Warbow speed shooting

[Heiner]

Hiya,

while discussing construction and usage of the linen arrowbags used in the late middle ages, someone recently stated that "Shooting 8 arrows out of the back quiver is almost impossible to do." (translated fairly enough). I did not agree and some more words were exchanged, mentioning the influence of heavy draw weight on speed shooting. I stopped arguing for the time being and intend to go out this weekend and shoot some rounds myself to see what results I personally can come up with.

Not living in a nutshell, I ask you guys shooting heavy bows (100+ lbs): How many arrows can you shoot per minute? Which arrow keeping device do you use (sidequiver, backquiver, soil)?

Looking forward your valuable answers,
Heiner

[ChrisD]

We had a discussion of this topic on another forum so I had a go - not with a longbow but a flatbow of 105lb.

Firstly, archers appear not to have shot from a bag or quiver - the habit, I believe, was to place the arrows head down in the ground to one side, handy for use. On this basis, I managed 10 arrows in one minute after 3 attempts ie on the other attempts I missed the cut and managed only nine.

They were not particularly aimed arrows but all drawn to a full length and the 'scatter' of arrows was not too severe, and in the context of massed archery, I would have defined it as 'useful' in that range was consistent - you certainly wouldn't want to have been part of a group standing where the arrows were falling!

C

[bow-toxo]

We had a discussion of this topic on another forum so I had a go - not with a longbow but a flatbow of 105lb.

Firstly, archers appear not to have shot from a bag or quiver - the habit, I believe, was to place the arrows head down in the ground to one side, handy for use. On this basis, I managed 10 arrows in one minute after 3 attempts ie on the other attempts I missed the cut and managed only nine.

  They certainly seem not to have shot from a back or shoulder quiver which was used to get arrows out of the way when travelling to where the shooting was to take place, when the quiver would be transferred to the hip. Eirst, arrows tend to rattle in a back quiver. Second, it is awkward to draw arrows from a back quiver. Third,.raising the arm that high is a warning signal to animal or enemy. I would say that shooting arrows out of a back quiver is a pointless exercise. It would seem even more awkward in the case of an arrow bag with perforated leather disc which would be used in the late Middle Ages for war, the only situation in which a sheaf of 24 arrows was needed.

[adb]

I believe back quivers are a Victorian invention. They're certainly not medieval.

[Heiner]

Hey everbody,

thanks alot for the comments. I am very aware of the authenticity of back quivers in the middle ages. If my initial text lead to confusion regarding this, I am sorry for that. The basic question was the speed of warbow shooting, other information was just meant to put things in context.

Anyway, here are the results from the weekend:

Round 0, warm-up with a 55er: 12 arrows per minute
Round 1, 100er: 11 arrows per minute
Round 2, 100er: 11 arrows per minute
Round 3, 100er: 11 arrows per minute

Looks like a pretty stable result to me  .

I'd like to add that my level of training is deplorable right now. One or two arrows more will easily be achievable by improving the  nocking technique. More practise will also allow increasing the draw weight. 110 to 115 lbs will not be a problem.

For those interested, here are the links to the YouTube videos: 55er, 100er round 1, 2, 3

Regards,
Heiner

[adb]

Good shooting  . However, to be true "warbow" shooting, you need to extend your draw to a full warbow draw of 31-32". Pull back past your ear, to full draw, and then see how many you can loose in a minute. Here's a full draw pic.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[ken75]

man adb it looks like that hurts !

[aero86]

how do you do that?  i mean that has got to launch them further than a north korean missile!

[adb]

  ... how do I do what? Shoot this bow... I don't mean to be sarcastic, but it's like anything else... practice. And no, they don't quite go as far as any missiles.  I was getting 190-200 meters with an EWBS standard arrow, 31.5" in length, and 52 grams weight. Really quite average, actually.

Also, it doesn't hurt, contrary to the expression on my face!

[bumppo]

I found this in "Agincourt" 2005 by Juliet Barker, page 303, may be of interest regarding speed shooting.

She reports a reference in the 1415 exchequers 2nd quarter financial records regarding the Duke of York's men after the siege of Harfleur:

"two days before the departure from Harfleur, his numbers had been reduced to eighty men-at-arms and 296 archers (four of the latter had been struck off because they could not fire the required minimum ten aimed arrows per minute."

Interesting to think that the medieval archer of Henry V time shot ten plus arrows per minute, and it seems they were regularly tested to make sure they could do it. If they were found unable to shoot ten rounds a minute they were sacked from active service.

[CraigMBeckett]

(four of the latter had been struck off because they could not fire the required minimum ten aimed arrows per minute.

I have not read her work but what a pity, one would have thought that anyone writing on the subject would use the correct terminology. Firearms are fired, arrows are either shot or loosed.

Craig.

[bumppo]

The verb she uses to describe the act of drawing, aiming and hitting a target with a bow and arrow is not the salient point of this post, sorry if you took it that way.

Just a what if, suppose you were a french man-at-arms at the battle of Agincourt receiving arrows shot from the english side, would you describe yourself as being under "fire" or being under "loosing?" I guess my point is, today we use a variety of verbs interchangeably to describe the same basic actions.

Again, my main point being the historical record of how fast an archer was supposed to shoot, not grammar.

[CraigMBeckett]

bumppo ,

suppose you were a french man-at-arms at the battle of Agincourt receiving arrows shot from the english side, would you describe yourself as being under "fire" or being under "loosing?"

If I were that Frenchman, other than the fact my thoughts would not be in English, I certainly would not use a verb that did not come into use until a far later date when the use of firearms was widespread. As an English speaker I would have thought of myself as being shot at, the same as I would if it were to happen today.

Your point regarding the interchangeability of verbs would be relevant if the verb in question was actually interchangeable with loose and shoot, when used to describe the propulsion of arrows from bows, it is not it never has been it is just bad English. Let me ask you this, would you say you sailed your car or hammered a screw, (unless you are one of those people who actually do use a hammer on screws), knitted a stitch or maybe loosed a gun?

Your point on the required speed of shooting was noted,  I was however simply stating that its a pity that someone who has an item published uses such poor English. It is even more of a pity when one considers that the words used were not those of the original report but the author's version of the same.

I am surprised you seem to have taken my comment as an attack on yourself, you are not the author Juliet Barker are you?

Craig.

[ChrisD]

Either way, thanks for providing the page from the Barker book. I have the book and remember the quote but could not find it on re looking. What I'm interested in is the source reference because I suspect this particular chestnut as being one of those which has acquired authenticity through endless repetition. Be interested to chase it down.
C

[bow-toxo]

bumppo ,



If I were that Frenchman, other than the fact my thoughts would not be in English, I certainly would not use a verb that did not come into use until a far later date when the use of firearms was widespread. As an English speaker I would have thought of myself as being shot at, the same as I would if it were to happen today.

Your point on the required speed of shooting was noted,  I was however simply stating that its a pity that someone who has an item published uses such poor English. It is even more of a pity when one considers that the words used were not those of the original report but the author's version of the same.


Craig.

Good point Craig ! The only way an arrow could be fired would be if it were shot from a musket, which did sometimes happen, or to stretch the point further, if it were set alight as a fire arrow. I have a further question. How did they measure a minute when clocks did not measure anything beyond the twelve divisions of the hour ?


                                                                                   Erik