European bows before the ELB

[ajbruggink]

Hey Guys,

I don't know this is the right discussion area for this or if this belongs in the English Warbow area but I'm interested in learning more about European bows, particularly ones that were used between the times of the Holmegaard and the Meare Heath and the Hundred Years' War, because my research thus far hasn't come up with very much. To cut to the meat, my question is what kind of bow (s) were used in Europe before the English Longbows used in Crecy, Poitiers, and Agincourt? The Europeans went to the Crusades before the Hundred Year's War, surely they brought bows with them right? There's lots of sources out there for the bows used in the Hundred Years' War but what about the bows they used before that? I'm interested because I would hopefully like to replicate some of these earlier medieval bows. Any responses or insights are greatly appreciated.

-Aaron         

[Del the cat]

Very good question!
What was used for everyday use?
When I did some filming for Tudor Monastery Farm, I took along Yew longbows and a 35# Hazel primitive (flat Belly, bark left on the back) for Ruth Goodman to shoot.
My argument being that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. It certainly wasn't anachronistic in the usual sense, but was it effectively an obsolete design?
In my view, bowyers will always use what wood is commonly available and always use designs from the past that suit that type of wood.
Mind this is all just gut feel and guess work... but at least it's not pontification by an "armchair expert"
As it happens no one commented on the Hazel bow being out of place.
Also got to remember that kids are always making bows too, and in medieval times may well of been getting small game with them. The kids become the adult bowyers and so life goes on.
When I complete my time machine (I'm waiting on a part that isn't invented until 2023 , it's on back order at "Time Machines Will be Us")  I'll pop back and have a look.
Del

[WillS]

The Balinderry Bow springs to mind (10thC) as it was identical to the 16thC Mary Rose bows but lots of Viking bows also resemble the basic longbow in shape, draw weight and wood used (yew mainly)

Here's a good link about Viking bows

http://vikingsonline.org.uk/resources/authenticity/bows/index.htm

And don't forget Otzi - 3,300 BC, and yet found with a yew bow identical again to the Mary Rose warbows, along with arrows the same length with fletchings and whipping the same length.  If he was using a bow like this 5000 years ago, there's a high chance (but little evidence sadly) that this design and style were used from the ice age right through to the high middle ages and mid Tudor period.  Certainly strong enough evidence to opine that during the Crusades the same type of bow would be used.

I also personally like the idea that composite and horn bows would have been used - hard to ignore the idea that the Crusaders would have discounted the short, powerful and practical bows used by the opposition. 

[Badger]

  I think about this a lot and can't hep but think they competed with one another in the process of developing bows. It didn't take them long to figure out heavier arrows penetrated better. They shared their experience and studied each others designs. A successful design would quickly catch on. Their had to be a lot of status involved with raising the bar for performance based on what was being asked of the bow. We have 9 million things we can apply ourselves to learning. The bow was a very important piece of technology and no doubt a considerate amount of time was spent on all aspects of its development.

[mikekeswick]

They wouldn't have used hornbows...or at least not for long...our humidity would make them fall to pieces 

Find out what they used them for, what materials, tools etc they had then go make the very best bow possible for that intended use and there's your answer! I personally doubt wether people would have used longbows for much other than killing other people. Too long to hunt effectively with unless you are in a hide of some sort and even then they would require a bigger hide...

[dwardo]

I would imagine it depended on how well you were living. If you had time like we do to fettle bows for the love of it and chasing performance then life was pretty good, "leisure time" so more than likely stunners were turned out, experiments with different styles, engineering, fettling etc.

If on the other hand life was migratory then I guess carrying several staves around with you waiting for them to season would be hard going. Processing large timber for very long heavy bows would also be pretty tough.
 Its much easier to take smaller stuff without steel tools. Smaller sapling types tend for me to be better candidates for shorter bows as there is more chance of a cleaner stave over a shorter length due to knots and branches.

Then there is the transition from hunter-gatherer to farming to take into consideration as well as the tool materials and man power available. 

Like Mike says it depends on on what it was used for, when and the tools/society and knowledge available at the time.

[Marc St Louis]

There was no need for high draw weight bow before they started wearing heavy armor.  There are accounts of natives killing or seriously wounding the Spanish who were wearing chain mail armor using lower draw weight bows

[WillS]

So what about the 10th century bows that have been found with identical dimensions (using the same wood) to the 150# Mary Rose bows?  Even if there's a 50 odd pound discrepancy the bows are still in the 100# range with ease.  The Balinderry Bow could be placed amongst the Mary Rose bows and only the curators would know the difference.

It can't be argued that the arms race forced bows to evolve to compete against plate armour, but there is also no ignoring the fact that a 3000BC bow and a 10th century bow were designed and built at weights matching those at the pinnacle of the medieval arms race.  They're right there as extant items. 

[ajbruggink]

Thanks for the responses, guys. My first wooden bow was a 45 lb English Longbow that I bought from Rudderbows. I love the bow, its light, its extremely quiet, shooting off the hand presents no problems for me and its accurate. I would like to use it for hunting but I am worried about its length, I can shoot sitting in a chair and on both knees on the ground and its length does not inhibit me when shooting in these positions but I have not taken it into the woods yet, guess I'll have to test it. I like the narrow, rounded look as well of the bow, its graceful in its own way, at least I like it better than wide limbed bows. The D-bow used by Native Americans interests me as well, maybe I'll try making one of those for hunting this year.

[George Tsoukalas]

I thought I read somewhere the longbow came about because of the lack of bow wood. The English needed a lot of bows for war. Making a flatbow takes more wood than a long bow. Hence the longer round bellied  design. More bows in a tree. Jawge

[mikekeswick]

So what about the 10th century bows that have been found with identical dimensions (using the same wood) to the 150# Mary Rose bows?  Even if there's a 50 odd pound discrepancy the bows are still in the 100# range with ease.  The Balinderry Bow could be placed amongst the Mary Rose bows and only the curators would know the difference.

It can't be argued that the arms race forced bows to evolve to compete against plate armour, but there is also no ignoring the fact that a 3000BC bow and a 10th century bow were designed and built at weights matching those at the pinnacle of the medieval arms race.  They're right there as extant items.

We've killed each other for a long time! However we also need to eat fairly often!
Anybody who uses a bow to hunt with will know that anything approaching 100# would be left at home.  (unless you were going after summat mighty large )
Otzi's stave/bow to be would not have been finished to over 100# - i'd bet the last penny I had on that.

[GlisGlis]

Have a look at those pages
http://www.outlab.it/schede.htm
All texts are italian but I think it could be what you're searching for. Many many pictures and a nice classification. Europe is one of indexs
Feel free to ask specific translations if you encounter difficulties

[WillS]

We've killed each other for a long time! However we also need to eat fairly often!
Anybody who uses a bow to hunt with will know that anything approaching 100# would be left at home.  (unless you were going after summat mighty large )
Otzi's stave/bow to be would not have been finished to over 100# - i'd bet the last penny I had on that.

Can o' worms! I think it was an almost finished bow.  I was never able to agree with the idea that a primitive man set off for a hike through the alps carrying small provisions, basic clothing, a quiver of finished arrows....and a 7ft chunk of yew stave he couldn't use.  What was he doing with the arrows? Throwing them at people? 

Still, that doesn't explain the Balinderry Bow    that's definitely a finished a bow and a very talented young bowyer called Eirik recently made an exact replica from the same wood species (taxus baccata) and it came out at 150#.

[GlisGlis]

Looking through the links I gave before i stepped in this page
http://www.outlab.it/sk1122.htm
showing archers shooting clay bullets to avoid loosing arrows in ponds
Never saw anything similar.
Have you ever tried it?
I guess the upper limb should have really big sight window and maybe also string aligned to a side to avoid the clay bullet to hit the bow

[bubby]

First off the otzi bow was still just a stave ruff cut, and the quiver full of finished arrows was two finished arrows, one to long to fit in his quiver under the flap, and a dozen unfinished arrows, I don't know how you can make an exact replica from an unfinished stave, and what draw length are you basing the weight at