Length of warbows?

[Micke D]

Hello guys!

I have some questions about the length of 16Th c warbows.
I think I have the length of all the Mary Rose bows, but I don't know how long the archers were?
I have read that these bows were made quite long for safety, but how much longer were the bows than the archers that used them?
Would a lighter bow, lets say a 16Th c 70 pound hunting bow, be shorter than a warbow?

[adb]

The majority of the Mary Rose bows were over 6', with some up to 80". I'm not 100% sure on the height of the archers during this era, but I've heard reported they were mostly well under 6'. So, longbows of that era were actually long... much taller than the archers using them.
As far as a true 16th century hunting bow goes... who knows. I don't think one exists.

[Davepim]

Illustrations from 14th century manuscripts frequently distinguish between Warbows and hunting bows in terms of length of the bow and draw-length by the archer. As such, hunting bows were shot much as they are today, with the anchor-point close to the side of the face and the bows themselves were shorter than Warbows.

Dave

[adb]

I suppose it may also be possible that bows used for war were also pressed into service as hunting bows... simply being drawn shorter. I fear it's something we'll never know for certain. Many ancient manuscripts and illustrations are often poor representations of fact... example: often showing arrows being shot off the wrong side of the hand, etc.

[Thesquirrelslinger]

it could also be that hunting bows were employed for close range warefare and ambushes.

[WillS]

I suppose it may also be possible that bows used for war were also pressed into service as hunting bows... simply being drawn shorter. I fear it's something we'll never know for certain. Many ancient manuscripts and illustrations are often poor representations of fact... example: often showing arrows being shot off the wrong side of the hand, etc.

With the risk of going slightly off topic here, this is something that's always intrigued me...

During the times when illustrators/artists were documenting archers in war, it's my understanding that it was almost compulsory for men to practice archery on a regular basis.  This means that all the illustrators and artists would have been trained in archery, at least to a base level.  Surely they'd know how a bow was drawn and shot, and would try to display as accurate a representation as possible?

An artist is always going to want to be as detailed and careful as possible, as nobody wants to have their work mocked.  So why would artists who understood archery all consistently get their drawings wrong?  Doesn't make sense!

Is there a chance they were right and we got it all wrong?  The Japanese shoot with their arrows resting on the right of the bow as compared to the left.  Just a thought, really.

[adb]

I seriously doubt that artists or scribe types would have been required to pick up a warbow! More salt of the earth farmer & labourers likely. That's likely why they got it wrong!

[WillS]

Ah thats a good point.  I had it in my head that ALL men/boys were required to learn.  Does seem odd though that the majority all put the arrows on the wrong side. 

[Davepim]

The Japanese use a thumb-release rather than a three-fingered release, and as with any culture using the thumb (manchu, mongolian, korean, ancient egyptian etc.) the arrow must be on the opposite side of the bow to us - its to do with how the string slips out of the fingers upon release. As to manuscript representations, it's highly variable. Some are better than others; I have been through two entire books available as online resources: the Smithfield Decretals and the Queen Mary Psalter. The Decretals, in particular, are quite precise in differentiating between Warbows and Hunting bows, both in terms of the archer's draw-length and the size of the bow. It's perfectly evident that the illustrator knew the difference between the two bows; you don't need a 140lb longbow to shoot rabbits and other small game (what most ordinary people were permitted to shoot) and even for large Red Deer stags, 140lbs would be overkill. As a lighter bow, say 60lbs, performs really badly when left at around 74" length, it makes sense that these bows would have been shorter.

Dave

[adb]

Would you be able to post some of those pictures?

[toomanyknots]

I am a right handed archer, and I shoot my arrow on the right side of the bow using a 3 finger grip. I don't have any problems with my release. Not saying anything either way, just putting that out there. 

[adb]

The only problem I see with resting the arrow on the right side of the bow for a right handed shooter is: how do you cant the bow? I cant my bow to the right a bit for warbow shooting, and even more for target and hunting. How do you keep the arrow from falling off your fist?

[Davepim]

Manchu archers use a thumb under the string to draw and the forefinger presses the arrow shaft against the side of the bow; manchu archers also cant the bow clockwise as do we; do a google search for ancient archery images and you will find photos of manchu archers from the late 19th/early 20th century shooting their warbows. As to images from manuscripts, sorry but you'd need special permission to post these. They are available as a resource to view only, from the British Library. The Smithfield Decretals has around 24 images depicting archery of one sort or another, only two panels are of "military" archery, but the difference is clear.

Dave

[adb]

OK... now I see. I never really thought about this at all. Interesting! It is obviously possible. It seems awkward, but maybe I should try it!

Was this standard for Mongol archers as well?

[llkinak]

Looks like there's quite a twist in the string where he's reefing on it...