Most of the true Victorian era( as opposed to similar designs in the 20thC, made up until the fibreglass era), were either unbacked lancewood, or lemonwood, some of yew either self or backed with yew sapwood, hickory, or bamboo (tonkin cane, not moso or madake).
A lot of new world tropical hardwoods were employed for bellywood due to their ability to resist compression, and chrysalling.
Bulletwood/beefwood, Ipe/Bethabara, snakewood, rubywood, were employed is this manner. A bow from these materials could be made much narrower than yew or lemonwood, less than 1" wide for a 60lb bow, sometimes as narrow as 3/4 of an inch, depending upon the type of wood.
Of the antique Victorian bows that I have personally seen, none of them have obvious Buchanan dips like most of the 20thC bows I have seen, or read about in books by Duff, or Bickerstaffe. I couldn't tell you how much bend there is in the handle, I'd say the range goes from full compass to stiff handle, depending upon the bowyer, and how early the bow was made in their career. Stiffer handles became more popular really only late in the 19thC, more so in the 20thC, after the Victorian era. Even then a stiff handle can be done without obvious dips, by leaving more wood on the belly, either side of the grip. I haven't seen a Buchanan dip on a bow made before the 20thC, even one made by Buchanan or his protoge'/successors. That doesn't mean they weren't made, I just haven't seen any.
The Victorian longbow never had a true arrow rest. Sometimes the top of the handle wrapping might be thick enough to act as a rest. They often had inlaid arrow passes, mainly mother of pearl, or ocasionally metal like brass, gold or silver. They always had horn nocks, usually cow, or water buffalo, vary rarely some other exotic animal, or cast metal.
I have seen what Badger is talking about, same width, different tillershape, for different draw weights. I usually associate them with the 20thC lemonwood high production bows, from bowyers like Stemmler.
