Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
Questions concerning Rate of "fire" per minute
bow-toxo:
--- Quote from: Ian. on January 10, 2012, 02:17:20 pm --- ""Concerning accuracy, a Vevetian visitor reported that any decent English archer, whether shooting level or with elevation, would hit within a half palm of his mark."
Neither of these are references, a reference is something that points us to the place where we could read the source ourselves. I could spend years trying to track down that particular piece of information. What you have there is hear'say.
--- End quote ---
I can add that the Venetian visitor was Giovanni Mihiel in 1557. I don't have his present address but you can look him up along with his letters on the internet. I hope that will help in your search for authenticity.
Ringeck85:
I think I have reprised my earlier opinion that "rate of discharge" was so important to warbow archery. Rather, I think a lot of people would agree that the unity of a volley (which would necessitate being at the speed of the slowest archers) and the concentration of fire would be more important.
And referring to the Strategikon quote, I think it might be a misinterpretation that the author meant "firing rapidly" meant loosing as many arrows as possible in a short time. I think rather in the context, to get the most speed and power out of the arrow with that kind of bow, it's about drawing and loosing as quickly as possible, and being able to loose an arrow or two, and then put the bow up and bring out the spear (as was a training exercise). So, mainly advice to a horse archer with a composite bow in that context.
Back to the warbow, here's a couple quotes for ya that we might be familiar with:
--- Quote ---Then the English archers stept forth one pace and let fly their arrows so wholly [together] and so thick, that it seemed snow. When the Genoways felt the arrows piercing through heads, arms and breasts, many of them cast down their cross-bows and did cut their strings and returned discomfited.
--- End quote ---
And
--- Quote ---Then ye should have seen the men of arms dash in among them and killed a great number of them: and ever still the Englishmen shot whereas they saw thickest press; the sharp arrows ran into the men of arms and into their horses, and many fell, horse and men, among the Genoways, and when they were down, they could not relieve again, the press was so thick that one overthrew another.
--- End quote ---
From Froissart's account of Crecy, the translation can be found here:
http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Crecy.html
So I think the 6-7 per minute makes a lot more sense in the context of volley fire. Could archers have loosed 12 per minute or so? Most likely good archers could when pressed, but it probably wasn't battle practice, for many reasons listed, mostly already mentioned in the thread already.
So unless someone can hunt down that specific quote about the "minimum requirement" (which even if it had been a requirement, doubtless they wouldn't have often actually gone to that maximum rate as it would not have been as effective as measured, concentrated volleys; another thought, could this have been a requirement for a small, elite unit of warbow archers as opposed to the rank and file that made the majority of the english numbers?) which I have looked a little for too, looks like my question regarding this has been answered, unless anyone else wants to offer their thoughts?
Ian.:
I will have a look for that quote Bowtoxo, when I have a few minutes that is.
Ringeck - I think you have summarised in nicely, we know the archers were more accurate than we are today, could shoot further, pull heavier bows. But the physics haven't changed, their fitness level would have been similar to ours and the time it take to pick up and arrow and nock it on the string can only be improved so much. What we can achieve today should be seem as a bare minimum of what we could estimate an English archer could do.
Dag:
Not to make a science project out of anyone's children but, it will be interesting to see how many of these children shooting heavy bows (for their respective age) turn out in a few years. I have noticed several kids in various warbow society videos shooting along with their parents and such. If they choose to stick with it as they grow up perhaps that will give us a new insight on the progression and capabilities of a medieval archer.
Again, I don't want to cause a stir by talking about people's children like they're an experiment because they are certainly not.
Ringeck85:
Indeed, Dag. I am both proud and envious of what some of the younger warbow archers are already able to accomplish, and I believe they will be the premier leaders on the subject in both knowledge and skill in not too long a time if they keep at it.
I can only hope to achieve a lighter weight warbow draw (my goal is to get to 100 lbs if I can, but not to hurry and injure myself), and that will take me a few years of dedicated practice, and some better instruction once I can get myself to some of the current experts.
This is slightly off topic (though maybe I could start a second thread with it?), but I think it would be awesome if we had a "triathalon" sort of thing with warbow archery contests, blunt sword sparring (either sword and buckler or single falchion/messer would probably be most appropriate for archers), and Medieval/Renaissance folk wrestling or maybe dagger play. It would unite martial artists with warbow archery and vice versa, and it would be a hell of a lot of fun!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version