What is "Warbow"

[sagitarius boemoru]

For the purpose of this forum, warbow should be a single stave english style full bend bow of at least 90# or/and 220 yrds with Standart arrow.
Backed yew is acceptable as there are 16. and 17. examples of backing yew for bows, but not exotics and multilam bows.

Call me snobbish, but either its the thing or it is not.


J.

[ratty]

are you just defineing the english warbow of the medieval ages? with a 32" draw / with linen/hemp string?

[Kviljo]

It's relative to what you want to define. Hehe

One could define Mary Rose-bows quite narrowly, but the English warbow is as far more than that. The sad thing is that we don't know how much more it is.

[sagitarius boemoru]

Its obvious that there is heritage of heavy bows for war in the area far before actuall english assimilation of longbow as main artilery armament.
Hehe.
Also from iconographic source we can tell the bows were bloody heavy already by the half of the 14. century, because the archer postures and drawing style is typical for heavy bows. Also the nocks have been probably present at that time as some sources show it quite clearly.

Of course it should be medieval warbow, nothing else. Calling anything else by that name, is degradation of the real thing.

The military use didnt actually lasted so long. Its safe to frame it by big battle events.

Hallidon Hill and reconquist of Scottland by english was time of forming the tactics, logistic and the technical advancement of the weapon. (First leap.)
This is first third of 14. century. But at Crecy this all was already functional. Its clear the advancement due to arms race was quite rapid.
The other leap occured around the time of Azincourt, or better yet around half of 15. century when plate armour was readily availble even for non-nobile combatants.
Last major battle event is Flodden Field. Mary Rose bows are last of the line. After Mary Rose, the bows have been still of some use in skirmishing even as late as english civil war, but we can safely tell it was a swan´s song only.

English bow does not need 32´´ draw, its obvious not everybody can reach it and even at MR was alotl of arrows shorter than this.

It is defined more by performance than anything else. Also the draw is not defined by obscure "english warbow should have 32´´ draw" but more by limitations of frame of said archer. A sporting style of draw is not acceptable, where a "stand in the bow" style is.

We can probably discard the requirement of linen and hemp string due to fact that neither material is availble in necessary quality anymore, but we should stay purist as much as possible.

I m very much responsible for recent popularisation of shooting heavy bows, but we should not degrade medieval archery by calling everything "warbow".



Jaro

[D. Tiller]

Jaro, lets try and keep this board here all inclusive. Any weight bow as long as it bends throughout, limbs no wider than handle, stands at least man height tall and draws to ear or chest. The bows knocks can be horn or self nocks since we have no idea what they made throughout the mideival ages.

Sounds good to me!

David T

[Miles]

I like some of the basic parts of the definition as in draw weight.

I know there's some evidence of the use of Ash and Elm not just Yew use to make English Self-Longbow's used in war but of both Woods I've not seen any very heavy bows made of them, but did have a 65 pound at 28” English Longbow made up white ash (a New World wood) the bow shots very well until I broke it’s limb.

Any one made a Hvy Warbow out of Ash or Elm yet?

Miles

[D. Tiller]

Thimo has and they shoot great from the videos I've seen!

[1/2primitive]

I would think that a warbow is just a heavy weight longbow, right? But then the warbow could be called a longbow and also a warbow. I would expect that a bow that has a lower draw weight (around 50-60 lb.) would just be labled as a 'longbow'(?). As for making it from a different wood, you can make a Cherokee style bow from a different wood and it would still be called a Cherokee style bow, just a different wood.
Agree? Disagree?
       Sean

[D. Tiller]

A little different in this case Sean. Since the warbow is actually different than the English Longbow. The Victorian Longbow does not bend in the handle but the Warbow does in what is called compass rose fashion. It historicaly has been made of three different woods Yew, Elm and Ash. So to be historicaly correct you nead to make them out of those three woods. Yew was the cadillac of the three.

Now if you just want a warbow you can make it out of any wood you like. People have made great warbows out of different woods and also made from different laminate of wood glued together. Pip Bickerstaff, among others, has made bows this way. I expect with the rarity and price of Yew today and in the future bows will be made more often from second woods or laminates. Personaly, if it bends compass rose and has a belly thats curved in the english fashion, standing man heght or taller its a warbow.

Primitive Archer has always been very inclusive as a website and magazine so lets keep this board that way too. We are just focussing down on a particular style in this area of the PA bulletin board.

[ratty]

English bow does not need 32´´ draw, its obvious not everybody can reach it and even at MR was alotl of arrows shorter than this.





Jaro

i have an opinion on the shorter arrows  i belive the shorter arrows on the MR would have had longer bodkins on them,and the longer shafts shorter heads bringing them all upto around 32" for optimum draw and power






so i belive the longer the draw the better if its back to your ear or past your doing fine by me

[duffontap]

This board can be totally inclusive for all I care.  BUT, Jaro has a legitimate point that we're dealing with historical data here and we should be responsible to represent 'the English Warbow' in a historically-accurate manner.  This provides lots of latitude for speculation and opinion, but for historical purposes, we need to use a stricter definition.  "Any weight, any tiller, any material, any draw length, any limb taper, any length, whatever I want to call a warbow" doesn't describe anything and doesn't advance our understanding of the historical subject at hand.  Does that make sense to you guys?
 
Take care,

          J. D. Duff

[SimonUK]

Ratty's theory on arrow length and arrow heards makes a lot of sense to me. I'm sure I read somewhere that it was the long 'english arrow' that was the major difference between english and continental archery equipment. If this is the case, the desire for a long draw length would surely have driven the development of a long arrow.

I guess there might be other advantages for a long arrow ...increased accuracy? ... increased weight yet still streamlined?

[ratty]

i sort of agree about the definition of the warbow, but i feel we have more to learn about how it was shot.

the medieval style (in the bow)

its no good owning one if you cant shoot it properly,or should i say historically correct.

as a few of you know when you first got your warbow you suddenly realised you had to change shooting style.

which is why i feel that the laminate warbow should not exclude people from the warbow threads the laminate warbow is just a warbow replica, which needs the same style and effort to shoot.

BUT for definition purposes a medieval English warbow was known to be made of imported yew.

a laminate if it is made to medieval style and weighs 100#+ and draw 32" is a (laminate replica medieval English warbow)

[D. Tiller]

Aye, theres the rub JD! There are many different variations on the Warbow theme historicaly speaking. We only have the Marry Rose bows to go by and they were at the tail end of the warbows development and millitary use.  They also had a lot of variation between them in there designs. We can only speculate on what early bows looked like or performed like. We have to keep in perspective that we just dont know except from whats found in a few painting and some written documentation. So we nead to keep it a bit vague.

Personally, I believe limiting bow materials to the three we know were used historically would defeat the inclusive nature of the PA bulleting board. Sure, there are limmiting factor but I think the nead to be a bit vague because of this. Some people wish to make historicaly accurat represintation of what was used durring the mideivil ages and that is a good goal and will allow us to figure out how things were back then. Others just want to build a warbow and shoot them and it does not matter what the material are or how heavy a wieght they pull.

Here are what I think we should limit our bassis for discusion on the English Warbow forum:

1) Bows must be round of belly.
2) Bows must taper from grip to nocks.
3) Bows should be man height or taller.
4) Bows must bend through out there length in Compass Rose fashion.
5) Should draw to the ear for the length of draw.
6) String nocks should be self or horn nocks. (Dont know what they were durring the early mideivil ages so keep it open a bit)
7) No recurves on bows except the small tiny ones that were used historicaly on yew bows. (Yep! They did put small recurve on some at the very ends of the bows. These were included, sometimes, on bows after the crusades)

This should limit things enough but still leave the board broad enough to include the majority of people who enjoy shooting a warbow style of bow.

[1/2primitive]

I like your definition, David.    Now what about all of the bows they have labled as 'longbows' now days? I mean, anything that isn't a recurve they call a longbow.
      Sean