Everyone has a strong opinion on whether the longbow or the crossbow was the better ranged weapon in the middle ages. There are speculative but nonetheless common claims like: “the longbow was the machine gun of the middle ages and the crossbow was the sniper rifle”. History buffs, testers and historians can get into heated debates about armor penetration, rate of fire and tactical application of these weapons. Certain aspects like rate of fire or penetration power can be tested experimentally, but testing has limits: after all, tests are not battles.

Also, the interpretation of such tests often leads to logical fallacies – for example: a better rate of fire doesn’t necessarily imply a more effective weapon in battle. In the same vein traditional historiography runs into problems because they often ignore the tactical implications of practical tests. A proper comparison of the two weapons needs to consider both practical tests and historiography. So, in this video we’d like to shed some light on the main arguments of the debate. We‘ll bring together testing and research and – maybe – get a baby step closer to understanding these two weapons and their roles in medieval warfare.