c.1330-c.1440 was down to two main factors:
1) Deployment
2) Law

The latter point is incredibly important - in lands under English rule it was law to practice archery for males between the ages of 16 and 60, at least once per week, from Edward 1's reign onwards (it was only repealed under James I, I believe).

If you look at the latter stages of the Hundred Years War, in fact you will see that the French, Burgundians, Bretons and Flemish were using large numbers of their own longbowmen (the Burgunians even copied English deployment with wooden stakes and pits).

The idea that the English had longbowmen and the 'French' had crossbowmen is in part a myth - the English used crossbowmen as well (they are listed on muster rolls) and the 'French' also had archers - in large numbers by the 1450's. The French force that Talbot slaughtered just before Castillon was made up mostly of French archers...

However what is notable is that the 'French' never had as much success with longbowmen as the English did, despite also having them. What was the main difference? Well surely the weapon and arrows were much the same in design, but a critical difference was the law. Englishmen were raised in the bow, with sports like golf, football, skittles and cockfighting being made illegal! This law was repeatedly enforced under Edward II, Edward III, Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V and Henry VI.... This legal enforcement of archery almost certainly resulted in far more effective archers.

I find it ironic that some modern archers seem to see the English warbow as a proletarian item, a symbol of the success of the working classes over the aristocracy... when in fact the success of the English warbow is almost certainly largely a result of English monarchical and government policy and the oppression of national sports (like football).

Matt

[janner]

Matt,

Some interesting points there. I might add tactical doctrine, which is (as you know) broader than deployment.

I'm still getting my head around the use of the bow in various armies in the Middle Ages, but I'm beginning to consider the Plantagenets armies development of a coherent methodology that allowed for effective mass use of bows in close conjunction with men-at-arms. Clearly the war bow had been around for some time, was used by many nations and was no wonder weapon. Yes, the English/Welsh armies had trained and proficient archers available in greater numbers, but that, alone, would not have been enough.

More thinking required on my side - sorry for that being a little 'in process'

Regards,

[admin]

Yeah - I also think that the sources give a hint in this regard in that several times during the Hundred Years War the English archers are described as shooting at almost point-blank range. I wonder if the English method of pinning the opponent at the front and then pouring a huge volume of heavy projectiles into them from the sides was somehow different to how other nations were generally employing missle troops.

[janner]

My feel is that the crux was coordination with the men-at-arms - many of whom were, by the turn of the fifteenth century, according to some data I've seen, former archers. I'm beginning to think that 'hence' referred to the archers being mixed up with the men-at-arms in the same way that it affected the soil than some static deployment/formation such as a wedge etc.

More red wine needed

[Dan Howard]

Heh. I stopped commenting in that thread because I agreed with pretty much everything Matt said.

[Chiron]

What impressed me when reading Alfred Burns was the times the archers were used for covering fire allowing the men at arms to close, this was used to great effect during several sieges. Archers also probably played a major role in minor engagements, an analyses of mounted archers might also be usefull in this respect.