Longbow - the arrowstorm revisited

[Patrick Waterson]

We fought as individuals in the absence of large shields and big pointy sticks! 

And billmen?

[Imperial Dave]

Hi Patrick. Do you mean did we have billblocks supporting us? We never fought alone but in most of the battles we staged the archer blocks had to fend for themselves if contacted

[Patrick Waterson]

This is one of the things I have wondered about regarding billmen - most people seem to deploy them with archers on either side, but would it make more sense to put the archers in front and run them back past or even through the billmen when opponents got close with intent?  At Towton, for example, one gets the impression of continuous archer front lines at the beginning of the battle.

[Erpingham]

This is one of the things I have wondered about regarding billmen - most people seem to deploy them with archers on either side, but would it make more sense to put the archers in front and run them back past or even through the billmen when opponents got close with intent?  At Towton, for example, one gets the impression of continuous archer front lines at the beginning of the battle.

I've thought a great deal about where longbowmen were in a battle and concluded we are a bit stuck in rigid stereotypes caused by Burne's interpretations of the "herse" and his detractors desire for a equally firm counter position.  So, I'm quite happy to see wings of archers in some places and other formations on others.  At Towton, it seems pretty clear at least some archers were deployed forward to start the battle, even if it was effectively a skirmish screen.  Groups of archers were also advanced at Homildon/Humbleton.  In Burgundian battles, archers could be pushed forward too.  So I think we can be sure that the English could deploy a screen of archers if they wanted to, possibly sent forward from larger bodies.

[Imperial Dave]

Both,

the archer blocks I fought in were placed in different positions in different battles. Sometimes we were on the wings  and sometimes we were behind the main men at arms and billmen.

I have to reiterate that the battles I participated in an actual archer block were all medieval in nature. Any dark age battles where I participated as an archer was as a screen

[Chuck the Grey]

As an aside, we used to practice speed shooting and on occasion could get 6-7 shots off in a minute. That would constitute heavy repetitive volleys but the accuracy definitely suffers and the munitions run out pretty quickly too!

Ammunition supply is a constant problem throughout history. When I was in the US Army, admittedly some time ago, there is a constant emphasis on controlling rate of fire to avoid wasting ammunition. During training, we were placed on the firing line at the range by squads and would engage multiple targets at various ranges as a groups of targets were popped up by a somewhat sadistic range officer. During the first exercise, every squad wasted ammo by having the entire squad engage every group of targets regardless of the range. We soon learned to have the best marksman engage the long range targets, generally at 200 or 300 m, and then would have the entire squad engage targets in the hundred meter range. I think the same thing would've applied to massed archers in both the medieval and ancient eras.

Every archer would have a limited supply of arrows and the chances of resupply during battle were probably low. In order to maintain a steady rate of fire, not all the archers in the unit would engage the enemy at the same time. This is a possible explanation for the depth to archer units as this would allow a significant number of archers to fire simultaneously while maintaining a reserve ready to engage the enemy as the first group of archers depleted ammo or became tired. They might've even been some type of rotation system that would allow the archer unit to maintain a steady rate of fire.

An important point to remember is that firepower isn't the total number of shots downrange, but the number of aimed shots during a given time.

[Patrick Waterson]

An important point to remember is that firepower isn't the total number of shots downrange, but the number of aimed shots during a given time.

Up to a point: longbows did not have foresights and backsights and opponents did not take cover on the battlefield, but progressed in nice big (and often slow) formations that would have been a mortarman's dream.

Arrows also lost their killing force after a certain distance, so it made sense for everyone to let go under the guidance of the master archer as soon as the enemy came within killing distance, as although one could send six or more arrows per minute, the rate of massed shooting would be less than individual shooting and nobody would get through their inventory before the attack ran its course.

Arrow resupply for English archers took two forms: once an enemy attack was beaten off, it would take them some time to reform and attempt another, so the archers could recover some shafts from the battlefield, but more reliable and much swifter was to have men and boys take arrow bags round the archers in situ so that they could each be given a couple of handfuls to add to anything they still had.

[Erpingham]

Arrow resupply for English archers took two forms: once an enemy attack was beaten off, it would take them some time to reform and attempt another, so the archers could recover some shafts from the battlefield, but more reliable and much swifter was to have men and boys take arrow bags round the archers in situ so that they could each be given a couple of handfuls to add to anything they still had.

For which we have evidence of the first but not for the second.  There seems no evidence of anyone involved in battlefield resupply, or of stashing reserve supplies on the field.  Mentions of collecting arrows may imply organised parties or just individuals scavenging what they could.  I've seen lots of mentions of "boys" who carried arrows in modern accounts but I can't recall any such in period records.  "Boys" served in medieval armies but usually as servants to men-at-arms. 

One of the sometimes overlooked aspects of the English liking to deploy archers on the defensive was arrow supply.  Archers expecting to be in static positions could carry more personal supplies of arrows than those expected to run about a lot.  Arrows bags could be dumped at the feet of the archer or emptied and the arrows stuck in the ground.

[Dave Beatty]

And just to bring the discussion into the 21st century check out the article, "The A-10 and Agincourt" at https://medium.com/the-bridge/cedc52d8a4ae