Yes, by far. But not because of their inherent accuracy.

​

In terms of accuracy, a flintlock musket with military ammo is actually pretty awful! Black powder creates thick soot that rapidly fouls the barrel and makes it harder and harder to force a bullet down. Muskets would be issued with undersized ammunition (the Brown Bess is nominally .75 caliber but was issued with .69 caliber bullets) that could be easily rammed down the barrel after a long battle but had horrible accuracy. The effective range against a man-sized target was roughly 100 yards with military bullets; it was longer with properly fitting bullets, but those were more for hunting or target shooting than battles.

​

While a longbow in the hands of a trained archer can easily achieve similar accuracy at 100 yards, the big problem is getting that trained archer. English longbows have a notoriously high draw weight (roughly 100 pounds give or take) and marching and firing will quickly tire the archer, reducing their accuracy and range. Archers had to be trained from childhood to develop the muscles necessary to reliably fire in battle, to the point where their skeletons have noticeably larger left arms.

​

By comparison, a musket is a godsend. Any soldier of average strength can be trained to use it and the gun will continue to fire with similar range and accuracy no matter how long they've been marching or shooting. While not perfect, the musket allowed for the majority of soldiers to eventually be equipped with ranged weapons.