It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: paraphi
No is the answer.
The warfare and tactics that developed in Napoleonic times was a few steps beyond bows and arrows.
Napoleon was not without fault. In his early days he out-thought the opposition, but he was outplayed in the Peninsular War and other places until his eventual defeat at Waterloo. Having bow-armed archers would not have helped one jot.
Napoleon is credited with declaring, "Cossacks are the best light troops among all that exist. If I had them in my army, I would go through all the world with them."
originally posted by: makemap
Basically. What I have seen during about the gun powder age is that muskets takes too long to reload. Even when the Chinese knew this bow beats muskets in closer range. The beginning of the French kingdom was happening during the Mongol Invasion. None of the European can compete against Horse archery tactic. The French had an alliance with the mongols before.
When Napoleon was at his might. There was Calvary to counter infantry and anti-calvary. But, what if Napoleon replaced his Calvary with Horse Archers instead?
Instead of 14k sword Calvary, image horse archer Calvary. Would he decisively win the battle instantly and counter Prussian Calvary charge?
Or simply this battle might not have existed and Napoleon was able to to prevent majority of the retreating enemies.
originally posted by: DerBeobachter
At least offered money to develope some gadgets, like tin cans(german version, where the complete history is described, that part about Bonaparte and the 12000 goldfranc he offered for inventing tin cans is completely missing in the english version, somehow...) and margarine...