“Nope, because the target was solid, and a line of men isn’t. And they were not metres! probably paces! And Wellington, of course, was absolutely right in enquiring whether it was not possible to raise a Corps of Archers! Sadly there were none left in England, or none to compare with the men of Crecy and Agincourt. The longbow was far more accurate than the musket, had a comparable range, and a vastly higher rate of fire. I watched a trained archer, using a bow with a draw weight in excess of a hundred pounds, put 15 out of 18 arrows through a Frenchman sized target at a range of 150 yards, all inside sixty seconds. A musket would have been really lucky to have got one ball close to that target in the same time! ” However, it IS metres for the test I mentioned. To be any good with a longbow you have to be VERY strong and you need a lifetime practise. Musketmen were hardly trained at all. If a man trains nearly his whole life with a musket, surely he gets better, too. (Many tests distinguish between “recruits” and “trained shooters” and there IS a big difference! Some of the results are formidable, please believe me, Sir!!!) Wellington was a dreamer asking for a Corps of Archers. Probably there weren’t even 10 men in whole England who could win (using longbows) against 10 French Fusiliers. Therefore I hate this comparison between musket and bow. It’s not that simple I think! ;)Kai