Bow Cases & Chests

[Dave Key]

Hi Cliff et al,
It's a good question. However I would counter with another question of my 
own. In the ACW were socks recorded or referenced and are they shown in 
illustrations?

The issue regarding bow bags is not their absence archaeologically, 
despite being shown & referenced, but their almost complete absence from 
the written and pictorial record as well (but see below for more on 
that!).

I include the ACW comparison not because it is proof either way but simply 
to highlight one of the issues we know we face and have to balance. 

Also, Bow bags are not socks. There is a serious point to that statement 
beyond the obvious. A bow bag is still a specialised piece of equipment in 
so far as it has to be made specifically for the job and as such I would 
expect to find at least occasional references, in the same way as there 
are for "arrow girdles"  and shooting gloves.

So ... I will confine myself to England (who by the way were not the only 
country to legislate and require the ownership of bows, so did the Scots, 
nor did everyone have to own one) and the English in France, as I have 
some references that may help.

I did a bit of digging and going back through some notes and found the 
following in an article Jonathan wrote (and I had completely forgotten I 
had ... sorry Jonathan ... entitled "?We do fynde in our countre great 
lack of bowes and arrows?, Tudor military archery and the Inventory of 
King Henry VIII") This includes the following snippet from King Henry 
VIII's inventory (taken from D Starkey ed, The Inventory of King Henry 
VIII  Vol I (London, 1998)), Items 1128-1131: 
 
Item iij cases of lether and one of Buckeram conteninge xlij Bowes
Item A Case of grene velvet embrodred over with golde and the kynges armes 
with one bowe
Item an other case of grene and white veluet with one bowe
Item ij Quivers one of grene velvet embrodred with golde and the kynges 
armes thother Quiver of grene and white velvet bothe furnished with 
shaftes

So, we have clear evidence from the C16th for both leather and cloth 
"Cases" for both single and multiple bows. In one instance the leather & 
buckram cases must have held at least 10 bows in each case. These cannot 
be anything but "Bow bags" (as we've been calling them), indeed a "Case" 
is probably a better term anyway.

Since these are contemporary with the Mary Rose Chests we have clear 
evidence for both in Tudor England.

However, I have not (yet) found similar references to bow cases in similar 
C15th accounts, i.e. inventories, in England. In the Howard's accounts I 
know of a quiver, shooting gloves, arrow girdles, but no bow cases. 
However, maybe I didn't look hard enough, or know what I was looking for! 

My personal opinion is that the Tudor evidence is a good enough piece of 
evidence to 'suggest' that similar cases were used in C15th England if 
only for personal bows. Certainly it is enough to warrant a bit more 
research.

However, we are still left with the need to question who received bows, 
how they were issued, how they were transported and how they were 
'maintained'.

My personal opinion (today at least) is that the majority of bows were 
issue, not personal. In England, the records show bows stored and 
transported en masse alongside the arrows. Also both the legal 
requirements and the surviving musters show that not everyone would have, 
or be expected to have, them. I see no problem with the concept of a bow 
being issued when in the war zone (including on the march as Brent's 
referenced illustration clearly shows) un-encased (i.e.without a 
covering). In the same way that army rifles are not covered but cared for 
today (i.e. cleaned & treated with respect) and returned to an armoury 
when not required. Similarly a bow can be unstrung (as references suggest) 
and waxed, oiled etc. whilst in the archers possession.

A final thought at this point ...  there are plenty of illustrations of 
crossbows with covers, but since a crossbow cannot be unstrung I would 
suggest that it is the string that is being protected via a cover, just as 
the bow string is removed for the same reason. 

And a final picture ... some time ago someone posted a picture of a 
Swedish soldier with an arrow bag. As well as the arrow bag he carries a 
halberd and a bow ... to my mind the bow is shown unstrung but uncovered 
(as the illustration is a simple line drawing it's hard to be sure). 
However, I'd be fascinated to know what others think and whether there are 
any more, similar, drawings from the same MSS that might be clearer?

Cheers
Dave



Clifton McCurley  
Sent by: living-history-bounce-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
30/03/2010 20:56
Please respond to
living-history-at-companie-of-st-george.ch


To

cc

Subject
Re: AW: Re: Bow






 

Thought I'd chime in from America. By the way, I don't respond to many of 
these discussions due to my lack of knowledge on European warfare. I love 
reading everything posted and learning though.

 

Anyways, to my point. I would contend that one of the reasons there aren't 
any bow bags left over would be the reason why it is difficult to find 
socks from the American Civil War. They are quite rare due to the fact 
that they are socks. People just didn't care to preserve them. That is why 
the most avid of American Civil War collectors very rarely find them, and 
that was only 145 years ago. There were millions of them produced, but 
nobody cared to keep them. They just used them up and tossed them. In the 
case of Medeivel soldiers, I imagine that they would have a bow bag for a 
time, but after use in the elements the soldier would get rid of it and 
get a new one. 

 

I imagine finding garments is hard enough, let alone a skinny linen sack 
that was considered disposable.

 

Anyways, just thought I'd chime in. Respects to all, and all my best from 
San Francisco, California!

 

Cliff McCurley

 

 

 


 
> From: gerry.embleton-at-time-machine.ch
> To: living-history-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> Subject: Re: AW: Re: Bow
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 21:13:06 +0200
> 
> I really don`t understand you line of reasoning... why should archers 
> NOT carry there own bows?Perhaps i`m just a wee bit dim...
> Gerry
> On 30.03.2010, at 18:55, e.berndt-at-europe.com wrote:
> 
> > I'm not much of a bow-expert, but here's a picture showing longbows 
> > being excavated from a Mary Rose chest.
> >
> > [img]http://i39.tinypic.com/w3faq.jpg[/img]
> >
> > I think it is an acceptable question on how a single archer would 
> > have saved his weapon from the weather, but on march usually an army 
> > has light cavalry advancing, so they're save from a surprise attack. 
> > I guess the truth lies somewhere in between whereas some archers 
> > must have been fully equipped on march to be able to react fast and 
> > most were in the train with their bows in chests. Still, a chest can 
> > be opened very easily and a bow can be strung very quick, so why 
> > wouldn't they use chests on a campaign?
> >
> > Grts, Ernst
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gerry Embleton 
> > To: living-history-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> > Sent: Tue, Mar 30, 2010 5:57 pm
> > Subject: Re: AW: Re: Bow
> >
> >
> > I agree absolutely with jonathan I cannot imagine archers bows kept 
> > in =20=
> > large chests on the march in dangerous country or archers who owned 
> > =20
> > heir own bows giving them up to dump in a chest . I believe that 
> > some =20=
> > of the staves found on the Mary Rose are unfinished staves.Bows Can 
> > be =20=
> > waxes but a stout linen or leather bag will protect them from 
> > knocks =20=
> > surprisingly well.I believe that a mediaevil archers had even more =20
> > eason to protect their bows than we do given their service.
> > Gerry
> > ow bags..
> > n 30.03.2010, at 15:25, Jonathan Davies wrote:
> >> Hi Dave,
> > I am sure that for mass storage bows would have been =20
> > carried in
> > chests as were arrows for safety and convenience. On the other hand 
> > =20=
> >> when
> > carried by individuals I would have thought that they would have =20
> > shown
> > greater care. My particular period is the high/low point of English 
> > =20=
> >> archery
> > that of the Tudors ( I enclose a copy of my article) and then that is
> > certainly the case.
> > Archers were issued with livery bows and arrows which were mass =20
> > produced by
> > craft methods to a very high standard. Certainly archers may have =20
> > appeared
> > at arrays with their own weapons but I am sure that many were issued 
> > =20=
> >> with
> > equipment provided by their employer. Whenever I have been issued =20
> > with a
> > weapon by Her Majesty I took great care of it and all its =20
> > accouterments,
> > keeping a weapon in good order was a sign of being a good little =20
> > soldier.
> > This meant much oiling, stripping and cleaning. I look after my =20
> > bows with
> > similar care but they require less care. Of course there are 'orrible
> > little men' who don't care for their arms and equipment but if your 
> > =20=
> >> life
> > depends upon its serviceability (as mine never did) you would =20
> > certainly
> > care for it.
> >
> > The archers who served would have been well aware of these issues I 
> > =20=
> >> think
> > and arguably they wold have been chosen for he skill in hat craft as 
> > =20=
> >> well as
> > for other qualities as soldiers.
> >
> > I fear I must go now as I am off to Crecy and Agincourt with a =20
> > school part
> > for the next few days.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Jonathan
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Dave Key  =20
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jonathan,
> >> I don't believe it's just in Henry VIII's reign that bows are =20
> >> stored in
> >> chests, and I would be very interested in a copy of your article.
> >>
> >> I had actually started to reply along the lines Jens had ... that we
> >> should maybe question the way in which we use/own our military =20
> >> equipment
> >> as the bow bag is, possibly, fulfilling a function that was not =20
> >> required
> >> by the medieval archer.
> >>
> >> So I'm going to play a bit of a devils advocate here and question the
> >> entire concept of an archer fretting over how he would "protect his
> >> 'valuable' equipment".
> >>
> >> We have the evidence from the Mary Rose for chests full of bows, we 
> >> =20=
> >>> have
> >> records of hundreds, even thousands, of bows being bought and =20
> >> stored in
> >> English garrisons and for specific campaigns. Both facts suggesting 
> >> =20=
> >>> a more
> >> "central issue" than the "personal property" approach than is =20
> >> normally
> >> assumed. In the records for war equipment stored in Calais in 1481 
> >> =20=
> >>> there
> >> are references to chests bound with iron and chests for arrows, even
> >> detail down to buckets and baskets of belts for arrows. but no =20
> >> references
> >> I've seen to bow bags.
> >>
> >> In the Howard's accounts there is a mention of an archery glove and 
> >> =20=
> >>> arrow
> >> belts but again no bow bags that I can recall.
> >>
> >> I'm not saying that individuals wouldn't have had them, but in a =20
> >> military
> >> context the en masse storage, transport and supply of both bows and 
> >> =20=
> >>> arrows
> >> suggests that chests were a more common and practical solution.
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Dave
> >>
> >>
> >> Jonathan Davies 
> >> Sent by: living-history-bounce-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> >> 30/03/2010 11:12
> >> Please respond to
> >> living-history-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> >>
> >>
> >> To
> >> living-history-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> >> cc
> >>
> >> Subject
> >> Re: AW: Re: Bow
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> In Henry VIII's reign bows appear to have been stored in elm =20
> >> chests. One
> >> of
> >> his decapitated Queen's was buried in one (skinflint). They =20
> >> (chests not
> >> dead queens) have also been found in the Mary Rose. To store bows 
> >> =20=
> >>> safely
> >> from damage rather than packing them loose would suggest either they
> >> recognised the danger or that loose bows area menace (which they =20
> >> are). If
> >> you are interested I will email you a copy of my article on Henry =20
> >> VIII's
> >> inventory which appeared in the Journal of the Society of Army =20
> >> Historical
> >> Research ages ago. It deals with all the archers ancillary =20
> >> equipment. In
> >> those circumstances. It doesn't included bowbags for military bows 
> >> =20=
> >>> but it
> >> also doesn't include bracers, tabs or gloves.
> >> There is also only one (possible) archer's tab in existence found in
> >> Coventry and identified as such by Hugh Soar. I wonder if bow bags 
> >> =20=
> >>> and
> >> other tabs were not identified by archaeologists and historians who 
> >> =20=
> >>> didn't
> >> automatically identify them as being archery equipment. At a =20
> >> lecture at
> >> the
> >> Birmingham Department of Archaeology on the Towton skeletons it was
> >> postulated that a small copper ring on one of the corpses could =20
> >> have been
> >> an
> >> archer's thumb ring! I remember seeing some turned horn items at a
> >> museum
> >> (Snibston I think) which were unidentified which to me looked =20
> >> exactly like
> >> horn nocks for bows prior to finishing. You tend to see/interpret 
> >> =20=
> >>> what
> >> you
> >> naturally identify and are looking for.
> >> Cheers
> >> Jonathan
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Jens B=F6rner
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> One question bothers me: why carying arround a bow when not strung 
> >>> =3D=
> >>>> anyway?=3D20
> >>> When on march, the bows could be placed on a wagon, in barrels, =20
> >>> like =3D
> >>> weapons
> >>> according to froissart for instance in the 100years war generally. 
> >>> =20=
> >>>> When
> >> =3D
> >>> near
> >>> to the battle, they will be taken out and strung. So is there =20
> >>> really a
> >>> reason for a "bowbag" apart from modern ones? Might this be the =20
> >>> reason =3D
> >>> why
> >>> we only bows strung in pictures? Compared to the crossbow, strings 
> >>> =20=
> >>>> are
> >>> mentioned to be worn underneath the clothing, and for instance the 
> >>> =3D=
> >>>> housebook
> >>> from wolfegg shows us crossbowmen on the march carrying their =20
> >>> crossbows
> >>> without any kind of protection.=3D20
> >>>
> >>> I personally think before thinking of something like a "bowbag" it 
> >>> =20=
> >>>> would
> >> =3D
> >>> be
> >>> an idea to examine the situation of bowmen during war, camp and =20
> >>> march
> >>> situations to find out if such was really necessary.
> >>>
> >>> with kind regards,
> >>> Jens B=3DF6rner
> >>> Diu Minnez=3DEEt
> >>> Reconstrution of german and french daily and military live, =20
> >>> clothing and
> >>> household equipment in the high and late middle ages
> >>> http://www.diu-minnezit.de
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Urspr=3DFCngliche Nachricht-----
> >>> Von: living-history-bounce-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> >>> [mailto:living-history-bounce-at-companie-of-st-george.ch] Im Auftrag 
> >>> =20=
> >>>> von
> >>> Jonathan Davies
> >>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. M=3DE4rz 2010 11:12
> >>> An: living-history-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> >>> Betreff: Re: Bow
> >>>
> >>> Bow bags protect against surface damage which could jeopardise a =20
> >>> bow, =3D
> >>> ash,
> >>> elm and yew bows do not like being thrown around. I have owned =20
> >>> all =3D
> >>> three
> >>> and shoot a war bow and treating them like an old chair leg would 
> >>> =3D
> >>> horrify
> >>> me! Bow bags also help protect them from direct sunlight. You =20
> >>> shouldn't
> >>> leave a bow out in the sun on a hot day without being aware of the 
> >>> =3D=
> >>>> potential
> >>> consequences. A bows performance is compromised by both heat and 
> >>> =20=
> >>>> cold =3D
> >>> as I
> >>> know only too well having broken a 70lb bow on a cold day through
> >>> carelessness. Bows need protection from the elements and it is =20
> >>> natural
> >> =3D
> >>> for
> >>> any archer to protect his 'valuable' equipment. Whether the =20
> >>> strings =3D
> >>> need
> >>> protection from rain is another question, we still wait on the =20
> >>> Mary Rose
> >>> excavations for some definitive information on the subject. How =20
> >>> they
> >>> protected the surface of the bow is another question entirely.
> >>> Cheers
> >>> Jonathan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Christian Folini <
> >>> christian.folini-at-time-machine.ch> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue, March 30, 2010 10:00 am, Jonathan Davies wrote:
> >>>>> Purely on a practical level you
> >>>>> would be extremely foolish to risk damaging your bow by leaving
> >> it=3D20
> >>>>> uncovered when not in use. If I do that should I assume that =20
> >>>>> my=3D20
> >>>>> illustrious brethren cared for ther bows less? If they did 
> >>>>> not=3D20=
> >>>>>> protect their bows then why not?
> >>>>
> >>>> There have to be sources somewhere.
> >>>>
> >>>> With the hundreds of thousands of bows being in use during the =20
> >>>> 14th=3D20
> >>>> and 15th century, I do not believe in the total absence of any =3D
> >>> evidence.
> >>>>
> >>>> Either there has to be an explanation in the sources on why they 
> >>>> =20=
> >>>>> do=3D20
> >>>> not need such protection. Or there has to be a hint on the form =20
> >>>> of=3D20
> >>>> protection that was being used.
> >>>>
> >>>> Hardly any bows survived, so I would not count on the survival of
> >> the=3D20
> >>>> protection (bags?). Even more so if they were made from linnen.
> >>>>
> >>>> On a painting or illumination that protection could look silly =20
> >>>> and=3D20
> >>>> uncomprohensible to an outsider. So I would not count on a =20
> >>>> period=3D20
> >>>> illustration either.
> >>>>
> >>>> So if there is anything, then it is more likely to be in the text 
> >>>> =3D=
> >>>> sources.
> >>>> But of course, those are the ones, that are more difficult to =20
> >>>> access.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I never quite understood the kind of protection a linnen bag =20
> >>>> could=3D20
> >>>> offer to a war bow. A linnen bag protects against minor scratchings
> >> on
> >>> =3D
> >>>
> >>>> the surface. Anything else will destroy the bow either with or =20
> >>>> without
> >> =3D
> >>>
> >>>> the linnen bag.
> >>>> Also, water should not be an issue. Greasing the wood regularly =20
> >>>> is far
> >> =3D
> >>>
> >>>> more effective.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Christian
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Unless stated otherwise above:
> >> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with =20
> >> number
> >> 741598.
> >> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire 
> >> =20=
> >>> PO6 3AU
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > -- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis --
> > -- Type: application/msword
> > -- File: Inventory.doc
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft?s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850552/direct/01/








Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU