Ash backed Yew Warbow

[Marc St Louis]

The Ash backing is plain sawn.  I used an Ash stave that I had, removed the bark and took 2 1/2 rings from the back for the backing.  That means the back of the bow has a natural rounded look.

[nickf]

lovely bow Marc! would love to get my hands on some quality yew soon ...and 110# is nice to shoot

Nick

[Yeomanbowman]

Very nice Marc,  I bet she's fast.

Hugh Soar told me there is a historical reference to a Tudor ash backed yew bow,  I assume a sport bow.

Cheers,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy,

Any chance of getting that reference?

Cheers

Nick

PS Nice bow, I'd be interested to hear how it performs!

Hello Nick,

I'll have to email him.

Cheers,
Jeremy

[Cooper]

A very fine bow … and a elegant way making the backing.

[bow-toxo]

personally I like the nocks, I'm not sure about the statement that "warbows should have side nocks", considering there is only evidense of 1 actual side nock found.

'Nock' means notch. The statement is based on the fact that side nock grooves are visible on every MR bowtip. While only one horn [side]nock remains, bowtip discolouration shows that others had horn, or possibly another material, nocks. Also nearly all early mediaeval bows that have been found had side nocks cut in the wood.

[cowboy]

Very nice one Marc! Beautiful bend - he aught to love it!!

[Yeomanbowman]

I have contacted Hugh Soar and he said that it is entirely possible that ash-backed yew existed but did not know of any literary reference. However he did say backed bows were introduced around the late 1500's.

Hope this helps.

[outcaste]

I have contacted Hugh Soar and he said that it is entirely possible that ash-backed yew existed but did not know of any literary reference. However he did say backed bows were introduced around the late 1500's.

Hope this helps.

Further to this point, page 47 of 'Secrets of the English War Bow' Hugh does discuss the practice of backing Yew bows when good quality Yew was in short supply, especially towards the end of the 16th century. He also points to 'Kelsal' of Manchester being the first to use it to good effect.

Also within the notes and references for this chapter it states that there is an Ash backed Yew bow dated 1650 held by The Royal Company of Archers Edinburgh.

Cheers,
Alistair

[alanesq]

personally I like the nocks, I'm not sure about the statement that "warbows should have side nocks", considering there is only evidense of 1 actual side nock found.

I would agree that warbows should have sidenocks as I have not seen any evidence of anything else being used
(well actually, I have been shown one painting which shows what looks like a modern nock but it was a while back and I cant get hold of a decent copy of the picture to examine it)

see     www.alanesq.com/sidenock.htm    for all the info I have (any extra info gratefully received)

[Yeomanbowman]

Hello Alan,
This is the image.  It's in 'The Great Warbow' in more detail.  To me it looks well observed as the proportions are correct.  The detailing is also accurate, things like the arrow being on the 'right' side of the bow and the 'loose'.  The top nock looks very similar to your MR drawing.  However, the image clearly show a loop rather than a noose/knot.  I'm not arguing with your general premise that as far as we know English warbows were side-nocked but I cannot be 100% certain that this was always the case.

[alanesq]

hi,

thats not the pic I was thinking of - its the one on the back of Richard Wadge's Arrowstorm - but its a good one - cant really see any detail of the actual nock but great detail in the string loop

I understand from at least 2 people that a loop can be used with sidenocks although I have not managed to do it myself yet
so the loop doesnt prove its not a sidenock although it does at least suggest I am wrong to be using a noose if it is?

When I finally get round to making my next bow with better size nocks I will give it another try

[burn em up chuck]

  spot on ! sweet. love that profile.

                                              chuck

[Yeomanbowman]

Alan,
You may want to exercise a little caution with a loop and side-nocks.  I'm not saying it cannot be done but Joe Gibbs related a salutary tale to me about the time he tried it and it pulled the limb to one side and as a result tore it clean off

What about double-side nocks and a loop akin to the nocks on a selfbow?  However, to me you would not gain the advantage of the spreading of pressure and, if cut-through to the wood cone, the ability to hold the horn on with a noose/bowyers knot.

Sorry for digressing from Marc's lovely bow! 

[bow-toxo]

      We have more than enough information from Tudor sources to be convinced that their bow strings as well as Viking strings used with self side nocks were tied at the bottom and had a loop at the top. No surprise that the painting clearly shows one.  However the Luttrell Psalter picture of archers at the butts shows what appears to be a double loop string. I have used self and horn side nocks exclusively for thirty five years and am trying to imagine how using a loop with side nocks could cause a limb to tear off. I am also trying to imagine a combat archer trying to replace a bowstring tied at both nocks with bowyers knots. LOL

                                                                                                               Cheers,
                                                                                                                  Erik

[alanesq]

I have used a sidenocked 120lb bow with bowyers knot at both ends and it can be done once you figure out the technique - the only problem I found was that as the knot at the top can move so you find that every time you adjust it the nocking point on the bowstring has moved

I too can't see why/how a loop would cause a limb to be pulled sideways?   maybe it was the nock came away from the bow or something?
its a good point though that without a noose the idea of the string holding the nock in place is brought into question.  although when braced I guess there is still going to be a lot of pressure on the string so it may still work?

I have tried using a small loop instead of a noose a couple of times but couldnt get it to work but I have since found out that my nocks are way too big so this may be why
it may also be my poor string making skills?

btw - sorry Marc St Louis for going off subject on your thread - maybe an admin might want to move the sidenocks posts to a new thread?