English bowmen vs Swiss pikemen.

I think it would in large part depend on terrain and leadership.... you have to pick your battles based on the troops you have. Leadership and quality matters too- good pikemen under a good leader might win in a situation where you would expect the archers to prevail. Lousy archers under a lousy leader could probably lose on a winning hand.

In an open field with clear shooting and no way to outflank the archers-- say like Agincourt-- the English would certainly inflict severe losses on the Swiss, but it's an open question on whether that would actually stop the Swiss like it did the French, who were less mobile, less organized, and poorly-led. After all, the Swiss plowed right through a lot of Burgundian firepower (archers, crossbows and artillery) at Morat and went on to rout the Burgundian army. EVen when heavily outnumbered and under heavy missile fire, like Arbedo and St. Jacob an der Birs, the Swiss took a lot of work to kill.

In different terrain and a different tactical environment-- for example, Formigny, Castillion, or Laupen. Agincourt, Crecy, etc. were pretty much perfect tactical situations from an archer's point of view-- not much to do but shoot straight from prepared positions. If you ask archers to attack an enemy's prepared position (e.g. Castillion, which the English lost), or expect them to react to a surprise attack while on the move or fight in hilly terrain (Laupen, where the Swiss ambushed the Habsburgs), you get different results.

At Grandson, for example, Charles the Bold was trying much what the English managed against the Scots at Falkirk and Pinkie-- use charging horsemen to keep the pikemen in a static defensive position while the missile troops got in their shooting at a stationary target. The difference is, the Burgundians couldn't pull it off.

The other thing is, most of the 'vs' examples here are pitched battles-- consider also how the same troops would have performed in chevauchees, skirmishes, or sieges. The Swiss troops weren't just pikemen-- they included lots of archers, crossbowmen, handgunners, etc.

On a man-for-man basis, the Swiss were probably more of a bargain-- easier to train, equip, and so on.

FWIW, Oman's stuff is quite outdated by now. Check out Kelly DeVries' "Infantry Warfare in the Early Fourteenth Century" or John Keegan's "The Face of Battle" for something more recent.

Also, I think the whole pikes-and-bows-destroyed-cavalry thing is a bit exaggerated. The first major victory with longbows was in the late 1200s. The first big victory involving pikes was in 1302 (Courtrai). Two hundred years after Courtrai, armored horsemen were still the most important part of an army.
 

Nikephoros

Banned
Also, I remember a discussion about the Macedonian phalanx, and it said that a wall of spears is pretty effective against missiles.
 
An old chestnut

I recently read a book about the art of war in the middle ages. It stated that the Swiss pike hedgehog and the English longbow yeomen were responsible for the ending of the feudal way of warfare.

Both of these forces could defeat superior numbers of feudal heavy cavalry, but how would they fare against each other?...


Sir John Hawkwood passed through Switzerland on the way to Italy. I think he went pretty much where he pleased and nobody was able to stop him.


The Swiss never attempted to block Hawkwood’s path, presumably because they never assembled a large enough force in time to engage him; he didn’t linger. However, I remember, as a boy in Switzerland; being shown the ‘Hill of the English’. This was allegedly the spot on which a smaller company of English Free Companions, who had invaded the valley to plunder, was brought to bay and slaughtered by the Swiss.

This of course, was a small engagement. The only larger battle where the two systems clashed head on was at Stoke Field 16 June 1487. Here the forces of Henry VII destroyed those of Lambert Simnel a pretender to the throne. Henry’s forces were typical of English armies at the end of the Wars of the Roses; a mix of knights, longbowmen and billmen. Simnel’s force had at its centre, 4,000 Continental Mercenaries, including Germans, Flemings and Swiss, led by Martin Schwarz a renowned Mercenary Captain.

The best accounts of the battle I have found are at:
http://www.richard111.com/stoke1.htm
http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Documents/the_battle_of_stoke.htm
 
Last edited:
Epic resurrection.

I'd also agree that the longbow by itself is nothing magical. Depolyed right, it beat Simnel and the Scots, deployed wrong, it got slaughtered by the Swiss.

Deployment and the state of the army as a whole matters a lot more.
 

Flubber

Banned
The Swiss never attempted to block Hawkwood’s path...


They blocked his path because he never went through Switzerland.

Hawkwood was elected to command of the White Company after it had already been in Italy for years. The company had been raised by a German from the usual odds and sods floating around Europe thanks to the nearly endemic warfare of the period. After accepting command, Hawkwood only worked in Italy.

Wow... nearly 4 years... I guess CalBear will be locking this one once he spots it.
 
They blocked his path because he never went through Switzerland.

[/FONT][/SIZE]

I think the point about Stoke Field is that the longbows failed to stop the pikes. The only mention of them in battle is that they slaughtered the Irish kerns, who made up the main contingent of the ‘Yorkist’ army. The kerns were largely unarmoured and easy meat for the longbowmen; Martin Schwarz mercenaries on the other hand, were well equipped and heavily armoured. The Royalist casualties, at over 2,000 men attest to the fact that the mercenaries came to hand blows with the King’s vanguard under Oxford and were only driven back when the main body came up to support them. Schwarz and Lincoln, the senior Yorkist commander were both killed in the battle.

By this time the longbow was not the major arm of English Armies, they were a combined arms force of Knights and Men at Arms, bill men and archers. The longbow was declining in importance and popularity, due to its failure to penetrate steel armour, which was becoming increasingly the norm.

I acknowledge the point about Hawkwood, I only recall that I had no memory of him fighting anyone in Switzerland.
 
Top