The History of the Crossbow: The Rise, Reign and Resilience of the Crossbow

In the dense stillness of the jungle, a modern soldier crouches beneath the canopy, his weapon of choice silent but deadly. It's not a suppressed firearm or high-tech drone, but a crossbow. Though often considered a relic of medieval warfare, this weapon, which once helped shape the course of empires, continues to whisper through the shadows of modern conflict.

The crossbow's story stretches across centuries and continents, from its earliest appearance in ancient battlefields, through its fearsome medieval dominance, to its near extinction in the face of gunpowder and finally, to a surprising modern rebirth in specialist military operations. This is the tale of a weapon designed for precision, power, and quiet lethality.

Terry Bailey explains.

An Early Modern period depiction of two soldiers with a horse-drawn ballista.

Ancient origins

The crossbow's roots lie deep in the ancient world, with the earliest known examples emerging from China during the Warring States Period, (475 to 221 BCE), with early examples discovered from the 5th century BCE. Chinese crossbows featured sophisticated bronze trigger mechanisms and were often mass-produced. This innovation allowed large military units to wield powerful, standardised ranged weapons with minimal training. Perhaps most remarkable was Zhuge Liang's "repeating crossbow", capable of firing multiple bolts in quick succession, centuries ahead of its time.

Meanwhile, in Hellenistic Greece, engineers developed the gastraphetes, (γαστραφέτης), or "belly bow," as early as the 4th century BCE. Described by Heron of Alexandria, (Ἥρων ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεύς), this mechanical device required the user to brace the stock against the abdomen and press down to load it. It was vital in siege warfare, where powerful bolts could be launched with force from behind fortifications.

The Romans took the idea further with torsion-powered siege engines like the arcuballista and cheiroballistra, which, while not quite personal crossbows, shared similar mechanical principles. These innovations paved the way for increasingly powerful projectile weapons in European and Byzantine warfare.

The weapon that changed the rules

Crossbows faded from prominence in Europe after the fall of Rome but returned with force by the 10th and 11th centuries, likely through Mediterranean trade or the Crusades. As European militaries embraced the weapon, it underwent significant improvements. The medieval crossbow, or arbalest, evolved with steel prods, cranks, and windlasses, enabling it to punch through armour at close range with devastating force.

On the battlefield, crossbows proved invaluable during sieges and defensive actions, where a soldier could shoot from behind cover without requiring the strength or lifelong training needed to master a longbow. Their use at the Battle of Hastings (1066) and by Genoese crossbowmen at the Battle of Crécy (1346) cemented their reputation as serious threats.

However, the crossbow was not without controversy. In 1139, the Second Lateran Council declared its use against Christians to be immoral and banned it, a rare moment when a weapon was condemned by the Church itself. This ban only heightened the crossbow's reputation as a fearsome equalizer.

Unlike the longbow, which required years of practice and physical conditioning, a crossbow could be used effectively by commoners, allowing them to kill even the most heavily armored knight from afar. For some, this represented a degradation of chivalric warfare; for others, a necessary step in the evolution of combat.

Compared to the longbow, the crossbow was easier to learn, had greater penetrating power, but suffered from a slower rate of fire. The longbow retained its place in English warfare, but across much of Europe, the crossbow ruled the battlefield for several centuries.

Fall from grace

By the 15th century, the rise of gunpowder weapons began to overshadow the crossbow. Matchlocks and arquebuses offered greater armour penetration, required less mechanical upkeep, and perhaps most significantly, produced the terrifying psychological effect of gunfire.

As mass infantry formations and volley fire tactics developed, crossbows struggled to maintain relevance. Muskets were cheaper, could be taught to recruits quickly, and their manufacture was more adaptable to emerging industrial methods. By the 18th century, crossbows had disappeared from the frontlines of most European armies, lingering only in rare instances, such as in Napoleonic-era coastal militias, before vanishing almost entirely from modern warfare.

The crossbow in modern conflict

During the Vietnam War, the Montagnard mountain tribes, an umbrella term for various indigenous groups living in Vietnam's Central Highlands, used primitive but highly effective crossbows as part of their traditional arsenal. Constructed from locally available materials such as bamboo, hardwood, and twisted plant fibers, these weapons were simple yet reliable, optimized for jungle terrain and ambush tactics. Montagnard crossbows typically featured hand-carved wooden stocks and flexible bows made from resilient native wood, firing short, sharpened wooden bolts.

Despite their rudimentary design, these crossbows could deliver deadly force silently, an essential advantage in close-range forest combat and for hunting. Their quiet lethality and rugged simplicity did not go unnoticed by American troops operating alongside them. U.S. Special Forces, who often worked closely with Montagnard fighters through the Civilian Irregular Defence Group (CIDG) program, were impressed by the crossbow's stealth capabilities, ease of construction, and lack of a signature report, critical features in jungle warfare where silence often meant survival. These encounters likely inspired U.S. experimentation with modernized crossbows for specialized tasks such as cutting tripwires, silent sentry removal, and setting traps, contributing to a small but enduring niche role for the crossbow in unconventional warfare. Similarly, Russian Spetsnaz units have been known to use compact crossbows for covert operations, including breaching and wire-cutting in environments where silence is vital.

Modern crossbow as a tool

Modern crossbows have also evolved into tactical tools, equipped with a variety of bolt types, from blunt and non-lethal projectiles to armour-piercing or even explosive-tipped variants. Some are designed to fold or collapse into survival kits, making them viable for hunting or stealth missions in hostile terrain. In specialized law enforcement units, crossbows serve non-lethal roles: deploying tranquillizers, nets, or breaching tools in hostage scenarios or urban environments where gunfire could escalate danger. Their silence and versatility have secured the crossbow a niche in military and policing contexts where subtlety and control are paramount.

Archaeological evidence

Archaeological evidence has played a crucial role in uncovering the early history and battlefield use of crossbows. Some of the oldest surviving crossbow components were found in ancient Chinese tombs, particularly from the Warring States Period (475 to 221 BCE). Excavations at sites like Tomb 3 at Qinjiazui and the Terracotta Army pits at Xi'an have revealed bronze trigger mechanisms that were standardised, as indicated suggesting mass production and wide deployment in early Chinese armies.

These finds demonstrate a high level of mechanical sophistication, with levers and sears similar in principle to modern firearm triggers. The Chinese crossbow was clearly not a one-off innovation but a cornerstone of ancient military strategy.

In Europe, physical remnants of early crossbows are rarer but not absent. Some Roman-era torsion crossbow-like devices, such as arcuballistae and cheiroballistrae, have been reconstructed from surviving parts and contemporary descriptions. Later medieval examples, including steel prods, windlass mechanisms, and wooden stocks, have been discovered in castle ruins, riverbeds, and former battlefields, often in fragments due to degradation over time. For instance, parts of crossbow quarrels (bolts) have been found at sites like the Battle of Visby (1361) in Gotland, Sweden, one of the most archaeologically rich medieval battlefield excavations in Europe.

More compelling still is the skeletal evidence of crossbow wounds, which offers chilling insight into the weapon's effectiveness. At Visby, numerous skeletons showed trauma consistent with crossbow impacts: puncture wounds in bone, especially in skulls and pelvises, where bolts had penetrated armour and lodged deep into the body. Some remains even display shattered limb bones or embedded bolt heads, testifying to the kinetic power of these weapons. The clean, concentrated puncture marks differ significantly from sword or arrow wounds, allowing archaeologists to distinguish crossbow injuries from other types of trauma. These finds confirm not only the battlefield presence of crossbows but also their deadly role in medieval warfare, where a single shot could pierce chainmail, break bone, and end a life in an instant.

Legacy and influence

Despite its eclipse on the battlefield, the crossbow lives on in the cultural imagination. From medieval reenactments to video games and TV shows like The Walking Dead, it has become a symbol of silent lethality and rugged resilience.

Crossbows also thrive in the fields of sport and hunting, especially in regions where gun ownership is restricted or tightly regulated. Modern hunting crossbows are precision instruments, engineered for stability and accuracy.

Among engineers and historians, the crossbow remains an object of fascination. Its intricate trigger systems, leverage mechanisms, and materials engineering continue to be studied as examples of early mechanical ingenuity.

Though outclassed by firearms centuries ago, the crossbow endures as one of history's most remarkable weapons, an invention that democratized lethality, challenged battlefield hierarchies, and even rattled the conscience of a medieval Church. From ancient Chinese skirmishes to the quiet footfalls of a special forces operator in the jungle, the crossbow's story is one of adaptation, resilience, and quiet power. It may no longer dominate the battlefield, but the crossbow still whispers in the shadows of warfare, silent, deadly, and unforgettable.

Echoes of the Crossbow

Needless to say, the story of the crossbow is not merely a chronicle of iron, wood, and sinew, it is a reflection of humanity's evolving relationship with power, precision, and progress. From the regimented ranks of ancient Chinese armies to the rain-soaked fields of medieval Europe, and from the dense, watchful jungles of Southeast Asia to today's urban tactical operations, the crossbow has carved a singular path through military history: one of constant adaptation, innovation, and quiet endurance.

Far more than a technological curiosity or medieval oddity, the crossbow revolutionized the battlefield by granting lethality to those once excluded from the warrior class. It helped dissolve the rigid hierarchies of feudal combat, where strength and aristocratic birth once dictated martial dominance. In its place came a weapon that demanded only a steady hand, a calm nerve, and the will to fire, shifting the power of life and death into the hands of the common foot soldier. The crossbow democratized warfare, frightened the nobility, and even compelled religious authorities to attempt its banishment, proof of how deeply it challenged prevailing norms.

Its mechanical sophistication, particularly in ancient China, speaks to the ingenuity of early engineers who saw beyond the bow's limitations. These innovations echoed centuries later in European refinements: windlasses, goat's feet, steel prods, and complex trigger mechanisms that brought a brutal elegance to the battlefield. The archaeological record, with its telltale puncture wounds and preserved bolt tips, preserves the visceral reality of its deadly impact.

And yet, the crossbow's story did not end with the thunder of muskets or the precision of rifles. Its rebirth in modern warfare, though modest, demonstrates a remarkable resilience. Where silence, stealth, and improvisation matter more than volume of fire, the crossbow endures, whether in the hands of Montagnard tribesmen defending their ancestral forests, or Special Forces soldiers operating deep behind enemy lines, The crossbow's relevance persists in situations that call for control, quiet, and calculated lethality.

In a world driven by ever-advancing technology, the crossbow reminds us that simplicity, reliability, and silence still have their place. It is a weapon not only of war, but of principle: one that marries form and function, history and innovation, brutality and discipline. It is a tool of ancient armies, a relic of medieval sieges, a whisper in the dark jungles of modern combat and above all, a tribute to the enduring ingenuity of those who shaped it.

The crossbow may no longer decide the fate of empires, but its legacy endures, etched in steel, remembered in bone, and still alive today.

The site has been offering a wide variety of high-quality, free history content since 2012. If you’d like to say ‘thank you’ and help us with site running costs, please consider donating here.

Notes:

Crossbow compared to an English Longbow

When comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the medieval crossbow to the English longbow, several key contrasts emerge that reflect the differing roles and accessibility of the two weapons.

The crossbow's greatest advantage over the longbow was its ease of use. Unlike the longbow, which required years of training and considerable physical strength to master, the crossbow could be effectively operated by less experienced soldiers with minimal instruction. This made it ideal for militias, mercenaries, or conscripted troops, especially in regions lacking a strong archery tradition.

Additionally, the mechanical design of the crossbow allowed it to achieve high draw weights through cranking mechanisms such as the windlass or cranequin, giving it the power to penetrate heavy armour at short to medium ranges, an area where the longbow could sometimes falter.

The crossbow also offered greater consistency in terms of aim and accuracy due to its stable mechanical release, which reduced the influence of human error compared to the manually drawn and released longbow. This precision made the crossbow particularly effective in siege scenarios, where defenders or attackers could take time to aim at fixed targets.

However, the crossbow had several significant disadvantages when compared to the longbow. Most notably, it had a much slower rate of fire, typically only 2–3 bolts per minute, leaving crossbowmen vulnerable during the lengthy reloading process. This made them less effective in fast-paced battles or open-field engagements, where the English longbow's rapid fire of up to 10–12 arrows per minute could dominate. Additionally, the crossbow was more cumbersome to carry and maintain, and its complex mechanisms were more prone to failure under adverse weather conditions, unlike the simpler and more robust longbow.

Therefore, while the crossbow offered greater armour penetration and ease of use for untrained soldiers, it lacked the speed, endurance, and battlefield versatility of the English longbow. Its strengths lay in precision and accessibility, whereas its limitations made it less effective in dynamic, large-scale combat scenarios dominated by trained longbowmen.

Zhuge Liang's repeating crossbow

Zhuge Liang's repeating crossbow, known in Chinese as the Zhuge nu, is one of the most iconic mechanical weapons in Chinese history. However, its association with Zhuge Liang may be more symbolic than literal. This device was a rapid-fire crossbow capable of shooting multiple bolts in quick succession with minimal user effort.

Though crossbow technology predated the Three Kingdoms period, the repeating crossbow attributed to Zhuge Liang was notable for its simplified firing mechanism, which allowed for a high rate of fire, a crucial advantage in the chaotic skirmishes of ancient warfare.

The weapon operated through a combination of a magazine-style bolt hopper and a push-pull lever mechanism. Each time the operator pulled and pushed the lever back and forth, the bowstring would automatically draw, release, and reload with a fresh bolt from the magazine. This allowed even relatively untrained soldiers or defenders in fortified positions to unleash volleys of bolts rapidly, making the weapon especially useful in close-quarters defence, ambushes, or when mounted on walls and chariots.

The bolts were often poisoned, compensating for their relatively low penetrative power compared to single-shot crossbows. While Zhuge Liang (181–234 CE), the famous strategist of the Shu Han state, is often credited with inventing or popularising the repeating crossbow, historical evidence suggests the concept may have existed before his time. However, his reputation as a master of military innovation and engineering likely led to the weapon being named in his honour. Surviving versions of the Zhuge nu from later dynasties show refinements in design, but the fundamental concept of a mechanical device enabling rapid bolt fire endured for centuries in Chinese warfare, proof of its practical ingenuity.

The English Longbow: A Weapon that Changed the Course of History

The English longbow, a weapon of understated simplicity and devastating effectiveness, is synonymous with medieval warfare and English military dominance from the 13th to 15th centuries. Crafted from a single piece of yew, over six feet long, the longbow earned legendary status on bloody battlefields, such as Crécy, Poitiers, and Agincourt. Its impact, however, was not limited to the battlefield. The longbow influenced military training, legislation, and craftsmanship, and even left behind a lasting imprint in archaeological and osteological records.

Terry Bailey explains.

Archers at the 1356 Battle of Poitiers. By Loyset Liédet.

Origins and evolution

The English longbow's origins are often shrouded in myth, misinterpretation, and regional pride. While its fame is firmly rooted in English military history, the bow's development was a long process influenced by earlier designs, neighboring cultures, and battlefield necessity.

The exact origin is a much-debated subject, however, it is generally agreed that similar weapons were used by Welsh forces as early as the 12th century. The English first encountered the longbow in Wales during campaigns under Edward I. Impressed by its power and range, he incorporated it into the military forces. By the early 14th century, the longbow had become England's primary missile weapon.

Needless to say, bows of one design or another have been used in the British Isles since the Mesolithic period (circa 8,000–6,000 BCE), with archaeological finds such as the Starr Carr site in Yorkshire providing evidence of simple hunting bows made of elm. These early bows were primitive by later standards, likely used for hunting rather than warfare.

Nevertheless, by the time of the Iron Age and into the Roman period (1st century BCE – 4th century CE), archery was practiced but did not dominate British military tactics. The Roman legions themselves preferred the short composite bow, primarily used by auxiliaries from the East.

The bow of Gwent

The first true longbow-style weapons are believed to have been used by the Welsh, from the region of Gwent, in southeast Wales. Chroniclers such as Gerald of Wales (Giraldus Cambrensis) writing in the late 12th century observed the formidable power of Welsh archers:

"They do not use the arrow with the crossbow, but with a very strong bow… They do not discharge the arrow from the ear, like the English, but from the breast."

These bows, made from elm or ash, had impressive range and force. One story told by Gerald recounts a Welsh archer driving an arrow through a knight's thigh, via maille armor, and into the saddle, pinning him to his horse. This raw power left a lasting impression on the invading Normans.

Adoption

As outlined the longbow was formally adopted by the English military during the reign of Edward I (1272–1307), particularly during his campaigns against the Welsh and Scots. Edward's wars in Wales exposed his armies to the effectiveness of the native Welsh bowmen. Recognizing its potential, Edward began integrating the bow into his forces.

By the early 14th century, under Edward II and Edward III, the longbow had become central to English military doctrine. It was standardized in terms of length (around 6 feet) and draw weight (often exceeding 100 pounds). The introduction of massed ranks of longbowmen marked a tactical revolution, replacing the slower, heavily armored knight as the dominant force on the battlefield. The institutionalized archery through training, and laws, making it the skill of every Englishman, marked a turning point in medieval warfare, as England's military might shift from armored nobility to the shoulders of its yeoman archers. Something the French nobility felt was unacceptable to leave the defense of France to the common folk.

Scandinavian influences

Some historians have speculated on whether the longbow might have been influenced by earlier Norse or even Slavic designs. While composite and reflex bows were common in Eastern Europe and Asia, there is little direct evidence that such designs influenced the longbow's development. Unlike composite bows, which were shorter and made from multiple materials (wood, sinew, horn), the English longbow was a self-bow, crafted from a single stave of yew. Its simplicity and size distinguished it from most other contemporary bows.

The yew wood used to craft the English longbow was ideally imported from the Alps or Italy, where the climate produced staves with the right balance of sapwood (which resists tension) and heartwood (which resists compression). Measuring about six feet in length, it could draw weights of 80 to 150 pounds, requiring extraordinary upper-body strength and years of practice.

Specialist professions:

The Bowyer and Fletcher

The longbow's production was the work of highly skilled specialists. A bowyer was responsible for crafting the bow itself. Bowyers required an intimate knowledge of wood properties and curing processes. They often aged the yew for several years before shaping it, to prevent warping and ensure maximum power and flexibility.

Whereas, the Fletcher crafted the arrows. These were typically made from ash or poplar shafts, with goose-feather fletchings and bodkin or broad-head iron tips. Arrowheads were sometimes produced by specialist arrow-smiths, a further specialist subset of blacksmiths. Each arrowhead type served different purposes, bodkins for penetrating maille armor, and broad-heads for causing devastating wounds to unarmored opponents.

Legislative support: Archery mandated by law

Archery became not only a military skill but a civic duty. Recognizing its strategic value, English monarchs implemented laws to ensure a steady supply of trained archers. Most famously, in 1363 under Edward III, a royal decree ordered that:

"...every able-bodied man on Sundays and holidays shall practice archery, and all other sports are forbidden."

This law was enforced for centuries. Even during the reign of Henry VIII, archery was promoted over other recreational activities like ball sports. Towns and parishes were required to provide butts (archery practice fields), and boys as young as seven were trained in its use.

Devastation on the battlefield

The longbow's effectiveness was not merely theoretical, it was proven repeatedly in major battles.

Battle of Crécy (1346): The English, under Edward III, faced a numerically superior French army. The disciplined volleys of English longbowmen decimated the French cavalry and Genoese crossbowmen. Chroniclers describe tens of thousands of arrows darkening the sky, breaking the momentum of France's elite forces.

Battle of Poitiers (1356): English forces under Edward the Black Prince used longbows to repel successive French cavalry charges. The high rate of fire and armor-piercing ability of bodkin arrows disrupted French formations.

Battle of Agincourt (1415): Perhaps the most iconic use of the longbow, Agincourt saw Henry V's lightly armored troops defeat a much larger French force. English archers, protected by muddy terrain and stakes, unleashed continuous volleys that devastated the advancing knights.

Longbow-men could shoot 10–12 arrows per minute, with a range advantage over the crossbow, while a crossbowman might manage two bolts at a far lesser range. The psychological and physical toll on enemy forces was immense. Arrows penetrated armor, pierced horses, and created chaos in tight formations.

Out of the approximate 7,000 English troops at Agincourt 5,000 were skilled archers who faced up to 20,000 French.

Side note:- Various numbers exist for the French army but most historians have settled on a figure of around 20,000, although this is not a solid figure.

Archaeological and osteological evidence

The legacy of the longbow is preserved not only in chronicles and law codes but in the archaeological record.

The Mary Rose Archers

The Mary Rose, Henry VIII's flagship, sank in 1545 and was raised in 1982. Among the thousands of recovered artefacts were over 170 longbows and more than 3,500 arrows. The bows were between 6 and 7 feet long, with draw weights over 100 pounds confirming historical accounts.

Skeletons of the crew revealed that archers had significantly larger shoulder and upper arm bones than other sailors. Their asymmetrical skeletal development, especially enlarged left arms and bowed spines, proved the longbow's physical demands. These findings have given modern researchers an unprecedented glimpse into the training and physiology of medieval archers.

Victims of the longbow

On the receiving end, forensic evidence from battlefield mass graves also tells a story. At Towton (1461), the largest and bloodiest battle of the Wars of the Roses, skeletons showed arrow impact injuries consistent with longbow strikes. These include embedded arrowheads in bones, shattered skulls, and rib injuries, all confirming the arrow's ability to kill through armor.

Decline and legacy

Despite its effectiveness, the longbow declined in the late 15th and early 16th centuries with the rise of gunpowder weapons. Firearms were easier to train with and had increasing penetrative power. Nevertheless, English archery continued into the 16th century, and even into the early Elizabethan period, largely due to its symbolic and cultural significance.

The longbow's legacy endures in both folklore and national identity. Characters emerged from Ballards such as mythologized Robin Hood demonstrating his prowess with the longbow, while Shakespeare immortalized longbow-men in Henry V with the rousing speech at Agincourt.

The English longbow was more than a weapon; it was a cultural institution, a craft, a law, and a legacy. Its rise was driven by skilled artisans, sustained by legal mandate, and proven by historical battlefield success. The longbow reshaped medieval warfare and lives on in museums, skeletal remains, and the cultural memory of England. From Mary Rose's silent testimony to the moss-covered bones at Towton, the story of the longbow is one carved not just in wood, but in the annals of history.

In conclusion, the English longbow was not merely an instrument of war but a transformative force in the medieval world, shaping tactics, influencing society, and leaving an enduring mark on history. Its power lay not only in its deadly range or the thousands of arrows unleashed in thunderous volleys but also in the institutions, laws, and traditions it spawned. It turned commoners into crucial components of military might, brought about an entire economy of craftsmanship, and left traces in both physical remains and national myth.

Its ascendancy marked a rare moment in history when discipline, training, and technological efficiency briefly triumphed over brute force and feudal hierarchy. For nearly three centuries, the longbow tilted the balance of power on the battlefield, allowing outnumbered English armies to defy expectations and secure legendary victories. The skeletal remains of archers, the embedded arrowheads in battlefield graves, and the preserved weaponry from the Mary Rose speak to its lasting power, not just as a tool of destruction, but as a symbol of England's martial ingenuity and cultural pride.

Though eventually overshadowed by gunpowder, the English longbow continues to capture the imagination of historians, archaeologists, and the public alike, especially in Cinematography. It stands as a testament to how a simple weapon, in the hands of the skilled and determined, can alter the course of nations. Its story is one of craftsmanship, law, war, and identity, woven into the very fabric of English history.

The site has been offering a wide variety of high-quality, free history content since 2012. If you’d like to say ‘thank you’ and help us with site running costs, please consider donating here.

Notes:

Comparing the English longbow with the crossbow

The medieval English longbow and the crossbow were two of the most significant ranged weapons of their time, each with distinct advantages and disadvantages that reflected differing military philosophies and battlefield roles.

The English longbow, made primarily from yew, was a powerful weapon with a long draw length that allowed it to shoot arrows at high velocity and over long distances. Its chief advantage lay in its rate of fire; a well-trained archer could loose 10–12 arrows per minute, significantly outpacing a crossbowman's 2–3 bolts over the same period.

The longbow was particularly effective in massed volleys, as indicated in the main text, famously demonstrated by English armies at battles such as Crécy (1346), Poitiers (1356), and Agincourt (1415). Furthermore, it was relatively light and did not require complex mechanical components, making it more resilient and less prone to failure in wet or muddy battlefield conditions thus easy to maintain.

However, the longbow also had notable drawbacks. Its effective use required years of intensive training and physical conditioning, as drawing a war bow often required a pull strength of over 100 pounds. This created a dependence on a professional or semi-professional class of archers, which not all nations could field. Additionally, accuracy with the longbow at long ranges was inconsistent compared to the more mechanically stable crossbow.

The crossbow, on the other hand, was easier to learn and required less physical strength to operate, making it ideal for militias or conscripted troops with limited training. Its bolts could penetrate heavy armor at shorter distances due to their high kinetic energy, especially with the use of windlass or cranequin mechanisms that allowed for stronger draw weights than a human arm alone could manage, making the crossbow an effective weapon in siege warfare and close-quarter skirmishes.

Yet the crossbow's slow reload time and heavier design made it less effective in fast-moving battlefield scenarios. In open-field combat, where rapid volleys could disrupt cavalry charges or inflict heavy casualties quickly, crossbowmen were often at a disadvantage unless protected by pavises or supported by infantry.

Needless to say, the longbow offered superior speed and range for trained forces, while the crossbow provided armor penetration and accessibility for less experienced troops. Each weapon reflected its society's military priorities and constraints, and both played pivotal roles in shaping the tactics and outcomes of medieval European warfare.

Rate of fire

The rate of fire for an English or Welsh longbowman during the medieval period was remarkably high compared to most other missile weapons of the time.

A well-trained longbowman could typically shoot between 10 and 12 arrows per minute in combat conditions, though in short bursts and under optimal circumstances, some accounts suggest rates as high as 15 arrows per minute. This rate was sustained not only by the physical strength and stamina of the archer but also by extensive training that began in childhood, legally mandated in England by royal decree to ensure a ready supply of skilled archers.

Unlike crossbows or early firearms, which required time-consuming loading and aiming processes, the longbow allowed for rapid nocking, drawing, and loosing of arrows. The technique was refined for speed and rhythm, often with archers carrying sheaves of arrows easily accessible in the ground before them or slung at their sides. In battle, longbowmen could unleash a volley of arrows capable of devastating enemy ranks before they even reached the front lines.

However, this high rate of fire came at a cost. The physical demands of drawing a longbow, often with draw weights of 100 to 150 pounds, meaning that longbowmen developed distinctive skeletal and muscular adaptations as detailed in the main text, especially in the shoulder and arm. Sustained shooting throughout a battle could lead to fatigue, gradually reducing the rate of fire. Despite this, the longbow's ability to deliver a rapid and continuous hail of arrows made it one of the most effective battlefield weapons of the Middle Ages, playing a key role in English victories such as already detailed, (Crécy (1346), Poitiers (1356), and Agincourt (1415)).

If we take Agincourt as an example, with approximately 5,000 archers each releasing 10 or 12 arrows a minute, the vast amount of missiles that were unleashed on the French army is hard to imagine yet that amount of missiles every minute would have had a devastating effect with a serious destructive force dealt to the enemy force.

Various arrowheads for the English longbow arrows

The formidable English longbow relied heavily on the type of arrowhead fitted to the shaft. The choice of arrowhead was not arbitrary, it was specifically tailored to the type of target the archer was expected to face. These arrowheads varied in design, material, and function, and they were integral to the success of English archers on the battlefield.

One of the most common arrowheads used with the English longbow was the bodkin point. This was a long, narrow, and often square-sectioned head, designed primarily for piercing armor. During the 13th to 15th centuries, as plate armor became more prevalent on the battlefield, bodkin points were refined to better penetrate the steel surfaces. Their shape allowed them to focus the force of the arrow into a very small point, enhancing their ability to slip between the joints of armor or even punch through mail or plate at closer ranges.

Another significant type was the broad-head, which had a wide, flat, and often barbed shape. These were primarily used for hunting, but in warfare, they could be devastating against un-armored or lightly armored foes, including horses and archers. The wide cutting edges inflicted serious wounds, making them effective for disabling or killing with a single shot. Their use against soft targets made them a versatile option in mixed-combat scenarios.

Additionally, specialized variants such as crescent-shaped or forked arrowheads existed, often for specific purposes such as cutting ropes or disarming sentries. Fire arrows were also available, which had special tips designed to carry burning material to ignite enemy structures or vessels.

Each arrowhead type was carefully crafted to suit the longbow's high draw weight and immense kinetic energy, ensuring maximum effect in battle or siege.

Thus, the success of the English longbow in warfare was not just a result of the bow's power and the archer's skill, but also the careful selection of arrowheads suited to particular tactical needs. This synergy between bow, arrow, and user helped define English military effectiveness during key conflicts such as the Hundred Years' War.

The English longbow is a symbol of freedom

The English longbow became more than just a battlefield weapon; it evolved into a potent symbol of freedom and agency for the common man in medieval England. Unlike the expensive warhorses and heavy armor that defined the knightly class, the longbow was a relatively inexpensive and accessible weapon. It could be wielded by yeomen, (freeborn commoners), who, with discipline and training, became the backbone of England's military strength.

This democratizing power of the longbow was reinforced by law. With monarchs, mandating longbow practice among the general population. Archery became not only a civic duty but also a shared national identity that cut across class boundaries. A skilled archer was a respected figure, and his ability to defend his homeland or influence the outcome of battle offered a rare form of empowerment in a rigidly stratified society.

The longbow thus stood as a tool of personal agency and patriotic contribution, binding the common man more closely to the English crown while subtly challenging the dominance of the feudal elite. As time passed, the longbow's symbolism persisted in English folklore and popular memory.

Legends of Robin Hood, the outlaw archer who defied tyranny and defended the rights of the poor, echoed these ideals. Whether fact or fable, such stories emphasized the longbow not merely as a weapon, but as a representation of fairness, resistance to oppression, and the valour of the ordinary Englishman. In this way, the longbow became etched into the national consciousness as a powerful emblem of freedom.

Shakespeare

Shakespeare's Henry V played a pivotal role in immortalizing English longbow-men.

KING HENRY V:

What's he that wishes so? My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin: If we are mark'd to die, we are enow to do our country loss; and if to live, the fewer men, the greater share of honour. God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more. By Jove, I am not covetous for gold, nor care I who doth feed upon my cost; It yearns me not if men my garments wear; Such outward things dwell not in my desires: but if it be a sin to covet honour, I am the most offending soul alive. No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England. God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour. As one man more methinks would share from me for the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more! Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host, that he which hath no stomach to this fight, let him depart; his passport shall be made, and crowns for convoy put into his purse: We would not die in that man's company that fears his fellowship to die with us.

This day is call'd the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day, and comes safe home, will stand a tip-toe when this day is named, and rouse him at the name of Crispian. He that shall live this day, and see old age, will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours, and say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars and say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.' Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, but he'll remember with advantages what feats he did that day. Then shall our names, familiar in his mouth as household words—Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter, Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester—Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd. This story shall the good man teach his son; And Crispin day shall ne'er go by, from this day to the ending of the world, but we in it shall be remember'd; We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; for he to-day that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,This day shall gentle his condition: And gentlemen in England now a-bed shall think themselves accursed they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks that fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.