Some of those Mary Rose bows are terrifying to look at (I presume you’ve visited the exhibition at some point?) - solid staves as thick as my forearm. I’m not small (6ft, about 175lb) and I would not want to even try to pull them (I’d strain something before I got part way to full draw 
).
2 Likes
No English longbows have survived from the period we’re discussing.
In Agincourt we have records of the French, after their defeat, destroying the baggage and bow-boys, which is also memorialized in Shakespeare’s play. In the play, the king himself cries out about the tragedy of the loss. In reality, the king’s men sent out orders for conscripts to fill the gaping holes in his archers. This is a decisive “crushing” from your own example.
This is why I selected Henry VII, because technology had improved, and by that point the conscripts were de rigueur drawn from the pool of men and boys unsuited to hand-to-hand fighting. Typically they’d have a body weight of 120-140 lbs, and yes, I saw the same shows as you: their bodies forensically display the effects of repetitive stress to the arm bones.
According to documented video evidence from Mythbusters, an 80-lb draw on a classic bow can pierce plate armour in a direct shot. Please remember that in Agincourt, historical records (and Shakespeare), depict the launch of arrows as a great flight or flock of birds, blocking out the sky. They went for the arc, a very lethal downward-striking attack, which is quite different from modern hunting where we go for the kill shot with minimal arc. An 80- or 90-lb bow is more than sufficient for the long arc shot, which absolutely destroyed infantry by the bucketload.
Finally, bows were not one size fits all. There’s plenty of information about varying sizes and weights as a man developed: (from Wikipedia)
He taught me how to draw, how to lay my body in my bow … I had my bows bought me according to my age and strength, as I increased in them, so my bows were made bigger and bigger. ~ Hugh Latimer
The Englishman did not keep his left hand steady, and draw his bow with his right; but keeping his right at rest upon the nerve, he pressed the whole weight of his body into the horns of his bow. Hence probably arose the phrase “bending the bow,” and the French of “drawing” one. ~ W. Gilpin
The first quote is from the reign of Henry Tudor, Henry VII. Clearly there was variability in the size of bows, and clearly boys were raised with a bow in the crib. Stringless, you cuddle right into the curve.
I was raised in the forest in Quebec, and my first bow was hand-made. This was early indigenous North American tradition, with an unlaminated sapling bow. As I got older, I employed the techniques of my English heritage, and with the use of a spokeshave and small bench, I created bows throughout my early years. The lamination made all the difference: if we presume Conan Exiles fletchers (for instance Herric, because we don’t have bowyers) know this, an archer could be as small as a 12-year-old me.
* Edited “fletching” for clarity.
3 Likes
Hunting bows are not warbows.
Full stop. Youthful modern recreation is not relevant to weapons of war anymore than the handling of a .22 is to the discussion of military rifles. Just as a hobby craft is not the same as one that must meet the rigors of warfare.
Hunting bows are not war bows. They can be improvised into combat, just as a felling axe can be used to hack a human… But it is far from how a weapon designed for battle would be configured.
I am very familiar with how the lean draw works. I use it. I teach it. And I tell you it will not allow a weakling of slight build to draw a war bow.
Your own quote even references growing in size and strength, of course a child’s first bow would not be of full combat draw weight. Just as a BB gun doesn’t have the recoil of an assault rifle.
Volley loose (arc shots blotting out the sun and raining feathered death) was the norm. On that we agree. The issue with draw weight is not just to get penetrating power, it is to allow for greater range and greater effective range.
But the surviving bows we do have from Henry 8th are not likey to be great alterations from those previously present. By the time of Henry the 7th, light horse were armed with pistols as well as light lance. The age of powder was already upon us.
Your claim of where Yeomen archers were drawn is curious. Considering it was the duty of all land owners at the time to be trained in archery. It wasn’t the pursuit of those physically unsuited for infantry service (which was mostly filled by professional men at arms or mercenaries) but it may be they were not trained for close quarters formation fighting. The press of melee requires significant different mental conditioning than coordinates archery. England stopped using conscript infantry (of their own people, slaves from Ireland were canon fodder for much longer, but that’s a tangent more about thralls than bows) as the norm after the Norman conquest. The Saxon Fyrd was a fine model when Alfred implemented it, but it went out of style as technology and tactics advanced, to say nothing of the money needed to maintain a fully kitted fighting force. It wouldn’t be until the age of pike and powder that mass conscription would form bulk infantry again.
That said, baggage trains are not combat units. Any unit can be scrubbed in a surprise attack. I was hoping you would reference Verneuil or Patsy… where we could discuss the tactics involved and difference between an ordered and disordered formation and similarities to modern artillery in placements… rather than a work of historical fiction by Shakespeare. Shakespeare is no more a historical source than Ridley Scott or Oliver Stone. While all make engaging pieces of entertainment, the naked propaganda to verifiable accuracy can be spotty. Also to note, Elizabeth 1st removed the Longbow from main composition in Trained Bands (trained militia), which would be contemporaneous with shows at the Rose and Globe. Shakespeare’s “Histories” were made for the masses, not for the scholars, thus much would be tuned to fit the (then) modern sensibilities. And sensibilities can shift in a generation, sometimes radically… But that’s another topic.
I would, however, note that history is getting a bit off topic. However, confining discussion of bows made for war to England is narrow. Military archers also appear throughout central and eastern Europe, the Levant, Maghreb, and especially Asia.
But to wrap it up, and bring it back to game…
The greatest of bow makers, designing custom bows would know that people come in different sizes and shapes… So why would Herric be so pathetic at his trade to make bows for children (who exist neither in the exiled lands nor on Siptah) and not to exploit the full strength of the one it is made for?
Also, appreciated that the difference between Bowyer and Fletcher is lost on so many game designers.
Further, being of English heritage in Quebec must be awkward at times. As a primary anglophone, I found warmer welcome in Paris than Quebec. I understand there is bad blood… but it was clear where I was not wanted.
3 Likes
I guess some people just get along better with others.
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.