Main Discussion Area > English Warbow

MR replica (pics)

<< < (8/10) > >>

ChrisD:

--- Quote from: Yeomanbowman on August 20, 2009, 07:27:13 pm ---A note of caution about drawing too many conclusions about draw weight from even to seemingly identical density of wood bows.  For example, if 2 staves were split from 1 bent log one would be reflexed the other deflexed.  The reflexed stave bow would be heavier at the same dimensions.  The way a bow is tillered also has an effect because if it is held too long on the tiller at various points it will increase set and reduce draw weight. 
BTW I am certainly not saying this is what has happened with kviljo's bow.

I think far more than one or two bows is needed to give a faithful picture.

--- End quote ---

Agree absolutely with all of that - the difficulty is getting enough of the stuff together. As an absolute minimum, you would be looking at replicates of three - so you end up making 12 bows as a bare minimum and even that wouldn't really be enough. It ends up being a lot of yew to be hunting around for!

C

bow-toxo:

--- Quote from: Jaro on August 21, 2009, 01:52:48 am ---"Jaro—The beginning of the medieval period is the fall of Rome whenever you date that. .As the Nydam bows are such close relatives of the MR ones, and are very close to the time the Saxons brought their longbows to England, I think they are worth considering and comparing."

"The beginning of the medieval period is the fall of Rome whenever you date that." - That would only bear relevance if the "medieval period" was homogenous body with similar level of technology and sociopolitical clima all through it, which is not. It is for good reason why era from fall of Rome till some 10. century is called "dark ages" - and it is not until end of it when modern feudalism developped from originall chieftan democracies and spread universaly through evrope. It is pretty nice bad comparition fallacy to assume that my argument is irrelevant since the date in question is so close to "medieval". Frankly if I was interested in this type of debate, I would respond  that MR bows arent "medieval", they are modern, since medieval age ends with the discovery of New world - a thing which you can read in each well meant yet badly written history book. I hope you catch my drift.


"As the Nydam bows are such close relatives of the MR ones, and are very close to the time the Saxons brought their longbows to England, I think they are worth considering and comparing."
1300 years of development of both the weapon and the armour and order of magnitude leap in metalurgy divides them, the only comparing of the Nydam bows and MR bows worth of doing is that of their qualities relatively to tactics and armour of the era they have been used in. And I would bet my shoes that again we will eventually get to very simple definition - that they were adequate to job they were designed to do, at the time they were.

Frankly, even technology on those two examples of bows is the same only as far as what is possible to make from small diameter yew tree with basic bowmaking principles in mind - since MR bows were manufactured in the clime best described as industrialised.


--- End quote ---

I didn't assume your argument was irrevelant . I suggested that the Middle Ages, being between the Greek/Roman period of classical culture
and the rebirth [Renaissance}of it, does not have an exact cut off point.. I agree that the MR bows and arrows are Renaissance and not mediaeval. I consider the bows similar because;---- they are longbows. they are both the right length for a 30" draw. they aree both tapered from a maximum width and thickness at the handgrip to slender tips, they are both designed to bend evenly throughout their length, they both have side nocKs, they both have a simililar variety of cross sections, they are both mostly of yew wood. Even with the average greater thickness of, and the horn nock pieces on the MR bows, I could imagine them coming out of the same workshop and I think they are worth considering and comparing.

Jaro:
"I suggested that the Middle Ages, being between the Greek/Roman period of classical culture and the rebirth [Renaissance}of it, does not have an exact cut off point"

That is exactly what you have not sugested, but nice backpedaling.

"I could imagine them coming out of the same workshop and I think they are worth considering and comparing."

I could not because  with regard to what these bows have in common, much more they have not - for example the backs of MR bows are worked down, while those on Nydam bows are not, the level of worksmanship on Nydam bows is extremelly uneven in terms of skill, on MR bows quite contrary to that, Nydam bows have diferent tapers which suggest they were tilered much like modern sporting longbow, the placement of nock grooves is not the end of staves etc...

These bows are only worth comparing in regards to their respective historical context, but not next to each other.

J.

adb:
I agree.

Kviljo:
Jaro, you're not saying that the nydam bows aren't the ancestors of the mr-bows? If someone should set up a typology of bows from the past, these two would definitely be on the same lineage...

It all depends on how narrowly we define the types, absolutely, but compared to the world wide spectrum of bows, I don't see that there could be any doubt.


By the way, Nydam bow nr. 1440 is made from a rather large trunk. - so not all the nydams were made from narrow staves :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page