Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Pharmboy
The historians have concluded that the English could not have been outnumbered by more than about two to one.

Highly unlikely. The battle was devastating to French morale, which it wouldn't have been had they lost a roughly equal conflict. It also made an enormous stir throughout Europe, which again an equal conflict would not have.

It is also relevant that the English were exhausted from long marching trying to evade the French, suffering severely from dysyntery and significantly malnourished.

If the English hadn't tried to stick with their archers and dismounted men at arms approach to battle after effective artillery made it obsolete, they could have kicked ass for at least another century.

30 posted on 10/25/2009 2:05:21 PM PDT by Sherman Logan ("The price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections." Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Sherman Logan

Field artillery didn’t come in until the 30 years war. What made the kinds of longbows needed to shoot through French armor obsolete was the little ice age and the collapse of the food system needed to get people big enough to pull them.


35 posted on 10/31/2009 2:34:42 AM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson