Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => English Warbow => Topic started by: toomanyknots on July 26, 2014, 04:37:35 pm
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTotQso20es
-
It would be hard to believe it was that old just from the good condition of the linen whipping in my opinion.
-
You'd be surprised what survives in the right conditions. If human tissue can survive thousands of years I'm sure an arrow could survive 600. It certainly looks VERY old.
-
This is an old story, been going round for years. Not sure why they're bringing it up again now.
Looks modern to me. Don't recall ever hearing/reading that linen binding was used - always silk. Plus the leather insert under the nock is used commonly today. Unless the thatched roof the arrow was lodged in (as the story goes) was in perfect condition and never repaired, just replaced over the years, those fletchings would be long gone.
Will wait for carbon dating, and fully prepared to be completely wrong, but currently convinced it's modern. Not a fake, just a modern one lost some years ago and found again.
-
This is an old story, been going round for years. Not sure why they're bringing it up again now.
Looks modern to me. Don't recall ever hearing/reading that linen binding was used - always silk. Plus the leather insert under the nock is used commonly today. Unless the thatched roof the arrow was lodged in (as the story goes) was in perfect condition and never repaired, just replaced over the years, those fletchings would be long gone.
Will wait for carbon dating, and fully prepared to be completely wrong, but currently convinced it's modern. Not a fake, just a modern one lost some years ago and found again.
That's what I would think. It would make sense that the binding would look so new if it was some of that polyester-fiber blend thread.
-
What's funny is that Hector Cole released a fairly detailed document about this arrow years and years ago, with measurements and head specifications etc. I mentioned this on the Facebook thread and got my wrist slapped for "making assumptions" so I'm not entirely sure what they're doing. Hopefully as they say it'll go in front of the Craft Guild of Fletchers and they'll get a definitive reply and if not, then Leeds Armoury will date it.
Isn't that nock end messy? Looks like it was a rush job. Almost makes sense for it to be genuine if it was made in a hurry along with thousands of others for livery use.
-
Don't know why you find it hard to believe this might be real, wait for the carbon dating and see.
-
Cos it's around 600 years old and the fletchings are still there...
Like I said, might be genuine. I'd be surprised but would love to be proven wrong!
-
I did a little (not more than that, really) and it appears if a professional thatching job is done with high quality thatching reeds, not straw, you can expect the roof to last about 60 years. If that was the case, this 600 yr old thatched roof would have been replaced approximately 10 times.
Granted, I am writing this on assumption that the arrow was found in the thatching, I don't know because I am at work and the audio cannot be turned on with this computer. I didn't get to hear what was being said.
Still, one loves a good mystery!
-
Well at 600 years old is not as old as a full set of birch arrows with feathers and a mongolian horn sinew bow that exists from the time of Genghis Khan. Go figure.
-
Were they found sticking out of a roof, having been exposed to the weather and bacteria/insects for the whole time, or were they carefully looked after and preserved? Go figure ;)
-
Well, a quick google search shows duck decoys found with intact feathers 2000 years old. They were in a cave, so conditions were better than in a roof (I assume), but still, they're 3 or 4 times older.
-
I think it's more down to location/situation than age. Keep something in a cave, with reasonably consistent humidity, temperature and away from the elements and I'm sure even the most delicate natural materials will survive for a very long time. Compare that to leaving something outside, and you'll get a much different result.
I mean, take an arrow you've just made and leave it outside somewhere for just 5 years. I think it would look very similar to this one.
-
Yeah, it's true. Was it literally just sticking out of a roof exposed to the elements?
-
Not entirely sure. The story a year or so back was that somebody was renovating an old building, and when they pulled the thatch down there it was. The story might change now though.
I don't know enough about thatched roofs to be able to say whether it would protect natural materials like wood and feather from the elements for 600 years or whether it would just rot away.
-
Where was it said it was 'sticking out'? For something like this to have been hidden all this time wouldn't that suggest to you it wasn't 'sticking out'?
Why on earth would they not have used linen to bind the feathers on. Silk would not always have been available 100% of the time...maybe the fletcher had just run out, maybe he didn't like silk...who knows but just because it's not silk means nothing.There are many ancient arrows with fletching intact that have been found all around the world.
-
Oh and surely it's obvious why this video has been made? Advertising, advertising, advertising ;)
-
My money is on this being authentic. Not everyone would have used silk like Mike said, to think otherwise is just dogma. Just like people used to insist that you had to leave a log out in the sun for years before it was dry enough to make a bow, again dogma.
-
At no point do they say the arrow was found in the thatch, that was just an assumption
It may have just been lying on the loft floor after having gone through the original thatch. An arrow lying in a dark loft amongst other debris isn't going to stand out too much.
Could have been buried under a few hundred years worth of chaff from hay or straw.
-
Has anyone got an update on the testing of the arrow found?
-
They still can't decide whether or not to get it tested....
-
I would go for authentic. It is almost certainly over 100 years old if stored in a protected place and I doubt 100 years ago they would have made an arrow like this. I have no problem believing it may be 600 years old.
-
It's interesting how short the shaftment length is between the fletch and the nock.
I've made a replica and can just get my fingers in without using a tab!
Mind you, I suppose those tough bastards didn't use tabs so there you go.
-
They used gloves actually. There's artwork showing them.
-
Every archer used a glove...... ::)
-
Some. Like I said, there is artwork showing some archers using a glove. But no tabs.
A glove would make this arrow even less practical. I can understand fully the concern in damaging the object by having it dated, as it will require removing some of the shaft, but you'd think with something so rare they'd be jumping at the chance to know?
-
Did they mention what the shaft is? Was it split timber or shoot shafting? Wouldn't carbon dating give a basic age to the shaft, fletch, leather and binding?
-
close inspection of the shaft shows it is very smooth with no apparent pins, knots or tooling marks. It looks to be made from cleeved stock.
-
Jeremy, have there been any thoughts on the wood species? It doesn't appear to be heavily grained like ash, so is it likely to be something along the lines of aspen or birch?
-
Yes, aspen is what Richard and Hector think and I can't say I disagree. It must the dense aspen as it's quite heavy(ish) given that Weapons of Warre states that many of the arrows may have been in the mid 40g range, from memory. Could be birch, though, as you say.
-
Does it say anywhere what the length of the fletch was? Just wondering, I have made my fletch to be the same size of my fistmele and I therefore know my fletch will clear my bows brace height using the same fistmele. Im guessing this obvious and simple technique would have been used back in the day.
Dean
-
The rust, looks kinda new, not dark Just my opinion... Neat anyway.
Wayne
-
Have read this thread with great interest :) You can tell more about the bows being used by the arrow, right?
Cant understand why the guy made 3 videos regarding it though. Maybe just go and actually test it???
-
According to Philip Head, in the New Year they're going to be doing "Neutron Bombardment" on the head, which will "hopefully be able to end the debate."
-
Looking forward to finding out its age in the new year then!
-
Looks modern to me.
-
Does anyone have an update on this 'Find'
ie testing etc
-
Nope. They won't test it. Fear of damage and finances are the given reasons. I'm still convinced it's modern.
-
Wasn't it to go to the Royal Armouries for preservation and testing?
If it is a medieval arrow, it would be a significant find, so surely the Museum would do the work!
-
When a roof is rethatched it is not usual to strip it right back to the timbers; the loose straw is scraped off and another layer sparred on. Over time the thickness can build up to several feet. The lowest layers of thatch can be hundreds of years old. There have been some well verified finds of late medieval or Tudor objects in the lower layers of thatch. My house is 400 years old and thatched; some of the original roof timbers look as if they were cut very recently because they have been kept dry and in the dark all these years. I have just tried a test on my roof: if an arrow is pushed into it the whole length can easily disappear into the thatch. If you want to find for a genuine medieval or Tudor arrow, then inside an old roof is the place to start looking.
-
I don't get it.
There is no reason not to test this arrow for age and I'm sure some museum would fund the process in exchange for allowing it to be exhibited.
I hope this is not some 'secret squirrel' episode whereby people in the know don't like to share info because it makes them feel superior!
-
Personally I get the feeling they're holding back because there's a strong indication it's modern. As you said, its not really that big a deal to get it tested and it would answer many questions.
To me it looks all the world like an amateur attempt at making a Medieval arrow. Something you'd see at a reenactment event for instance. A couple of experts have commented on how incredibly well made the head is (and how much it looks like Cole's WA/type 16) and yet the binding looks terrible. Thick linen unevenly bound with the fletchings far too close to the nock smacks of somebody's first try.
If it was genuine, in my opinion there's a huge juxtaposition - with such a badly made fletching and nock end, the head doesn't match. You wouldn't put a beautifully made, time consuming and highly expensive barbed head on such a crappy arrow in times when it mattered. If you're a reenactor however, making crappy arrows and buying the best heads on the internet is very common, as is using linen for the binding.
-
You may be right Will but if you had something like this, it only becomes valuable if it gets validated.
Unlike you however, I'm open to the possibility that it could be old.
Linen thread, hastily positioned, I have no problem with.
We all know the reference to using silk thread but I think that gets taken out of context when it comes to the mass production of war arrows in medieval times.
For these arrows linen would be used.
Silk would be to expensive to use and would make no sense when linen serves the purpose quite well!
'Best Arrows', ones used by the nobility for hunting etc may have silk bindings and they may have been dyed red and would be applied carefully in a nice uniform way for appearance sake but not the millions produced for warfare!
-
That argument goes out the window when you consider the document asking for silk to bind the arrows for the Agincourt campaign ;)
I think deciding silk is more expensive than linen is a modern outlook. Silk was used for everything during the 14th-16th century, including common garments (peasant women's cotehardie skirts were made of silk very often for instance) and sewing threads were usually silk. I had a discussion just a day or two ago with someone very knowledgeable in dying methods of the period and red it seems was one of the cheaper colours. To dye silk and then it into strong thread was common place and should not be considered excessive or unusual.
Also, there are absolutely no records or surviving historical arrows that utilise linen. Arrows from the 16th century (MR) and much much earlier (WA arrow) both use silk binding, so there's very little reason to imagine it was unusual. It's very usual these days however to use linen...
-
This is very interesting topic!
What is the reference using silk thread on war arrows?
And what is "the document asking for silk to bind the arrows for the Agincourt campaign"?
Are there other references using silk and/or linen threads?
It is interesting that the old books (Roi Modus, L'art d'archerie and Toxophilus) mentions using silk (and hemp but no linen, except Toxophilus) as a bowstring material. Later sources refers to mainly hemp.
Why silk was used and was it common? It was import good from the Far East, so it is easy to think that it was rare and expensive.
-
Silk was imported to Europe very early on, but by the 11th century it was already being produced in Italy, France was producing it by the 15th century and Spain was producing it by the end of the 16th century.
Even by the mid 1300s there was silk velvet being woven in Italy. It takes dye very easily and bright colours were easy to create.
I wish I knew where the document was available regarding Henry's silk order but I can never find it when I need it. It's out there somewhere!
-
hello all, my first experience in old weapons was a sword found in the desert of N. Africa, a good friend who was the man got my interest in primitive archery begun. we were re-enactors, blacksmiths, anything medieval or renaissance was our passion. that sword was dated to the crusade period, apparently the local tribes dig them up frequently then use them as tools (sadly) but it was very well built to standards i never imagined possible, so that point on this arrow seems entirely feasibly authentic. of course the desert is famous for preservation. as to the rust ? that is possibly ongoing from current exposure, archaeologists try to keep artifacts sealed for that reason.