Well said J.D.
So based on actual evidence the basic design characteristics of an English War Bow would be the following?
1) Typically over 90# draw weight with many well over 100# being drawn 30" to 32"?
2The bow bends throughout it's entire length?
3) It is typically a single stave but there are examples of backing being used?
4) Yew was the wood of choice but there were examples of other woods like elm being used?
5) The cross section was oval/rounded. Not a high stacked belly or a flat back right?
Help me nail this down. Bring facts and evidence to the table.
)
I think Jaro is right on the money with his observations/point. To this I would add...
1. Dave has an interesting point about whether earlier EWB’s were lower weight. The simple answer is we cannot be sure. However, to me it seems very unlikely that many sub 100Lb bows were at Crecy some 200 years before the Mary Rose sank. Bishop Lattimer, writing in 1549, lamented the decline in English archery.
"The art of shooting hath been in times past much esteemed in this realm. It is a gift of God that He hath given to us to excel all other nations." From his use of the past tense I infer that well shot heavy military longbows were less commonplace in Tudor times and certainly does not represent a zenith in strong shooting, in fact the contrary. I am convinced that it the MR archers we are looking at the crème yet still of a diminished gene pool.
3. If one asks 'What is "Warbow" then the simple historically based answer is laminates are ruled out. The English warbow should be a self-bow made from period woods. Staves do not need to be expensive and can be purchased in board form to make into a very serviceable bow, maybe not as fast as a laminate, but remember we are deliberately (and proudly) shooting an anachronism. There is evidence of backed warbows during their dying days, so I think these must be accepted, too. JB’s (Alan's?) point about laminates giving the experience of shooting in the heavy English bow is very valid and they are great for roving. However, I feel that what can be learnt in regards to how warbows performed in the past is limited. It's a bit like making historical amour out of titanium as it's corrosion-free, stronger and lighter. Yes, laminates gives the general feel but just keep in mind they should theoretically perform better than most Self-bows as the stresses of each facet of a bows section can be catered for.
5. A white wood bow will really benefit from a flatter belly. If we can work that out I'm sure as hell sure that medieval bowyers did too. Conjecture? Yes, but so is all theory as to white bow sections in the medieval period as we have no examples.
Again I would stress that these are my personal views and welcome the contributions of heavy laminate shooters and these points are to help define an EWB, not to exclude anyone. There are place to post any sort of primitive bow here anyway.
Cheers,
Jeremy
