Charles Gadda wrote:
This is one possible explanation, but the example you cite is somewhat flawed:
Well, granted, but my point was the sequel: their own employers rode them down and killed them. I was trying to address the original question, "why would they carry an ineffective weapon into battle?" by showing the consequences if they didn't. Or who knows, perhaps the French showed up in Genoa saying they wanted 400 crossbowmen, "never mind those obsolete longbows, we want *crossbows*!" Merc. captain tells his men "learn to use 'em, we have a job." Genoese complain but what the heck, French outnumber English 5-1 anyway, so they pick up crossbows and march off. It amounts to the same thing - equipment by edict, not by soldiers' choice or by demonstrated superiority. I also grant your point that the troops would discard them quickly under the right circumstances - perhaps leading to a later question, "why would they show up for battle *unarmed*?".
-- - Mark 210-522-6025, page 888-733-0967 ===== Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com. Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body "unsubscribe tft"