Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Long vs crossbow

Expand Messages
  • ranulfmayle
    Well said!! ... But ... longbow, ... lacks ... to ... for ... much ... own ... of ... superior. ... like
    Message 1 of 2 , Jul 22, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Well said!!


      --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, "Ben" <unclestrongbow@y...>
      wrote:
      > Okay, this feels soooooo crazy, but I'm going to try to argue the
      > merits of the crossbow (having an English longbowman persona).
      But
      > I've been sane now for a long while. The change is refreshing.
      >
      > First, the crossbow does seem to favor a static defense. It's
      > compact, has a tremendous range and is easier to use than a
      longbow,
      > as it has fewer physical requirements of the shooter. It's also
      > able to stay primed & ready to shoot almost indefinitely. It
      lacks
      > speed in sending bolts down range, which is not so important when
      > you have a static position with lots of cover. So, yes, I can
      > easily accept that the crossbow is superior for seiges.
      >
      > Truth be told, the longbow wasn't, in and of itself, so great a
      > weapon. It was hard to draw, had almost no mechanical help
      > whatsoever, and it was very large compared to the crossbow. What
      > made the longbow's reputation wasn't so much the bow itself, in my
      > humble opinion, as the man behind it. Its speed made it better on
      > open ground than the crossbow, while its size, I think, made less
      > favorable from a wall or other cover. The longbowman was trained
      to
      > shoot as quickly and as accurately as poosible, but their main
      > advantage was that they could fill the air with arrows much faster
      > than crossbows. Facing a charging line of horsemen, numbers help
      > more than accuracy, methinks. But the sheer amount of training
      for
      > a yeoman made him more costly than a crossbowman in the long run.
      > While the crossbow is more costly in materials and time, it is
      much
      > easier to train a man at arms to use it.
      >
      > As a weapon, the crossbow is more mechanically advanced, and does
      > more of the work for the shooter, making it easier to use,
      > especially from a defensive position. It gets high marks on its
      own
      > design and ease of use. While the longbow is simpler to make and
      > harder to use, I find that its appeal to me is more in the sense
      of
      > accomplishment I get from each shot than in any technical
      > superiority over the crossbow. It's not the bow that is
      superior.
      > It is who the bow makes me, as an archer, that defines my love for
      > it. The crossbow is a fine weapon...but I feel that I'm a better
      > man for taking up the longbow, and following a harder path. I
      like
      > the crossbow, but I LOVE the longbow.
      >
      > Yours on the line,
      > Jon Strongebowe
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.