Crossbow.

Matchlock · 10th February 2012, 01:09 PM

Ok, I announced it and here it is.

There are a few North Italian all-steel crossbows known retaining their original all-steel quarrels (crossbow bolts), some of these crossbows fitted with a rounded pistol-grip butt like yours, and a few others with a two- or three-link chain instead of the usual string. While the one attached, dated 1562 and signed by the maker Opera de Renaldo de Visin da Asolo (preserved in the collection of the Ducal Palace in Venice, is 66.3 cm long, various similar are much smaller and are nowadays believed to have been built especially for carrying secretly and in order to use for assassinations.

A period of origin of the first half to the mid 16th c. seems to be common to all members of this very special group of North Italian crossbows. The shape of the rear sight on the attached crossbow is identical to rear sights found on contemporary matchlock and wheellock muskets.

Any thoughts?

Best,
Michael

Matchlock · 10th February 2012, 02:24 PM

Hi there,

I tried some photoshopping on Ericlaude's images; though the colors are not correct, more details have become visible, I hope.
Telling from the both general shape and construction and the bolts/screws or rivets used, I should not date it before the 19th c. Thus this might be one of the numerous Historismus (Victorian) copies, including that certain amount of both style mingling and fantasy characteristic of that period), of Renaissance originals like the one in Venice.

As the iron surfaces clearly show significant differences in rust and pitting I assume that some older and not belonging parts were associated.

Best,
Michael

Matchlock · 11th February 2012, 11:49 AM

Please refer also to my thread

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...bow+collection

Best,
Michael

Jim MacDougald · 15th February 2012, 04:20 PM

Hi Michael,
You are a goldmine of information. Thank you! In the group of photos you posted, the first photo is of my crossbow, and the rest are of Eric Claude's (Where did he go???? He started this whole thing with the photos of his crossbow.) I am endeavoring to take and re-size some photos showing more detail than my earlier photos. A striking difference between mine and Eric Claude's is that his looks much more "machined", especially the countersunk screws. Mine appears much more primitive. My photo was "photoshopped" by me to be clearer, and in doing so, I changed the exposure and thus the color of the wood from very dark to very light. Next batch will have truer coloration and some better construction detail and evidence of significant worming. Is worming common in wood that is only 200 years old? Also, when researching "knights in armor" I keep seeing reference to the fact that mounted, armored knights were 'killed off" by the crossbow in the 15th century. I had thought that a steel-stringed crossbow, with HEAVY and nearly unbendable steel bow, and a Goat's Foot lever to cock it, would be the only weapon capable of harnessing the kinetic energy necessary to pierce armor. I have cocked this one and it appears to produce an enormous force when the trigger is pulled. (I did that without a bolt in it, obviously). That's why I thought this crossbow was a 14th century "Knight-killer"). In Payne-Gallwey's book, he stated that steel bows created problems because they required Goat's Foot levers to cock, and that these levers caused the bowstring to stretch. He couldn't figure out how to make it work...and he never mentions steel bowstrings. I don't think he knew there was such a thing. Odd, since he published the book in 1903, and should have known of bows such as mine and Eric Claude's. The great mystery to me is that Sotheby's described a nearly-identical bow in 1998 as "17th century, used for firing incendiaries", and this description was copied by Del Mar when they sold a similar one in December 2011. And, when i contacted the Royal Armouries in Leeds, they said they had never seen one like it, but thought it "no older than 18th century, probably used for incendiaries or trap". It would appear the RA and you, Michael, are in agreement. It is good to get this resolved, as neither of the recognized "experts" (Sotheby's, Del Mar) appears to have been right. Pics to follow. Jim

Matchlock · 25th February 2012, 07:48 PM

A detail of the iron chain-link 'bow string' of what I call another 19th c. trap crossbow.

Best,
Michael

weapons 27 · 27th February 2012, 05:33 PM

Jim
this crossbow is at me, I asked has Eric Claude to put the photographs on your site. I did not make yet party of your group!!! if you need photographs more precise, I can send some .I thank you all for the research job..
cdlt

antoine

Matchlock · 15th March 2012, 12:53 PM

I finally found the trap crossbow in the pic last posted, and attach an overall view. Telling from the screws and other manufacturing criteria, it is made in 16th c. style but should be classed as 19th c. The overall length is 53.5 cm.

Also attached please find the only historic illustration of a trap (war) crossbow that I have ever noticed in period artwork, of the Early Gothic period, by Villard de Honnecourt, ca. 1230, in the Ms.fr. 19093, Bibliothèque Nationale Paris.

Best,
Michael

Matchlock · 20th June 2012, 12:55 PM

Hi Eric,

I just came across a rather similar specimen, the tiller also made from wood:

http://www.webarcherie.com/forum/ind...lete-ancienne/

and:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=15730

That sample and yours might both be of French origin, adopting the old North Italian style!

Btw, just like the guy who originally posted this I am wondering about the use of the blunderbuss-like mouthed opening of the bolt housing, which also seems to have been equiped with a sort of bead foresight ?! (bottom attachment).

Any thoughts?

Best,
Michael

Jim MacDougald · 20th September 2019, 09:57 PM

Is anyone still following this thread re "steel bowstring" crossbows? I have been away for years, and have some updated info and a few questions.

Matchlock · 20th June 2012, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matchlock

FRom post # 26:

There are a few North Italian all-steel crossbows known retaining their original all-steel quarrels (crossbow bolts), some of these crossbows fitted with a rounded pistol-grip butt like yours, and a few others with a two- or three-link chain instead of the usual string. While the one attached, dated 1562 and signed by the maker Opera de Renaldo de Visin da Asolo (preserved in the collection of the Ducal Palace in Venice, is 66.3 cm long, various similar are much smaller and are nowadays believed to have been built especially for carrying secretly and in order to use for assassinations.

A period of origin of the first half to the mid 16th c. seems to be common to all members of this very special group of North Italian crossbows. The shape of the rear sight on the attached crossbow is identical to rear sights found on contemporary matchlock and wheellock muskets.

Michael

I am convinced that the present cord string on this small crossbow dated 1562 is a replacement of the original three-link iron 'string'.

m

10th February 2012, 01:09 PM	#1
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Ok, I announced it and here it is. There are a few North Italian all-steel crossbows known retaining their original all-steel quarrels (crossbow bolts), some of these crossbows fitted with a rounded pistol-grip butt like yours, and a few others with a two- or three-link chain instead of the usual string. While the one attached, dated 1562 and signed by the maker Opera de Renaldo de Visin da Asolo (preserved in the collection of the Ducal Palace in Venice, is 66.3 cm long, various similar are much smaller and are nowadays believed to have been built especially for carrying secretly and in order to use for assassinations. A period of origin of the first half to the mid 16th c. seems to be common to all members of this very special group of North Italian crossbows. The shape of the rear sight on the attached crossbow is identical to rear sights found on contemporary matchlock and wheellock muskets. Any thoughts? Best, Michael Attached Images Last edited by Matchlock; 10th February 2012 at 02:46 PM.

10th February 2012, 02:24 PM	#2
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi there, I tried some photoshopping on Ericlaude's images; though the colors are not correct, more details have become visible, I hope. Telling from the both general shape and construction and the bolts/screws or rivets used, I should not date it before the 19th c. Thus this might be one of the numerous Historismus (Victorian) copies, including that certain amount of both style mingling and fantasy characteristic of that period), of Renaissance originals like the one in Venice. As the iron surfaces clearly show significant differences in rust and pitting I assume that some older and not belonging parts were associated. Best, Michael Attached Images Last edited by Matchlock; 10th February 2012 at 04:49 PM.

15th February 2012, 04:20 PM	#4
Jim MacDougald Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 8	Crossbow Hi Michael, You are a goldmine of information. Thank you! In the group of photos you posted, the first photo is of my crossbow, and the rest are of Eric Claude's (Where did he go???? He started this whole thing with the photos of his crossbow.) I am endeavoring to take and re-size some photos showing more detail than my earlier photos. A striking difference between mine and Eric Claude's is that his looks much more "machined", especially the countersunk screws. Mine appears much more primitive. My photo was "photoshopped" by me to be clearer, and in doing so, I changed the exposure and thus the color of the wood from very dark to very light. Next batch will have truer coloration and some better construction detail and evidence of significant worming. Is worming common in wood that is only 200 years old? Also, when researching "knights in armor" I keep seeing reference to the fact that mounted, armored knights were 'killed off" by the crossbow in the 15th century. I had thought that a steel-stringed crossbow, with HEAVY and nearly unbendable steel bow, and a Goat's Foot lever to cock it, would be the only weapon capable of harnessing the kinetic energy necessary to pierce armor. I have cocked this one and it appears to produce an enormous force when the trigger is pulled. (I did that without a bolt in it, obviously). That's why I thought this crossbow was a 14th century "Knight-killer"). In Payne-Gallwey's book, he stated that steel bows created problems because they required Goat's Foot levers to cock, and that these levers caused the bowstring to stretch. He couldn't figure out how to make it work...and he never mentions steel bowstrings. I don't think he knew there was such a thing. Odd, since he published the book in 1903, and should have known of bows such as mine and Eric Claude's. The great mystery to me is that Sotheby's described a nearly-identical bow in 1998 as "17th century, used for firing incendiaries", and this description was copied by Del Mar when they sold a similar one in December 2011. And, when i contacted the Royal Armouries in Leeds, they said they had never seen one like it, but thought it "no older than 18th century, probably used for incendiaries or trap". It would appear the RA and you, Michael, are in agreement. It is good to get this resolved, as neither of the recognized "experts" (Sotheby's, Del Mar) appears to have been right. Pics to follow. Jim

25th February 2012, 07:48 PM	#5
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	A detail of the iron chain-link 'bow string' of what I call another 19th c. trap crossbow. Best, Michael Attached Images

15th March 2012, 12:53 PM	#7
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	I finally found the trap crossbow in the pic last posted, and attach an overall view. Telling from the screws and other manufacturing criteria, it is made in 16th c. style but should be classed as 19th c. The overall length is 53.5 cm. Also attached please find the only historic illustration of a trap (war) crossbow that I have ever noticed in period artwork, of the Early Gothic period, by Villard de Honnecourt, ca. 1230, in the Ms.fr. 19093, Bibliothèque Nationale Paris. Best, Michael Attached Images

11th February 2012, 11:49 AM	#3
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Please refer also to my thread http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...bow+collection Best, Michael

27th February 2012, 05:33 PM	#6
weapons 27 Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 462	Jim this crossbow is at me, I asked has Eric Claude to put the photographs on your site. I did not make yet party of your group!!! if you need photographs more precise, I can send some .I thank you all for the research job.. cdlt antoine

20th June 2012, 12:55 PM	#8
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi Eric, I just came across a rather similar specimen, the tiller also made from wood: http://www.webarcherie.com/forum/ind...lete-ancienne/ and: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=15730 That sample and yours might both be of French origin, adopting the old North Italian style! Btw, just like the guy who originally posted this I am wondering about the use of the blunderbuss-like mouthed opening of the bolt housing, which also seems to have been equiped with a sort of bead foresight ?! (bottom attachment). Any thoughts? Best, Michael Attached Images Last edited by Matchlock; 20th June 2012 at 01:43 PM.

20th September 2019, 09:57 PM	#9
Jim MacDougald Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 8	Update Is anyone still following this thread re "steel bowstring" crossbows? I have been away for years, and have some updated info and a few questions.