when did muskets fully replace the Bow in Europe?

Message Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic

   Omar has the physical picture.  Medieval peasants, the tenants of the nobility who raised levies for war, worked at tough physical labor from their later childhood.  But just anyone wasn't suitable for the longbow.  The strongest were needed to make it effective.
I think the Assize specified that practice must be engaged in, but how often it was really done, who knows?
In regard to economic factors concerning firearms, one was demographic, the other technological:  

After the Plague of the mid 14th c., there was a shortage of agricultural labor to work the land, worse in some places than others, and a recurrance of food shortages which led to weaker resistance to diseases, etc.  Eating was more important than practicing archery, and although that hardly disappeared overnight, the change in economic realities and the gradual shift away from feudal models of social relationships caused, not the technology itself, but the serious look at its use.

Again it didn't happen quickly, but labor shortages in the 14th c. translated into some use of professional soldiers (not necessarily all nobility) to conduct conflicts.  That became more expensive.  Through the 15th c., as gunpowder technology developed, and as costs for war increased, the need to economize caused the further adoption of hand held firearms as those became more reliable.

Somewhere in that period, 1450-1500, it became economical enough to equip sizeable numbers of soldiers with firearms.  The costs of workmanship to make the arquebus type weapon, and the chemical propellants became less than the other economic costs of long practice for numbers of longbowmen.  Anyone could learn to use a firearm in a short time.  Accuracy wasn't important.  A very large number of soldiers didn't survive a campaign due to disease and exposure, etc. anyway, so go the cheaper route. 

EDIT:  I don't want to give the impression that the longbow was the only missile weapon in use before firearms became practical.  Certainly in the later medieval period the crossbow was used, and the "archers" of the French and Burgundian Compagnies d' Ordinance were I believe, so armed.

The crossbow had been used by Roman troops in the late Empire, like 4th and 5th c.  It seems to have disappeared after the mounted soldier in the West became paramount, but other bows were widely used in the East (Byzantine and other states).

My knowledge of the Eastern Empire and the others is pretty weak.  Maybe all you Byzo's can fill us in regarding the evolution of the missile weapons there from the 4th c. on.

As far as the late medieval crossbow in Italy, Spain, France, etc., was that resurrected because of the Renaissance fascination with classical antiquity?  

If armor could be pierced by masses of arrows launched at high angle, what happened when the labor shortages mentioned above caused a change in battlefield tactics (pikes; guns that could be moved around; light stradioti).  The armor got heavier, and the mechanical advantage of the crossbow could impact that, but it was a much shorter range missile weapon.  Doubtful that it was much faster to load than an arquebus.  It certainly wasn't as fast as using a quiver of arrows.

Interesting stuff.

Edited by pikeshot1600 - 05-Apr-2008 at 20:30