Donate to the Lead Adventure Forum to keep it alive!
No doubt the Honourable Company of Cheesemakers will be along to claim that Welsh Rarebit was actually invented in 1564 by a cheeseshop owner in Westminster.
¶ Of Seynt Peter that cryed cause bobe. lxxvi.¶ I fynde wrytten amonge olde gestes, howe God mayde Saynt Peter porter of heuen, and that God of hys goodnes, sone after his passyon, suffered many men to come to the kyngdome of Heuen with small deseruynge; at whiche tyme there was in heuen a great company of Welchemen, whyche with their crakynge and babelynge troubled all the other. Wherfore God sayde to saynte Peter, that he was wery of them, and that he wolde fayne haue them out of heuen. To whome saynte Peter sayd: Good Lorde, I warrente you, that shal be done. Wherfore saynt Peter wente out of heuen gates and cryed wyth a loud voyce Cause bobe, that is as moche to saye as rosted chese, whiche thynge the Welchemen herynge, ranne out of Heuen a great pace. And when Saynt Peter sawe them all out, he sodenly wente into Heuen, and locked the dore, and so sparred all the Welchemen out.By this ye may se, that it is no wysdome for a man to loue or to set his mynde to moche vpon any delycate or worldely pleasure, wherby he shall lose the celestyall and eternall ioye.
The "longbow" was reasonably ubiquitous around Western Europe would be my response and within what we now call the UK. IMHO it was really a matter of how they were deployed and used in their battlefield roll that is the question of whether they become the longbow of English use(?). For example where one the body the bow was drawn back to. The cheek or the ear? That sort of stuff.One way to address the question is maybe to ask if the "longbow" was used at Hastings, though probably not to the same effect as in later centuries.(As many on this particular section of the forum will know, during the latter stages of the HYW and certainly post 1453 here were were certainly efforts on the continent to replicate the use of the bow in English armies).Kind Regards
For over a century the longbow reigned as undisputed king of medieval European missile weapons. Yet only England used the longbow as a mainstay in its military arsenal; France and Scotland clung to the technologically inferior cross-bow. This longbow puzzle has perplexed historians for decades. We resolve it by developing a theory of institutionally constrained technology adoption. Unlike the crossbow, the longbow was cheap and easy to make and required rulers who adopted the weapon to train large numbers of citizens in its use. These features enabled usurping nobles whose rulers adopted the longbow to potentially organize effective rebellions against them. Rulers choosing between missile technologies thus confronted a trade-off with respect to internal and external security. England alone in late medieval Europe was sufficiently politically stable to allow its rulers the first-best technology option. In France and Scotland political instability prevailed, constraining rulers in these nations to the crossbow.
At the battle of Courtrai, for instance, the small principality of Flanders was able to muster an army of archers larger than the army of the entire kingdom of France, which consisted of knights and men-at-arms (Rogers 1993, p. 252). In this sense, a weapon like the longbow allows for the military enfranchisement of commoners, which institutionally constrains the ruler.
A longbow-equipped rebellion against a longbow-equipped king would likely end in the latter’s defeat. The probable victor would depend strongly on which side had the larger number of archers, and given the longbow’s cheapness, rebel archers could outnumber the king’s. Hence, a king would adopt the longbow only if he were politically secure. In contrast, given the expense of crossbows, a crossbow-equipped rebellion against a crossbow-equipped king was very unlikely. Hence, a politi-cally insecure king could adopt the crossbow
Caws pobi. It’s caws pobi and it’s our gift to the culinary world.