Late Gothic Crossbows and Accouterments

fernando · 10th June 2012, 05:04 PM

Hi Swordfish,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swordfish

... This I can't let stand without contradiction. But before I'm going to disprove all arguments, the reader must have the opportunity to judge the weight of the opinions of these experts. Are these real experts, or self appointed so called 'experts' for early crossbows? ...

Should you in time consider that sometimes your style is not the ideal one, we would be happy to see you adopting a more diplomatic approach to other members posts.
Just don't leave room to anyone (correctly or incorrectly) realize that you have a second intention in contradicting their impressions.
The type of discussion we favour here is that of exchanging perspectives, not that of exchanging disputes ... specially those sounding personal.
Don't take it wrong; it may be our self appointed non expert feeling that things will derail if we don't use prevention brakes.

Swordfish · 10th June 2012, 08:09 PM

Dear Fernando,

It is not my intention to exchange personal disputes here, but if I am criticised hard to depict fakes here, it must be allowed to give a hard answer.
I don't believe that this forum should be a Theology-tutorial, where no controversial discussion is allowed. A discussion without opposed oppinions is no real discussion, but I know when I have to stop. There is no need for any prevention brakes, such as closing a thread.

Micke D · 10th June 2012, 08:39 PM

I have not had the time to read your answer through yet, but I will read it and explain what I meant with me earlier comments.
I hope that you don't take my comments personaly as it is the crossbows i'm doubting and not you as a person.
I am in no way an expert, I'm just an amateur, but as this is one of my favorite subjects I have read many books and seen a lot of crossbows, so I believe that I know something about how they should look.

Mikael Dahlström,
Stockholm Lockbow Society,
Sweden

Swordfish · 10th June 2012, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micke D

I have not had the time to read your answer through yet, but I will read it and explain what I meant with me earlier comments.
I hope that you don't take my comments personaly as it is the crossbows i'm doubting and not you as a person.
I am in no way an expert, I'm just an amateur, but as this is one of my favorite subjects I have read many books and seen a lot of crossbows, so I believe that I know something about how they should look.

Mikael Dahlström,
Stockholm Lockbow Society,
Sweden

Hi Micke,

If I have left the impression to criticise you personally, I apologize for that. Every contribution that is well foundet is wellcome, irrespective thereof if it comes from an expert or an amateur. We are all amateurs. In no case it was my intention to bar you from furher contributions.

Best

fernando · 10th June 2012, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swordfish

... There is no need for any prevention brakes, such as closing a thread...

Oh no, the brakes weren't meant for that.

Andrew · 11th June 2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swordfish

Dear Fernando,

It is not my intention to exchange personal disputes here, but if I am criticised hard to depict fakes here, it must be allowed to give a hard answer.

Good. The best way to avoid personal disputes here is to maintain a diplomatic and polite demeanor, as suggested by your moderator.

Quote:

I don't believe that this forum should be a Theology-tutorial, where no controversial discussion is allowed.

What you believe this forum "should be" is irrelevant--you are a guest.

Quote:

A discussion without opposed oppinions is no real discussion, but I know when I have to stop. There is no need for any prevention brakes, such as closing a thread.

Excellent. Thank you, in advance, for your continued consideration and cooperation.

cornelistromp · 13th June 2012, 08:14 AM

to classify a weapon as doubtful or falsification , is permitted but this must be done deliberately.
not because of a gut feeling or because such person has never seen it before. Oakeshott quote: It Means nothing That You never seen it before unless you have seen them all, those 100.000's.
if such a statement is not brought argued, it evokes the natural incomprehension and irritation. action is minus reaction! maybe we can restrict ourselves to the facts.

the crossbow under discussion post#153;
a reflex and recurved composite bow is probably the most efficient form. This bow is similar in shape to the 15th century ottoman short composite flight bow. This has the greatest cast ever known and is suitable for heavy and light arrows but also brings more energy to lighter arrows. see research Mr. Adam Karpowicz's

http://www.atarn.org/islamic/Perform...rkish_bows.htm

Crossbow post 153 and 156

Making Such a bow requires high skill and patience. Because of the long time required for the organic materials to dry it takes 1 to 3 years to make a composite bow. So I think we can definitively exclude a modern forgery.

although I like the crossbow of post # 156 better, I think that Both of them are original mid 15th C, South??? or Central Europe???, the parts are almost certainly.
it can be, but this is only an assumption that in the very early life of the crossbow post #153 the stock has been renewed.this is based on the rather square shape of the stock.

that other than the common materials have been used I do not see as an alarm signal, as long as it was available and it works in practice, it is simply just possible.

best,

David Jaumann · 13th June 2012, 10:04 AM

@Matchlock: Tank you for the pictures of the cranequins from Churburg!

Strong reflex bows are indeed the fastest ones! But I´m very much impressed that bows with thick cross sections, like the ones from the late 15th century shown in the last few posts can endure such a strong reflex. The material of bows with high cross sections is really much stressed. (That´s also the reason why english warbows with thick cross sections usually were made of yew wood.)

I have found one more wooden stock probably made of oak wood on the internet today. It was probably made in the 15th century and it is exposed in Hambourg. The trigger mechanism is very simple because the string is released with a "Zapfenschloss".

Here is thethe link:
http://folini.tikon.ch/reenactment/s...20Hamburg.jpeg

best wishes,

David

fernando · 13th June 2012, 02:09 PM

Hi David,
Links are not so good for the thread history and forum archives preservation.
Direct upload is what should preferably be done.
By the way, this crossbow stock you post, exhibited in Hamburg State Museum, is labeled as a Children's example

.

David Jaumann · 13th June 2012, 02:20 PM

Thank you for posting the picture! I tried at first posting it directely, but it didn´t work because the picture was to big. How can I scale down the sice of the pictures?

Yes, it is labeled as a children´s example!
I don´t have the mesurements, but I belive that the bow fixed on the stock was probably to heavy for a child, because the bow must have been quite broad. What do you think?

Matchlock · 13th June 2012, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Jaumann

@Matchlock: Tank you for the pictures of the cranequins from Churburg!

Strong reflex bows are indeed the fastest ones! But I´m very much impressed that bows with thick cross sections, like the ones from the late 15th century shown in the last few posts can endure such a strong reflex. The material of bows with high cross sections is really much stressed. (That´s also the reason why english warbows with thick cross sections usually were made of yew wood.)

I have found one more wooden stock probably made of oak wood on the internet today. It was probably made in the 15th century and it is exposed in Hambourg. The trigger mechanism is very simple because the string is released with a "Zapfenschloss".

Here is thethe link:
http://folini.tikon.ch/reenactment/s...20Hamburg.jpeg

best wishes,

David

Hi David,

Thank you so much for bringing this remarkable sample to our knowledge!

And 'Nando, thanks a lot for adding the photo and pointing out that the item was designed for a child.
I did some photoshopping and like to add for information that it is the City Museum (Stadtmuseum) Hamburg where it is on display.

Best,
Michl

Swordfish · 13th June 2012, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Hi David,

Thank you so much for bringing this remarkable sample to our knowledge!

And 'Nando, thanks a lot for adding the photo and pointing out that the item was designed for a child.
I did some photoshopping and like to add for information that it is the City Museum (Stadtmuseum) Hamburg where it is on display.

Best,
Michl

Unfortunately this 'remarkable' item is no medieval crossbow! This is a tiller of a whale-bow which were used in Norway until about c. 1900! See Josef Alm: European Crossbows.
Depending on the length maybe a children's whale-bow used as a toy.

Best

13th June 2012, 08:14 AM	#7
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	to classify a weapon as doubtful or falsification , is permitted but this must be done deliberately. not because of a gut feeling or because such person has never seen it before. Oakeshott quote: It Means nothing That You never seen it before unless you have seen them all, those 100.000's. if such a statement is not brought argued, it evokes the natural incomprehension and irritation. action is minus reaction! maybe we can restrict ourselves to the facts. the crossbow under discussion post#153; a reflex and recurved composite bow is probably the most efficient form. This bow is similar in shape to the 15th century ottoman short composite flight bow. This has the greatest cast ever known and is suitable for heavy and light arrows but also brings more energy to lighter arrows. see research Mr. Adam Karpowicz's http://www.atarn.org/islamic/Perform...rkish_bows.htm Crossbow post 153 and 156 Making Such a bow requires high skill and patience. Because of the long time required for the organic materials to dry it takes 1 to 3 years to make a composite bow. So I think we can definitively exclude a modern forgery. although I like the crossbow of post # 156 better, I think that Both of them are original mid 15th C, South??? or Central Europe???, the parts are almost certainly. it can be, but this is only an assumption that in the very early life of the crossbow post #153 the stock has been renewed.this is based on the rather square shape of the stock. that other than the common materials have been used I do not see as an alarm signal, as long as it was available and it works in practice, it is simply just possible. best, Attached Images Last edited by cornelistromp; 13th June 2012 at 08:58 AM.

13th June 2012, 02:09 PM	#9
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Hi David, Links are not so good for the thread history and forum archives preservation. Direct upload is what should preferably be done. By the way, this crossbow stock you post, exhibited in Hamburg State Museum, is labeled as a Children's example . Attached Images

10th June 2012, 08:09 PM	#2
Swordfish Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 129	Dear Fernando, It is not my intention to exchange personal disputes here, but if I am criticised hard to depict fakes here, it must be allowed to give a hard answer. I don't believe that this forum should be a Theology-tutorial, where no controversial discussion is allowed. A discussion without opposed oppinions is no real discussion, but I know when I have to stop. There is no need for any prevention brakes, such as closing a thread.

10th June 2012, 08:39 PM	#3
Micke D Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 41	I have not had the time to read your answer through yet, but I will read it and explain what I meant with me earlier comments. I hope that you don't take my comments personaly as it is the crossbows i'm doubting and not you as a person. I am in no way an expert, I'm just an amateur, but as this is one of my favorite subjects I have read many books and seen a lot of crossbows, so I believe that I know something about how they should look. Mikael Dahlström, Stockholm Lockbow Society, Sweden

13th June 2012, 10:04 AM	#8
David Jaumann Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 35	@Matchlock: Tank you for the pictures of the cranequins from Churburg! Strong reflex bows are indeed the fastest ones! But I´m very much impressed that bows with thick cross sections, like the ones from the late 15th century shown in the last few posts can endure such a strong reflex. The material of bows with high cross sections is really much stressed. (That´s also the reason why english warbows with thick cross sections usually were made of yew wood.) I have found one more wooden stock probably made of oak wood on the internet today. It was probably made in the 15th century and it is exposed in Hambourg. The trigger mechanism is very simple because the string is released with a "Zapfenschloss". Here is thethe link: http://folini.tikon.ch/reenactment/s...20Hamburg.jpeg best wishes, David

13th June 2012, 02:20 PM	#10
David Jaumann Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 35	Thank you for posting the picture! I tried at first posting it directely, but it didn´t work because the picture was to big. How can I scale down the sice of the pictures? Yes, it is labeled as a children´s example! I don´t have the mesurements, but I belive that the bow fixed on the stock was probably to heavy for a child, because the bow must have been quite broad. What do you think?