crossbow of one foot, two foot and 'a tour'

[wardlaw]

Glaive 123 -

thank you for your comments. I am sure you are onto somehting with the one and two foot crossbow.

I have to ask, however, where you got your infomration about the crossbows being held upright 'more like a bow'? If it is purely based upon the images you cite (and I know there are lots more with a similar depiction of the crossbow held in this manner) I wonder whether you are not misinterpreting an artist convention - a reflection of the artist struggling to depict the crossbow when, side on, the arms and quarrel disappear? I am not entirely clear what you are referring to when you talk about a 'top tiller' - I am not aware fo having seen a surviving example with one, nor can I make them out on the illustrations?

I am sure that 'à tour' means 'of the tour' and, whilst it may not be a springald, surely refers to a heavier bow.

[Glaive203]

Originally Posted by wardlaw

Glaive 123 -

thank you for your comments. I am sure you are onto somehting with the one and two foot crossbow.

I have to ask, however, where you got your infomration about the crossbows being held upright 'more like a bow'? If it is purely based upon the images you cite (and I know there are lots more with a similar depiction of the crossbow held in this manner) I wonder whether you are not misinterpreting an artist convention - a reflection of the artist struggling to depict the crossbow when, side on, the arms and quarrel disappear? I am not entirely clear what you are referring to when you talk about a 'top tiller' - I am not aware fo having seen a surviving example with one, nor can I make them out on the illustrations?

I am sure that 'à tour' means 'of the tour' and, whilst it may not be a springald, surely refers to a heavier bow.

It's not my idea that they were held more or less vertically. Crossbows switched to the horizontal method when the gun stocks and sights were applied to them. I can being a traditional archer and bowyer tell you why (or ex archer and bowyer as I've not made bows or shot them since I lived in the country and had no trouble finding 200-400 yard meadows to shoot in).

The Roman crossbow did not use the Han/Chinese nut and hook/tricker/tickler system, instead it's "trigger" was a board attached to the tiller with a peg sticking out of it. The peg went through a hole in the tiller and literally pushed the string out of a notch in the tiller which held it. This was not a very smooth release and quarrels could shatter on impact. Holding these crossbows horizontally is awkward and slightly painful when on tries to pull the tickler which can throw off ones aim, especially when aiming down. There was also the risk of splinters from a shattered quarrel flying into ones face, a risk reduced by the vertical hold, finally the lath obstructs ones vision of the target when held horizontally.

Some of these reasons remained in effect with the adoption of the Han trigger mechanism. A "top-tiller' is a small plate attached to the tiller, going straight up and then bent at a right angle again to go over the nut and hold the quarrel.

The best translation of "a tour" is "tower" in English we would say a "tower crossbow" A crossbow spanned by the girdle and hook method is already as strong as one can make them without mechanical means of spanning them which did not exist at this early period. I already knew that crossbows were originally held almost vertically, but wondered how they were shot from arrow loops, as the archer had to hold the lath really vertically, as he often was standing at an angle to the loop. Richard Rutherford Moore supplied the answer (he's a re-enactor, best known for his acting role as sergeant Harper on the Sharpe series set in the Napoleonic wars). http://www.sthubertsrangers.org/crossbows.htm

Sorry for the tardy reply.

[fernando]

Rather interesting input Glaive203 !

Originally Posted by Glaive203

... The best translation of "a tour" is "tower" in English we would say a "tower crossbow"

Well, not necessarily .
As you know, the term tour has quite a few attributions, namely journey, lathe and, for the matter, turn, as for winch.
Some (French) sources say that arbalete a tour comes from the mechanism that applies tension to the bow.

Arbalètes à tour
D'origine romaine, ce sont les engins que nous nommons couramment « catapultes ». Ils tombent dans l'oubli avec la chute de l'Empire romain. Ils sont remplacés, à partir du XIe siècle, par l'arbalète à tour ou à treuil qui tire son nom du mécanisme qui sert à bander l'arc

[Glaive203]

Originally Posted by fernando

...for the matter, turn, as for winch.
Some (French) sources say that arbalete a tour comes from the mechanism that applies tension to the bow...

Thank you for the correction, but I think it's in error. We were discussing the 13th century and neither the crannequin or windlass existed (OK the windlass existed for balistae, but not for crossbows) Therefore we should discount

.

[wardlaw]

Randall Moffett's paper 'Military Equipment in the Town of Southampton During the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries' in the Jounral of medieval Military History, volume 9 (2011) refers to Liebel's book on springalds and great Crossbows, saying that Liebel makes a very good case for the one-foot/two-foot distinction being a reference to the length of the bolt.

[Micke D]

Randall Moffett's paper 'Military Equipment in the Town of Southampton During the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries' in the Jounral of medieval Military History, volume 9 (2011) refers to Liebel's book on springalds and great Crossbows, saying that Liebel makes a very good case for the one-foot/two-foot distinction being a reference to the length of the bolt.

I have not read Moffett's book, but I can strongly recommend Liebel's book on springalds and great Crossbows! I think also that Liebel is correct about the one-foot/two-foot distinction being a reference to the length of the bolt. A bit more than 1 foot long bolts for the hand held crossbows and 2 feet long bolts for the bigger crossbows usually placed in castles and fortifications.

[fernando]

THIS WORK looks like serious stuff.

If in one hand one-foot crossbows were field weapons and two-feet crossbows were for siege purposes, still the distinction between either term refers to the stirrup accomodating one or two feet, depending on the strenght needed to be applied to arm the weapon:

THIS OTHER ONE might be not so academic, but pretends the same.

.