Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
what lbs makes it a warbow insted of a longbow
Rod:
Whilst it is obvious that a "warbow" should be a heavy bow, such draw-weights are not necessarily an absolute guide to the intended use since heavy hunting bows are known to go up to the 100lb range, even if today most bowhunters think 50lb to 60lb "normal" and 70lb to 80lb "heavy".
It is understandable that there is a focus on achieving high draw-weight, but there is what you can pull, and what you can control and this has always been so, in any style and at every level.
I am not suggesting that the misguided notions of those "warbow" critics who scoff at weights that they cannot themselves draw should be accepted, but there is a kernel of truth behind this attitude and IMHO it should not be forgotten in the emphasis on achieving higher draw-weights.
Rod.
bow-toxo:
--- Quote from: Rod on March 02, 2009, 05:48:46 am ---Just a personal view, but IMHO weight alone does not a "warbow" make.
I don't even care for the term.
In it's heyday it was just a "bowe", even the term "longbow" had no currency until it was used to distinguish a "longbow" from a "crossbow".
What do you think?
Rod.
--- End quote ---
Like you, I don't care for the newfangled term. Bows have been used in war for centuries before the Mary Rose. Most bows from the Roman period Danish bogs woulld draw less than 100 pounds but were found with bodkin pointed arrows that were used only in war. So is a warbow any bow that was ever used in war or do we want to consider only the exceptionally powerfull Tudor bows ? We really need a definition of the word, hopefully a better one than the BLBS definition of "longbow". BTW, the word 'handbow' was used to distinguish from a 'crossbow'. The word 'longbow' [long bow] distinguished it from the shorter handbow, the'smallbow'. At least that was the mediaeval terminology.
Rod:
It is a question where I would try to keep an open mind.
There have been tribal cultures who make a distinction between a hunting bow and a heavier "war"bow.
One such was the Cherokee nation who used bows in the 70lb range for hunting but went up to the 100lb range for a fighting bow.
Looking at warbow cultures where there is a written record, we only have information where archery was an activity of the literate classes, which lets out the post Roman european bow until Gaston Phoebus' "Livre de Chasse" or Ascham.
Where the literature is extensive the median for infantry bows appears to be in the 120lb to 150lb range, somewhat less for the smaller cavalry bows, from 90lb to 120lb.
Not to say that the weaker men might not have drawn lighter bows and some strong men might not have used heavier, but in terms of manageability and penetration they do seem to top out in the 165lb range with anecdotal claims for ancient heroes and kings claiming weights regarded as generally beyond the scope of other men.
But who, relying on the good grace and favour of a warlord would contradict such a claim, however unlikely?
Rod.
stevesjem:
One of the things that seems to be missed on this thread is the fact that there are quite a number of men around today who can shoot bows of 140lb+, and some that can easily draw and shoot well bows in excess of 160lb, now these people have not had to train as our forefathers did, their lives do not depend on the bow and so are probably no where near what a medieval archer was capable of, there still seems to be this underlying attitude that if we can't they they couldn't.
The only English bows found and intended for warfare are the MR bows and I have proven many times that the bow weights would have been very high, by far heavier than even the strongest of todays archers, bar 1 or 2.
The medieval archer would have lived by the bow, shooting it regularly and with purpose, the military archer of the day was the best the country had to offer, these were not just any old archer but chosen for there ability to shoot a bow for warfare with both accuracy and distance.
It would be chirlish of us nowadays to think that they would have been shooting light weight bows, I mean you wouldn't go into battle nowadays with an air rifle would you?
Lets be sensible about this, yes there are claims made about the bow weights of the MR bows, but high and low, but I very much doubt the archer of the past would be happy having a bow that would just about do the job it was intended for, he would want something he could rely on and a bow that would easily do what was required of it.
Steve
huntertrapper:
good post fellas thats a question i always had.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version