bow building grain orientation

[bow-toxo]

Style"[/i] can have a number of meanings. Had I said i want to build authentic medieval bows, I would be using Spanish or Italian yew. Do you think i'm stupid or something?? I know that eucalyptus wasn't used; for heavens sake, Australia wasn't inhabited by caucasians in the medieval period. I simply use it because it is what there are plentiful supplies of at the timber merchants here. A medieval bowyer did the same thing, they used what woods were in plentiful supply, be it yew, elm, ash or any other of a number of woods. as for backings, I have read in a number of places that linen was used at the time.
[/quote]

 I was not sure what you would consider "medieval style" warbow and went for what I thought it might mean , and said that you could ignore my post. I didn't mean to imply you were stupid, but many people have really loose ideas about meanings and many feel that putting "ye olde" in front of anything makes it medieval. I was not sure what remained of "medieval style" in your description.  Actually, medieval bowyers were limited in the number of yew bows they were allowed to make and had to make more from less desirable "mean wood", and a choice was made from a limited list of woods the Crown considered suitable. As I also said, I welcome any evidence about medieval backing, of linen or anything relse. I have read many books on the topic and still have no evidence, or even claim, that linen was used, apart from yours.

                                                                                                 Erik

[CelticArcher]

I am almost certain that I recall a passage refering to backed bows in Roger Ascham's Toxophilus. I will check that tonight though, I could be wrong.

[CraigMBeckett]

CelticArcher ,

despite what some say about it, i've had good results in the past  with australian mountain ash, eucalyptus regnans,

Have you? What weight bows are you talking about, are they backed with something? Or used with a different wood as belly? Please post photos as I believe the wood to weak in both tension and compression, especially the latter and therefore useless for bow making and would like to see evidence that I am wrong.

By the way Bow-Toxo is correct there were no (or at least there is no evidence of there being) any such thing as a backed medieval bow. Backing came in later, far later,  and was used on recreational bows.
By the way The period in which Ascham lived was not by definition the Middle Ages, but rather was the Reformation/Renaissance Period, as was pointed out to me the Bows from the Mary Rose are not Medieval but Renaissance.

Craig.

[Purbeck]

Style"[/i]  Actually, medieval bowyers were limited in the number of yew bows they were allowed to make and had to make more from less desirable "mean wood", and a choice was made from a limited list of woods the Crown considered suitable.                                                                                                  Erik

Erik, can you remember where you read this? I would be very interested see what was on the list.

[CraigMBeckett]

Bow-toxo,

Actually, medieval bowyers were limited in the number of yew bows they were allowed to make and had to make more from less desirable "mean wood", and a choice was made from a limited list of woods the Crown considered suitable

.

Erick, I have never read of the crown dictating what "mean wood" the bowyers used only that they had to produce a certain number relative to the number of Yew bows they produced.

Henry's statute of 1515 stated "  And boyers for everie bowe of ewe, to make two of Elme wiche or othere wood of meane price, and if thei be founde to doe the contrarie, to be committed to warde, by the space of viii daies or more."

Henry's statute of 1541, which is generally a reiteration of of earlier statutes says that "Common Bows are to be made of Ash Elm etc".  (This is the only text on the statute that I can currently find, as it is in modern English it may be regarded as suspect) anyone have a better version?

Therefore it appears that the list was open to all and any wood the bowyer cared to use. Of course these statutes only cover the period mentioned so there could be other periods when a prescription on the woods to be used was in force, if anyone has additional info on this I would like to hear of it and its source.

Purbeck,

Erick, can you remember where you read this? I would be very interested see what was on the list.

If you are interested in a list of woods used for bows, take a look at Ascham's Toxophilus book II, I believe he mentions a number there.

Yes... found the entry! The offered list is:  "Brazil, elm, wych, and ash"  all of which Ascham dismisses as making "mean bows".

In addition to this the Mary Rose Trust lists a part of a bow found on the orlop deck (4th lowest deck) as being made of willow!!!!!

Craig.

[bow-toxo]

 Craig; While it is true that the crown did not require a choice from the suggested list, that list indicated the preferred "meane woods'  Edward IV issued a list that included yew for Irish longbows "of yew, wych hazel[wych bieing a Saxon word meaning supple],ash, aubourne, or any other reasonable wood". Emphasis on "reasonable". Cambrensis says the Wellsh didn't make their bows of cornus, laburnum or yew, lndicating that he would have expected those woods. Cornus, a Latin word, could mean either horn or dogwood. The French also used whitethorn for flight bows [Lartdarcherie]. I suppose that most bowyers would stick to the list and leave balsa wood alone.

[CraigMBeckett]

Erick,

In your post you said "and a choice was made from a limited list of woods the Crown considered suitable" which I disagree(d) with especially for the periods I mention. Your list from Edward IV does nothing to change that and I would suggest that it is your interpretation that places the emphasis on reasonable. What is the difference between this use of reasonable in this statute and Henry's use of "suitable" in the 1515 statute? They both give the selection of suitable or reasonable woods to the bowyer.

I am puzzled and must ask what has Gerald got to do with this part of the discussion when he was merely a cleric and not a law maker, or are you offering this as an adjunct to the list of woods used in bow making? Even here I have to disagree with your list of woods the two translations of his work I have read say:

1, "They are made neither of horn, ash nor yew, but of elm; ugly unfinished-looking weapons, but astonishingly stiff".

2. "Yet the bows used by this people are not made of horn, ivory, or yew, but of wild elm; unpolished, rude, and uncouth, but stout".

No mention of either dogwood or laburnum however as you say cornus may be either horn or dogwood as it is the name of the dogwood genus, but I question whether it was the medieval Latin name used for dogwood or is merely the modern scientific name which only dates to the last few centuries, perhaps if there are any Latin scholars reading this they can enlighten us as to the use of cornus in ancient and medieval Latin. I lean towards cornus meaning horn, for we know that horn bows were not unknown to the English if by nothing else that the Roman occupation and it would be surprising if Gerald did not use it in his flowery comparison of the Welsh bows. In addition there is definitely no mention of laburnum in Gerald's text.


As for the list from Edward IV can you tell me the statute date and if possible post the text of it, I want to see what the intended purpose was, all I can find from him effecting/concerning archery are :

1464  Aspen that is not fit for arrows may be used for patten making. A partial repeal of Henry V statute reserving Aspen for the manufacture of arrows.
1472  Merchants are to bring into England 4 bowstaves with every ton of imported goods.
1482  The price of yew bows is set to a maximum of 3s. 4d.

The statute you refer to may be one of the above but as I only have notes on the major point of the statute not the full English text of it I do not know.

Craig.

[bow-toxo]

Craig   In the second half of the fifteenth century, Edward IV issued a curious statute, his fifth act. Referring to Ireland, it specified that "every Englishman, or Irishman living with Englishmen, provide himself with an English bow of his own height plus a fistmele and with twelve shafts of the length of three quarters of the Standard". Apparently the motive was to make the Irish accustomed to longbows even with arrows more suited to their short bows. My assumption is that Cambrensis had enough familiarity with Norman bows to know what they were commonly made of, even though as a clergyman , like Ascham, he was not required to practice shooting

                                                                Erik

[adb]

I've always wondered why you guys (Erik & Craig) don't have an off forum discussion about medieval longbows. As usual, you guys have dragged this topic (which was grain orientation in bow making) off to a pissing contest about medieval longbows. I, for one, find it annoying. This guy has asked for some advice. Why don't we keep it there?

[bow-toxo]

I've always wondered why you guys (Erik & Craig) don't have an off forum discussion about medieval longbows. As usual, you guys have dragged this topic (which was grain orientation in bow making) off to a pissing contest about medieval longbows. I, for one, find it annoying. This guy has asked for some advice. Why don't we keep it there?

Sorry about your annoyance. I thought I might contribute to “I'm interested in building medieval style warbows” once the grain issue had been dealt with. It seemed like a good idea at the time but got sidetracked.

[CelticArcher]

While the topic has become removed from what I originally asked, I have learned a fair amount from reading it..

i'll try and get a picture of my eucalyptus bows (well, at least the one that worked best) and my RH warbow

[CraigMBeckett]

Adb

I've always wondered why you guys (Erik & Craig) don't have an off forum discussion about medieval longbows. As usual, you guys have dragged this topic (which was grain orientation in bow making) off to a pissing contest about medieval longbows. I, for one, find it annoying. This guy has asked for some advice. Why don't we keep it there?

Threads wander where they wander, as I pointed out to you in a different post when you whinged in a similar manner, you yourself are responsible for threads wandering from where they began. I believe this is the 26th post in this thread, and Erick and I have only posted a few times mainly in answer to other posts as anyone without your jaundiced eye can easily see for themselves, indeed the post Erik opened with was directly aimed at the originator of this thread, who himself had moved on from grain orientation to bow backing and this post in answer to your whinge is 1/3 of the number of posts I have previously sent to this thread. Now, the originator of this thread has had his original question answered many times, he himself has varied the direction of the thread and again had his questions answered, he is also capable of complaining if he is offended by the direction any part of it takes and in this case it seems he is happy. While I gather you are not a fan of either history or the correct use of our language, in a forum on the English Warbow you are going to get information on both, I suggest that if you do not like what you read then stop reading it.

As for "a pissing contest about medieval longbows" your imagination and prejudice is getting the better of you I see nothing here that is remotely like that.

I would also remind you this forum is entitled English Warbow, and discussion here is meant to be on that subject and items connected with the same. I would suggest you stop wasting our time and refrain from posting such arrant nonsense.

Craig

[CraigMBeckett]

While the topic has become removed from what I originally asked, I have learned a fair amount from reading it..

i'll try and get a picture of my eucalyptus bows (well, at least the one that worked best) and my RH warbow

CelticArcher,

Its your Tassie oak/ Vic ash/eucalyptus regnans bow I'm interested in, I would be interested in any info you have on the density of the particular wood you use as your wood must be far better than the Vic Ash/Tassie Oak I can get locally.

By the way how do you know its Eucalyptus Regnans as opposed to Eucalyptus Obliqua or Eucalyptus Deegatensis, All three are sold commercially as Vic ash or Tassie Oak.


Erik,

Craig   In the second half of the fifteenth century, Edward IV issued a curious statute, his fifth act. Referring to Ireland,

I was aware of that statute but as it referred to Ireland and overseas territory not "the Realm"  I had not included notes on it in my list of Statutes affecting England and Wales etc.

My assumption is that Cambrensis had enough familiarity with Norman bows to know what they were commonly made of, even though as a clergyman , like Ascham, he was not required to practice shooting

Not true of their younger days, he was not born a clergyman, and anyway King Edward III's declaration of 1363:

 "Whereas the people of our realm, rich and poor alike, were accustomed formerly in their games to practice archery – whence by God's help, it is well known that high honour and profit came to our realm, and no small advantage to ourselves in our warlike enterprises... that every man in the same country, if he be able-bodied, shall, upon holidays, make use, in his games, of bows and arrows... and so learn and practice archery."

Gave no permission for clerics not to practice. There is ample evidence of clerics not only practicing with the bow but in their using it both against the French and the Scottish.

What makes you think Ascham was not required to practice?

Craig.

[adb]

Adb

I've always wondered why you guys (Erik & Craig) don't have an off forum discussion about medieval longbows. As usual, you guys have dragged this topic (which was grain orientation in bow making) off to a pissing contest about medieval longbows. I, for one, find it annoying. This guy has asked for some advice. Why don't we keep it there?

Threads wander where they wander, as I pointed out to you in a different post when you whinged in a similar manner, you yourself are responsible for threads wandering from where they began. I believe this is the 26th post in this thread, and Erick and I have only posted a few times mainly in answer to other posts as anyone without your jaundiced eye can easily see for themselves, indeed the post Erik opened with was directly aimed at the originator of this thread, who himself had moved on from grain orientation to bow backing and this post in answer to your whinge is 1/3 of the number of posts I have previously sent to this thread. Now, the originator of this thread has had his original question answered many times, he himself has varied the direction of the thread and again had his questions answered, he is also capable of complaining if he is offended by the direction any part of it takes and in this case it seems he is happy. While I gather you are not a fan of either history or the correct use of our language, in a forum on the English Warbow you are going to get information on both, I suggest that if you do not like what you read then stop reading it.

As for "a pissing contest about medieval longbows" your imagination and prejudice is getting the better of you I see nothing here that is remotely like that.

I would also remind you this forum is entitled English Warbow, and discussion here is meant to be on that subject and items connected with the same. I would suggest you stop wasting our time and refrain from posting such arrant nonsense.

Craig

Okeedoh, Craig, you carry on being the resident expert in all things medieval warbow. It's funny, though, cuz for you and Erik, it always seems to 'wander' in the same direction. You, and Erik both, seem to have a special way of insulting just about everyone on this forum. I, for one, am tired of it.

[CraigMBeckett]

With apologies to CelticArcher.

It's funny, though, cuz for you and Erik, it always seems to 'wander' in the same direction. You, and Erik both, seem to have a special way of insulting just about everyone on this forum. I, for one, am tired of it.

MMM! adb I had no idea that you were now the spokesman for everyone on this forum? I also find it strange that you feel insulted especially when again you have intervened in threads not started by you and by your actions are insulting the thread originator, the threads wandered with active participation of the originator, yet it is you who claims to be insulted!

Grow up and stop assuming the mantle of spokesman for the masses.

If the originator of any thread asks that it return to the original thrust fine but when one of the gallery whinges I shall ignore it.

Craig, you carry on being the resident expert in all things medieval warbow

My we are getting bitchy are we not?

Craig