Was firing arrows at Enemies clashing your own Doomed Units practical?

[Pisces Axxxxx]

One thing that people often wondered and I did too at one point.

 

When I watched the movie Bravehart, during the Battle of Falkirk Edward Longshanks I ordered his English Longbow men to fire at Scottish Units. The thing was that these Scottish Units were in clash with Edward's troops so he tried to warn Edward saying "Won't we hit our troops?". Edward responded "Yes-but we'll hit their's as well". Thus in addition to the nobles betraying William Wallace, the film portrays the English Longbow men as a key factor in the English Victory in this battle.

 

Now when people rewatch Bravehart they often comment during Stirling Bridge "Instead of sending the rest of his melee units to attack Wallace after all the English Knights were being slaughtered, why doesn't the English General fire at the Scottish units in Melee? I mean all the Knights are going to die, you might as well take advantage of this opportunity!"

 

Indeed people often wonder why Generals were hesitant to order Arrows to be fired on Enemy units clashing with their own Doomed Melee Units. I mean if they were gonna die anyway why not use that to your advantage to take out enemies of your own so your doomed unit's lives don't go to waste?

 

Was what Edward I did at Falkirk in Bravehard common in Medieval Warfare?If not why wasn't it practical to commit such an act?

[Melvadius]

Fire at your own units deliberately and see your army morale crumble faster even if it doesn't turn on you personally.

[iolo]

One thing that people often wondered and I did too at one point.

 

When I watched the movie Bravehart, during the Battle of Falkirk Edward Longshanks I ordered his English Longbow men to fire at Scottish Units. The thing was that these Scottish Units were in clash with Edward's troops so he tried to warn Edward saying "Won't we hit our troops?". Edward responded "Yes-but we'll hit their's as well". Thus in addition to the nobles betraying William Wallace, the film portrays the English Longbow men as a key factor in the English Victory in this battle.

 

Now when people rewatch Bravehart they often comment during Stirling Bridge "Instead of sending the rest of his melee units to attack Wallace after all the English Knights were being slaughtered, why doesn't the English General fire at the Scottish units in Melee? I mean all the Knights are going to die, you might as well take advantage of this opportunity!"

 

Indeed people often wonder why Generals were hesitant to order Arrows to be fired on Enemy units clashing with their own Doomed Melee Units. I mean if they were gonna die anyway why not use that to your advantage to take out enemies of your own so your doomed unit's lives don't go to waste?

 

Was what Edward I did at Falkirk in Bravehard common in Medieval Warfare?If not why wasn't it practical to commit such an act?

 

The English seem to have been too gangly and skinny to be much use with the longbow, and most bowmen were 'Welsh'. I don't suppose they'd care much which lot of foreigners they hit.

[GhostOfClayton]

From the 13th Century, it was law that every Englishman between ages 17 and 69 was required to keep and practice with a longbow. That law was not abolished until the introduction of the Betting and Gaming Act of 1960. . . . Yes 19 60.

 

That's how good we are.

[Melvadius]

You may be interested to know that Clive D.W. Feather (someone interested in archery) apparently decided to do some research in the Squire Law Library in Cambridge into the legal situation and posted some relevant sections of the various statutes with his interpretation here.

 

Although the earliest laws he was able to read date from the reign of Henry VIII he believed that the obligation for Englishmen to practice archery probably stopped around 1863 before any remaining elements of the statutes notably relating to what bows could be made of and the fact aliens were not allowed to take them abroad or use them in England being finally repealed in 1960.

[iolo]

From the 13th Century, it was law that every Englishman between ages 17 and 69 was required to keep and practice with a longbow. That law was not abolished until the introduction of the Betting and Gaming Act of 1960. . . . Yes 19 60.

 

That's how good we are.

 

The fact you were so useless at it meant you had to be forced to do constant practice, yes.