Author Topic: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW  (Read 9621 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline OTDEAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 140
Hi all

I have two 80"ish flawless pieces of ash drying and will be making myself another longbow.  Keep trying to get them right.  With the measuring techniques suggested in the Roi Modus, I am going to be experimenting with a 74" longbow (bend through the handle of course) and 34" arrows.  I am going to make this bow just light enough for me to draw comfortably.  I will also spine each arrow in turn after shooting them to see how they fly.

1) Does anyone have any suggestions for starting width at centre?  I work in inches.  I am aiming for about 65lbs @ 34 inch.  I have long arms and this measurement will suit me when I draw to my ear, which is what I intend to do, just they used to. 

2)  Any suggestions what measurements for taper on a 34" arrow?  I am thinking of trying 3/8" at the shoulder and having 5/16" taper at nock.  I will be using ash or birch arrows.  My arrow heads will be 100g field points.

Offline Del the cat

  • Member
  • Posts: 8,288
    • Derek Hutchison Native Wood Self Bows
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2014, 04:44:23 am »
With Ash Id suggest going as wide as you can whilst still making it look like a longbow, also trapping the back and heat treating the belly.
Keep the belly fairly flat with just a slight curve and rounded corners, don't try a high arched belly... that's best left for Victorian Yew target bows.
Obviously the quality of Ash like any wood is very variable, the stuff growing in the UK is poor.
So to answer the Q I'd start with 1.4 - 1.5" width.
I use inches for length and mm for width depth as they are a convenient size.
Where is your Ash from? Maybe some one with more local knowledge will have experience with that wood.
I'd say you are making the bow way too short for a 34" draw. I'd go as long as maybe 78" and start 1.5" wide.
Bottom line is better to start too wide as the width can be reduced later without loosing too much draw weight.
(doubtless someone will be along to contradict me shortly ;) ;D ::) )
Oh yeah, the arrows sound fine. I've had 3/8 Maple which was good too. and "Modkin" point... dunno if you get them over there?
Del
« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 04:54:56 am by Del the cat »
Health warning, these posts may contain traces of nut.

Offline WillS

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,905
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2014, 05:24:38 am »
I think Del's on the money with everything he said!   That bow is way too short for a 34" draw.  It's almost too short for a 32" draw - you want to be looking at 78" - 80" long for your 34" draw to keep it on the safe side.  You say "keep trying to get them right" which (and please excuse any assumptions) suggests that you're struggling to get a bow finished.  By starting so short, you're already making life difficult for yourself, so go to 80" and get a working bow before trying to make them as short as you can.

You're looking for 65lbs which isn't even close to warbow weight, so this is probably best moved to the normal bows section, but like Del said, 1.5" wide is about right.  You can start wider if you want and reduce while you're tillering if it looks too wide.

With ash, make sure you know the density - some of it may look "flawless" but if the density is too low it'll just be a soggy noodle by the time it's done.  Ash has a funny way of being either very very good, or very very bad.  The good stuff works like steel - it'll blunt all your tools and make you want to give up bow making forever, but will also produce a solid, hard bow.  The bad stuff (which sadly is far more common) works like butter under the tools, but takes set like crazy. 

As for the 34" arrows - I think that's a bit excessive.  As an example, the longest arrows found on the Mary Rose were just around 32", with the most common being 30.5".  There's one guy in the EWBS who shoots 33" arrows and that's an upper limit.  It's one thing to stand with your arms out and measure 34" back to your ear, but once you have an actual bow with any decent weight in your hands, your arm compresses, your body compresses and you end up losing up to 6" of draw length if the bow is heavy enough.  I remember one of the top EWBS guys mentioning that he lost 8" of draw length while shooting a 170# bow, so don't assume you'll have a 34" draw once you're shooting. 

If you've yet to succeed with a bow (and again, apologies if I'm wrong and making assumptions!) I would go for a 76" or 80" long bow (ash especially likes being long and wide - if it was a decent piece of yew you might get away with 74") and 32" arrows as the standard.  You'll still need to be very good at tillering and working a stave just to achieve a 32" bend longbow.  Add to that the complications of trying to hit an exact weight and keeping it high, and you'll find pretty quickly that going for a short bow, with a long draw length and a pre-determined draw weight will be a hell of a challenge.

Of course, if you like a challenge then make it 72" and go for the full 34" draw at 110#.  It can be done ;)

Offline OTDEAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 140
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2014, 08:26:30 am »
Thanks for responding, I will try and answer you both in turn.

Del:

My ash is from North Yorkshire, the wood is good quality and I have made several smaller bend through the handle bows.  The best I had with ash was 62 inch ntn, heat treated with a trapped back.  It pulled 54lb @ 27" about 1" of string follow.  The bows I have made are being pulled to 26" which is my anchor at the moment on my 'short draw' as I would call it.

I will start about 1/2 wide and see what kind of strength I get at floor tiller.  Go from there.  78" might be right it might be wrong.  The reason I am opting for 74" is because I am making a bow using guidelines given in a medieval treatise on hunting with the bow.  From my own experience, bow length is normally safe when you double the arrow length and add a little?  I seem to remember this was a general rule suggested in a lot of books I have read.  My own experience of bow making has supported this rule and I personally have found my bows only follow the string for about 1" or 1.5" when I keep within those limits.  So I reckon if my arrows are 34" and I double that, I get 68" so I have 6" to play with for safety, bearing in mind this is not a stiff handled bow, that should be more than adequate?  Any more limb length would just add mass and slow the bow down? 

Think I will stick with those arrows and see how I get on.  Thanks for the input Del.

WillS:

If you read my response to del think you will see my logic for the bow length and 34" arrows.  I do have experience of making flat bows successfully and light weight bend through the handle bows but now I am trying to raise my game and make heavy weight longbows.  My inspiration comes from my love of english history and a few books that indicate that bows were custom made to fit the archers limb lengths.  I know the warbows were mostly mass produced, but this I believe would have taken place as it says so in the ROI MODUS  real medieval book on archery.

 The 74" for the longbow and 34" arrow are not just random figures I have plucked out of the air, using methods of measurement using my fist as measuring tools, I have calculated these are the optimum lengths for bow and arrow for me personally when using the advice written in the ROI MODIS.  Taking that advice and using my own fists as the measuring tools these are the measurements I have gained for a long bow and arrow to be used with the technique of pulling to the ear.  Only one way to learn if its right or not and thats to make it!

Appreciate what you said about the Mary Rose finds, but they varied in length, bow strength, arrow length, this makes me feel that some of the equipment might have been 'tailor' made for some of the archers.  How else do you explain these variables?  The Mary Rose bows were tillered to different strengths which makes me firmly believe they were clearly intended for different men with different physical strengths, a 'tailor fit' This fits with my own experiment of making a bow using measuring techniques for measuring an individual for a bow in the middle ages.

Think I will try one stave at 74" and follow both your advice on the other stave any try say 78" that way if your right I will probably have a good bow and if Im right I can come back on here with photos of me 74" tailor made bow.

P.S Wills Dont know if you are in the UK, you probably are?  I have found that even poor ash when heat treated and with a trapped back like Mike Roberts advised me to do when I startd out, always turns out a champion bow wood if you keep it dry, well sealed and well tillered.  I hear you about the density.  When Im tillering, as soon as I notice any string follow, I look at the bow and if its not a tillering issue I generally aim for a lighter weight bow because the bow cant take the weight I was originally tillering for.

Thanks for the feedback lads.  I will update you once I have started.  Will be  while yet, never have the time!

Dean.




Offline Del the cat

  • Member
  • Posts: 8,288
    • Derek Hutchison Native Wood Self Bows
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2014, 10:09:00 am »
There may be a difference between young Ash and that from a mature tree*. I know I've been dissapointed with stuff from upto about 6" diameter. I do have some stuff from a much bigger tree, but I'm in no rush to use it as it's well down my lisy of fave' woods.
Del
*Anyone with first hand experience care to comment on this hypothesis? Sapling vs mature.?
Health warning, these posts may contain traces of nut.

Offline WillS

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,905
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2014, 10:56:49 am »
Good stuff.  I wish you luck! 

The reason I mentioned the long arrow possibly being over the top is because you see a lot of people assuming their draw length doesn't change when shooting a bow.  You seem to know your stuff so I apologise if I came across as patronising! 

R.e. English ash - I've had plenty of crap stuff that just won't make a decent weight bow.  Your method of watching and adjusting eventual weight seems sensible - I always pig headedly battle on trying to hit high weights and often failing haha! I've found that to push over 80# or so, you want about .75 sg with ash.  It's hard to find stuff that good.

Heat treating and trapping shouldn't be necessary with good ash, but they're very good methods for lower sg stuff.

As a side note - I personally believe the MR bows weren't tailored to individuals.  I think the bowyers just made the best bow from each stave and this is why the bowyers marks are varied but recurring - the bows come out at various weights due to the woods density, and the bowyer marks the weight on the grip section for easy selection.

Offline OTDEAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 140
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2014, 02:45:39 pm »
Del:

The ash I have used is never bigger than 3-4" diameter Ash trees from soggy Yorkshire.  I think as long as you heat treat the wood and keep an eye on string follow as you tiller, then, you can pretty much get a good weight bow for that particular density of ash.  Of course design does make a difference, flat belly always for ash!  When I make these longbows I will keep a flatish belly with slightly rounded edges and a trapped back.  If I keep the bows long enough, then the string follow should not be bad I reckon.

I really have no experience of Ash from a large tree but I can certify through three years of exploding bows that were mostly small diameter (3-4") Ash trees, that using the 'no string follow" tillering technique with a heat treated belly and trapped back.  Ash is a great wood for a given bow weight.  Discovering what the right weight to tiller for, is, what I heard learned from hands on experience.  Ash is good wood, you just need some faith and the patience to experiment and learn what Ash will take.  But you already know this Del!

WillS:

You didnt come across as patronising, I came on here for advice so patronise me as much as possible.  I love hearing folks opinions, good, bad or just plain freaky.

No set tillering as described above is just the same as understanding how far you can push a certain density of wood.  It works for me anyways.  I have through a lot of mistakes learned that English Ash is good wood, any wood is good, just knowing how to work with the wood rather than against the wood is the difference between the guy who ruins his stave and the fella who ends up with a working bow.

MR: I think the answer would be somewhere in the middle.  Yes the density of the Yew wood is different for each stave, yes the bowyer marked the grip, yes the bowyer would have made the best bow from the stave, yes the bowyers made several bows and thats why the marks varied.  Clearly these guys were locked up in the Tower of London churning out bows in the armoury or elsehwere.  So yes in that respect I believe you are right.

However!  The ROI MODUS which was published at the height of the warbow during the 14th century clearly states how to measure an individual for longbow and arrow length using his own fists.  Here is clear evidence of someone stating how a bowyer would take personal measurements for making a bow.  This book was written about 100 years before the MR sank, its not difficult to believe that some archers would have received a tailor fitted bow.  Just like a new suit!  It would be no different than when the native americans used their own bodies to measure for arrow and bow lengths, this is well documented.  Using your own anatomy to get measurements for the perfect bow length and arrow length makes total sense when you think about it.  Afterall, your own anatomy will be pulling the custom bow and arrow.

The bottom line is, we will never know the answer regarding the MR finds. It is, afterall, guess work.  But I do believe a source that was written down at the time when the warbow was being used to instruct the french on how best not to perform a cavalry charge against massed formations of longbow men.   :o :o :o
« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 02:49:36 pm by OTDEAN »

Offline OTDEAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 140
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #7 on: July 21, 2014, 03:16:16 pm »
For anyone who cares to read it, this might be of interest in relation to this post and the medieval source mentioned for measuring bow and arrow lengths based upon ones own body:

Ye Olde Standards of Bow and Arrow Length
23 January 2013 at 09:28

Standards of Bow and Arrow Length

by Erik Roth 

An archar off Northumberlande Say slean was lord Perse, He bar a bende bowe in his hand, Was made of trusti tre;

 An arow that a cloth-yarde was lang,  Toth harde stele hayld he; A dynt that was both sad and soar, He sat on sir Hewe the Mongonbyrry.

With Spanish yew so strong, Arrows a cloth yard long, That like to serptnts stung Piercing the weather.

 

 THE HONTYNG OF THE CHEVIAT [Chevy Chase]

Drayton

 

There has been much controversy about the lengths of mediaeval bows and arrows.  The arrows were of various lengths according to whether they were intended to be drawn to the breast, to the ear, or to the point of the shoulder and they also varied according to the size of the shooter.

 

The length of the bow corresponded to the length of the draw.  In most cases, arrows were drawn to the head and draw length equaled arrow length, which was measured from base of nock to points of the arrowhead barbs or shouldering of the head.

 

A bow casts an arrow by its speed of recovery from full draw.  All other things being equal, the shorter the bow, the faster it will be, for as Howard Hills axiom states; “The more a bow limb is bent, the faster it returns.”  The optimum length of a bow is then determined by how far the material of which it is made will bend without breaking.  Mediaeval bows were made long enough to provide a safety factor, but those used for flight shooting to maximum distance were very close to breaking at full draw.  Now for the standards.

 

For longbows, the earliest reference to Mediaeval proportions is the French ‘Book of Roi Modus’ written at the beginning of the fourteenth century before the Hundred Years War.  The word ‘longbow’ is not used, even Lartdarcherie uses the term ‘arc a main’.  The book, about hunting, probably originates in Normandy.  The ‘English’ bow of yew is to be 22 poignees, measured between nocks, and the arrow is to be 10 poignees from base of nock to points of barbs.  ‘Poignee” means a grasp, or the width of a fist.  The stave and shaft may be measured off by grasping with alternate hands, taking care to press one well down on the other.  This method of measuring was used by English country people well into the 19th century.  It should be noted that a person who gains weight will find his poignee measurement increased, but in any case the crucial relationship will remain proportional.

 

I am 5’8” tall and this recipe gave me a bow of 5’11” and arrows of 31-1/2”.  “Roi Modus” says to draw to the ear and draw up the arrow to its head.  The arrow worked out exactly right for this kind of draw.  Roi Modus adds that the bowstring should be of silk, braced at a height of a palm and two fingers from the bow.

 

In 1515 “Lartdarcherie”, in Picard dialect, was printed in Paris.  The Hundred Years War was long over and Paris was again a French city.  “Lartdarcherie”, mentioning “Roi Modus,” tells us that according to custom the arrow should be ten poignees and the bow should be two poignees more than double the arrow length, exactly as specified nearly two centuries before.  Flight bows should be a poignee shorter but only two or three arrows a day should be shot from them.  It is pointed out that many archers draw longer arrows but many of these shoot a weaker arrow by doing so.  There are also many who use a shorter shaft, still making long shots and shooting as strongly as others, but the booklet’s author suggests that they would be finer archers by using the 10 poignee draw length and adds; ‘I venture to say that it is impossible to shoot a long arrow in an an ungraceful way, if the bow is pushed forward, that is, pressed toward the target when the arrow is loosed.

 

Roger Ascham’s “Toxophilus”, printed during the reign of Henry VIII, was England’s first book on archery.  Writing of longbows when practice with them was still compulsory, Ascham refrains from giving measurements of bows or arrows on the grounds that individual variations make that impossible.  However as the English also drew to the ear and drew the arrow to the heads, the length of arrow shot in this way could hardly have been much different from the 10 poignee French arrows.

 

But what of the famous clothyard arrows with shafts three feet in length?  Were they really used, or did the term refer to smaller arrows of perhaps 30” as Roberts suggested in 1800?  The term “clothyard” dates from 1465, and clearly refers to an exceptionally impressive arrow.

 

In Medieval and Renaissance writings, the terms ‘clothtyard’, ‘clothier’s yard’ and ‘tailors yard’ are sometimes used interchangeably with the word ‘eli.’  But there was some confusion caused by local variations of measurements that had the same name.  The “Statute of the Staple” was fixed at 36 inches and the English eli was designated as five-fourths of the standard, or 45 inches.  However the Scotch eli was 37 inches, as was the yard of three Rhineland feet used by Flemish clothmakers brought to England under the Plantagenets, this yard being abolished in 1533.

 

The old Saxon standard is stated in the ninth century Cotton manuscripts; “Tres pedes faciunt ulnam.” Three feet make an eli r yard, and perhaps this held best in popular usage. Royal statutes were often ignored in Medieval times.

 

A contemporary wrote of the English archers at Agincourt that ‘the most part of them drew a yarde.’                           

 

In 1825 a Mr. A.J. Kempe saw in Cornwall some arrows which he believed to be old English, that were 3 feet two inches long.  This measurement probably included the head.  Cornish archers of the rebel party who defended the high road at Deptford bridge in 1446 were reported to have shot arrows ‘in length afullyarde.’  Francis Bacon { 1561-16261 also reported the Cornish rebels as using arrows of a ‘tailors yard’ Carew, in his “Survey of Cornwall” of 1602, tells us that the Cornishmen used shafts of ‘a cloth yard in length’ for long shooting.  The English Board of Trade presently considers the 37” Flemish yard to have been the clothyard.  These sources leave little room to doubt that Cornishmen used arrows of a good 36” in length.

 

John Smythe wrote in his “Discourses on Weapons”; ‘Our English bows, arrows and archers do exceed all other bows used by foreign nations, not only in thickness and strength, but also in the length and size of the arrows.  ‘He doesn’t say just how large and thick they were, but Paulus Jovius does.  A sixteenth century traveller, he reported that the English shoot arrows somewhat thicker than a man’s little finger and two cubits long, headed with barbed steel points from bows of extraordinary size and strength.  These were war arrows.  A cubit is the measure of a man’s forearm from elbow to the extended middle fingertip, and two cubits make 36”.  This is a thick and heavy arrow by modern standards, even taking into consideration that it was doubtless breasted and of aspen.

 

Many modern archers might consider such an arrow impossible to shoot effectively.  However Dr. Pope tested a Chinese of Mongolian war arrow that his brother had purchased in China from a Chinese who had demonstrated shooting it.  The arrow was 38” long by 1/2” in diameter with a forged iron head.  Though it was tapered in the foreshaft it weigls four ounces.  By comparison a hunting arrow of today weighs an ounce and a half or less.  This Chinese arrow was scarcely to be differentiated from the late Mediaeval clothyard, an English specialty.

 

The reflexed composite bow that accompanied this arrow drew 98 pounds at 28 inches, a long way from full draw.  Neither Pope nor his companions could draw it more than a foot and proper testing was impossible.  Finally Dr. Pope, a seasoned bowhunter, shot the arrow from his 85 pound hunting bow, the strongest he could command.  It flew only 115 yards.

 

Pope then made up an arrow based on a 16th Century Italian painting showing bow and arrow realistically portrayed.  The arrow, considering the bow length as six feet, worked out to a 1/2” shaft 35 inches in length wtih feathers nine inches long and 1 1/2” high.  The broadhead was 3 1/2 inches long and weighed more than an ounce, the entire arrow weighing three ounces.  It was doubtless with growing feelings of inadequacy that Pope, who had killed grizzlies and lions with his arrows, managed to shoot this arrow 117 yards from a longbow of 72 pounds at 36 inches.

 

A great longbow for shooting a yard long arrow must be about six and a half feet in length, and statutes gave preference to imported bowstaves of six and a half feet long.  Foreign tradesmen could import them free of duty.  Some statures specified seven foot staves.

 

Clothtyard arrows are too long to be fully drawn in a draw to the ear and were drawn to the shoulder of the drawing arm.  They were probably shot only at roving or flight distances with the bow hand elevated.  For my part, I find that in drawing to the point of the shoulder, 36 inches is about the maximum length that I could draw.  Drawing beyond the shoulder, as the Japanese did, is very difficult with a powerful bow.

 

We may consider the yard long arrows to have been the maximum length in use with handbows in mediaeval Europe.  Longer then this, they would be used as jave1ins.

 

In the second half of the fifteenth century, Edward IV issued a curious statute, his fifth act.  Referring to Ireland, it specified that every Englishman, or Irishman living with Englishmen, provide himself with an English bow of his own height plus a fistmele and with twelve shafts of the length of three quarters of the standard.  [The word  fistmele at this time referred to the width of a fist, the poignee, and  now includes the extended thumb to determine a bow’s brace height].  This length of bow works out the same for me as the Roi Modus method, and also corresponds to an old rule that the bowstring should be the length of the shooter.  Bows used by Scottish mounted archers in the service of Louis XI and his opponent Charles of Burgundy in the wars of 1475-1477 were equal to a man’s height.

 

The arrows are another matter.  ‘The Standard’ is the 36” yard fixed in the ‘Statute of the Staple’.  Three fourths of the Standard was 27”.   No explanation is given for a variable bow measurement coupled with a fixed, and proportionally short, arrow measurement for anyone over 4’ 5” tall if the proportions above noted are here applicable.  The arrow measurement would appear to be a standardization for military purposes in a land in which short bows [Irish bows] and arrows had come into use.  Perhaps Edward wanted the Irish who had not learned longbow shooting in childhood, to at least become accustomed to long bows.  Longbows and arrows were sent to Ireland to be sold to the king’s subjects but a statute of  1515 suggested that in default of long-bows in Ireland, the king’s subjects should apply themselves to the Irish bows.

 

But curiously in Roberts time, when men still drew to the ear and only 5’6” was considered average height, 27” arrows were used with six foot bows as standard practice although many archers sensibly cut the bows down to 5’8” or less.  Of course by this time bows were made with a stiff handgrip area rather than the even bend of mediaeval times, and had to be somewhat long.

 

These 27” arrows may be considered the shortest that would be used with longbows and are better suited to use with the short handbows that were used throughout Europe during the entire Middle Ages.

 

LE LIVRE DE CHASSE gives specifications for the short handbow, that he calls a  Turkish bow, referring to its length rather than its construction, also known as a  smallbow,  and its arrows.  It was written in the fifteenth century by Gaston, Count of Foix, a county on the northern side of the Pyrenees.  During the Hundred Years War he refused to aid either English or French forces and was passionately fond of hunting, in which pursuit a short bow has certain advantages.  It is less cumbersome in brushy country and can be readily shot from a kneeling position.  It is also quick of cast although its light arrow has less impact than that of the longbow and would not be advisable for war but can be shot completely through a deer.

 

Gaston suggests a shaft of 8 poignees from nock to barbs.   This gives me 26 1/2” shaft, the same length as a method of recent tradition of placing an end of the shaft against the base of the neck, the other end between the extended fingertips of both outstretched arms.  The bow is to be 20  poulcees between nocks.  Under the assumption that this measurement is the length of the thumb from tip to second joint, I get a bow that measures 4’ 8” between nocks.  The completed bow matches those in the illustrations for the fifteenth century edition of the book.  They are shown being drawn variously to the breast or face.  Gaston adds that the bow, designed for short range shooting, should be “weak”,  that the silk bowstring should be braced to the height of a paume de large, a palm’s breadth, and that the well filed and sharpened broadhead should be four fmgers broad and five fingers in length, of course a swallowtail broadhead.  The bow is shorter than it would have been using the Roi Modus method, but as it is necessarily thinner than a longbow, it will tolerate a greater bend.  The six small bows that Sir Peter Courtney sent to France for the king’s gamekeeper in the time of Richard II would have been of this type and in 1527 Charles V was informed that the Earl of Desmond’s men were armed with small bows and swords.

 

In all the foregoing examples we find equipment made to fit the size of the bowman, with the exceptions of the clothyard and the Three-fourths of the Standard arrows.  The ‘traditional’ English longbow of recent times most nearly matches the atypical Fifth Act of Edward IV, perhaps because during the numerous archery revivals people looked to the only precisely specified old English measurements.

 

This “traditional” six-foot longbow and twenty-eight inch arrow left the archer with a bow that was, by other mediaeval standards, ten inches too long for the arrow, with a loss of potential casting power. Because of the post-medieval fashion of the stiff handgrip and tips of the “traditional” longbow, some of this additional length was necessary to avoid breakage, but some practical archers such as Dr. Pope cut their bows to 5 ‘8” in length, thereby increasing their efficiency.

 

The Mary Rose find illustrates the specifications given above.  The bows averaged 6 and a half feet in length.  Sir John Smythe had noted that military bows were made long enough that they did but seldom break.  Most of the arrows were  32”, a minority, about a third, were 28”.  The average was 30 1/2”. Both the long and the short arrows were bound together in the same sheaves to be shot from longbows of a minimum of six feet in length.  A biography of Charlemagne, written by a scholar who knew him personally, describes the emperor’s fondness for his hunting weapons, a good silver-hilted Frankish sword, a spear, and a bow with long and short arrows.  It seems clear that both long and short arrows were shot from longbows.

Offline toomanyknots

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,132
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2014, 05:10:20 pm »
Interesting!
"The way of heaven is like the bending of a bow-
 the upper part is pressed down,
 the lower part is raised up,
 the part that has too much is reduced,
 the part that has too little is increased."

- Tao Te Ching, 77, A new translation by Victor H. Mair

Offline Del the cat

  • Member
  • Posts: 8,288
    • Derek Hutchison Native Wood Self Bows
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2014, 06:10:54 pm »
In the above post you say.
" I am 5’8” tall and this recipe gave me a bow of 5’11” and arrows of 31-1/2”. "
That is a ratio of bow length/arrow length of 2.254 (to 3 dp)

This contradicts your suggested bow length of 74" for your 34" arrow which gives a ratio of  2.176

They can't both be right.
If you take the 2.254 figure, then for a 34" arrow the bow should be 76.64" (to 2 dp)
I'd suggest the extra 2.64" would be most beneficial.

However, an interesting post, despite the mismatch of arithmetic.
Del
« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 06:16:05 pm by Del the cat »
Health warning, these posts may contain traces of nut.

Offline OTDEAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 140
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #10 on: July 21, 2014, 06:16:08 pm »
This post:

" I am 5’8” tall and this recipe gave me a bow of 5’11” and arrows of 31-1/2”. "

Has nothing to do with me personally, that is copied and pasted from the book that discusses the ROI Modus, not me.  Those are the authors measurements from the book "with bended bow".  My own measurements for 74" and 34" arrow are correct for me.

Those are the measurements for the author using the same technique I got 74" bow and 34" arrow, I personally am 6ft 4!


mikekeswick

  • Guest
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2014, 03:21:48 am »
As Dean suggested above I just don't hold with this some/most ash is junk thing.
It's about getting the correct thickness for a start and then trapping the back HEAVILY and of course heat treating the belly.
Ash is massively strong in tension.
Compression resistance is somewhere about average.
Once you even up it's properties you will start to get great performance.
However I will say that ash isn't the best candidate for heavy narrow bows, especially when people insist on rounding the belly! Yew likes a rounded belly but ash, elm etc just don't.
74 inch will work for a 34 inch draw.
Width can of course be adjusted? Length isn't the only determining factor. The aim is to get the strain correct at full draw wether that be by giving it enough length OR width.

Offline OTDEAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 140
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2014, 09:43:14 am »
Folks really need to leave the poor yew trees alone and go cut some other bow woods and experiment.  You will only learn that way.  Banging on about junk wood is just a sign that you only use one type of wood or you lack the experience and knowledge to make a good bow from any wood.   

Offline WillS

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,905
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2014, 10:02:16 am »
As far as I can tell, nobody is "banging on" saying other woods are junk, just that some wood is not suitable for a certain style.  This is the warbow section remember.

Some ash is crap.  Some is superb.  The crap stuff makes good kid bows or light bows, but not heavy warbows.  You can save it to a degree by heat treating, but it shouldn't be necessary.  The good stuff makes very good warbows with no heat treating or trapping or anything else.  The fact that guys like Jaro can make 160# ash bows with a ROUND belly and no heat treating just proves that fact.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2014, 10:06:35 am by WillS »

Offline Del the cat

  • Member
  • Posts: 8,288
    • Derek Hutchison Native Wood Self Bows
Re: ROI MODUS AND BODY MEASUREMENTS FOR MAKING MEDIEVAL LONGBOW
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2014, 12:08:12 pm »
Just for the record I stated my opinion that UK Ash is "poor" note I also asked if anyone had an opinion on the sapling vs mature theory.
I did not say it was "Junk"
On a scale of 1-10
I'd have thought junk was 1, but poor was maybe 3 or 4  :laugh:

Feel free to take my advice or leave it, that is the spirit it is given in.
Del
« Last Edit: July 28, 2014, 01:47:48 pm by Del the cat »
Health warning, these posts may contain traces of nut.