Wanted to thank you for all the wonderful books. I’ve read the Sharpe series as well as the grail series, and I have what may sound like an odd question. It seems to me that long bow might have well been a more lethal weapon than the muskets of Sharpe’s day. The rifles and cannons I understand, but why would one use a musket over a bow? The bow was quicker to load, more accurate at a longer range, and the defenders wouldn’t have carried shields. Couldn’t the bow have wreaked more havoc against a line of troops? Perhaps the bow wasn’t considered “civilized” or was the “cough” of a thousand muskets a much better pschological tool? In all your research, have you ever come across a battle of bows versus muskets? Just a curious thought, hope you don’t mind the rambling. A.S.