# did ya know?



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*stories*

Did you know that 5500 longbowmen were the catalyst of the defeat of the French at the battle of Agincourt in 1415? I think they sometimes had 150lb pounds at times too. Maximum target range was 250 yards. I've actually written my senior thesis on archery and its effects during the 100 years war. 

Did you know that Crecy in 1346 was the first time Cannons were used in combat in europe?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

at Agincourt, most of the archers suffered dysentery and went into battle naked from the waist down-something the French found rather insulting. Add wet conditions to the mix, which didn't allow the French crossbow mercenaries to get much use of their bows, and it was a complete nightmare for the French.

BTW the English archers weren't above using germ warfare-dipping their arrows in the results of their ailments


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

bsu_beginner said:


> Did you know that 5500 longbowmen were the catalyst of the defeat of the French at the battle of Agincourt in 1415? I think they sometimes had 150lb pounds at times too. Maximum target range was 250 yards. I've actually written my senior thesis on archery and its effects during the 100 years war.
> 
> Did you know that Crecy in 1346 was the first time Cannons were used in combat in europe?


Wow, i didn't know that they went to 150lb!! Sweet. ya i had read about 250 accurate range, isn't that amazing. 
The battle of crecy was a huge defeat for the french. Even though the English had a army of 10,000-under the command of Edward III-were outnumbered 4 to 1, they came out crushing the French-under the command of Philip VI. The Genoese mercenaries had to shoot into the afternoon sun, besides wich they had to shoot uphill. Also, the battle of crecy was the first time mooning came into act. the mercenaries mooned the English longbowmen, though they payed dearly for it.
I was wondering who first made the cannons? that's interesting that they were first used in the 100 year's war. I love medieval history, so anything u got, let me know.


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

Jim C said:


> at Agincourt, most of the archers suffered dysentery and went into battle naked from the waist down-something the French found rather insulting. Add wet conditions to the mix, which didn't allow the French crossbow mercenaries to get much use of their bows, and it was a complete nightmare for the French.
> 
> BTW the English archers weren't above using germ warfare-dipping their arrows in the results of their ailments


 I read that at the battle of Agincourts it took place on a newly plowed field. and so that didn't cope to well with the supremely heavy french knights. I wouldn't like to see naked archers shooting leathel yuck through the air at me either.    . well if u have anymore info for me let me know, thnx.


----------



## Whittler (Nov 20, 2003)

That's enough to make you mess your pants pulling on #150 lol.

I read that they had marks on their arm guards/bracers they were called then, so they could shoot 100-200 or more yeards and be quite accurate.

Can you imagine pulling on that much weight and haveing the bow explode. There would be splinters flying every were.


----------



## Jim McPhail (Jan 8, 2005)

Jim C said:


> BTW the English archers weren't above using germ warfare-dipping their arrows in the results of their ailments


One of our leading UK authorities on longbows, Hugh Soar, says that that's a bit of a myth. Yes, there were bacteria-carrying arrowheads, but only because the archers didn't use quivers - they simply stuck the points of the arrows in the soft ground, close by, so that they were ready to load.

He also says that the arrow storm was also in the region of 100,000 arrows in the air per minute, and reports from the battle say the sky was actually dark because of it.


----------



## Jim McPhail (Jan 8, 2005)

medievallongbow said:


> Did ya know that 1400's English longbows averaged about 100# draw weight!!! They drew 3ft long arrows, and had a range of up to 400yds!!! English archer skeletens that were found, usually had twisted spines from years of massive pulling. In the "hundred year war", the English longbows were an imposing force. Hope ya injoyed this small chunk of hisotry.


King Richard III, famous for his hump back, was an archer in his youth - which probably accounts for his hump.


----------



## Jim McPhail (Jan 8, 2005)

medievallongbow said:


> I read that at the battle of Agincourts it took place on a newly plowed field. and so that didn't cope to well with the supremely heavy french knights. I wouldn't like to see naked archers shooting leathel yuck through the air at me either.    . well if u have anymore info for me let me know, thnx.


Yep, and it rained a lot too. The English took out the front row of French and when their knights tried to advance many of them tripped over the dead bodies and drowned in the mud. Part of this was due to the type of helmets they were using, based on a German design, which was not easy to open.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*plucking yew*

Actually, in Crecy and Agincourt, Kings Henry V and Edward III used contracted archers. "Civilian contractors." In fact, remember the story of Robin Hood? The archery tournament he shot in was actually recruitment. They'd take the top 20 or so from each archery tournament and recruit them to fight for pay. In addition, if you could capture someone, you could randsom him. So there was financial incentive to take prisoners, not kill them. 

One of the unfortunate things from the battle of Agincourt was the execution of 3000 French prisoners. There were more french prisoners than the english had fighting men. It wasn't uncommon for that to happen. When Richard III fought in Antioch, during the Third Crusade, he had 8,000 muslim prisoners slaughtered. The French killed 1000 Turkish prisoners at Niceopolis in 1396. ARchers were considered beneath the bounds of chivalry, so they were tasked to kill the Frenchmen. it wasn't until Henry the VIII that archery has been considered a "cool" thing. 

Chinese used gunpowder and were the first to use cannons in the 1300's. Interestingly enough, the English never mentioned using cannons during the battle. I would ventur to say that cannons were very unchivalristic, and so they never wrote about it. Much the same way the Japanese don't actually tell their kids in grade school about the war attrocities they commited against POW's during WWII, but everyone else talks about them... a lot.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*plowmarks and Greeks*

Its weird because the Greeks didn't like archers. They didn't have any. Laecidedius (the famed spartan General who promised to fight in the shade when told that the Persian arrows would blot out the sun) didn't have any spartan archers. However, it is ironic that when you read the Odessy, that Odyseus actually slew Penelope's lovers with one arrow in the dramatic showdown at the end of the story. Ironic huh? Apollo was known as the God of archery and there are inscriptions in his temple at how much his fiery arrows were to be feared. 

Oh yeah, rules of chivarly made the french the ones that choose the battlefield at Agincourt and Crecy. If you've ever seen the battle field, its a perfect rectangle. Much like a rugby pitch. The problem was at the field pinched in the center some to only 900yards. So they had to send the knights in peicemeal. I'd say that the English archers were only facing a threat of perhaps 4-5 thousand Frenchmen at the time. If the french had choosen a site where they could use all 25,000 men (under Albert, King Philip of Franch didn't show up cuz he went mad when his wife was cheating on him and he swore he was made of glass, any warriors in here can attest that if your leadership sucks... you really don't have any good reason to fight) and blitzed the English, it would have been one of histories most one-sided battles. I'm sorry to offend any French in the room and any English archers. But the battle pretty much was lost before the first arrow flew. If you read Clauswitz and apply his concepts, you'll find that the french broke all 9 rules of war at least once.


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

Thanks for the posts guys.    . Keep any medieval history chunks coming.  . Especially bow stuff.
I've read that they had three different types of bows. longbows, which had a "D" shape, and had the longest range. compsite(or recurve) bows, were curved at the end, had a medium range, and were usually made up of composite wood and bone bonded together. and short bows, which were the most common bow incountered, had a shorter range. short bows were drawn back to your chest, and were 3 to 4 feet long. composite bows were of Asian background, and were favored most for horseback archery.

PS. who came out with the trebuchet(my favorite medieval siege weapon)?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

medievallongbow said:


> Thanks for the posts guys.    . Keep any medieval history chunks coming.  . Especially bow stuff.
> I've read that they had three different types of bows. longbows, which had a "D" shape, and had the longest range. compsite(or recurve) bows, were curved at the end, had a medium range, and were usually made up of composite wood and bone bonded together. and short bows, which were the most common bow incountered, had a shorter range. short bows were drawn back to your chest, and were 3 to 4 feet long. composite bows were of Asian background, and were favored most for horseback archery.
> 
> PS. who came out with the trebuchet(my favorite medieval siege weapon)?



actually the turkish composite bow had by far the longest range. A turkish sultan in the USA apparently shot an arrow in the 850-900 yard range during a visit to the USA within a decade or so after the Civil War.

Don Rabska (a guy who knows more about bow design and archery technical matters than almost anyone around now that Earl is dead and Charlie Pierson is very old) told me of mongol "sniper" archers who would kill sentries at several hundred yards at night with these composite bows. Now being a decent fita shooter and someone who qualified (DCM) as expert with a M16 style rifle I was a bit skeptical but I never doubt anything Don tells me when it comes to archery

English archers weren't graded on accuracy but rate of fire and range. THey practiced shooting up to 24 arrows in a couple minutes and drew past their jaw so as to increase range (not the most accurate anchor but it gave an extended draw) I have had SCPA types shoot at my range and they work on their speed-most of them can't shoot a bow anymore accurately than I can throw an arrow but the good ones can really crank out the arrows at a fast rate


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

I know it doesn't add to the discussion here but .. I've shot my 85lb self Yew long bow on the Azincourt (yes that's how you spell it) battlefield. I cannot begin to tell you what a thrill it was. In shot replica battleshafts from the advanced position on the Tramecourt - Azincourt road. As a souviner I 've had the arrows framed (still with the mud on them) and I have a small packet of earth from th e battle field.


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*azincourt*

Yes, the french renamed the town of Agincourt to Azincourt after the battle. ironically, the battlesite of Crecy is now bi-sected by a huge soybean processing plant. Weird when you think of it... here in the US, we have "custer's last stand" "remember the maine" and "remember the alamo." Apparently, the French enjoy winning more than they actually win.


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

Jim C said:


> actually the turkish composite bow had by far the longest range. A turkish sultan in the USA apparently shot an arrow in the 850-900 yard range during a visit to the USA within a decade or so after the Civil War.
> 
> Don Rabska (a guy who knows more about bow design and archery technical matters than almost anyone around now that Earl is dead and Charlie Pierson is very old) told me of mongol "sniper" archers who would kill sentries at several hundred yards at night with these composite bows. Now being a decent fita shooter and someone who qualified (DCM) as expert with a M16 style rifle I was a bit skeptical but I never doubt anything Don tells me when it comes to archery
> 
> English archers weren't graded on accuracy but rate of fire and range. THey practiced shooting up to 24 arrows in a couple minutes and drew past their jaw so as to increase range (not the most accurate anchor but it gave an extended draw) I have had SCPA types shoot at my range and they work on their speed-most of them can't shoot a bow anymore accurately than I can throw an arrow but the good ones can really crank out the arrows at a fast rate


Hey, how many pounds were those Turkish bows? and how far did they range during the middle ages, as opposed to civil war time? that's very cool that the could shoot that well, I'll hafta read up on that. thanx.


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

*sweet!*



Phil said:


> I know it doesn't add to the discussion here but .. I've shot my 85lb self Yew long bow on the Azincourt (yes that's how you spell it) battlefield. I cannot begin to tell you what a thrill it was. In shot replica battleshafts from the advanced position on the Tramecourt - Azincourt road. As a souviner I 've had the arrows framed (still with the mud on them) and I have a small packet of earth from th e battle field.


I haven't been able to find any yew bows(though I've tried many times). that's cool.


----------



## BDHUNTR (May 24, 2003)

Is there any truth to the following? In a battle (I'm guessing before Agincourt) that the English lost, their captured archers had their middle fingers of their right hands cut off to prevent them from drawing their English longbows. After they defeated the French at Agincourt, the English archers proudly displayed their middle fingers, to show that they were victorious and had not lost their digits to zee Frenchies. And that (supposedly) is where "flipping the bird" started.

Even if untrue, it sounds good!

BTW, I am almost finished reading a highly-detailed historical account of the First World War. My God! It is a wonder Europe survived, let alone to fight an even bigger war less than twenty years later!


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

BDHUNTR said:


> Is there any truth to the following? In a battle (I'm guessing before Agincourt) that the English lost, their captured archers had their middle fingers of their right hands cut off to prevent them from drawing their English longbows. After they defeated the French at Agincourt, the English archers proudly displayed their middle fingers, to show that they were victorious and had not lost their digits to zee Frenchies. And that (supposedly) is where "flipping the bird" started.
> 
> Even if untrue, it sounds good!
> 
> BTW, I am almost finished reading a highly-detailed historical account of the First World War. My God! It is a wonder Europe survived, let alone to fight an even bigger war less than twenty years later!


 Actually, if you can find a bible, look in Genesis Chaptor 19, and that's where the whole "flipping" thing originated. All the way back to biblical times. 
That WW1 book sounds interesing, what's the title, and who's the auther?


----------



## BDHUNTR (May 24, 2003)

It is titled "_The First World War_" by Martin Gilbert, published by Henry Holt publishers. It was printed in 1994, but as I borrowed it from a friend of mine, I do not know where he purchased it.

I thought I was quite knowledgeable about the "War To End All Wars." I can now frankly say I was ignorant of many things. In America we now a lot about WWII, the Civil War, and that's about it. While Vietnam was recent and still a bitter memory to a lot of folks, most do not truly know the history of it or other wars that were fought by American troops. The Korean War is a forgotten war by most. Ask 100 people on the street what the Chosin Reservoir is and they will probably say it is a watershed for San Francisco or some other metropolitan area. But WWI was waged on such a huge scale, the loss of life so great, and the impact that it had, and still has, on the world today, was so far-reaching, it is a wonder more people do not know about it.

Almost the entire Middle East as we know it today sprang from WWI, including the nations of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Yugoslavia was created as a confederation of Serb, Croat and Slavic nation-states (where the war actually began) and degenerated into basically those same states in the early Nineties, culminating with genocide and ethnic cleansing. It begat the Russian Revolution and the fall of the Tsars and the foundation of the Soviet Union, and of course, by the harsh treatments under the Treaty of Versailles, put the German economy into such a state of ruin that it made it easy for National Socialism to rise in popularity, so that a mere twenty years later a little Austrian corporal could rise in power and bring the world once again to the brink of chaos. 

It's a good read!


----------



## duck_killa (Mar 2, 2005)

*Any truth???*

I got this in an email today... font know if its true or not, sounds similar to one of the posts a little ways up...

Giving the finger before theBattleofAgincourtin 1415, the French,
anticipating victory over the English, proposed to cut off the middle finger
of all captured English soldiers. Without the middle finger it would be
impossible to draw the renowned English longbow and therefore they would be
incapable of fighting in the future. This famous weapon was made of the
native English Yew tree, and the act of drawing the longbow was known as
"plucking the yew" (or "pluck yew"). Much to the bewilderment of the French,
the English won a major upset and began mocking the French by waving their
middle fingers at the defeated French, saying, See, we can still pluck yew!
"PLUCK YEW!" Since 'pluck yew' is rather difficult to say, the difficult
consonant cluster at the beginning has gradually hanged to a labiodental
fricative 'F', and thus the words often used in conjunction with the
one-finger-salute! It is also because of the pheasant feathers on the
arrows used with the longbow that the symbolic gesture is known as

"giving the bird." IT IS STILL AN APPROPRIATE SALUTE TO THE FRENCH TODAY!

So any ideas?


----------



## Z-MAN (Jan 25, 2004)

Thanks for the History lesson people. I enjoyed the posts. --
" The true hunter counts his achievement in proportion to the effort involved and the fairness of the sport." Dr. Saxon Pope


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

Most of the Yew used in the Hundred years war with France wasn't English. The vast majority was Spanish or Italian. A law was passed in Spain in 1398 ordered all Yew trees to be felled and burned to prevent the English from making bows that may be used against the Spanish. 
The chronicles of the French historian Jean Froissart are quite clear as to the origins of the "two fingered salute" . 

' The Englishmen who were in three battles lying on the ground to rest were with the Earl of Northampton and the Earl of Arundel. The Earl of Arundel spoke "we are all well ordered to fight this day, some come in haste and some in evil order to remove the hand and fingers that would serve our Kynge (King), but they all stayed still and not abashed would show thyre (their) fingers to the Lord John of Hainault"


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

*thank you!!!*



Phil said:


> Most of the Yew used in the Hundred years war with France wasn't English. The vast majority was Spanish or Italian. A law was passed in Spain in 1398 ordered all Yew trees to be felled and burned to prevent the English from making bows that may be used against the Spanish.
> The chronicles of the French historian Jean Froissart are quite clear as to the origins of the "two fingered salute" .
> 
> ' The Englishmen who were in three battles lying on the ground to rest were with the Earl of Northampton and the Earl of Arundel. The Earl of Arundel spoke "we are all well ordered to fight this day, some come in haste and some in evil order to remove the hand and fingers that would serve our Kynge (King), but they all stayed still and not abashed would show thyre (their) fingers to the Lord John of Hainault"


Thank you so much Phil. I was looking for a place to cite that. By the way, to anyone who wants. I'm doing my senior thesis on this very topic... would anyone like to review it?


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

The spelling of Azincourt(Agincourt) is an interesting one. There are only two recognised accounts of the battle by people who were there. One is the account of Jean Waurin, with the french army (who later retold the events to the Historian Enguerran Monstrelet in 1447) , the second was Jean le Fevre who was with Henry V's army. According to LeFevre's account , while Henry was scouting for a passage across the Somme river they captured a servant of Charles D'Albret , constable of France. The captured servant informed Henry as to the position of Marshal Bouciccaut and the size of the French army. LeFevre noted that the head of the french column was already stalled at Tramecourt stretching to Azincourt (with a Z). Also, one of the French knights who attacked the English baggage carts was reputed to be Isembard D'Azincourt (with a Z). But... 
what we have to remember is, in the 15th century there was no regognised and universal spelling of words in French , English or Latin.


----------



## spobow (Jul 17, 2004)

Anyone know if accuracy was important or if these archers were accurate out to 400yds or were they just shooting into a mass of men and hoping to hit one?


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

I doubt if any of the Hundred Years War archers reached 400 yards. The Mary Rose replica bows made by Pip Bickerstaffe and shot by Mark Stretton only reach between 300 to 350 yards. The main advantage was the saturation fire power the English archers could achieve. An archer could loose around 10 arrows per minute ,multyply that by 5000 archers and you have 50.000 arrows per minute dropping on you. In a mounted charge lasting four minutes you have to consider 200,000 arrows landing on the size of a football pitch. Remembering that the shafts were a massive 5/8th of an inch diameter and up to 36 inches in length. the archers would pick their points to suit the situation. Barbs and swallow tails to injure the horses then at closer ranges 180 - 100 yards short and long bodkins to penetrate mail and armour. When the arrows were all spent the archers would go in with maul and knife to finish off anyone who wasn't worth ransoming.


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

*B.T.W* the historian Mike Loads estimated that the mounted charge at Azincourt lasted around 8 minutes. So @ 50.000 arrows per minute you have 400,000 arrows shot or 833 arrows per second.


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

http://www.stortford-archers.org.uk/medieval.htm


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

Excellent link BEES :thumbs_up :thumbs_up


----------



## Henry VI (Apr 16, 2005)

"Did ya " also know that in some battle...I forget which during the medieval era... the French lost against the English because of their crossbows? They had these crossbows which you had to crank it to pull the string down, while the British had their longbows. The French spent so much time cranking their bows that the English slaughtered them with their longbows. Kinda sad huh...


----------



## the-ghost (Sep 11, 2004)

thats correct at agincourt the archers did win the day, but it was by using their daggers and axes rather than arrows. the french knights in heavy armor couldnt move in the mud with their plate boots stuck. archers who at the time wore mostly cloth or leather boots could move freely and did them in with daggers and anything else they had at hand. only thing an arrow could get through in that battle was horse flesh. its been proven through mechanical testing that and arrow of the same steel used then couldnt penitrate the same thickness and type of steel the french used in their plate mail.


----------



## the-ghost (Sep 11, 2004)

oh and i belive it was the first two fingers of the shooting hand, think thats why the english flip you the bird with two fingers.


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

*HenryVI* I believe the battle your talking about was Cresy The French ysed Genoaese cross bowmen in the first attack. Because of the wet conditions the range of the crossbows with wet strings was reduced. Unhappy that the crossbow men were being ineffective the french orderd a mounted attack over the crossbow men.
*Ghost* I would beg to differ on your statement that the arrow was not effective against armour


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

Here's a larger Warwick 2


----------



## the-ghost (Sep 11, 2004)

phil theres a tv show in america, its called forensic history or something close. its on the history channel. anyway they use a scentific approach and crime scene approach to come up with the facts. anyway they took a bodkin of standard type for the day, and matched it to metal remains of a agincourt bodkin. did the same with armor then used a machine to create the same tolerance as a longbow of the day and the bodkin bent over everytime. they did the same with a guy shooting a longbow and everytime the bodkin deflected and came out bent. they also tested the soil and found that a plate boot would stick in the soil due to suction, and a cloth or leather boot wouldnt. you also have to keep ibn mind the amount of prisnors taken in this battle. they were all killed by archers using daggers. henry didnt know the battle was over so he had them all put to death.


----------



## the-ghost (Sep 11, 2004)

sorry the pictures mean very little, could be tin for all we know not french steel. looks prettty scimpy to me.


----------



## Henry VI (Apr 16, 2005)

I know this has nothing to do with the subject, but I thought it was funny. The term for bow in French is "arc" and you know the famous leader of the French Revolution, I think, Joan of Arc. (Joan of the bow), get it? I know it was dumb, but funny...


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

There are numerous examples of plate armour penetration by bodkins. Two of the best examples are in the Azincourt museum in France, another is an exhibit in the Royal Armouries Museum (Leeds U.K.) The plate armour illustrated above is a replica of a 15th century Frensh design called an Asperea plate. It's made from 5mm wrought iron (less than 1% carbon) common to the Hundred years war, hardened, tempered and then polished. Believe me that armour is anything but skimpy.


----------



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

*Henry VI* .....theres about 260 years separating the French Revolution and Jean d'Arc (her name wasn't Joan)


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

Phil said:


> *Henry VI* .....theres about 260 years separating the French Revolution and Jean d'Arc (her name wasn't Joan)


 jeanne, right? Or as the english called her after the seige of orleans "a sorcerest."


----------



## Henry VI (Apr 16, 2005)

hey bsu, still showing your senior thesis??? I want to see it please.


----------



## Henry VI (Apr 16, 2005)

*New Topic*

Hey you guys, ever hear of the great Howard Hill?


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Not deleted, just no activity in a while, so it was over a month old. Apparently you settings do not show threads over a month old. You can change that.


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

*My bad*

My bad, I was wrong. The French chopped off the middle fingers of the English longbowmen when they were captured. This prompted the English to wave their middle fingers at the French in defiance. Sorry about the biblical reference, that wasn't related to what we were talking about.:embara: :sad:


----------



## COmuzzified (Jul 29, 2006)

after spending 18 yrs shooting a welsh longbow and one that is identical to those used at the battle of Agincourt i can definitivly tell you that the english long bow with the proper arrows were able to reach out past 400 yrds and in one instance an archer in wales slew an attacking irish maurader with a single arrow at a distance verified by a friar from the local monestary of 143 rods that is the equivelent of 745 yrds a rod is 5.5 yards and was a standard lenght of measure in the middle ages i myself have been able to acheive 532 yrds with a 96 inch 110 # bow with a 41 inch arrow that weighed in at 2527 grains


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

*Goodness!*



COmuzzified said:


> after spending 18 yrs shooting a welsh longbow and one that is identical to those used at the battle of Agincourt i can definitivly tell you that the english long bow with the proper arrows were able to reach out past 400 yrds and in one instance an archer in wales slew an attacking irish maurader with a single arrow at a distance verified by a friar from the local monestary of 143 rods that is the equivelent of 745 yrds a rod is 5.5 yards and was a standard lenght of measure in the middle ages i myself have been able to acheive 532 yrds with a 96 inch 110 # bow with a 41 inch arrow that weighed in at 2527 grains


That's pretty sweet! Man 745yds(low long whistle). You must have quite a hefty long arm yourself to pull back a 110# bow at 41inches. Where'd you get your bow and is it made out of yew or something similar???? That's just awesome:shade: :shade: :shade: !!! By the way,thanks for the post. God bless!


----------



## COmuzzified (Jul 29, 2006)

the arrows are 41 inches with the anchor i was taught to use i was at 32 inch draw length and the reason for the length was for added weight and those arrows had some seriouse FOC and Kinetic energy lol there was a test done at the royal military academy in the uk that states that some of the arrows used may have been close to 4000 grains moving at around 200 fps in a drop from the apex of there flight and may have attained kinetic energy of around 200 to 500 psi


----------



## Sika Shooter (Aug 3, 2006)

medievallongbow said:


> Did ya know that 1400's English longbows averaged about 100# draw weight!!! They drew 3ft long arrows, and had a range of up to 400yds!!! English archer skeletens that were found, usually had twisted spines from years of massive pulling. In the "hundred year war", the English longbows were an imposing force. Hope ya injoyed this small chunk of hisotry.


They could more often be 180 pounds. and the world record for heviest longbow is 205 pounds


----------



## WhiteHarness (Nov 2, 2006)

Phil said:


> There are numerous examples of plate armour penetration by bodkins. Two of the best examples are in the Azincourt museum in France, another is an exhibit in the Royal Armouries Museum (Leeds U.K.) The plate armour illustrated above is a replica of a 15th century Frensh design called an Asperea plate. It's made from 5mm wrought iron (less than 1% carbon) common to the Hundred years war, hardened, tempered and then polished. Believe me that armour is anything but skimpy.



Where are these examples? I've never seen them. I am aware of a bascinet that Joan of Arc dedicated to a church after it had saved her life from an arrow. It has a small hole in the side. A hole in the plate does not indicate that the arrow penetrated with sufficient force left to injure the armour's wearer. What makes you so sure that these plate were in fact pierced by arrows?

What's an "Asperea plate?" Nothing in any book on the subject of armour I've ever read makes use of such a term. That piece of armour is a "plackart," the lower portion of a mid-to-late fifteenth century breastplate. 

I doubt very much that it's made of 5mm wrought iron. No armour of that period was that thick, and didn't need to be that thick in order to defeat arrows. I believe the photos you have there are from the flawed test that was published in Primitive Archer magazine two or three years ago. IIRC, the breastplate was only 18ga--1.2mm thick and of unhardened modern mild steel. 

I refer you to both the "Appendix I: The Target" of Robert Hardy's _Longbow_ and to the chapter on armour penetration in Dr. Alan Williams' _The Knight and the Blast Furnace_. It seems that the authorities are in agreement that an arrow fired from a very powerful bow could pierce the thinner steel on the limbs, but not the 2mm+ thick plates on the torso and head.

Breastplates were seldom thicker than 2-3mm until armourers began to make them proof against early firearms. Williams' book has a chart with breastplate thicknesses across a long span of time. 

Nor did the armour have to be any thicker to defeat the bows of the period. Recall what the chronicler said of the "most assuredly harnesed(sic)" Scots at the battle of Flodden. They:

"...abode the most dangerous shot of arrows, which sore them annoyed but yet exept it hit them in some bare place, did them no hurt."

The longbow was incapable of piercing good plate armour of the day. You need a crossbow for that.

See here as well:

http://www.rdg.ac.uk/engin/home/material/ancient/AW_poster.jpg

Note that the 80 joules produced by the longbow falls far short of the 280J needed to defeat that plate armour. 

The old myth, cherished by Anglophiles and Toxophiles, that longbows were magical weapons that fired nuclear arrows that could pierce any armour needs to die. If that were the case, then plenty more "longbow victories" would have followed Crecy, Poitiers, and Agincourt. But there aren't any more such. Where was the longbow's much-hyped ability to ignore plate armour at Patay, where the longbowmen were trampled by a charge of those very French plate-clad knights whose bane they supposedly were? Why, in the Wars of the Roses, is it noted by chroniclers that plate-clad noblemen were killed by arrows _only_ when they raise their visors to drink, breathe, or shout (Lords Clifford and Dacre)?

I point you also to this discussion:

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1321&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=100


----------



## WhiteHarness (Nov 2, 2006)

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=72955&d=1113674753

In fact, Phil, it is very evident from this photo that the reproduction armour here is much less than 5mm thick. Look at how the plates in the fauld overlap; 5mm of thickness would be quite eivdent there. No, this piece is much thinner. I am still convinced that these are photos from the same very flawed test published in Primitive Archer a while back. 

Regarding draw weights of bows:

Just because monsters like Mark Stretton pull 180-200 pound bows doesn't mean that every medieval archer did. IIRC, the estimates on the Mary Rose bows are much lower--80-150lbs.

The longbow was not a wonder-weapon. It wasn't the weapon itself that won those three great battles for the English. It was the proper implementation of the weapon.


----------



## Templar1305 (Oct 24, 2006)

Here is what little I know about these topics....

The Welsh gained a strong reputation for archery in the middle ages and were recruited heavily to be military archers.

Many skeletons of Welsh bowmen recovered from those days show that a great deal of them appear deformed because the bones in the left arm are substantially thicker and denser than the bones in the right arm. From stabilizing those heavy draw weights! (Modern archery legend Howard Hill often used a very heavy longbow).
At the battle of Agincourt, the heavy armour worn by the french trapped them in the slimy mud. Most archers were lightly armoured if armoured at all. Drawings of military archers show them wearing a chamber pot looking helmet or coif, a chain mail vest and thats about it. Later on professional mercenary archers would wear more armour.

King Edward I encouraged archery tournaments becuase it was a way of instilling a useful military skill among the populace. 
I wish I could tell you more.....Thats about it.
Robin Hood appears to have been a figure of British folklore from ancient times remembered later as a romantic outlaw. By the 1400s, some real life outlaws were using the name as a moniker and Robin Hood and Robert Hoods pop up all the time in old law enforcement accounts from then.


----------



## Stuka1166 (Oct 19, 2006)

Great dialogue !!

I truly enjoyed reading all the posts on the subject !!


----------



## BlackArrow (May 7, 2006)

Jim C said:


> actually the turkish composite bow had by far the longest range. A turkish sultan in the USA apparently shot an arrow in the 850-900 yard range during a visit to the USA within a decade or so after the Civil War.
> 
> Don Rabska (a guy who knows more about bow design and archery technical matters than almost anyone around now that Earl is dead and Charlie Pierson is very old) told me of mongol "sniper" archers who would kill sentries at several hundred yards at night with these composite bows. Now being a decent fita shooter and someone who qualified (DCM) as expert with a M16 style rifle I was a bit skeptical but I never doubt anything Don tells me when it comes to archery
> 
> English archers weren't graded on accuracy but rate of fire and range. THey practiced shooting up to 24 arrows in a couple minutes and drew past their jaw so as to increase range (not the most accurate anchor but it gave an extended draw) I have had SCPA types shoot at my range and they work on their speed-most of them can't shoot a bow anymore accurately than I can throw an arrow but the good ones can really crank out the arrows at a fast rate


The Turkish bow was a Flight bow... their contests were flight contests. 

For a really good authority on the subject see Paul Klopsteg's "Turkish Archery and the Composite Bow." It's available as a re-print by the Simon Archery Foundation from the University Museum of Manchester University, UK. 

Klopsteg had access to old Arabic sources that in turn dated back to the era when these bows were used when he wrote in 1934, and describes in detail both the bows and the training. Draw-weights were reputed to be high, with the flight bows specially conditioned in a heated box for up to 48 hours before shooting. 

Whilst the longbow was a good weapon, so were Asian Composites- ATARN website is a good place to start.


----------



## Templar1305 (Oct 24, 2006)

I may be wrong here, but I seem to recall back in college reading somwhere about Turks and Mongols and other eastern archers who were reknowned for their ability to hit a man on the other side from horseback at full gallop with their short, composite bows.


----------



## BlackArrow (May 7, 2006)

Templar1305 said:


> I may be wrong here, but I seem to recall back in college reading somwhere about Turks and Mongols and other eastern archers who were reknowned for their ability to hit a man on the other side from horseback at full gallop with their short, composite bows.


No, you're not wrong. Mongols in particular used mounted archers, but so did the Chinese and islamic nations (i.e. "Saracens"- turks, persions etc). Before that you had the Parthians (in area of modern Iran)- they walloped the Romans a few times. The Scythians were horse archers near the Black Sea area and precursers of the Huns, another tribe of horse archers who were instrumental in the fall of the Roman Empire. 

Then the Japanese had mounted archers- the term for a Samurai path originally meaning "way of the horse ad bow." Mounted archery is still practiced in Japan- it's called Yabusame. They use a composite bow too but theirs is about 7 feet long and made form lams of bamboo  

In fact, horseback archery as a discipline is being re-introduced- Kassai in Hungary has a "school" and there are I believe international champs/training camps. ATARN (Asian Traditional Archery Research Network- http://www.atarn.org/frameindex.htm) will probably have some links here's a couple more:

http://www.horsearchery.org/
http://www.horsebows.com/
http://www.sevenmeadowsarchery.com/

They all have history info plus how the discipline and bows are being revived.

There are also horse archery training events in US, I found this link http://www.atarn.org/training/david_gray_training.htm on ATARN.


----------



## Flintlock1776 (Aug 19, 2006)

*I did not know*



bsu_beginner said:


> Did you know that 5500 longbowmen were the catalyst of the defeat of the French at the battle of Agincourt in 1415? I think they sometimes had 150lb pounds at times too. Maximum target range was 250 yards. I've actually written my senior thesis on archery and its effects during the 100 years war.
> 
> Did you know that Crecy in 1346 was the first time Cannons were used in combat in europe?


Must have been interesting


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

*just a thought...*

Awhile back a friend of mine held a local archery shootout at his house. that was a blast and toward the end of the day we had a special shoot where there was a rubber chicken set out across a pond about a hundred yards from where all of us were lined up. We all only got one shot and it had to be at the same time. That was pretty much just a totally awesome thing (despite only a few people brought recurves). I got a sort of adrenaline rush when when there was a loud "thump" as we all shot and watching your arrow mingle with the others as they all curved towards the target. Anyway, I was just thinking of how much of an adrenaline rush you would get if you were shooting among about 5000 archers all doing that at such a long range with loud powerful bows... I think it would be kinda addicting...:wink:


----------



## Lionors (Feb 24, 2007)

*Impressive*

l have stood on a field with around 40 other longbow archers, all loosening an arrow at the same time. Each bow makes a different sound but gosh - the noise is something so very different to the ears.
Worse still is standing up the target end from a long shoot. You cannot see the archers but hear a air cutting noise then arrows rain down from everywhere. Its magical and scarey all at once.
What a feast for sight and eyes must Crecy, Poitiers, and Agincourt of been? (Not that the archers would of stopped and watched!)
The shear numbers of arrows and archers - staggering.


----------



## camotoe (Sep 19, 2006)

I love all the stuff you guys have been talking about. I know absolutely nothing of medieval warfare and the history of some of these weapons and battles. Is there a good book you can recommend for someone to find out about this stuff? Thanks


----------



## medievallongbow (Feb 3, 2005)

*hmmm.....*

I haven't actually been able to find any books purely devoted to the war. Most of the information I've found have come from extensive googling :tongue: :wink: . If I find anything though I'll most definitely let you know. I'm sure there are some way more knowledgeable people here than me, so hopefully someone can get you hooked up.


----------



## WoolyWelsh (Sep 9, 2006)

camotoe said:


> I love all the stuff you guys have been talking about. I know absolutely nothing of medieval warfare and the history of some of these weapons and battles. Is there a good book you can recommend for someone to find out about this stuff? Thanks



If you want a good read, _please_ take a look at *Longbow - A Social and Military History*, by Robert Hardy, third edition, 1992. Carefully read chapter 11, and the appendices. 

As far as the phrase "pluck yew" and it's various forms; this is internet myth and just plain tripe and conjecture.


----------



## Corsair (Nov 21, 2005)

have a look at this. The bloke is drawing a 200lb draw weight long bow 









This is from the UK Clickers Archery website: 
http://www.clickersarchery.co.uk/online/pages/danage.php


----------



## WoolyWelsh (Sep 9, 2006)

Corsair said:


> have a look at this. The bloke is drawing a 200lb draw weight long bow
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That chap looks like he is "shooting in the bow"; the whisker-burn must be awful.


----------



## Corsair (Nov 21, 2005)

He's a Pommie - they love pain.


----------



## SLOWHAND (Dec 28, 2006)

Henry VI said:


> "Did ya " also know that in some battle...I forget which during the medieval era... the French lost against the English because of their crossbows? They had these crossbows which you had to crank it to pull the string down, while the British had their longbows. The French spent so much time cranking their bows that the English slaughtered them with their longbows. Kinda sad huh...



Not for us it aint!
From a very early age the sons of medieval English peasants were taught how to use the longbow(scaled down ofcourse) and it's practice was compulsary. Our national sport of soccer was actualy made illegal by Parliament because it was interfearing with archery practice! The practice butts were often kept at the local church, and many English place names still reflect this. There is a Butts Lane near to where I live which was probably where medieval archery practice took place. Many people have surnames that reflect their ancestors past, Archer, Bowman, Bowyer, Arrowsmith, Fletcher, are fairly common surnames in Britain.


----------

