Flatbows found on the Mary Rose?

[Phil Rees]

Horace I know its "Schrodinger´s cat" . Obviously that was a pun on similar thought experiment.

"I have to admit, I find it a little unusual  and disappointing that this information hasn't been submitted to a journal for peer review scrutiny"

Obviously it will be published when MR trust thinks its proper , since they pay for the testing. Regardless - You can log onto EWBS site and ask directly Mark Stretton (if you find me oh so untrustworthy) directly, who gave him the information.

Let me point out that the information about whitewood bows, even though rebuked from official source floats around since like 1979 or when the first book came out, yet the research proving that, wasnt published in journal for peer review either.  Rather longer period of time isnt it? Why wasnt the "whitewood" bow at least photographed - many many others were.

Jaro

You forgot to mention who the authors of the research results are

[markinengland]

Horace,

Yes, that's the lecture I was talking about. Glad to know that I'm not making this up, even if I did get some of the names wrong!

Jaro,

I think this is in danger of becoming personal - I hope it doesn't.

There are a number of references to some or a few of the MR bows not being yew. What they are I don't know as this has never been confirmed.  The fact that reference was made at this lecture to non-yew MT bows was reported by me, and now confirmed by Horace. I put this fact forward because I thought it may be of interest . Why the knowledge of this is patchy I do not know - but I would rather not be attacked for putting this information forward. I have no investment in it being correct or incorrect.

I am of course aware that a lot of work has been done on better understanding the MR bows in the past five years. That doesn't necessarily alter the fact that 5 years ago some of the bows were not thought to be yew - and that is presumably still the case. Until such time as more information is available on these particulalr bows that's all that can really be said - some of the MR bows may not be yew. It would be of considerable interest to identify which specific bows were in question and to clarify this.

I'm not sure what you mean by shiny mirrors. I in no way intend to deny or belittle your expertise and knowledge. I do however wish you did not so easily discount the opinions of some others which may also be valid. If Robert Hardy, after living with these bows for so long thought that a few were not yew, I'd like to know why rather than just discount a possibly fascinating bit of knowledge. I am sure that he has made mistakes and have no doubt he has learnt a great deal during his lifelong interest in longbows. Perhaps he's correct, perhaps not - but why attack so hard when someone reports this?

My mind may be an odd shape - but is that relevant? The people who have said that they feel that not all the bows were yew must presumably have had what appeared to them at the time to be a good reason for beleiving this and saying this. I don't agree or disagree with what they say - I would like to know why they said this, what it was based upon and see work to establish whether it is correct or not. Perhaps there is a language barrier at work but I feel you are getting dangerously close to personal insults which I do not appreciate.

You do keep on referring to these bows as being whitewood. They may not be whitewood, they could be on New World wood. What they are is not known. All that is known is that those who had access to the MR bows at that time thought that some of them were not yew.

"The whole affair is like "accusing me that I cannot be scientist because I dont worship on altar of Rodenberry". Bizzare." Jaro, I'm afraid that I just did not understand this, simple corkscrew-brain shiny mirror person that I am  I accuse you of nothing. Why shoot the messenger? I don't care if you believe or don't believe this about MR bows I just reported something I felt might be of interest.

Bizarre Mark with corkscrew brain and shiny mirror in England 

[Pat B]

I won't allow it to get personal here on PA!!!      

[Phil Rees]

Jaro
Would you be kind enough to clarify what is your relationship with and to the Mary Rose Trust?

[backgardenbowyer]

I really hope this doesn't get personal - because like so many others I would genuinely like to know if some of the MR bows were not yew.  I've heard this said several times and denied several times.  The truth is that so far as I know no comprehensive study cataloguing all the bows has been published.  I think it is about time we in the archery community had such a comprehensive study available - and I'm a little surprised that it hasn't been done.  It would be very interesting to see statistical analyses of the measurements of the full range of bows cross referenced to the places they were found on the site so that we could see if any groups or categories seem to emerge perhaps suggesting different types of bows for different purposes.  I don't know what would be involved in scientifically analysing the wood species of all the bows - but subject to the levels of preservation it must be possible and and surely could have been done by now.  There are very clear historical records that whitewood longbows were made in the middle ages.  Whether there were any on the MR and whether they were accepted as serviceable for war is a different matter.

[mullet]

 Backgardenbowyer,

 Cross your fingers, ego's and "I'm smarter than you" attitudes fly on this site more than bat's out of a cave. And, about a piece of wood, shaped into a bow that only a handfull of people care about "discharging an arrow" out of.  It would be nice to glean some of this knowledge without putting on the boots and wading through so much crap to get to it. JMO

[markinengland]

Mullet,

I think that discussions about these bows get heated at times because quite a few people are interested in them, but relatively little historical evidence exists.

Odd thing is, I think there is generally a more tolerant open minded atmosphere when the discussion is about old hornbows, or old native american bows - perhaps because more records and examples exist?

Even though there have been a few intense words, I'm not sure there is too much "crap" as you put it.

Mark in England

[mullet]

 Mark;

 The "crap" I'm refering to is when the name calling starts it tends to get worse and worse in the Warbow section untill everybody starts getting their feelings hurt. Then the Moderators start getting all the Emails with everbody tattling on each other.

 An educated discussion would be a lot more pleasant then all the bickering. I really enjoy reading some of the information you guys have, but after awhile it gets too bothersome to find the knowledge mixed in with the insults.

[markinengland]

I do sometimes wonder if the rules should be "no mention of sex, politics, religion and medieval!"

[mullet]

 

[nidrinr]

Have to agree. It should be possible for adults to have different meanings without starting to make names and such. No matter what was or was not on the MR, I have plans to make more bows from wytch elm using MR dimensions. I believe w.elm is the whitewood most mentioned if I remember correct.

[bow-toxo]

J

Mr. Roth its amusing to see you pedall, but given that you didnt cave-in under Mark Stretton´s and Steve Stratton´s authority on the subject, and babbled your nonsense on and on in older threads I wont loose my time on you, since you cannot do the thing anyway.

" I am not entirely ignorant about Alemannic bows. They are a European exception with a stiff handle similar to Victorian bows, not bending in an arc, and used with ca. 25” arrows"

- They are as unlike as victorian bow as one might imagine. There are no victorian bows with that profile which is exactly the "galeon", unlike the victorian high gothic arch (which is exceptionall by itself) and both the technology and approach to some solutions (handle and tips) are very very different.

"Mr. Roth its amusing to see you pedall, but given that you didnt cave-in under Mark Stretton´s and Steve Stratton´s authority on the subject, and babbled your nonsense on and on in older threads I wont loose my time on you, since you cannot do the thing anyway."

        I think you are referring to the time I avoided making personal attacks against the personal attacks and insults directed against me in BIG RED BLOCK LETTERS. I don’t think personal attacks and insults really belong on here.
Please let me know which is “the thing” that I cannot do and you won’t have to “loose” any more of your valuable time on me.


- "They are as unlike as victorian bow as one might imagine. There are no victorian bows with that profile which is exactly the "galeon", unlike the victorian high gothic arch (which is exceptionall by itself) and both the technology and approach to some solutions (handle and tips) are very very different."

The Alemannic bows, which share the Victorian characteristics of stiff handle and the bend at midlimb, are not “as unlike as victorian bow as one might imagine”  My imagination would pick every Nydam and MR bow.as being more unlike Victorian bows.

I  agree with you that the idea that the rectangular bows were for crossbows, probably because of the flat bellies, is ridiculous.
 
                                                                                                                      Erik

[Phil Rees]

"Two of them are #A807 and #A115"
I dont think those are what an engeneer call square. We are still talking about bows with moderatelly rounded belly. I can ask directly, but I fear that those are a) galeon or very uneven profile b) so called "slab sided" bows - which by many people have been refered wrongly as "square" and off course rebutall

(Btw - quick search shows that even in Journal of society of Archery antiquities these are called "squarish" - which can be lots of shapes.)

Jaro
The reference numbers you cite (#A807 and #A115) don't correspond to the pictorial examples you give which are #3947 and #3965.
Would you like to clarify the point your trying to make?

[ken75]

im curious about this also, yew is not an option for me and white woods is my drug of choice.
one other thing im curious about do you guys get together and build bows ,trade info ,enjoy each others company.....well its a thought anyways !

[nidrinr]

I knew I had read it somewhere:

"Secrets of the English War Bow",
page 13, referring to the Mary Rose bows: "..although current archaeology has revealed the presence on board of at least some bows of other wood."

page 17 says something about the 8 more rectangular shaped bows. -I'm not sure how much text I'm allowed to copy from a book, but in general the text says theese are "..significantly more robust and longer than the others..." "...the draw weight of these formidable things has been assassed as significantly greater than the others..." -It is suggested that theese were not hand held weapons.