Author Topic: Long Bow Accuracy  (Read 8193 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lucasade

  • Member
  • Posts: 335
Re: Long Bow Accuracy
« Reply #15 on: October 04, 2014, 06:43:32 pm »
I think it would be reasonable to assume that each archer would march with his bow (his meaning the one in his possesion...) and a sheaf of arrows - I heard somewhere they had two sheafs each at the start of a battle but one is not too much to carry?

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: Long Bow Accuracy
« Reply #16 on: October 04, 2014, 08:46:16 pm »
I wouldn't base the artifacts found on a ship long after the heyday of the longbow as representative of land battles a few hundred years previously..
 Apples and Oranges.
 Once the netting gave way any loose longbows would surely have drifted away.

Offline Ringeck85

  • Member
  • Posts: 139
Re: Long Bow Accuracy
« Reply #17 on: October 10, 2014, 06:35:39 pm »
I think it depended on context for which.

I would imagine most of the time, an archer on land would carry their own bow with them unless it was an impediment (like, say, if they're off duty but part of a town or fortress's garrison and only take their bow when on duty). 

Medieval warfare was for the most part Not pitched battles; these were relatively rare.  Rather, raids and counter raids (called chevauchée) into lightly defended territory, ambushes, and sieges, were much more common.  And even when there were pitched battles, there was often a town or city or fortress as the main objective, and the people trying to defend the place would offer battle as an alternative, usually in an attempt to relieve or prevent a siege. Pitched battles did start to become more common in Early Modern times though with increasing numbers of paid, professional, mercenary or civic standing armies, rather than temporary levies or mercenaries or militia that were relied on most of the time in medieval armies.

In addition to garrison duty in a town or fortress (where only those on watch would be armed all the time), or serving aboard a ship (where you could store arms away until needed as surprise attacks on sea were rare, you'd usually see them coming), or being part of an official military raid/mission, it's likely that there was certainly some way to resupply if they ran out of arrows, but that doesn't mean they never carried their arms with them.

Archers might also be in small groups foraging, or laying in ambush, or any number of tactical situations that would make resupply of arrows difficult, indicating that unless the archers were part of a large force on the march, their arrows would probably be with them, and their bows too I would imagine, unless the situation didn't call for them to be on alert (like if they're far from the front lines or in a garrison and off duty).

There were also independent forces using archers, usually bandits that preyed on local populaces, and the more formidable groups had seized a key fortress.  They would more likely carry their own equipment than groups connected with a particular lord or faction.

A related example where not carrying your equipment with you turned out poorly was at Crecy, where the Genoese crossbowmen didn't have their pavise shields with them (left in the baggage train, and their crossbow strings were wet) when trying, and failing, to engage the English archers.
"It is how we choose what we do, and how we approach it, that determines whether the sum of our days adds up to a formless blur, or to something resembling a work of art."
-Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

(Ren', in Wytheville, VA)

Offline OTDEAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 140
Re: Long Bow Accuracy
« Reply #18 on: October 22, 2014, 09:54:43 am »
Wills,

Just responding to your earlier post, the sides did take tactical rests between melee.  This is documented at Crecy and some of Edward IIIs archery took the time to flank the French to shoot from the extreme flank to get past the frontal armour of the horse by shooting the beasts in the side and rear.

Dean