How much information is there about longbows used in Europe that aren’t English. As I understand it, the Mary Rose bows have been studied extensively, and debated. All the other extant bows are from other places and cultures, however, I have mostly encountered them used as a reference in the debate about English bows. Is there any good information about these bows? How sure can one be about their draw weights? Has anyone tried to put together a less Anglocentric history of the bow?
Two yew longbows were found in Opole in 1931, I think they were dated roughly to 11th century.
[ Linked Image ]
The better preserved one seem to be fairly standard yew bow with D shaped cross-section, though it has interesting stiffened tips.
Unfortunately they both perished during WW2, apparently.
[ Linked Image ]
The better preserved one seem to be fairly standard yew bow with D shaped cross-section, though it has interesting stiffened tips.
Unfortunately they both perished during WW2, apparently.
| Dan Howard wrote: |
| European longbows haven't changed for thousands of years.
https://www.iceman.it/en/bowstring/ |
That is interesting. It says that the length of the bow should be about equal to the height, I have always read that longbows were longer than the height.
There does seem to be some variation between the different finds, although, there is some variation among the Mary Rose bows, but I am not sure how much of that is due to the variation in the wood or the fact that they are made by hand. The Oberflacht bows, are the most unusual and may not be considered longbows. I think with the rest, the main difference are the tips, both the shape of the tips and the fact that some of them have horn or metal on them. However, I am also wondering about the draw weights. I understand there is some controversy regarding the Mary Rose bows, but doesn’t seem to be much regarding the other bows.
You may find the following articles useful regarding bows outside England
https://www.academia.edu/42795135/The_Ballinderry_bow_An_under_appreciated_Viking_weapon
https://www.academia.edu/26324240/Bows_from_the_Netherlands_1
https://www.academia.edu/42795135/The_Ballinderry_bow_An_under_appreciated_Viking_weapon
https://www.academia.edu/26324240/Bows_from_the_Netherlands_1
The following is a technical description of the Viking bow finds at Hedeby (Haithabu). Best descriptions and images I can find online. German text, which won't be an issue for Ryan.
http://www.branche-rouge.org/les-articles/tou...bows.0.pdf
http://www.branche-rouge.org/les-articles/tou...bows.0.pdf
| Dan Howard wrote: |
| European longbows haven't changed for thousands of years.
https://www.iceman.it/en/bowstring/ |
They were as powerful as the Welsh and English bows described by Geraldus of Wales and later authors? Because they would have made quite an impression.
To make a comparison, a Byzantinist I talked to once said extant Crusader Era Turkish composite bows were way below the 120-150lbs of the classic 14th century onwards longbow, the reason why they weren't as troublesome to foot and horse as the longbow would be to 14th century ones would be.
----
To answer the post question: there's an extant longbow in Portugal, from the Alcacer do Sal's Church, now in Museu Municipal Martim Gonçalves de Macedo, dated 14th century, where we also find bows and arrowheads. The said yew bow is 1,70m, which would meant as tall as the person using it.
"Although the English were the great masters of bow-making and archery, there's notice through a carta de quitação to Gonçalo Afonso, quartermaster of the Lisbon's city arsenal in the 15th century, concerning the existence of numerous yew bows."
Source: https://repositorio.ul.pt/bitstream/10451/47538/1/Caderno-15-ATQ-1.pdf
The issue is: we don't know who used. The Portuguese hired and worked with English mercenaries in the Castilian Civil War, the Portuguese Civil War and during John de Gaunt's invasion of Castile. Portuguese historiography assumes longbows were never used in wars here, its role being fulfilled by a royal-controlled institution of crossbowmen, though there is written evidence for bows in the Royal Arsenal of Lisbon, where tons of weapons and armor were stockpiled.
There's at least one Portuguese painting showing a longbow being used with a crossbow, dated 1530's:
[ Linked Image ]
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mart%C3%ADrio_de_S%C3%A3o_Sebasti%C3%A3o_(Greg%C3%B3rio_Lopes)
I assume longbows were used in Portugal for sports, but we don't have evidence of them being used in battles. Same in the other Iberian Kingdoms. But I suspect they were used in Navarre given how the country was influenced by the French, and by the fact we know Gascons were using longbows.
We do have artistic evidence for the so-called "Turkish bows", or composite bows, in 15th-century painting of Saint George by Pedro Nisart, made in the Balearic Islands (Aragonese Crown), c.1468-70.
https://www.alamy.com/saint-george-altarpiece-detail-of-the-conquest-of-the-city-of-mallorca-by-the-troops-of-king-jam-image212470796.html?imageid=6809F56D-4875-451F-9044-88105CC22151&p=855935&pn=1&searchId=985aa7feebe15234519b6832cf0df0f1&searchtype=0
For outside the Iberian peninsula: they were used in France, Scotland (lowlands at least), Ireland (the English Pale at least), Netherlands, Italy (Augusto Boer has shown a source advising the use of both composite and longbows) and artistic evidence in Germany and Hungary.
Turks didn't mention longbows even though French longbowmen were present in the crusade of Nicopolis of the late 14th century, though it's likely they didn't fight the battle which was (from what I read) only an issue of the French heavy cavalry.
The bows didn't change. The only thing the English did was to develop tactics to use them more effectively in battle and to engineer society so that more archers were available.
| Dan Howard wrote: |
| The bows didn't change. The only thing the English did was to develop tactics to use them more effectively in battle and to engineer society so that more archers were available. |
So you think that vikings and merovingians were using bows that were the same draw weight as the Mary Rose bows? There are also differences such as different types of nocks and some bows have metal studs in them.
| Pedro Paulo Gaião wrote: | ||
They were as powerful as the Welsh and English bows described by Geraldus of Wales and later authors? Because they would have made quite an impression. To make a comparison, a Byzantinist I talked to once said extant Crusader Era Turkish composite bows were way below the 120-150lbs of the classic 14th century onwards longbow, the reason why they weren't as troublesome to foot and horse as the longbow would be to 14th century ones would be. ---- To answer the post question: there's an extant longbow in Portugal, from the Alcacer do Sal's Church, now in Museu Municipal Martim Gonçalves de Macedo, dated 14th century, where we also find bows and arrowheads. The said yew bow is 1,70m, which would meant as tall as the person using it. "Although the English were the great masters of bow-making and archery, there's notice through a carta de quitação to Gonçalo Afonso, quartermaster of the Lisbon's city arsenal in the 15th century, concerning the existence of numerous yew bows." Source: https://repositorio.ul.pt/bitstream/10451/47538/1/Caderno-15-ATQ-1.pdf The issue is: we don't know who used. The Portuguese hired and worked with English mercenaries in the Castilian Civil War, the Portuguese Civil War and during John de Gaunt's invasion of Castile. Portuguese historiography assumes longbows were never used in wars here, its role being fulfilled by a royal-controlled institution of crossbowmen, though there is written evidence for bows in the Royal Arsenal of Lisbon, where tons of weapons and armor were stockpiled. There's at least one Portuguese painting showing a longbow being used with a crossbow, dated 1530's: [ Linked Image ] https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mart%C3%ADrio_de_S%C3%A3o_Sebasti%C3%A3o_(Greg%C3%B3rio_Lopes) I assume longbows were used in Portugal for sports, but we don't have evidence of them being used in battles. Same in the other Iberian Kingdoms. But I suspect they were used in Navarre given how the country was influenced by the French, and by the fact we know Gascons were using longbows. We do have artistic evidence for the so-called "Turkish bows", or composite bows, in 15th-century painting of Saint George by Pedro Nisart, made in the Balearic Islands (Aragonese Crown), c.1468-70. https://www.alamy.com/saint-george-altarpiece-detail-of-the-conquest-of-the-city-of-mallorca-by-the-troops-of-king-jam-image212470796.html?imageid=6809F56D-4875-451F-9044-88105CC22151&p=855935&pn=1&searchId=985aa7feebe15234519b6832cf0df0f1&searchtype=0 For outside the Iberian peninsula: they were used in France, Scotland (lowlands at least), Ireland (the English Pale at least), Netherlands, Italy (Augusto Boer has shown a source advising the use of both composite and longbows) and artistic evidence in Germany and Hungary. Turks didn't mention longbows even though French longbowmen were present in the crusade of Nicopolis of the late 14th century, though it's likely they didn't fight the battle which was (from what I read) only an issue of the French heavy cavalry. |
Interesting, I haven’t heard of a Portuguese bow. That would be a valuable find, being earlier than the Mary Rose bows, yet later than other bows. Is there any idea of what was used on the Iberian Peninsula before the crossbow? Slings or composite bows?
| Ryan S. wrote: | ||
So you think that vikings and merovingians were using bows that were the same draw weight as the Mary Rose bows? There are also differences such as different types of nocks and some bows have metal studs in them. |
Of course. There are accounts all throughout history telling of people who could draw heavy bows. When you have a greater percentage of the population practicing archery, you get a greater percentage of the population who can draw those heavy bows.
| Dan Howard wrote: | ||||
Of course. There are accounts all throughout history telling of people who could draw heavy bows. When you have a greater percentage of the population practicing archery, you get a greater percentage of the population who can draw those heavy bows. |
Makes sense, but is it backed up by evidence? There is also the question of the advantage of a super heavy bow in a time without metal armour. According to this: http://www.landschaftsmuseum.de/Seiten/Lexikon/Pfeil_Bogen-MA.htm The largest Oberflacht bow has a draw weight of 300 Newtons, at 40 cm. Why the draw distance so short is, I don’t understand. The Oberflacht bows are also the most unusual, but they are the only bows where I have found a draw weight for.
| Quote: |
| The Oberflacht bows are also the most unusual, but they are the only bows where I have found a draw weight for. |
From Halpin's Ballindery article, linked above
"No estimate of the performance of the Ballinderry bow has been possible but replicas of closely comparable Viking Age bows from Haithabu (Hedeby) were found to have draw weights of 38-46kg (84-101 lbs) and with these bows Paulsen achieved distances of up to 195m for light arrows, up to 180m for typical military arrows and up to 160m for heavier hunting arrows."
| Anthony Clipsom wrote: | ||
From Halpin's Ballindery article, linked above "No estimate of the performance of the Ballinderry bow has been possible but replicas of closely comparable Viking Age bows from Haithabu (Hedeby) were found to have draw weights of 38-46kg (84-101 lbs) and with these bows Paulsen achieved distances of up to 195m for light arrows, up to 180m for typical military arrows and up to 160m for heavier hunting arrows." |
Thanks, I just read the article today, as I couldn’t get the website to work. I must have overlooked the part about the Haithabu bow. That fits into what I have read, that the earlier bows are estimated to be slightly weaker than the Mary Rose bows because they are not as thick.
| Ryan S. wrote: |
| Makes sense, but is it backed up by evidence? |
If you can make a 6' long yew bow with a D section, you can make it to any draw weight you want. I don't know any bowyers who find that making heavier bows requires a skill which is not used for medium-weight bows.
OTOH there are the coroner's report with a bow a yard and a half long, and the short bow from Ireland. So there is evidence that some people in the British Isles were using short bows circa 1300 (aside from the art which we have reasons not to trust).
| Quote: |
| OTOH there are the coroner's report with a bow a yard and a half long, and the short bow from Ireland. So there is evidence that some people in the British Isles were using short bows circa 1300 (aside from the art which we have reasons not to trust). |
There is also a short bow from St Andrews in Scotland
https://moloneyarchaeology.wordpress.com/2020/01/16/the-st-andrews-bow-evidence-for-an-archer-in-14th-century-scotland/
Incidentally, if anyone has the online whereabouts of a report on this bow, it would be interesting to have a link.
| Sean Manning wrote: | ||
If you can make a 6' long yew bow with a D section, you can make it to any draw weight you want. I don't know any bowyers who find that making heavier bows requires a skill which is not used for medium-weight bows. OTOH there are the coroner's report with a bow a yard and a half long, and the short bow from Ireland. So there is evidence that some people in the British Isles were using short bows circa 1300 (aside from the art which we have reasons not to trust). |
I don’t think that a heavy bow is harder to make, just harder to use. My understanding is that all the other extant bows are thought to be lighter than the Mary Rose bows, or at least comparable to the lower range of Mary Rose bows. A Stone Age man could have made a 180 lbs bow, but did he? A 70 lbs bow would have been easier to shoot.
You mention short bows, and I am aware that some have suggested that the two extant short bows are children’s toys. Therefore, it would seem that it would be very interesting to know how heavy they are. As far as I know, the Waterford bow is built similar to other bows that are longer.
I am not sure length is a good way to classify bows, at least as a primary category. For example, two of the Oberflacht bows are significantly shorter than the other one. Is the one a longbow then and the others either medium or short bows (YMMV)? However, the Oberflacht bows are more similar to each other, than to all other bows.
I did not know about the St. Andrews bow! Combined with the coroner's record and the bow from Ireland I think there is pretty good evidence that some people in the British Isles were using relatively short bows in the second half of the Middle Ages.
I suspect there have been Europeans shooting 20 lb self bows and Europeans shooting 200 lb self bows in every century since the Neolithic. The thing that changed is how many people use long self bows with a heavy draw weight.
There are two main estimates of the draw weights of the Mary Rose bows. Both cite the same physics model by Professor Kooi and I do not fully understand the causes of disagreement. The lower model is not so much higher than the estimates of the heavier Viking Age bows.
| Ryan S. wrote: | ||||
I don’t think that a heavy bow is harder to make, just harder to use. My understanding is that all the other extant bows are thought to be lighter than the Mary Rose bows, or at least comparable to the lower range of Mary Rose bows. A Stone Age man could have made a 180 lbs bow, but did he? A 70 lbs bow would have been easier to shoot. |
I suspect there have been Europeans shooting 20 lb self bows and Europeans shooting 200 lb self bows in every century since the Neolithic. The thing that changed is how many people use long self bows with a heavy draw weight.
There are two main estimates of the draw weights of the Mary Rose bows. Both cite the same physics model by Professor Kooi and I do not fully understand the causes of disagreement. The lower model is not so much higher than the estimates of the heavier Viking Age bows.
| Sean Manning wrote: |
|
I don’t think that a heavy bow is harder to make, just harder to use. My understanding is that all the other extant bows are thought to be lighter than the Mary Rose bows, or at least comparable to the lower range of Mary Rose bows. A Stone Age man could have made a 180 lbs bow, but did he? A 70 lbs bow would have been easier to shoot. |
I suspect there have been Europeans shooting 20 lb self bows and Europeans shooting 200 lb self bows in every century since the Neolithic. The thing that changed is how many people use long self bows with a heavy draw weight.
There are two main estimates of the draw weights of the Mary Rose bows. Both cite the same physics model by Professor Kooi and I do not fully understand the causes of disagreement. The lower model is not so much higher than the estimates of the heavier Viking Age bows.[/quote]
Why do you think that people were drawing 200 lbs bows? Has such a high weight bow ever been found? What is the advantage of a 200 lbs bow? My understanding is that the main advantage of a heavy bow is that it shoots a heavy arrow, and therefore has a better chance of piercing armour. However, I haven’t seen any numbers relating to that.
As far as viking era bows compared to the Mary Rose bows, the Royal Armouries says the Mary Rose bows ranged from 65 lbs to 160 lbs. So the "viking" bows would fit into that range. I am not sure how they got the weight range for the Hedeby bow. I understand that there is only one complete bow, but also bow fragments. So is the range based on the fragments, or just the complete bow. If just the complete bow, then does the range reflect a margin of error? Bows are also made from a natural material using hand tools, so how much variation is unintentional.
| Quote: |
| I am not sure how they got the weight range for the Hedeby bow. |
From the Halpin quote given, they made replicas.
Page 1 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum