How War Bows were manufactured for wars

[adb]

I think that theory has since been rejected.

[Robby101]

I know they carried a pretty hefty inventory when campaigning and was wondering if anything has ever been uncovered listing the support personnel, bowyer's and fletcher's specifically.
Robby

[Hrothgar]

Robby101 there are several sites which offer information about the Mary Rose. According to the ship's log there were 185 soldiers (archers) on board; supposed to be 250 longbows of which 177 have been recovered. Several interesting facts are noted: the bows weren't fitted with horn nocks--although horn nocks were on board--the theory is that the bowstrings were already affixed to the nocks and would be slipped onto the bows when used; the ship had been re-fitted for guns and cannons, including side gun ports, and was carrying a crew of gunners as well. Apparently by this time, on this particular ship, the brunt of her weaponry and offense, for sea battles, were cannon and gun, and not archers.
I haven't been able to find any evidence of bowyer tools or related artifacts. There remained several thousand arrows, while most of the horn nocks and bowstrings decayed over time.

[WillS]

Weapons of Warre is by far the most comprehensive list of items found on board.  Nothing is left out.  There are no bowyers tools because the ship wouldn't have had bowyers onboard.  It was going out to fight an immediate battle just off the Portsmouth coast.  Unfinished bows, craftsmen and so on would have been pointless and heavy.

As for the removable horn nocks theory, again that's been more or less disproved.  There was a thread about it recently and HUGE discussion on the EWBS forum with a few people adamant that it was the case but no evidence to support the idea.  It also makes the bows impossible to string.  Imagine trying to get two horn nocks onto the tips of a 150# bow.  You need a stringer as no human could do it without, and yet a stringer requires both horn nocks to be in place in order to work!  Personally I thought it was a sound theory until a couple of very knowledgeable bowyers and warbow archers set me straight!

Interestingly however, the actual mechanics does work though - on a bow light enough to string without a stringer you can have unglued removable nocks because at brace the string tension keeps them in place.

[Del the cat]

Robby101 there are several sites which offer information about the Mary Rose. According to the ship's log there were 185 soldiers (archers) on board; supposed to be 250 longbows of which 177 have been recovered. Several interesting facts are noted: the bows weren't fitted with horn nocks--although horn nocks were on board--the theory is that the bowstrings were already affixed to the nocks and would be slipped onto the bows when used; the ship had been re-fitted for guns and cannons, including side gun ports, and was carrying a crew of gunners as well. Apparently by this time, on this particular ship, the brunt of her weaponry and offense, for sea battles, were cannon and gun, and not archers.
I haven't been able to find any evidence of bowyer tools or related artifacts. There remained several thousand arrows, while most of the horn nocks and bowstrings decayed over time.

There were almost no horn nocks because the horn gets eaten by microrganisms... yum yum horn protein .
Same as there are no strings... (well I think there is one fragment). The position of the horn nocks is clearly visible on the bows. There is also evidence that some final tillering or finishing was done after the horn was fitted.
Del

[adb]

... just like there were no remaining arrow heads. Long since rusted away.

[WillS]

Apparently (god knows where I got this but it's stored away in my memory bank from somewhere!) the divers that first found the arrows saw impressions of the arrowheads (or at least residue in the silt the exact shape and size of the arrowheads) but the minute they started moving the arrows they lost all sign of them. 

Somebody, somewhere who was first to dive the MR wreckage knows what those arrowheads looked like.  And we'll never find out!

[matthijsc]

  Has anyone read any history on the actual manufacturing process of war bows? I would be curious to see how a regular military bow looked as opposed to a soldier or officer who may get a custom one done. Did yhey use helpers to rough out bows and do the finishing? did one guy do the nocks while another guy built the bows? How much has been discovered on this?

I do not know much about this topic, but I do know all English men (in the middle ages) were required to have a bow and practice with it at least once a week (it was in some documentary about the English yew longbow, I think). I would there for assume they would make their own bows and arrows, as they were doomed to break at some point and buying a new bow every other month was not really affordable()...

But who knows.

[WillS]

I do not know much about this topic, but I do know all English men (in the middle ages) were required to have a bow and practice with it at least once a week (it was in some documentary about the English yew longbow, I think). I would there for assume they would make their own bows and arrows, as they were doomed to break at some point and buying a new bow every other month was not really affordable()...

But who knows.

I think it's unlikely they'd make their own, personally. The guilds were secretive and the skills were only taught to a select few.  It's more likely that the apprentices would have been churning out simple meane wood bows for practice or recreational use,  and the more valuable Spanish, Portugese and Italian yew bows made by the master bowyer and delivered to armouries for campaigns.

That's not to say some of the people might have dabbled in making them, of course.