Late Gothic Crossbows and Accouterments

David Jaumann · 12th February 2013, 09:10 AM

Thank you Andi!
That would be really nice! Is my guess right that this nut was constructed for a weaker crossbow that could be spanned with a belt?

Micke D · 12th February 2013, 01:14 PM

Yes this family seems to have had some crossbows and they span from middle to late 15th century.

I see now that I was generalizing maybe a bit too much when I said that about the length reduction. As you have seen for yourself, there were also longer crossbows later in the 15th c. The longer crossbows are, as you have also recognized, the ones that was spanned with Riemenrollenspanner. The crossbows that use the Cranequin are in most cases shorter. There are a few crossbows that have used both spanning systems, and a few that started with Riemenrollenspanner and gone over to the Cranequin, the crossbow in post no. 55 is of the latter type.

So I think that both types was made parallel to each other during the 15th c, the longer ones in many cases for war, as they were faster to span, and the shorter ones mostly for sport and hunting.

On page 38-41 in "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" you have an example of what looks like a very early long crossbow spanned with a Riemenrollenspanner, but I think it’s from 1430-1440 also but with an earlier style of inlays on the tiller underside that seems to have been popular around 1400.

I wish I had more info about the crossbow in post no. 55; as it’s one of the most interesting crossbows I have ever seen, I don’t even know if it has gone to a museum or a private collection. I will check with Finer if he can tell.
Yes it has a two-axle-lock, BUT the first axle is hidden/built in. Very strange!

No I don’t think that Peter Finer´s estimation is set too early, I think it is too late! I think this is the earliest known crossbow with a two-axle-lock. I have discussed this with Holger Richter, the author of "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" and he think it can be from as early as 1460, but my estimate is somewhere between 1460 and 1470. The crossbows shown on the St. Veit-Altar is probably the second oldest known crossbow with a two-axle-lock.

David Jaumann · 16th February 2013, 03:05 PM

It sounds very likely that the crossbow on post no.55 is one the first crossbows with a two-axle-lock, as you said! I guess that the crossbow maker wanted to hide the two-axle mechanism, because he didn´t want other crossbow makers to copy it. It could tell us that the two-axle-lock was´t common yet...

I do still have a view questions about composite prods of the late 15th century.

Were crossbow prods symmetrical or asymetrical in general?
On page 55 in "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" is a prod that looks asymetrical to me. But I´m not shure, if this impression is due to the camera perspective or if the prod distortioned during the last centuries. An asymetrical design would reduce the friction on the stock...

The horn stipes of a crossbow prod were shorter than the entire length of the entire prod, which means that the horn stripes must be assembeled angularily. Were these joinings always in the middle part as shown on page 52 in "die Hornbogenarmbrust" or were these joinings more often allocated on the entire length of the prod? Is a well made teethed joining always a potential weekpoint?

Thank you and best wishes,
David

Micke D · 17th February 2013, 06:20 PM

Hi David!

Yes I’m also thinking that this crossbow maker was hiding this new invention so that it wasn’t copied by his competitors. I believe that this crossbow maker could actually be THE inventor of the two axle lock, and maybe also the four axle lock! He was at least one of inventors. I think, based on the inlay design and the crossbows overall design, that this maker has also made the crossbow in post #1. This crossbow is later than the one in post #55; it could very well be from 1475 as it says at Peter Finer’s website. Check out the similar design of the crossbow and the delicate inlays between the hole in the tiller and the long white strip below the lock. An interesting and odd thing about this crossbow that it WAS originally built as a two axle crossbow, but it was later rebuilt as a one axle crossbow! This could of course have been done later when the tiller was repaired at the front.

If you also check out the fancier and a lot more expensive crossbow in post #88, page 3, Royal Armouries, Leeds, Inv. –Nr. XI. 11, you will see the same pattern of delicate inlays on the same place as the two other crossbows. This one has a kind of four axle lock, ("Die Hornbogenarmbrust" page 100), that don’t seem to have been used on other crossbows and a lot different than the usual type that was used from at least 1496 to more or less modern times.

I have earlier looked for asymmetrical composite bows, but I can’t say anything conclusive about it, some bows look a bit asymmetrical but the majority seems to be straight. I think the one you mentioned is much to degraded to use as an example for an asymmetrical bow. It’s possible that composite crossbow bows don’t handle the twisting well if they were built asymmetrically.

I think that it is always better if one can build the bow from as few and as long horn strips as possible, but if you look at page 46, 47 and 89 of "Die Hornbogenarmbrust", you will see some examples of how I think most looked inside with pieces of different length and thickness glued together. I don’t think the “teethed joining” between the layers was the weak point but possibly the overlap between the horn pieces or if you get more overlaps at the same place in one of the bow limbs. I think the “teethed joining” was what held the bow together, the pieces locked a bit like LEGO pieces to each other and the glue line was longer.

Best wishes,
Micke

Andi · 20th March 2013, 07:50 PM

Here you will find some macro photos of a crossbow nut found in the Schlossstraße in Hamburg-Harburg.

I am wondering about the substance which can be seen on the middle of the nuts notch. It seems to be metallic, possible lead or tin? Has anyone an idea of its purpose? I was also not able jet to take the dimensions and have to ask the exavators of the object.

cornelistromp · 20th March 2013, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andi

Here you will find some macro photos of a crossbow nut found in the Schlossstraße in Hamburg-Harburg.

I am wondering about the substance which can be seen on the middle of the nuts notch. It seems to be metallic, possible lead or tin? Has anyone an idea of its purpose? I was also not able jet to take the dimensions and have to ask the exavators of the object.

yes it is lead, or, in the case of a brass nut it is an iron bar.
it ensures as a counterweight that the nut reverses in the ideal position. (After each shot the nut rotates fast around.)
in the neutral position, the nut can be fixed by the bows internal mechanism while the string stretched can be attached behind the nut again.

best,

Micke D · 21st March 2013, 11:59 AM

It’s definitely not lead, it’s a reinforcement piece of iron or steel that’s riveted in the nut. All crossbow nuts have this from at least the 14th century.

12th February 2013, 01:14 PM	#2
Micke D Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 41	Yes this family seems to have had some crossbows and they span from middle to late 15th century. I see now that I was generalizing maybe a bit too much when I said that about the length reduction. As you have seen for yourself, there were also longer crossbows later in the 15th c. The longer crossbows are, as you have also recognized, the ones that was spanned with Riemenrollenspanner. The crossbows that use the Cranequin are in most cases shorter. There are a few crossbows that have used both spanning systems, and a few that started with Riemenrollenspanner and gone over to the Cranequin, the crossbow in post no. 55 is of the latter type. So I think that both types was made parallel to each other during the 15th c, the longer ones in many cases for war, as they were faster to span, and the shorter ones mostly for sport and hunting. On page 38-41 in "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" you have an example of what looks like a very early long crossbow spanned with a Riemenrollenspanner, but I think it’s from 1430-1440 also but with an earlier style of inlays on the tiller underside that seems to have been popular around 1400. I wish I had more info about the crossbow in post no. 55; as it’s one of the most interesting crossbows I have ever seen, I don’t even know if it has gone to a museum or a private collection. I will check with Finer if he can tell. Yes it has a two-axle-lock, BUT the first axle is hidden/built in. Very strange! No I don’t think that Peter Finer´s estimation is set too early, I think it is too late! I think this is the earliest known crossbow with a two-axle-lock. I have discussed this with Holger Richter, the author of "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" and he think it can be from as early as 1460, but my estimate is somewhere between 1460 and 1470. The crossbows shown on the St. Veit-Altar is probably the second oldest known crossbow with a two-axle-lock. Last edited by Micke D; 12th February 2013 at 07:57 PM.

16th February 2013, 03:05 PM	#3
David Jaumann Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 35	It sounds very likely that the crossbow on post no.55 is one the first crossbows with a two-axle-lock, as you said! I guess that the crossbow maker wanted to hide the two-axle mechanism, because he didn´t want other crossbow makers to copy it. It could tell us that the two-axle-lock was´t common yet... I do still have a view questions about composite prods of the late 15th century. Were crossbow prods symmetrical or asymetrical in general? On page 55 in "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" is a prod that looks asymetrical to me. But I´m not shure, if this impression is due to the camera perspective or if the prod distortioned during the last centuries. An asymetrical design would reduce the friction on the stock... The horn stipes of a crossbow prod were shorter than the entire length of the entire prod, which means that the horn stripes must be assembeled angularily. Were these joinings always in the middle part as shown on page 52 in "die Hornbogenarmbrust" or were these joinings more often allocated on the entire length of the prod? Is a well made teethed joining always a potential weekpoint? Thank you and best wishes, David Last edited by David Jaumann; 17th February 2013 at 10:24 AM.

12th February 2013, 09:10 AM	#1
David Jaumann Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 35	Thank you Andi! That would be really nice! Is my guess right that this nut was constructed for a weaker crossbow that could be spanned with a belt?

17th February 2013, 06:20 PM	#4
Micke D Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 41	Hi David! Yes I’m also thinking that this crossbow maker was hiding this new invention so that it wasn’t copied by his competitors. I believe that this crossbow maker could actually be THE inventor of the two axle lock, and maybe also the four axle lock! He was at least one of inventors. I think, based on the inlay design and the crossbows overall design, that this maker has also made the crossbow in post #1. This crossbow is later than the one in post #55; it could very well be from 1475 as it says at Peter Finer’s website. Check out the similar design of the crossbow and the delicate inlays between the hole in the tiller and the long white strip below the lock. An interesting and odd thing about this crossbow that it WAS originally built as a two axle crossbow, but it was later rebuilt as a one axle crossbow! This could of course have been done later when the tiller was repaired at the front. If you also check out the fancier and a lot more expensive crossbow in post #88, page 3, Royal Armouries, Leeds, Inv. –Nr. XI. 11, you will see the same pattern of delicate inlays on the same place as the two other crossbows. This one has a kind of four axle lock, ("Die Hornbogenarmbrust" page 100), that don’t seem to have been used on other crossbows and a lot different than the usual type that was used from at least 1496 to more or less modern times. I have earlier looked for asymmetrical composite bows, but I can’t say anything conclusive about it, some bows look a bit asymmetrical but the majority seems to be straight. I think the one you mentioned is much to degraded to use as an example for an asymmetrical bow. It’s possible that composite crossbow bows don’t handle the twisting well if they were built asymmetrically. I think that it is always better if one can build the bow from as few and as long horn strips as possible, but if you look at page 46, 47 and 89 of "Die Hornbogenarmbrust", you will see some examples of how I think most looked inside with pieces of different length and thickness glued together. I don’t think the “teethed joining” between the layers was the weak point but possibly the overlap between the horn pieces or if you get more overlaps at the same place in one of the bow limbs. I think the “teethed joining” was what held the bow together, the pieces locked a bit like LEGO pieces to each other and the glue line was longer. Best wishes, Micke

20th March 2013, 07:50 PM	#5
Andi Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Halstenbek, Germany Posts: 202	Here you will find some macro photos of a crossbow nut found in the Schlossstraße in Hamburg-Harburg. I am wondering about the substance which can be seen on the middle of the nuts notch. It seems to be metallic, possible lead or tin? Has anyone an idea of its purpose? I was also not able jet to take the dimensions and have to ask the exavators of the object. Attached Images

21st March 2013, 11:59 AM	#7
Micke D Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 41	It’s definitely not lead, it’s a reinforcement piece of iron or steel that’s riveted in the nut. All crossbow nuts have this from at least the 14th century.