English longbow

Self-yew English longbow, 6 ft 6 in (2 m) long, 470 N (105 lbf) draw force.

A period illustration of the Battle of Crécy. Anglo-Welsh longbowmen figure prominently in the foreground on the right, where they are driving away Italian mercenary crossbowmen.

The English longbow, also called the Welsh longbow, is a powerful type of medieval longbow (a tall bow for archery) about 6 ft (1.83 m) long used by the English and Welsh for hunting and as a weapon in medieval warfare. English use of longbows was effective against the French during the Hundred Years' War, particularly at the start of the war in the battles of Crecy (1346) and Poitiers (1356), and most famously at the Battle of Agincourt (1415). They became less successful after this, with longbowmen taking casualties at the Battle of Verneuil (1424), and being completely routed at the Battle of Patay (1429) when charged before they had set up their defensive position. The term "English" or "Welsh" longbow is a modern usage to distinguish these bows from other longbows, though in fact identical bows were used across northern and western Europe; indeed a very large proportion of yew bowstaves were imported from Spain from the fourteenth century onward, if not earlier.

The earliest longbow known from England, found at Ashcott Heath, Somerset, is dated to 2665 BC, but no longbows survive from the period when the longbow was dominant (c. 1250–1450 AD), probably because bows become weaker, break and are replaced, rather than being handed down through generations. More than 130 bows survive from the Renaissance period, however. More than 3,500 arrows and 137 whole longbows were recovered from the Mary Rose, a ship of Henry VIII's navy that sank at Portsmouth in 1545.

Description

Length

A longbow must be long enough to allow its user to draw the string to a point on the face or body, and the length therefore varies with the user. In continental Europe it was generally seen as any bow longer than 1.2 m (4 ft). The Society of Antiquaries says it is of 5 or 6 feet (1.5–1.83 m) in length. Richard Bartelot, of the Royal Artillery Institution, said that the bow was of yew, 6 feet (1.83 m) long, with a 3 foot (914 mm) arrow. Gaston Phoebus, in 1388, wrote that a longbow should be "of yew or boxwood, seventy inches [1.78 m] between the points of attachment for the cord". Historian Jim Bradbury said they were an average of about 5 feet and 8 inches. All but the last estimate were made before the excavation of the Mary Rose, where bows were found ranging in length from 1.87 to 2.11 m (6 ft 1 in to 6 ft 11 in) with an average length of 1.98 m (6 ft 6 in).

Draw weights

Estimates for the draw of these bows varies considerably. Before the recovery of the Mary Rose, Count M. Mildmay Stayner, Recorder of the British Long Bow Society, estimated the bows of the Medieval period drew 90–110 pounds-force (400–490 newtons), maximum, and Mr. W.F. Paterson, Chairman of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries, believed the weapon had a supreme draw weight of only 80–90 lb_f (360–400 N) . Other sources suggest significantly higher draw weights. The original draw forces of examples from the Mary Rose are estimated by Hardy at 150–160 lb_f (670–710 N) at a 30-inch (76.2 cm) draw length; the full range of draw weights was between 100–185 lb_f (440–820 N). The 30-inch (76.2 cm) draw length was used because that is the length allowed by the arrows commonly found on the Mary Rose.

A modern longbow's draw is typically 60 lb_f (270 N) or less, and by modern convention measured at 28 inches (71.1 cm). Historically, hunting bows usually had draw weights of 50–60 lb_f (220–270 N), which is enough for all but the very largest game and which most reasonably fit adults can manage with practice. Today, there are few modern longbowmen capable of using 180–185 lb_f (800–820 N) bows accurately.

A record of how boys and men trained to use the bows with high draw weights survives from the reign of Henry VII.

[My yeoman father] taught me how to draw, how to lay my body in my bow ... not to draw with strength of arms as divers other nations do ... 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. For men shall never shoot well unless they be brought up to it.

— Hugh Latimer.

What Latimer meant when describes laying his body into the bow was described thus:

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.

Construction and materials

The preferred material to make the longbow was yew, although ash, elm and other woods were also used. Giraldus Cambrensis, Gerald of Wales, speaking of the bows used by the Welsh men of Gwent, says: "They are made neither of horn, ash nor yew, but of elm; ugly unfinished-looking weapons, but astonishingly stiff, large and strong, and equally capable of use for long or short shooting." The traditional construction of a longbow consists of drying the yew wood for 1 to 2 years, then slowly working the wood into shape, with the entire process taking up to four years. (This can be done far more quickly by working the wood down when wet, as a thinner piece of wood will dry much faster.) The bow stave is shaped into a D-section. The outer "back" of sapwood, approximately flat, follows the natural growth rings; modern bowyers often thin the sapwood, while in the Mary Rose bows the back of the bow was the natural surface of the wood, only the bark being removed. The inner side ("belly") of the bow stave consists of rounded heartwood. The heartwood resists compression and the outer sapwood performs better in tension. This combination in a single piece of wood (a self bow) forms a natural "laminate", somewhat similar in effect to the construction of a composite bow. Longbows will last a long time if protected with a water-resistant coating, traditionally of "wax, resin and fine tallow".

The trade of yew wood to England for longbows was such that it depleted the stocks of yew over a huge area. The first documented import of yew bowstaves to England was in 1294. In 1350 there was a serious shortage, and Henry IV of England ordered his royal bowyer to enter private land and cut yew and other woods. In 1470 compulsory practice was renewed, and hazel, ash, and laburnum were specifically allowed for practice bows. Supplies still proved insufficient, until by the Statute of Westminster in 1472, every ship coming to an English port had to bring four bowstaves for every tun. Richard III of England increased this to ten for every tun. This stimulated a vast network of extraction and supply, which formed part of royal monopolies in southern Germany and Austria. In 1483, the price of bowstaves rose from two to eight pounds per hundred, and in 1510 the Venetians obtained sixteen pounds per hundred. In 1507 the Holy Roman Emperor asked the Duke of Bavaria to stop cutting yew, but the trade was profitable, and in 1532 the royal monopoly was granted for the usual quantity "if there are that many". In 1562, the Bavarian government sent a long plea to the Holy Roman Emperor asking him to stop the cutting of yew, and outlining the damage done to the forests by its selective extraction, which broke the canopy and allowed wind to destroy neighbouring trees. In 1568, despite a request from Saxony, no royal monopoly was granted because there was no yew to cut, and the next year Bavaria and Austria similarly failed to produce enough yew to justify a royal monopoly. Forestry records in this area in the 17th century do not mention yew, and it seems that no mature trees were to be had. The English tried to obtain supplies from the Baltic, but at this period bows were being replaced by guns in any case.

The string

Bow strings were, and still are, made of hemp, flax or silk, and attached to the wood via horn "nocks" that fit onto the end of the bow. Modern synthetic materials (often Dacron) are now commonly used for strings.

The arrow

A wide variety of arrows were shot from the English longbow. Variations in length, fletchings and heads are all recorded. Perhaps the greatest diversity lies in hunting arrows, with varieties like broad-arrow, wolf-arrow, dog-arrow, Welsh arrow and Scottish arrow being recorded. War arrows were ordered in the thousands for medieval armies and navies, supplied in sheaves normally of 24 arrows. For example, between 1341 and 1359 the English crown is known to have obtained 51,350 sheaves (1,232,400 arrows).

Only one significant group of arrows, from the Mary Rose, has survived. Over 3500 arrows were found, mainly made of poplar but also of ash, beech and hazel. Analysis of the intact specimens shows their length to vary from 61 to 83 centimetres (24–33 in), with an average length of 76 centimetres (30 in). Because of the preservation conditions of the Mary Rose no arrowheads survived. However, many heads have survived in other places, which has allowed typologies of arrow heads to be produced, the most modern being the Jessop typology. The most common arrowheads in military use were the short bodkin (Jessop M10) and a small barbed arrow (Jessop M4).

Use and performance

Training

Longbows were very difficult to master because the force required to deliver an arrow through the improving armour of medieval Europe was very high by modern standards. Although the draw weight of a typical English longbow is disputed, it was at least 360 newtons (81 pounds-force) and possibly more than 600 N (130 lb_f), with some estimates as high as 900 N (200 lb_f). Considerable practice was required to produce the swift and effective combat shooting required. Skeletons of longbow archers are recognisably adapted, with enlarged left arms and often bone spurs on left wrists, left shoulders and right fingers.

It was the difficulty in using the longbow which led various monarchs of England to issue instructions encouraging their ownership and practice, including the Assize of Arms of 1252 and King Edward III's declaration of 1363: "Whereas the people of our realm, rich and poor alike, were accustomed formerly in their games to practise archery – whence by God's help, it is well known that high honour and profit came to our realm, and no small advantage to ourselves in our warlike enterprises... that every man in the same country, if he be able-bodied, shall, upon holidays, make use, in his games, of bows and arrows... and so learn and practise archery." If the people practised archery, it would be that much easier for the King to recruit the proficient longbowmen he needed for his wars. Along with the greater ability of gunfire to penetrate plate armour, it was the long training needed by longbowmen which eventually led to their being replaced by musketmen.

Despite the modern view that longbows had trouble penetrating high-quality plate armour after about 1350, as late as 1415 the hail of arrows created by massed ranks of thousands of longbowmen helped to win the battle against plate-armoured French knights at Agincourt. The French mounted charge against the English defensive position was ineffectual. The vast majority of the French knights advanced on foot but, exhausted by walking across wet muddy terrain in heavy armour and being buffeted by thousands of arrows, they were overwhelmed when the English and Welsh longbowmen, using their swords and mauls, joined the hand-to-hand fighting in support of the English men-at-arms.

On the battlefield English archers stored their arrows stabbed upright into the ground at their feet, reducing the time it took to notch, draw and loose, as drawing from a quiver or arrow bag is slower. An unintended effect of this practice was that an arrowhead that had been stuck into the dirty ground would be more likely to cause infection.

Range and penetration

The range of the medieval weapon is not accurately known, with estimates from 165 to 228 m (180 to 249 yds). Modern longbows have a useful range up to 180 m (200 yd). A 667 N (150 lbf) Mary Rose replica longbow was able to shoot a 53.6 g (1.9 oz) arrow 328 m (360 yd) and a 95.9 g (3.3 oz) a distance of 249.9 m (272 yd). A flight arrow of a professional archer of Edward III's time would reach 400 yds. It is also well known that no practice range was allowed to be less than 220 yds by order of Henry VIII.

The longbow was capable of long range, and was highly accurate at short range. Most of the longer-range shooting mentioned in stories was not marksmanship, but rather thousands of archers launching volleys of arrows at an entire army. Longbowmen armies would shoot a rain of arrows landing indiscriminately in the target area. An archer could hit a person at 165 m (180 yards) "part of the time" and could always hit an army.

Gerald of Wales commented on the power of the Welsh longbow in the 12th century:

... [I]n the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuirasses, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal.

In a modern test, a direct hit from a steel bodkin point penetrated Damascus chain armour.

However, even heavy-draw longbows have trouble penetrating well-made steel plate armour, which was used increasingly after 1350. A 2006 test was made by Matheus Bane using a 75 lbf (330 N) draw (at 28") bow, shooting at 10 yards; according to Bane's calculations, this would be approximately equivalent to a 110 lbf (490 N) bow at 250 yards. Measured against a replica of the thinnest contemporary "Jack coat" armour, a 905 grain needle bodkin and a 935 grain curved broadhead penetrated over 3.5 inches (89 mm). ("Jack coat" armour could be up to twice as thick as the coat tested; in Bane's opinion such a thick coat would have stopped bodkin arrows but not the cutting force of broadhead arrows.) Against "high quality riveted maille", the needle bodkin and curved broadhead penetrated 2.8". Against a coat of plates, the needle bodkin achieved 0.3" penetration. The curved broadhead did not penetrate but caused 0.3" of deformation of the metal. Results against plate armour of "minimum thickness" (1.2mm) were similar to the coat of plates, in that the needle bodkin penetrated to a shallow depth, the other arrows not at all. In Bane's view, the plate armour would have kept out all the arrows if thicker or worn with more padding.

Other modern tests described by Bane include those by Williams (which concluded that longbows could not penetrate maille, but in Bane's view did not use a realistic arrow tip), Robert Hardy's tests (which achieved broadly similar results to Bane), and a Primitive Archer test which demonstrated that a longbow could penetrate a plate armour breastplate. However the Primitive Archer test used a 160 lbf (710 N) longbow at point blank range, generating 160 joules (vs. 73 for Bane and 80 for Williams), so probably not representative of battles of the time. Other research has also concluded that later medieval armour, such as that of the Italian city state mercenary companies, was effective at stopping contemporary arrows. Archery was described by contemporaries as ineffective against plate armour in the Battle of Neville's Cross (1346), the siege of Bergerac (1345), and the Battle of Poitiers (1356); such armour became available to European knights of fairly modest means by the late 14th century, though never to all soldiers in any army. Strickland and Hardy suggest that "even at a range of 240 yards heavy war arrows shot from bows of poundages in the mid- to upper range possessed by the Mary Rose bows would have been capable of killing or severely wounding men equipped with armour of wrought iron. Higher-quality armour of steel would have given considerably greater protection, which accords well with the experience of Oxford's men against the elite French vanguard at Poitiers in 1356, and des Ursin's statement that the French knights of the first ranks at Agincourt, which included some of the most important (and thus best-equipped) nobles, remained comparatively unhurt by the English arrows."

Modern tests and contemporary accounts agree therefore that well-made plate armour could protect against longbows, however there are a number of caveats to this point; not all plate armour was well-made or well looked after, and there were also weak points in the eye and air holes and joints where arrows could penetrate, meaning that even if the armour was proof against nearly all arrows, being shot at by thousands of longbowmen would have been an uncomfortable experience, physically and mentally. One contemporary French account described the barrage at Agincourt against French knights wearing plate armour as a "terrifying hail of arrow shot".

Full plate armour of the highest quality was also extremely expensive, only used by knights; the vast majority of soldiers were not armoured in plate from head-to-toe. Even for knights, in practice their horses tended to be less well protected, so that longbows could kill or wound the horses even when the arrows had little effect against the knights themselves. For example, shooting the French knights' horses from the side (where they were less well armoured) was used effectively by the English longbowmen to help win the Battle of Poitiers.

Shooting rate

A typical military longbow archer would be provided with between 60 and 72 arrows at the time of battle. Most archers would not loose arrows at maximum rate, as it would exhaust even the most experienced man. "With the heaviest bows [a modern warbow archer] does not like to try for more than six a minute." Not only do the arms and shoulder muscles tire from the exertion, but the fingers holding the bowstring become strained; therefore, actual rates of shooting in combat would vary considerably. Ranged volleys at the beginning of the battle would differ markedly from the closer, aimed shots as the battle progressed and the enemy neared. Arrows were not unlimited, so archers and their commanders took every effort to ration their use to the situation at hand.

Nonetheless, resupply during battle was available. Young boys were often employed to run additional arrows to longbow archers while in their positions on the battlefield. "The longbow was the machine gun of the Middle Ages: accurate, deadly, possessed of a long range and rapid rate of fire, the flight of its missiles was likened to a storm." This rate was much higher than that of its Western European projectile rival on the battlefield, the crossbow. It was also much higher than the standard early firearms, although the lower training requirements and greater penetration of firearms eventually led to the longbow falling into disuse.

Treating arrow wounds

The only way to remove an arrow cleanly was to tie a piece of cloth soaked in water to the end of it and push it through the victim's wound and out of the other side — this was extremely painful. There were specialised tools used in the medieval period to extract arrows from places where bone prevented the arrow being pushed through. Prince Hal, later Henry V, was wounded in the face by an arrow at the Battle of Shrewsbury (1403). The royal physician John Bradmore had such a tool made, which consisted of a pair of smooth tongs. Once carefully inserted into the socket of the arrowhead, the tongs screwed apart till they gripped its walls and allowed the head to be extracted from the wound. Prior to the extraction, the hole made by the arrow shaft had been widened by inserting larger and larger dowels of elder pith wrapped in linen down the entry wound. The dowels were soaked in honey, now known to have antiseptic properties. The wound was then dressed with a poultice of barley and honey mixed in turpentine. After 20 days the wound was free of infection.

History

Longbowmen executing Saint Sebastian. German painting from ca. 1493

Further information: History of archery

The first recorded use of the term 'longbow', as distinct from simply 'bow', occurs in a Paston Letter of the 15th century.

Origins

The origins of the English longbow are disputed. While it is hard to assess the significance of military archery in pre-Norman Conquest Anglo-Saxon warfare, it is clear that archery played a prominent role under the Normans, as the story of the Battle of Hastings shows. Their Anglo-Norman descendants also made use of military archery, as exemplified by their victory at the Battle of the Standard in 1138. During the Anglo-Norman invasions of Wales, Welsh bowmen took a heavy toll of the invaders and Welsh archers would feature in English armies from this point on. However, historians dispute whether this archery used a different kind of bow to the later English Longbow. Traditionally it has been argued that prior to the beginning of the 14th century, the weapon was a self bow between four and five feet in length, known since the 19th century as the shortbow. This weapon, drawn to the chest rather than the ear, was much weaker. However, in 1985, Jim Bradbury reclassified this weapon as the ordinary wooden bow, reserving the term shortbow for short composite bows and arguing that longbows were a developed form of this ordinary bow. Strickland and Hardy in 2005 took this argument further, suggesting that the shortbow was a myth and all early English bows were a form of longbow. In 2011, Clifford Rogers forcefully restated the traditional case based upon a variety of evidence, including a large scale iconographic survey. Whether or not there was a technological revolution at the end of the 13th century therefore remains moot. What is agreed, however, is that the English longbow as an effective weapon system evolved in the late 13th and early 14th centuries.

Fourteenth and fifteenth century

The longbow decided many medieval battles fought by the English, the most significant of which were the Battle of Crécy (1346) and the Battle of Agincourt (1415), during the Hundred Years' War and followed earlier successes, notably at the Battle of Halidon Hill (1333) during the Scottish wars. The longbow corps saw particularly heavy casualties at the Battle of Patay and this loss contributed to England's eventual defeat in that war.

The longbow was also used against the English by their Welsh neighbours. The Welsh used the longbow mostly in a different manner than the English. In many early period English campaigns, the Welsh used the longbow in ambushes, often at point blank range that allowed their missiles to penetrate armour and generally do a lot of damage. One famous Welsh longbow victory was on 22 June 1402 when Owain Glyndŵr fought a battle against the English at Bryn Glas. He strategically placed his longbowmen on top of a high hill, so that they had a better range than the English longbowmen, who were overwhelmed down on the low ground. The result was a decisive victory for the Welsh.

Although longbows were much faster and more accurate than the black powder weapons which replaced them, longbowmen always took a long time to train because of the years of practice necessary before a war longbow could be used effectively (examples of longbows from the Mary Rose typically had draws greater than 637 N (143 lb_f)). In an era in which warfare was usually seasonal, and non-noble soldiers spent part of the year working at farms, the year-round training required for the effective use of the longbow was a challenge. A standing army was an expensive proposition to a medieval ruler. Mainland European armies seldom trained a significant longbow corps. Due to their specialized training, English longbowmen were sought as mercenaries in other European countries, most notably in the Italian city-states and in Spain. The White Company, comprising men-at-arms and longbowmen and commanded by Sir John Hawkwood, is the best known English Free Company of the 14th century. The powerful Hungarian king, Louis the Great, is an example of someone who used longbowmen in his Italian campaigns.

Sixteenth century and after

Longbows remained in use until around the 16th century, when advances in firearms made gunpowder weapons a significant factor in warfare and such units as arquebusiers and grenadiers began appearing. Before the English Civil War, a pamphlet by William Neade entitled The Double-Armed Man advocated that soldiers be trained in both the longbow and pike; this advice was followed only by a few town militias. The last recorded use of bows in an English battle seems to have been a skirmish at Bridgnorth, in October 1642, during the Civil War, when an impromptu town militia proved effective against un-armoured musketeers. Longbowmen remained a feature of the Royalist Army, but were not used by the Roundheads.

Longbows have been in continuous production and use for sport and for hunting to the present day, but since 1642 they have been a minority interest, and very few have had the high draw weights of the medieval weapons. Other differences include the use of a stiffened non-bending centre section, rather than a continuous bend.

Serious military interest in the longbow faded after the seventeenth century but occasionally schemes to resurrect its military use were proposed. Benjamin Franklin was a proponent in the 1770s; the Honourable Artillery Company had an archer company between 1784 and 1794; and a man named Richard Mason wrote a book proposing the arming of militia with pike and longbow in 1798. Donald Featherstone also records a Lt. Col. Richard Lee of 44th Foot advocated the military use of the longbow in 1792. There is a record of the use of the longbow in action as late as WWII, when Jack Churchill is credited with a longbow kill in France in 1940. The weapon was certainly considered for use by Commandos during the war but it is not known whether it was used in action.

Tactics

Archery is not very accurate at extreme distances, so generals massed longbowmen in order to create a 'cloud of arrows.' A skilful general would alternate flights of arrows with cavalry charges and sometimes flank attacks to demoralise the enemy. The arrows were used in volleys and not aimed at specific targets until the enemy was quite close. Although bowmen were still deadly at close range, they were light troops unsuited to prolonged hand-to-hand combat and were vulnerable to a committed attack by cavalry. Consequently they were often deployed behind physical barricades, such as stakes and poles driven into the ground; at Agincourt, they were deployed behind boggy ground. This practice discouraged offensive battle tactics because the longbow was most effective when an opposing army charged. Longbowmen were vulnerable to attack until their defensive barricade was complete, as happened, for example at Patay in 1429.

Battle formations

The idea that there was a standard formation for English longbow armies was argued by Alfred Byrne in his influential work on the battles of the Hundred Years War, The Crecy War. This view was challenged by Jim Bradbury in his book The Medieval Archer and more modern works are more ready to accept a variety of formations.

In summary, however, the usual English deployment in the 14th and 15th centuries was as follows:

• Infantry (usually dismounted knights and armoured soldiers employed by the nobles and often armed with pole weapons such as pollaxes and bills) in the centre.
• Longbowmen were usually deployed primarily on the flanks, sometimes to the front.
• Cavalry was rarely used but, where deployed, either on the flanks (to make or protect against flank attacks), or in the centre in reserve, to be deployed as needed (for example, to counter any breakthroughs).

In the 16th century, these formations evolved in line with new technologies and techniques from the continent. Formations with a central core of pikes and bills were flanked by companies of "shot" made up of a mixture of archers and arquebusiers, sometimes with a skirmish screen of archers and arquebusiers in front.

Surviving bows and arrows

More than 3,500 arrows and 137 whole longbows were recovered from the Mary Rose, a ship of Henry VIII's navy that was sunk at Portsmouth in 1545. It is an important source for the history of the longbow, as the bows, archery implements and the skeletons of archers have been preserved. The bows range in length from 1.87 to 2.11 m (6 ft 1 in to 6 ft 11 in) with an average length of 1.98 m (6 ft 6 in). The majority of the arrows were made of poplar, others were made of beech, ash and hazel. Draw lengths of the arrows varied between 61 and 81 centimetres (24 to 32 inches) with the majority having a draw length of 76 centimetres (30 inches)). The head would add 5–15 cm depending on type, though some 2–4.5 cm must be allowed for the insertion of the shaft into the socket.

The longbows on the Mary Rose were in excellent finished condition. There were enough bows to test some to destruction which resulted in draw forces of 450 N (100 lbf) on average. However, analysis of the wood indicated that they had degraded significantly in the seawater and mud, which had weakened their draw forces. Replicas were made and when tested had draw forces of from 445 N to 823 N (100 to 185 lbf).

In 1980, before the finds from the Mary Rose, Robert E. Kaiser published a paper stating that there were five known surviving longbows:

• The first bow comes from the Battle of Hedgeley Moor in 1464, during the Wars of the Roses. A family who lived at the castle since the battle had preserved it to modern times. It is 1.66 m (65.5 in) and a 270 N (60 lbf) draw force.
• The second dates to the Battle of Flodden in 1513 ("a landmark in the history of archery, as the last battle on English soil to be fought with the longbow as the principal weapon..."). It hung in the rafters at the headquarters of the Royal Scottish Archers in Edinburgh. It has a draw force of 360 to 410 N (80 to 90 lbf).
• The third and fourth were recovered in 1836 by John Deane from the Mary Rose. Both weapons are in the Tower of London Armoury and Horace Ford writing in 1887 estimated them to have a draw force of 280 to 320 N (65 to 70 lbf). A modern replica made in the early 1970s of these bows has a draw force of 460 N (102 lbf).
• The fifth surviving longbow comes from the armoury of the church in the village of Mendlesham in Suffolk, and is believed to date either from the period of Henry VIII or Queen Elizabeth I. The Mendlesham Bow is broken but has an estimated length of 1.73 to 1.75 m (68 to 69 inches) and draw force of 350 N (80 lbf).

Social importance

The importance of the longbow in English culture can be seen both in the legends of Robin Hood, where he was increasingly depicted as a master archer, and also in the "Song of the Bow", a poem from The White Company by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

During the reign of Henry III the Assize of Arms of 1252 required that all "citizens, burgesses, free tenants, villeins and others from 15 to 60 years of age" should be armed. The poorest of them were expected to have a halberd and a knife, and a bow if they owned land worth more than £2. This made it easier for the King to raise an army, but also meant that the bow was a weapon commonly used by rebels during the Peasants' Revolt. From the time that the yeoman class of England became proficient with the longbow, the nobility in England had to be careful not to push them into open rebellion. This was a check on the power of the nobility of England which did not exist on the European continent.

It is conjectured that yew trees were commonly planted in English churchyards to have readily available longbow wood.

See also

• Archery
• Infantry in the Middle Ages

References

• Andrzejewski, Stanislaw (2003) [1954]. Military organization and society. ISBN 978-0-415-17680-4.
• Auden, Thomas (2008). Memorials of Old Shropshire. Read Books. ISBN 1-4097-6478-8. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Bacon, Edward (1971). Archaeology: Discoveries in the 1960's. New York: Praeger. ISBN 0-304-93635-9. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Bradbury, Jim (1985). The Medieval Archer. The Boydell Press. ISBN 0-85115-194-9. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Barker, Juliet (2006). Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle That Made England. Little, Brown and Co. ISBN 0-316-01503-2. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Conan Doyle, Arthur (1 May 1997). The White Company. Project Gutenberg. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Featherstone, Donald (1973) [1967]. Bowmen of England. London: New English Library. ISBN 450016269. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: length (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
• Hageneder, F. (2007). Yew: A History. Sutton Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7509-4597-4. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Heath, E.G. (1980). Archery : A Military History. London: Osprey. ISBN 0850453534.
• Heath, E.G. (??) [1972]. The Grey Goose Wing. p. 134. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |year= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)CS1 maint: year (link)
• Kruschke, Earl Roger (1985). The right to keep and bear arms: a continuing American dilemma. C.C. Thomas Publishing Co. ISBN 0-398-05141-0. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Longman, C.J.; Walrond, H. (1967). Archery. New York: Fiederick Ungar Publishing Co. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Oakeshott, R. Ewart (1960). The Archaeology of Weapons. London: Lutterworth Press. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Pope, Saxton (2003). Hunting with the Bow and Arrow. Project Gutenberg EBook. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Rothero, Christopher (1984). The Scottish and Welsh wars, 1250–1400. Men at Arms. London: Osprey. ISBN 0-85045-542-1. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Sellman, Roger (1964). Mediaeval English Warfare. London: Methuen. ISBN 978-0-416-63620-8.
• Strickland, Matthew; Hardy, Robert (2005). The Great Warbow: From Hastings to the Mary Rose. Sutton Publishing. ISBN 0-7509-3167-1. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Trevelyan, G. M. (2008). English Social History – A Survey of Six Centuries – Chaucer to Queen Victoria. READ BOOKS. ISBN 978-1-4437-2095-3.

Journals

• Cummins, Josephine (November 2006). "Saving Prince Hal: maxillo-facial surgery, 1403". Dental History Magazine (19). Glasgow, Scotland: History of Dentistry Research Group, University of Glasgow. ISSN 1756-1728. Retrieved 3 October 2011. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Kaiser, Robert E. (December 2003). "Medieval Military Surgery". Medieval History Magazine. 1 (4). {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Kaiser, Robert E. (1980). "The Medieval English Longbow". Journal of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries. 23. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Rogers, Clifford J. (2011). "The development of the longbow in late medieval England and "technological determinism"". Journal of Medieval History. 37 (3). {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Other

• Levick, Ben (1992). "They Didn't Have Bows, Did They?". Regia Anglorum Publications 2002. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Further reading

Books

• Allely, Steve (2000) [1992], Hamm, Jim (ed.), The Traditional Bowyers Bible, vol. 1, The Lyons Press, ISBN 1-59921-453-9 {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
• Aspel, G. Fred (2000) [1993], Hamm, Jim (ed.), The Traditional Bowyers Bible, vol. 2, The Lyons Press, ISBN 1-58574-086-1 {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
• Baker, Tim (2000) [1994], Hamm, Jim (ed.), The Traditional Bowyers Bible, vol. 3, The Lyons Press, ISBN 1-58574-087-X {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
• Allely, Steve (2008), Hamm, Jim (ed.), The Traditional Bowyers Bible, vol. 4, The Lyons Press, ISBN 978-1-59921-453-5 {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
• Hardy, Robert (1992), Longbow: A Social and Military History, Patrick Stephens, ISBN 1-85260-412-3
• Soar, Hugh David Hewitt (2004), The Crooked Stick: A History of the Longbow (Weapons in History S.), Westholme U.S, ISBN 1-59416-002-3
  • A review by Bernard Cornwell in The Times

Journals

• Thomas Esper The Replacement of the Longbow by Firearms in the English Army, Technology and Culture, Vol. VI, No. 3, 1965.
• B.W. Kooi C.A Bergman. PDF:An Approach to the Study of Ancient Archery using Mathematical Modelling, Antiquity 71:(271) 124–134 (1979)

Other

• Rulon l. Hancock. PDF: United States National Archery Association Flight committee modern longbow flight rules, U.S. National Archery Association. September 2002.
• Paul Lalonde. A Bundle of Tudor War Arrows, An article about the arrows found on the Mary Rose.
• Liesl Wilhelmstochter. Ealdormere Archery Handbook: Section 11: Towards a more medieval archer
• Staff. Mary Rose historical ship, The Mary Rose Trust – {note: BACK of bow faces enemy.}
• The Great Northwood Bowmen Medieval Longbow Archery and re-enactment Society, re-enacting the 15th century, based in London.