Picky, picky, picky...
Apr. 17th, 2005 02:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gridloreA few years ago I picked up The Future of War by George and Meredith Freeman. I'd never gotten around to reading it until today.
Imagine my feelings when I found not one, but two gross historical errors in the first few pages of the first chapter!
The first whopper is comment about the conquistadores "revolutionizing" warfare with their "primitive guns." By the time the Spanish were tap-dancing all over Mesoamerica, guns had been the staple of European war for almost 150 years.
Then the authors declare that guns came to dominate the battlefield because of their superior range. Bollocks! Any good bow or crossbow outranged early guns! A lonqbow is accurate and deadly out to several hundred feet, a distance not matched by guns until the late 19th century. Guns became dominant for one reason: it is far easier to train a musketman than it is to train a bowman.
I'll keep reading, but so far I'm unimpressed.
Imagine my feelings when I found not one, but two gross historical errors in the first few pages of the first chapter!
The first whopper is comment about the conquistadores "revolutionizing" warfare with their "primitive guns." By the time the Spanish were tap-dancing all over Mesoamerica, guns had been the staple of European war for almost 150 years.
Then the authors declare that guns came to dominate the battlefield because of their superior range. Bollocks! Any good bow or crossbow outranged early guns! A lonqbow is accurate and deadly out to several hundred feet, a distance not matched by guns until the late 19th century. Guns became dominant for one reason: it is far easier to train a musketman than it is to train a bowman.
I'll keep reading, but so far I'm unimpressed.