Changes
Bows
,/* Archery in warfare */
{{Archery}}
==Self-bows==
Bows in the Viking Age were made from a single piece of ‘D’ section wood, usually yew if available [HALPIN Halpin 2008: p.40-41] (Dublin, Hedeby, Wassenaar), but elm (Dublin, Hedeby) and even scots pine (Dublin) were also used. Bow varied in strength up to around 100lbs (Hedeby). <br>
Bows were made by working down a wooden stave so that the heartwood formed the bulk of the bow, giving it its strength, while a layer of sapwood was retained along the bow’s back to give the bow more elasticity under tension and to help prevent it from breaking. <br>
Many of the bows were extremely simple and we have a number of finds of bows that still have the bumps and branch accretions left from the removed branches along their backs (Wassenaar, Hedeby). <br>
<gallery mode=Packed heights=130px style="Padding-left:30px; text-align:left;">Archery - parts of the bow (Gav).jpg|Parts of the bow</gallery>
===Bow Grips===
None of the bows found in the Viking Age have any distinct swelling around the area of the handgrip or show any evidence of having a separate handgrip attached. The bow-staves run roughly parallel along their entire length. The only unique finds of bows that do have a distinct handgrip come from the C7th Alemannic graves at Oberflacht in southern Germany.
===Bow nocks===
To attach the bow string a simple notch or ‘self-nock’ was cut into the bow stave, near both the bow’s terminals. Self-nocks can be either double-nocks or single-nocks, otherwise known as ‘side-nocks’, with similar numbers having been found of each type. The nocks were always cut into the sides of the bow-stave and never into the front or back. <br>
<gallery mode=Packed heights=250px style="Padding-left:30px; text-align:left;">
Archery - Side-nock (Hedeby - Paulsen 1999).jpg|Single-nock or Side-nock<br>(Hedeby [Paulsen 1999])
Archery - Tied on bow String (Stuttgart Psalter f.146v).jpg|Tied on bow string<br>(Stuttgart Psalter fol.146v)
</gallery>
When bows were single-nocked, or side-nocked, then the cut notches are cut into the opposing sides of the bow-stave, top and bottom.<br>
<gallery mode=Packed heights=40px style="Padding-left:30px; text-align:left;">
Archery - Opposing side-nocks (Gav).jpg|Bow-stave showing opposing single-nocks
</gallery>
Some bows only had a self-nock at one end of the bow-stave, with the assumption that the bow-string must have been tied on at the other end (Hedeby, Dublin). A manuscript image showing a tied on bow string might also be seen in the Stuttgart Psalter. <br>
It appears that nocks with horn inserts or separately attached horn nocks were not used on self-bows in the Viking Age period. Mary Rose?
Finds of separate nocks have been found, such as the bone example from the C7th grave at Bad Cannstadt in Germany, but these have been identified as coming from a composite bow (Hörnig 2004, [Hoernig 2005: p.119). See the section of Eastern style archery for more information].
====Stringing nocks and string keepers====
Some bows have either a secondary set of nocks at one end of the bow-stave (Dublin, Waterford) or alternatively a hole has been drilled through the terminal (Adare Castle) ([Halpin 2008, : p.59-60)].
The secondary set of nocks, known as ‘stringing nocks’ helped in stringing the bow. <><>
The hole drilled through the terminal was probably a ‘string keeper‘. A loop of twine or leather thong was passed through the hole and the bow string with the intention of stopping the bow string from slipping down the bow-stave when unstrung.
<gallery mode=Packed heights=250px style="Padding-left:30px; text-align:left;">
Archery - String keeper (Stuttgart Psalter f.21r).jpg|String keeper<br>(Stuttgart Psalter f.21r)
</gallery>
===Deflexed and reflexed terminals===
We also have evidence for some bows having deliberately bent terminals after the nock points. These bent terminals either pointed towards the shooter (Dublin, Hedeby) or pointed away from the shooter (various manuscripts). Bows with terminals that bend towards the shooter, otherwise known as ‘deflexed’, are considered to be a diagnostic characteristic of a ‘Viking’ bow. These bent terminals were purely decorative and did not affect the ability of the bow in any way ([Halpin 2008, : p.???)]. <br>'''Art'''<brgallery mode=Packed heights=250px style="Padding-left:30px; text-align:left;">* [[TArchery -Nock Deflexed (Pierpoint-Morgan Lib. M#T64|T64]] BL Harley . 736 f.64r14).jpg|Bow with terminals that point towards the shooter (deflexed).<br>* [[T(Pierpoint-Morgan Lib. M#T84|T84]] Vatican Reg.12 f736 fol.24v<br>14, AD 1130)'''Archaeology'''London, British Library MS Cotton Claudius B IV fol.41v.jpg|Bow with terminals that point away from the shooter (reflexed).<br>(Brit. Lib. Cott. Clau. B IV, AD 1040) --<br>'''Discussion'''<br/gallery>Almost all of the Anglo-Saxon manuscripts show bows with nocks deflexed bent away from the archer(reflexed), the complete reverse of the deflexed nocks found in archaeology. <br><br> === Re-curved (Reflexed) Self-bow ===''A re-curve self-bow is where the stave Many of the bow is deliberately curved away from bows found in Hedeby have the string.'Viking'<br>'''Archaeology'''<br>* Ballinderry, Ireland, late C10th. [HALPIN 2008: p.184-185] 1 Complete bow.* Hedeby, Denmark, [PAULSEN 1999] '''Discussion'''<br>Many style of nock that are bent towards the Hedeby bows are shaped this wayarcher (deflexed), along with the Ballinderry bow from Ireland. Paulsen [PAULSEN Paulsen 1999] makes the case that this is “caused by shrinkage of the soft sapwood in the front”, a theory that is rejected by Halpin [HALPIN Halpin 2008: p.61] who cites a number of authors including Hardy who makes the comment that the bows from the Mary Rose were also re-curved and “that no process during the lifetime of the bows, or after deposition, are convincing explanations for this feature”.<br><br>
=== Bow Strings ===
These were probably made from hemp, linen or silk. The evidence seems to point at hemp being the most commonly used material (Halpin 2008, p.61). Bow strings were usually 3 to 4mm thick and made from 3 ply twine (Altdorf, Switzerland (Hörnig 2004, [Hoernig 2005: p.110]))<br>'''Archaeology'''<br>* Wincott Heckett has suggested that a tablet-woven tubular silk cord, dated to mid C12th, from Waterford may be a bowstring. [HALPIN Halpin 2008: p.61] Halpin then quotes Soar who suggests that the most common material for bow strings was hemp.* In York, England. A , a lump of beeswax was found with a groove possibly caused by rubbing against a thread or string. Walton-Rogers comments that beeswax was often used on bow strings [WALTON ROGERS Walton Rogers 1997: p.1785]'''Discussion'''<br>--<br>
==Using the Bow==
===Archery in warfare===
Using archery in warfare appears to have been common in mainland Europe but probably not in Britain or Scandinavia. Why this was so is difficult to understand. Bows were used to both attack and defend fortifications but not apparently in direct combat. <br>
In Charlemagne’s armies it became an essential weapon: ‘lanceam, scutum et arcum cum duas cordas, sagittas duodecim’ Capitulary of Aarchen Aachen of 802/3, c 9. This instruction is most likely the result of the Carolingian wars against the Avars who we know from grave finds used composite bows with bone lathes ([Manley 1985, : p.226)]. <br>We have evidence from <><> and manuscripts that in battle archery was often performed by two men working together, one firing while the other supplied arrows.<gallery mode=Packed heights=120px 250px style="Padding-left:30px; text-align:left;">Archery - Paired (Harley Psalter f.6r).jpg|Archery in pairs (Harley Psalter f.6r)Archery - Paired (Harley Psalter f.7r).jpg|Archery in pairs (Harley Psalter f.7r)
</gallery>
===Poison===
Battle of Maldon ‘poisoned point’ & ‘bows were busy’ ([Manley 1985, : p.225)]
===Horse Archery===
It appears that archery was not performed in Britain from horseback but it might have been done in France and the rest of mainland Europe. Byzantium warriors were known to ride backwards while shooting ([Nicolle 1984)].
</gallery>
== References ==
<HarvardReferences />
