Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => English Warbow => Topic started by: Del the cat on December 28, 2011, 01:54:40 pm
-
It was my B'day over the hols. As a surprise my family got me enrolled as a patron of the Mary Rose which gives me access to the private collection.
My daughter organised a visit and the curator of the collection opened up specially on my birthday so I could look at all the longbows and other artefacts I got to handle some of the bows! He was a great bloke and went way above and beyond the call of duty.
The best bit was seeing the knotty wobbly bows rather than the 'best' ones which are usually illustrated. There are deffinitelt some character bows there. One had a big knot in the middle and cleary visible grain violations on the back mostly running along the length. I'll post some pics later.
Interestingly some were obviously distorted by the weight of silt on them (IMO) and gave the impression of huge reflex. Quite a few just showed that slight reflex you get when a stave is split out from the log. I got the feeling that the bows hadn't been used much, if at all. (Most were found in stored in chests)
It took a couple of days to get the grin of my face!
Del
-
That does sound excellent, cant wait to see the pictures.
-
Awesome Del! I really can't wait to see those pics.
Jon
-
That must have been a wonderful experience indeed Del! I can only imagine the feeling of holding one of those great bows. I can't wait to see pictures either!
-
Sounds amazing. Even the bows on display are worth a look (and my 7 year old was asking today when she could go again) so the back room collection must be fantastic!
-
Here's a few pics.
(http://i411.photobucket.com/albums/pp195/Del_the_Cat/Mary%20Rose/100_1740.jpg)
(http://i411.photobucket.com/albums/pp195/Del_the_Cat/Mary%20Rose/100_1742.jpg)
(http://i411.photobucket.com/albums/pp195/Del_the_Cat/Mary%20Rose/100_1745.jpg)
These show one of the 'best', the most wobbly character bow and the rings and knot showing on its back.
You can see the rack of bows on the left of the pic.
Del
-
Wow, that's way cool! Congratulations. What an awesome gift.
George
-
WOW!!!
Yes Sir!
That is Bloody AWE Inspiring!
What a Great Birthday Present! :)
Thank You for sharing.
-gus
-
That is incredible! I can't decide whether handling antique bows or swords is better (there is a much greater quantity of surviving swords to be fair), but they're both pretty freakin awesome!
-
COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!!!
-
It was also a huge thrill for me visiting the MR Museum. Some of the yew bows are truly massive. I didn't get to handle any, but just looking was a privilege.
-
That is insanely cool Mr. Cat. those babies are huge! I bet at night you go to sleep thinking of making a replica now!
-
I'm making a 90# longbow now which is about all I can manage, it's been influenced by those beauts.
I'd just love to see one of those medieval bowyers at work.
Del
-
What a specacular b-day gift. The inspiration alone must be tremendous, to see and hold these massive bows. I recently viewed a neanderthal stone tool in a local museum, and was very motivated just by that alone. Nothing like viewing (and holding, you lucky cat) such wondrous artifacts.
-
Lucky you Del.
Do you know the archive number of the bow you show in the photos?
For those Interested can you tell us what it costs to be a patron?
Have you changed your mind about big (in length) bows now as I seem to recall you making some disparaging remarks about them.
Craig.
By the way Del, Happy Birthday.
-
Lucky you Del.
Do you know the archive number of the bow you show in the photos?
For those Interested can you tell us what it costs to be a patron?
Have you changed your mind about big (in length) bows now as I seem to recall you making some disparaging remarks about them.
Craig.
By the way Del, Happy Birthday.
Sorry I don't know the actual number of those bows.
I'm currently working on being able to draw a copy of 80A0608, which is one of the shorter/lighter bows. (Hopefully I'll be able to draw it by Sunday and I'll take post some pics). It's 90# at 28" and I've taken it back to 29" on the tiller.
I took the data from 'Weapons of Warre'
Yes indeed, I've modified my views on both horn nocks & the length of heavier bows, mind I still don't like the look of Victorian style longbows of light weight which are being drawn to the chin and yet are a foot taller than the archer.
Information on becoming a patron is on their website http://www.maryrose.org/ (http://www.maryrose.org/) however it should be noted the access I was given was above and beyond that extended as part of becoming a patron, which allows acces to the 'extended collection' rather than the actual store rooms.
Del
-
I'm currently working on being able to draw a copy of 80A0608, which is one of the shorter/lighter bows. (Hopefully I'll be able to draw it by Sunday and I'll take post some pics). It's 90# at 28" and I've taken it back to 29" on the tiller.
I took the data from 'Weapons of Warre'
Del
How close are your dimensions to those published for 80A0608? I would be interested to know the draw weight at whatever draw length you finally take it to as well as how accurately you copied the original dimensions, in fact can you provide the final dimensions of your bow in the same form as given in weapons of war plus possibly the perimeter at each position?
Craig.
-
Done it for the upper limb. It was based on 80A0608 (page 607 Weapons of Warre)
Length ntn 1892mm
figures are position, width, depth
Centre 36.0, 32.55
100 34.6, 32.59
200 33.55, 29.76
400 32.00, 28.34
600 29.60, 27.17
800 24.85, 20.32
900 20.66, 18.92
edge of horn nock 14.9, 14.7
It's built for a guy who wanted 90# at 28".
I've taken it to 29 ~100 and were it not for two big knots on the belly/side I'd feel it was easily ok for 32".
There is a slight pinch on one knot on the belly. I'd estimate it would be about 120 at 32".
It's hard to measure accurately due to paralax and not wanting to hold at full draw whilst messing about.
The Yew was cut early last November by a tree surgeon topping out some old Yew at Audley End House. http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/daysout/properties/audley-end-house-and-gardens/ (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/daysout/properties/audley-end-house-and-gardens/)
Hope this is useful.
Have a look at my bowyers diary, I posted a short vid and a still, you can see I'm not quite back to full draw.
I'm hoping to maybe get some better footage tomorrow in the back garden (when Mrs Cat is out ;))
Once I get decent pics, I'll post it here on PA, dunno if I should post in warbows or just bows really...?
While I'm at it, here are the draw weight length figures I took (rather hurriedly), it's fairly linear.
lbs dist "
10, 9.5
20, 11.75
30, 14.2
40, 16.8
50, 19.25
60, 22
80, 24
90, 28
Del
-
Del - that is amazing. We look forward to more information and views about the bows. V. interesting to hear about the grain violation on bows of this weight - those old bowyers must have had confidence in their wood and their work.
Hope to see you are Wally's shoot in May if not before
Stan
-
p.s. Del - what's your impression of the intended draw length of these bows? I've handled one of the arrows at the museum and although I didn't get to measure it, it was certainly no monster. Given that the skeletons found were on average a few inches smaller than typical heights today I've always been a bit doubtful about 32" + draws as standard and wonder if they were maybe more in the region of 29-30" with the extra bow length a deliberate over build for a military weapon which had to withstand hard service and all sizes of archers.
Any thoughts?
Stan
-
Looking good Del, interesting dimensions to go on. I look forward to the full draw ;D. Also you could look into a scale with a 2nd hand that stops at the highest weight the scale reaches , very convenient as you don't want to be focused on the scales when you are holding onto something this weight.
Stan - According to most records there were two lengths that are common 30" and 31.5" I think 30" being more common. They were shorter back then but its more to do with muscle mass and how your body compresses with the weight; training from a young age their bodies would compress less than the archers shooting today. I think a 32" draw would not be out of place for them.
-
WOW thats really cool! where is the full draw pictures! >:D I wonder if thos bows were tillered and ready for use? I also would be interested to know if they would still be safe to shoot after being under for the amount of time they were. Thats again very cool congrats and happy late birthday!
Josh
-
WOW thats really cool! where is the full draw pictures! >:D I wonder if thos bows were tillered and ready for use? I also would be interested to know if they would still be safe to shoot after being under for the amount of time they were. Thats again very cool congrats and happy late birthday!
Josh
When the MR was first recovered, some of the bows were put on the tiller, although the weights were no where near what they should have been the tiller remained perfect. There is a picture of one of the bows on the tiller in Robert Hardys 'Warbow'.
-
thanks for the info
Josh :)
-
p.s. Del - what's your impression of the intended draw length of these bows? I've handled one of the arrows at the museum and although I didn't get to measure it, it was certainly no monster. Given that the skeletons found were on average a few inches smaller than typical heights today I've always been a bit doubtful about 32" + draws as standard and wonder if they were maybe more in the region of 29-30" with the extra bow length a deliberate over build for a military weapon which had to withstand hard service and all sizes of archers.
Any thoughts?
Stan
I recon most people draw about an inch less than they say they do! With those big bows it certainly compresses the draw a bit too, mind I'm nowhere near shooting 'in' the bow yet.
I just don't know really so my opinion isn't worth a lot, but I'm pretty sure those bows would go back to 32" no prob'
Yup, I've signed up for the primitive meet already :) Look forward to seeing you there, I'll bring the primitive crossbow too.
Del
-
Done it for the upper limb. It was based on 80A0608 (page 607 Weapons of Warre)
Length ntn 1892mm
figures are position, width, depth
Centre 36.0, 32.55
100 34.6, 32.59
200 33.55, 29.76
400 32.00, 28.34
600 29.60, 27.17
800 24.85, 20.32
900 20.66, 18.92
edge of horn nock 14.9, 14.7
It's built for a guy who wanted 90# at 28".
I've taken it to 29 ~100 and were it not for two big knots on the belly/side I'd feel it was easily ok for 32".
There is a slight pinch on one knot on the belly. I'd estimate it would be about 120 at 32".
It's hard to measure accurately due to paralax and not wanting to hold at full draw whilst messing about.
The Yew was cut early last November by a tree surgeon topping out some old Yew at Audley End House. http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/daysout/properties/audley-end-house-and-gardens/ (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/daysout/properties/audley-end-house-and-gardens/)
Hope this is useful.
Have a look at my bowyers diary, I posted a short vid and a still, you can see I'm not quite back to full draw.
I'm hoping to maybe get some better footage tomorrow in the back garden (when Mrs Cat is out ;))
Once I get decent pics, I'll post it here on PA, dunno if I should post in warbows or just bows really...?
While I'm at it, here are the draw weight length figures I took (rather hurriedly), it's fairly linear.
lbs dist "
10, 9.5
20, 11.75
30, 14.2
40, 16.8
50, 19.25
60, 22
80, 24
90, 28
Del
Hi Del,
Thanks for posting the dimensions. Comparing your's with WoW for bow 80A0608 it looks like your bow is generally both wider and deeper so all thing being equal (which of course they are not), you should be coming up with a stronger bow, but of course there then is the question of the quality of the Yew, do you have a ring count for the stave and was it from the bole or a limb? Was the measured limb the top or bottom one and if possible can you post the dims of the other limb.
If you ever draw it further than the 29" and measure the weight please let me know what it achieves.
Hopefully others who build MR approximations will, over time publish, the info on their bows so we can then get a better idea of the likely weight of the originals.
Craig
-
It is interesting to see what it will achieve. Del from looking at the bow first hand was there any knots or weakness in the bow that the bow maker would have had to content with, overall what is the quality of the original?
-
Super post Del. What an outstanding idea for a gift.
-
@ Craig.
I prob won't pull it past 29" as there are some pretty severe knots and I don't want to blow it.
Can't be bothered to measure up the lower limb as it's nicely finished now and I don't want to be sticking masking tape on it and marking distances. It roughly follows the WoW dimensions in a similar way to the upper.
Not my dims are generally a tad over rather than under because ye cannae put the wood back on!
It wasn't a huge log prob' 7" diameter, the Yews were bing trimmed back so I'd guess it was some of the taller stuff being topped out.
This pic shows the worst knot, it showed on the belly but not on the back, so I didn't know where it went??!
As I worked the bow down, it became exposed as squarish knot of rotten wood showing on the side of the bow. I figured the only way to fill it was to clean out the rot then pack it with Yew dust & epoxy mix to provide a sound surface which I could then drill and peg. It took 3 pegs of 11/32" and a final one of 7mm to plug the hole, the pegs go in at and angle towards the belly and are about 3/8 to half inch long.
(http://i411.photobucket.com/albums/pp195/Del_the_Cat/Website%20stills/100_1788.jpg)
The redish tinge round the knot is a nice feature, there's a smilar knot on the other limb, which isn't quite so bad and has a very slight pinch. It's a wonder it holds up.
As the force draw plot is pretty linear, you could plt it and interpolate back to 32".
I'll see if I can do a ring count and tack it on the end of this post.
Ring count per inch is meaningless on this stave! (see below)
At the grip there is a 1/2" band of very tight rings on the belly 0.011" wide, then a band of wide rings upto a maximum of about 0.056" wide for another half inch, then as we aproach the back of the bow and the sapwood the rings go very tight again, which made trying to follow a ring on the back pretty tough.
Del
-
Thanks Del.
Nasty Knot that, is that a split I see going from the centre of the knot on the back to the knotty area on the side?
Craig.
-
Yeah, it's a crack, it's been there pretty much from the start and isn't moving. Being on the belly I'm not too worried, but I'm keeping an eye on it. The pinch on the mirror image knot on the other limb is more concern, but that seems stable too.
The great thing about the stave is the back which is pretty much clean aloang the whole length excepty for a pin knot which swells up nicely and I've left proud.
Del
-
That is cool!
-
Great story Del and very nice pics. Thanks for sharing.