Crossbows outrange Longbows?

[Jmilbrandt]

I was just watching Warriors on the history channel, it was about the battle of Agincourt. The host was talking about the differences between the longbows the English had and the crossbows the French had. He said that a crossbow generally outranges longbows and that the only advantage to the longbow was the reload speed. That isn't true is it? I always thought that longbows out ranged crossbows.

[Badger]

  a 100# longbow would store about the same energy as a 200# crossbow typicaly, if they were large crossbows with longer draws they would store mre energy naturally.

[Dane]

One of the great advantages of the cross bow is that it takes relatively little training for someone to get procient. Also, you don't need the physical strength a war bow shooter has to have. They can stay loaded and spanned for a long time, and you don't need as much room as a long bow.

Making one is much more complex and difficult, though, so they would have been far more expensive than a yew bow. Less material needed for the bolts vs. a war arrow, too.

Dane

[deerhunter97370]

From what I always understood at Agincourt the crossbowman were out of range for there crossbows, at the range of of the English Longbows. And since the crossbows werent effective the French charged their calvery and got slaughtered. Joel

[Badger]

I believe most of the crossbows were relatively light weight back then, less than 200#. These would have lacked range over the longbow. Steve

[JW_Halverson]

The accounts of Agincourt I have read state the Italian mercenary crossbowmen were getting nicely aerated/perforated long before they could return fire.  They turned and marched back out of range of the longbowmen where the French reneged on payment and slaughtered the crossbowmen instead of paying their wages.

[mullet]

 That's the story I read too.

[Jaro]

By 1400´ most crossbows would still have composite prods, though there are steel prods already in use, they are nowhere as thick and heavy as late 1600´ hunting renaissance crosbows too often cited as "as heavy as 1200 pounds".

Composite prods have drawweight limitations and by that time belt hook with or without single pulley was standart spanning device for field weapons. That should tell you how heavy these probably were. But these bows had still relativelly long draw (for crossbows I mean)

In 1500´the situation was different, steel prods/short draws were standart and german cranequin most common in mid/western europe. In Schilling chronicles is "sound of german cranequins being unwind" described as most prevalent sound on battlefield. At that time though arquebuis was already cheaper and more used alternative.

We have here some husite crossbows from early 1400´ intended for field use and they do not appear to be very heavy, nor well made......

Jaroslav

[Len]

I think some of you may be confusing crecy with agincourt in regards to crossbowmwen being killed by the French knights etc. A typical fieldcrossbow of the time probably had a draw of around maybe up to 300lb , so its not going to out range an English warbow and its not going to get anywhere near it for rate of fire, IMO .

[Loki]

It was Crecy the crossbowmen were ridden down by their own cavalry,because they had retreated from the engagement with the Longbowmen.They had to retreat because they had no pavises to reload behind so they fell like wheat to the English arrows.

At Agincourt the crossbowmen werent positioned so they could shoot at the English,the battlefields so narrow and the French Nobles were so eager to kill the English peasents they filled their 'battles' with Infantry and left the Crossbowmen to the rear,they must of been confident  .

[Yeomanbowman]

In 1901 Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey shot a 3 oz bolt from a siege crossbow 450 yards over the Menai Straits several times.  The stock was a replica but the prods were original 15th century steel ones from Genoa.  They had a pull of over 1/2 a ton!.  However, the weight in the hand was on 18lbs and he said could be shot without a stand by a fit man.  According to him the crossbows at Agincourt were made with steel prods. 
Cheers,
Jeremy

[Justin Snyder]

Well paint me stupid.... I always thought of a crossbow as a weapon more suited for defending the castle in siege warfare. In an open field battle I want the longbow.

[bow-toxo]

Two mediaeval sources claim that a longbow would shoot farther than a crossbow unless the crossbow were big enough to be a problem to carry.

[Yeomanbowman]

Erik, what period are these sources, please?  Gerald of Wales implies that xbows were a little more powerful. As you know he was familiar with the Welsh elm bow and the Aglo-Norman xbow.

[bow-toxo]

Erik, what period are these sources, please?  Gerald of Wales implies that xbows were a little more powerful. As you know he was familiar with the Welsh elm bow and the Aglo-Norman xbow.

 I have to apologize. I have searched my notes and can't find the references. They were mediaeval ones. What aas the quote fron Geaald of Wales ? I'm not familiar with it. He was of course writing just when the crossbow was becomimg very popular and Richard Lionheart was about to go on crusade and hire lots of crossbowmen in Italy.