Medieval Research: The Beautiful, Brutal Bow

Here we are, finally. The post on archery that was long coming. I’m feeling much better now, thanks for asking, so let’s get twanging.

First thing you guys should know is that I was originally planning to make this one a standoff between the two bows of the medieval times; the longbow and the crossbow. I would have made it one short post with random facts from each, but soon enough I realized; there is just way too much awesome information out there for me to ignore. Seriously, did you know that trained archers never fired more than six arrows a minute in battle? Any more and they would risk injury. Aye, that’s hardcore.

Anywho, one meagre post barely gives these beautiful weapons any justice. So I decided to make this particular piece part one of two; and with that in mind, I give you today, the bow

Simple facts to start you off with the bow; they were made from two parts. There was the flexible wood, and the string or cord that joined either end. Anything that fits this description is in fact a bow.

And yes, that goes for this, too.

Keep in mind though, that bows were usually much complicated than that. Bow making was an art in itself, and different cultures developed differently shaped bows that had varying accuracy and strength.

Bows were not in any way the first weapon that launched projectiles. The gentleman right here was called a slinger; these guys were hitting targets with frightening accuracy long before bows were even thought of. Those of you who played the RTS game Rise of Nations at one time or other will remember them.

 So, you’re wondering what’s so impressive about throwing stones? David and Goliath, people. At short range, even five of these dudes yelling and swinging those slings would make you want to pause and contemplate whether or not the cause was really worth the headache that was imminent.

Every bow is just a stick without the bowstring. This string is much more than a simple cord, mind you. People’s lives literally depend on it; if its fine, others die, and if it breaks in mid-aim, then chances are you die.

 You may have heard or seen the word ‘nock’ at some time or other. This word has two meanings; the first was to fit the string to the bow, and the second was to fit an arrow to the string. 

The word just so happened to be a noun, too; it was both the grooves on either end of the bow where the string caught, as well as the groove on the arrow itself, where it fitted onto the string. Like so:

Archers always were expected to take good care of their bowstrings, and with good reason. In later years, the strings themselves were well made to prolong life. Some may have even been marked to show where the arrow was meant to be nocked (heh heh, I used the word). The string around that point would have been reinforced to prevent wear by the archer’s hands. How do you reinforce thread? With more thread.

And finally, the ends of the string. One side always had a permanent loop into it. The other did not. The archer always had to tie a loop into it himself. Why, do you ask? This gives him more room to make the string shorter or longer as he needed. It would also mean that he could have a bunch of extra strings in his pocket that could fit any bow he tripped over during battle.

The knot the archers traditionally used was, of course, called the archer’s knot. But according to dear Wikipedia, it resembles the timber hitch. Of course it does. I wouldn't know.

There are so many different types of bows, and there’s still too much information to talk about every single one of them. But I’ll just talk about the two most common bows and be done with it

The most well-known one would be the long bow. Stated simply, it’s what its name implies. It is just a really long bow. There aren’t any curves in longbows, and that's because there’s no need for any. 

See, most are over five feet, which means that the string would have to be long, too. The extra length would be enough for you to draw it back to your face. Observe lucky guy on the left. With that much pull, the arrow would have plenty of force upon release to travel pretty far.

Some sources say that the longbow could shoot upto about 400 yards. If you’re a casual archer for hunting or something related, you are probably used to distances like 60 to 70 yards, or even 30 to 40 yards. I know, 400 would make you wonder what those historians were drinking. 

You should remember, though, that archers train for life. They literally lived to shoot that darn arrow, and darn them if they can’t make the 400 yard mark. It’s a 120lb draw on the best longbows, after all, and that is impressive to say the very least. If they can pull back on 120 pounds, then it seems legit that the arrow they loose can make it to 400 yards.

This would also explain why archers wouldn’t want to fire more than six arrows a minute. Thinking on it now, pulling back on 200lb every ten seconds? That’s some serious strength needed there.

Another definition of a longbow would tell you that it’s the only bow where the string does not touch the limbs other than where it nocks. This makes sense when you consider the recurved bows, which are much shorter, and yet rather more beautiful

This is a recurve bow. Isn’t she something? Notice the way tips curve away from the archer when unstrung, and how it straightens out when drawn. Recurves were a lot shorter than the longbows, and that meant the shorter string would have less power. The curves solved this; when the archer let fly, they added more power by bending back to how they were when the string was released. Basically, recurves are much more efficient than a straight bow of the same length.

You might be wondering about what I said earlier about “string not touching limbs other than where it nocks” on a longbow. That is as opposed to a recurve bow, where as you can see on the picture on the right (a close up of the same bow just above) the string is in contact with the wood even below where its nocked. 

            A longbow doesn't touch the wood again after the nock. There aren't any curves in it, so its easy to imagine.

The thing about recurve bows; the handy size lets them be the perfect tool for hit and run attacks on horseback. The Mongols were probably those who were most famous for horse archery. Their raids were destructive, and the fierce discipline Mongol soldiers had made their tactics all the more devastating.

             Imagine trying to draw a longbow on the back of a charging horse. It's not impossible; but if the said horse is moving, then it would be rather difficult to aim, unless you're pretty good at shooting with the bow held horizontally. Longbowmen in the time of Prince Edward (aka the The Black Prince) seemed to be capable mounted archers; but then again, they pretty much practiced all their lives.

There are more types of bow, obviously. The composite bow is simply a bow made from two different materials. It would most likely be fiberglass and wood, these days; but back then, they would have used wood and horn and/or combinations like that. 

And then there are the reflex bows, the flatbow, the bare bow (basically the medieval type, without the fancy modern trappings) and so on. But let’s leave these for another day. I'll definitely come back to them, because they are just too good to not talk about.

At this point, after all those different bows I mentioned, there is a seemingly obvious question : which of these bows is the best? I’ll just let this guy do the talking on that one. I have no idea who he is, but he makes a good point.

And there you have it. It’s the archer, not the bow. Though of course, a 50lb bow would still be more powerful than a 20lb one. It’s a matter of common sense, really.

And here is another something of his I found interesting. Have a listen:

Who would have thought? Anybody here know what this guy’s name is, please let me know in the comments. I tried searching on YouTube; he’s there, but his name isn’t.

             And so we’re done with medieval bows, that played one heck of a part in the Middle ages, and still do even now. Today, archery is just plain cool. There’s this guy...

... and then this guy ...

... and there's always this guy ...

... and countless others, in different media. Archery, in a word, is awesome. But back then, it was so much more. It was a way of life. Archers trained from their childhood, and kept training throughout; they literally lived and died by their bow. It was the only thing they knew. Frankly, as far as I’m considered, it’s all you needed to know.

It wasn’t always so, though; this glorious skill had humble beginnings. In medieval England, short bow archers were held as the lowliest of the low. (Three guesses who were the highest of the high. Here’s a hint: it rhymes with night).

It all changed in the Battle of Hastings, 1066, when archers turned the tide and showed the world how important they were. But that. too, is a story for another time, as colorful as it is.

For now, I’ll have to leave you here with this:

Invalid indeed. Does it work? I'd rather not be on the receiving end of that one.

I've got bows barely covered, and now you see why this would never have made one third of a post. I hope you found this as interesting as I found these facts to be. 

Next up, crossbows. 

Sources:

                Wikipedia

                www.instructables.com/archery

                www.medieval-life-and-times

                history.stackexchange.com

                boards.straightdope.com