Following on from this thread:
I've always been interested to see the results of a LGDR battle between an army equipped with muskets (flint- or match- lock), versus an army equipped with bows. Although muskets represent a technological leap, they do have their drawbacks. So, how well do the muskets of 1700-1750 stand up to massed bowmen? I would also be interested to know if bows could outrange a musket.
Has anyone seen a result of a battle in LGDR between these two types of army? What was the result? Can the result be put down to poor Generalship, or was the playing field generally level, with one side coming out better due to equipment?
I ask this question due to the thoughts of the Duke of Wellington, who I believe was considering deploying bowmen during the Napoleonic Wars, as the bow outranged the musket of the time, and had a much greater mass of firepower. I don't know if this is entirely true, I cannot remember my source for this.
baggins wrote:Review of Warfare in the Eighteenth Century by Jeremy Black
I've always been interested to see the results of a LGDR battle between an army equipped with muskets (flint- or match- lock), versus an army equipped with bows. Although muskets represent a technological leap, they do have their drawbacks. So, how well do the muskets of 1700-1750 stand up to massed bowmen? I would also be interested to know if bows could outrange a musket.
Has anyone seen a result of a battle in LGDR between these two types of army? What was the result? Can the result be put down to poor Generalship, or was the playing field generally level, with one side coming out better due to equipment?
I ask this question due to the thoughts of the Duke of Wellington, who I believe was considering deploying bowmen during the Napoleonic Wars, as the bow outranged the musket of the time, and had a much greater mass of firepower. I don't know if this is entirely true, I cannot remember my source for this.