[Greg Griggs]

Hello all,
Doing a bit of historical research into the weapon usage of the 5th - 7th C. Scotland. Okay - so it wasn't Scotland then, but you know the region. Being new to these forums, I'm hoping this is the proper place to ask my question. We have some idea as to what edged weapons were used at that time and place, but can anyone fill me in about the possible usage of bows? IE: if bows were used, were they of the short variety, or more like the common Welsh long-bow? Any help along this line will be appreciated. Many thanks!

[Eric Nower]

Hey Greg,


The Welsh longbow, if I recall I away from my books right now, didn't really see appearance in England/scotland area until the late 12th cen. Before then most were what we call shortbows, I've got books that have the info at home I'll give you the titles they're very good sources---The Medieval Archer is one off the top of my head

http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...ht=longbow
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1062&start=0


A couple a articles I found useing the search function too.

[Michael P Smith]

[Eric Nower]

Hello all,

Michael is right, it's great to go back and brush up on things from time-to-time The "shortbow" is a 19th cen term. A "short ordinary bow" was more common in the east than in the west and was used more for mounted combat and on the ground. The "longbow" or ordinary wooden bow has been around for a long time. The term "welsh longbow" came in use because the southernwelsh were known to be very good shots with a bow.

[Greg Griggs]

Thanks for your replies gentlemen. As I have found in my research on this topic there seems to be a large disparity in not only the use of archery during that time period, but if there were bows; what type would they have been? The only written histories from that period are from the Romans, but there have been several "pictographs" found that do depict archers. It just seems to be one of those things that will forever be open for debate. Thanks for the resource Eric - I think I will pick up a copy of The Medieval Archer and see if it can help. Any other ideas, I would appreciate greatly. Be well all.

Greg

[Kevin Toomey]

That's twice I've lost my long labored post due to login problems this effort will be shorter.

It wasn't until the bronze age that bows made with a single growth ring on the back appeared , Otzi's bow is not made in the same way as the ELB, Vimose, Kragehule etc. It is double edge ringed with pointed nocks( nock only one remains) with D belly. The easiest way I can think of to describe this type is half a sapling with the flat face being the back the round half, the belly. Both D and flat neolithic bows have been found.

Early iron age bows were also nocked differently that the ELB, though by this time the neolithic construction had completely disappeared with single growth ring back adopted. Hardy, Longbow, A Social and Military History 1993 mentions an oak flatbow found in Scotland dated~?1300bc the exact details escape me.


One Saxon grave yeilded traces of a 5 foot bow. Nothing approaching an entire bow though there is nothing about bowmaking to keep you from doing such.

I think it is safe to say that in the absence of yew wide flatbows with slightly convex bellies were made rather than narrow nearly circular bellied D yew bows.

[Dan Howard]

It seems that the yew longbow was introduced to the British Isles by Scandinavians. When you actually look at the evidence there is nothing to suggest that the Welsh used it before they began fighting in Edward's armies.

Here is an interesting factoid. According to Dr. Lynn White, Jr., there are two Old Irish words for bow: one for a regular bow, and its root is Celtic; the other is for a longbow, and its root is Norse.

[Jean Thibodeau]

Is a longbow defined just by scale and draw weight compared to smaller less powerful self bows ?

At the point of history when we know that longbows became known as the typical British speciality, was this a technical advance in the art of making bows or simply the systematic mass use of very powerful bows that might have been in use earlier here and there but in a less well documented way.

If there is little technical difference between a lets say, a 4 foot long 50 to 60 pound draw eight bow and a 6 foot 100 to 150 pound bow, the making and use of very powerful bows like this could have been used / made by individuals who wanted or had the strength to use the most powerful bows.

In a legendary / historical case like Ulysses the bow was probably an eastern style composite bow rather than a large selfbow.

When the skill and materials are lacking to make composite bows the only option remaining is a question of scale: Bigger / longer being more powerful.

[Kevin Toomey]

[Jean Thibodeau]

Kevin;

Thanks for the explanations: The subtleties of construction and design that define an English longbow may be more specific than a very VERY over-generalization about really BIG self bows that are not recurves or some other thing that would disqualify them as " English " longbows.

From what you said, if I understand correctly, some bows that are called English longbows can be smaller and less powerful than the monster bows I was visualizing: It is a matter of design D shape as you mentioned.

My knowledge is superficial here, but I was not completely unaware of what you mentioned, but I found it very useful.

Just taking a big round piece of wood an putting a strings on it won't automatically give you a bow, and bad design will give you a heavy draw weight that may not transfer energy to the arrow efficiently: Recurves, modern compound pulley bows etc..... are ways of using lower draw weights that will give you a faster arrow than a much heavier but badly designed bow.

Oh, I'm just trying to clarify my thoughts here as I assume that I'm not telling you anything you are unfamiliar with ! ( Assuming that I am not completely wrong here. )

I've done a little archery but I haven't studied the subject of bows in depth.

Oh, the Ibex horn !? I have no idea except that horn was used in making composite bows: I think inside the curve and using pieces cut thin and storing power through compression, while sinew was used on the outside to store energy through tension, the whole thing kept together using strong cord ( Silk ? ) and glue and with some outer covering of parchment or maybe bark ? Again I may have the details wrong.

[Kevin Toomey]

IIRC in The Traditional Bowyers Bible v1 Tim Baker did some experiments with a simple sapling with minimal retouching and drying time to make a primitive bow getting approx. 20% less arrow speed than what one would expect from a properly made bow. Which I believe says alot about what efforts homo sapiens will go through to get just a little more better. As I recall his bow was 35 pounds and the proportion may not carry through at higher weights.

The semantic distinction I would make would be: did you say English longbow or English warbow- I may be unique in this. But obviously a 40 # warbow is just silly in this context. A quick look online reveals many so called ELB @ low cost are flatbows. many with rigid handles. this is just not true to form. My definition would be a yew w/ D cross section that bends throughout its length with horn nocks. I suppose really it should be at or about 6 feet. At 60 inches I was thinking in terms of a kid's bow or something? if it has all of the other features and there is a reason for its short length seems OK to me. that maybe pushing it to some but the other features are more important to me. Not least of which is the wood. It may still be Ok to say "I have an ELB of ash, 70#" such might make a decent bow but will not reflect what a 70 pound yew bow is capable of nor what ash is capable of in the form of a flat bow.



your tension compression ideas are correct. String? I'm not so sure about that but glue yes. coverings yes both have been used.

[Eric Myers]

The D-section yew longbow is English, though probably in long use before it became famous. The Welsh longbow was (is?) a flatbow made of elm, not yew. Both got to very high draw weights, with similar stories attributed to them, such as shooting arrows into a 4" oak door and the points sticking out the other side of the door, or of pinning an armored leg through the saddle and into the horse.

Compared to a flatbow, a D-section bow is very stable, durable, and easy to manufacture, so it's a good design for a war bow. Also, it's not as efficient as most flatbows, but this is partly compensated for by the generally heavier arrows used in war (basically they remain in contact with the string longer, so more energy is transferred from the bow).

There were other reasons for making short bows than just riding. Laminated bows of horn/antler and sinew can be shorter because the materials have higher compression and tensile strengths than wood, and in lots of places were far more abundant than wood. These materials may have been more resisitant to extreme cold as well. Also, peoples who lived and hunting in dense brush or undergrowth tended to have shorter bows than peoples in more open environments.

[Michael P Smith]

[Eric Nower]

[Michael P Smith]

[Michael P Smith]

[Michael P Smith]

[Eric Myers]

[Michael P Smith]

[Eric Myers]