Main Discussion Area > English Warbow

some winter reading

<< < (2/2)

Hawkdancer:
Got to remember that an academic thesis falls into a different category, the proposition has to be convincing to usually at least 4 or 5 Doctoral level scholars in that field as well as an outside scholar.  The "ivory tower" doesn't necessarily follow field logic - sometimes it is "BS, MS( More S), and PhD(pile it higher and deeper) or you learn a little about a lot for a Bachelor' degree, a lot about a little for a Master's degree, and a whole lot about nothing for a Doctorate!  :o (lol) :o!  Haven't read this one yet, but chapter one usually just starts the argument. Btw, I only got to the Master's level twice, couldn't get the committee to agree on the format for the research.
Hawkdancer

stuckinthemud:
The dimensions of the prehistoric bows and of the Mary Rose finds was useful, at least for me.  You just got to skim through, not treat it like a novel.

Del the cat:

--- Quote from: stuckinthemud on August 16, 2019, 02:33:44 am ---now now Del, there's more than one way to....download a pdf  :) ;) :D >:D

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2943/42c68bb3c7bc2d2e6c6e0d8ebd7bb2b29eee.pdf


I tested the link and it works for me, there's no advertising so I do not think it breaks PA rules.  If it doesn't work, PM me and I'll email you a copy

Andrew

--- End quote ---
That worked just fine ... cheers.
Del

meanewood:
Like everyone else on here, I enjoy seeing what others are doing and what opinions they have in regards to bow making and it's history.
This document is obviously having to satisfy academics in a way that we don't have to adhere to with our own opinions on the subject.
On the subject of the origins of the bow used in warfare in the medieval period, I get the feeling the author isn't a bow maker!
When it comes to the 'evolution' of this type of bow, in the absence of artifacts that supply all the answers as in this case, then
'experimental archeology' is the key to understanding some of these questions.
The 'Mary Rose' bows are a fantastic example of artifacts that provide a wealth of knowledge and understanding but they have to be
seen in context.
The yew bows are not all the same.
They vary in length, profile and very likely draw weight, perhaps by a lot!
So what does that mean, beyond the observation that maybe standardisation and uniformity were not as important as they are in later military applications.
The obvious answer is different bowyers had different ideas of how to do the same thing, remembering each stave presents its own challenges.
Remember, an Elm bow was also recovered from the wreak and to say it's nothing like the Yew bows would be an understatement!
In fact, could this be the type of bow being used at Hastings in the 'Bayeux Tapestry'?
If so, what is the difference between a so called 'longbow' and 'short' bow when they are both essentially 'Warbows'?
The answer is, the type of wood used to make heavy bows for warfare dictated their design!
So if the Welsh were using Elm for bows in the conflict with 'Norman England', it stands to reason, they were shorter than Yew bows used elseware.
We know other woods were used for bows on Henry VIII's warships, so how long were they?
When it comes to bows used in warfare, I don't buy into a so called 'evolution' from short bow to longbow.
 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page