Main Discussion Area > HowTo's and Build-a-longs
Mary Rose Replica Bow Build-Along--An Entrance into the World of War Bows
duffontap:
Step 7.2: ?Replica? Horn Nocks
One of the problems we run into with building a replica of a Medieval bow is how to fill the gaps in our understanding of how the equipment was used. A great example of this is the horn nocks on the Mary Rose bows. Every intact bow tip shows clearly that it had, at one time, a horn nock fitted onto it similarly to how we do it today. Similar--but not the same. Limb tips were tapered to a point and the horn was glued on (probably with hide glue) and a single side nock was cut through the horn into the bow tip. The obvious questions that this raises are, ?why horn nocks? and ?why a single side nock??
The Mary Rose bows were not intended to be ornate. The horn tips were not decorative, but were functional parts of military weaponry. Those who have worked with Yew may have already guessed that Yew in very high draw weights will not survive very long without horn tips or their equivalent. While tillering my own replica, I filed a set of temporary nocks into the wood, and it wasn?t a few minutes before the string deeply gouged into the sapwood on the back. OK, so the ?why horn nocks? question is answered easy enough.
But how does a single side nock work? Many believe that the bowstrings that were used in Medieval times had no loops and were tied to both ends of the bow with two timber hitches. Living in this day, where we primarily use strings with two plaited loops, the single side-nock begins to be less practical. Here?s the conflict: closer replication, or more practical function?
My original plan was to use the single side-nock that was present on the original bows, but once again, not knowing exactly how these worked, it is difficult matching the originals. I want my replica bow to be a functional, regular shooter. After consulting Pip, and a few others in the mother country, I have decided to use more modern grooves in my horn nocks. I have also resisted the urge to make them fancy. I chose to match the horn nock replica on the Mary Rose web page (pictured below) as it seemed the only slightly-better-than-completely-arbitrary style of horn nock to copy. It struck me as being a good example of rugged, practical, military functionality. I forced myself to comply to this simple standard.
Another note: many of the notches in the bow tips revealed that the horn nocks had two grooves on the same side. This could have meant that they were made to be used with a bow stringer, or as an easy adjustment for brace height. I chose to include this double-groove in my nocks to facilitate the use of a stringer. I can string a bow that draws 100# at 30? but not one that?s 80? long.
The first image below shows a Mary Rose bow tip without the nock, the only horn nock to be found on the Mary Rose, and a replica that I kinda modeled my horn tips on.
The second image is of me working down my own double-groove horn nock.
Questions welcomed.
J. D. Duff
[attachment deleted by admin]
D. Tiller:
JD are you going to shine up the horn on the bow? I really like what your doing with the project. Thats turning into a bow to be really proud of. Looking at the horn nock on the Mary Rose bow and the replica it looks like the one found on the Rose was really rustic compared to the one shown in the replica. Was the replica an actual repro of the Mary Rose or a more fanciful version?
I like what your doing with those knocks!
D. Tiller
duffontap:
DT,
Yes, I'll shine them up and coat them with tru-oil for protection. The replica on the Mary Rose webpage is not exact by any means. It's just a good example of simple functionality. I could get really fancy with a horn tip, but that would be a departure from replication.
Your questions spotlite the inherent problem with any replica project: replication vs. functional or aesthetic preference. I'm trying to stick closer to the replication side of the fence, but I need a bow that I can shoot any time without an expert to string it for me--hence the slightly more modern nocks.
As to whether or not the one surviving original was more rustic: it most likely was, but I suppose it is at least somewhat deteriorated from all the years under water. I haven't seen it (other than in the picture) so I don't know if it is very close to being perfectly intact.
Thanks for the continued interest,
J. D. Duff
Matti:
What kind of cows there were in medieval England? What kind of horns they had? Maybe they were long and narrow?
Some role play:
If I was a horn tip maker (50-100 tips per day) I'd use the last inch of a horn, the very tip of it and just cut it and drill a cone shaped hole into it. Then some rounding and string grooves. No polishing! Why would I do that, why would I waste time (at least 15 min per tip) and energy for that? It's for army, they don't care. For bows for private customers and nobles I would polish them well and charge more of course. The rest of the horn pieces I would sell to my neighboring fletcher for arrow inserts.
;)
duffontap:
True Matti, although a course, unpolished string groove in horn can saw through a Dacron string in a couple of shots--it could do much worse with a linen string. There had to be some detail work. Rugged functionality may mean an absence of decorative touches but does not mean 'quick and easy.' I would think that Medieval 'cow tippers' would be given adequate time on each bow to insure that it was as good as it could be for the battlefield.
J. D. Duff
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version