Hakonarson
11-05-2002, 15:14
Contrary to popular belief the French were not complete idiots! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
Longbowmen obviously remained an important and powerful part of English armies until the 1500's, and yet the French might've well expected to overwhelm them at Agincourt in 1415 when the MAA fought on foot - for they had done so several times before.
Nogent sur Seine - Froissart describes how heavily armoured infantry with large shields (pavises) "broke through the line of archers and flung them in disorder; for their shields were so strong the arrows made no impression on them".
Cocherel - 1346 where "the archers "shot fiercly togheher, but the Frenchmen were so well armed (ie armoured) and pavised (ie shielded) that they took but little hurt.....and so entered in among the English and Navaresse".
And at Auray (1364) again "the English archers shot well, but their arrows hurt not, as the French were well armed and shielded from them"
Also the French retained smaller bodies of mounted men-at-arms to ride down archers, especially towards the flanks. The stakes adopted by the English (as at Agincourt) were in response such bodies, and they were sometimes successful, such as at Vernueil in 1424.
There was also horse armour - at Poitiers the mounted German portion of the French army was had armoured horses, and the Earl of Oxford, observing the ineffectiveness of fire at their front led his archers to the flank where they could shoot at the unarmoured hind-quarters.
The French also tried more sophisitcated tactics, such as telling off troops to march around the English and attack their rear, or attack their horses - both infantry and cavalry were used for this.
Longbowmen obviously remained an important and powerful part of English armies until the 1500's, and yet the French might've well expected to overwhelm them at Agincourt in 1415 when the MAA fought on foot - for they had done so several times before.
Nogent sur Seine - Froissart describes how heavily armoured infantry with large shields (pavises) "broke through the line of archers and flung them in disorder; for their shields were so strong the arrows made no impression on them".
Cocherel - 1346 where "the archers "shot fiercly togheher, but the Frenchmen were so well armed (ie armoured) and pavised (ie shielded) that they took but little hurt.....and so entered in among the English and Navaresse".
And at Auray (1364) again "the English archers shot well, but their arrows hurt not, as the French were well armed and shielded from them"
Also the French retained smaller bodies of mounted men-at-arms to ride down archers, especially towards the flanks. The stakes adopted by the English (as at Agincourt) were in response such bodies, and they were sometimes successful, such as at Vernueil in 1424.
There was also horse armour - at Poitiers the mounted German portion of the French army was had armoured horses, and the Earl of Oxford, observing the ineffectiveness of fire at their front led his archers to the flank where they could shoot at the unarmoured hind-quarters.
The French also tried more sophisitcated tactics, such as telling off troops to march around the English and attack their rear, or attack their horses - both infantry and cavalry were used for this.