THE CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT OF CROSSBOWS

MEDIEVAL

BALISTARIUS.

A crossbow maker in his shop with the stock of a crossbow in his hand.

Engraved by Jost. Amman.

From a Work on ' Mechanical Arts,' by Hartman Schopper, 1568

THE PRIMITIVE CROSSBOW, WITH A BOW OF SOLID WOOD, WHICH WAS BENT BY MANUAL POWER ONLY

The earliest crossbow doubtless had its bow formed of one stout piece of tough wood, such as ash or yew. It was bent by drawing its string to the catch of the lock by means of the hands alone.

T h e feet were pressed against the centre of the bow to gain a leverage, one foot on each side of the stock. A s the primitive crossbow had no stirrup, the back of its b o w could be placed close to the ground, for the purpose of placing the feet upon it preparatory to drawing its bow-string.

Next page, shows a crossbowman bending his weapon in this manner.

These simply constructed crossbows may be recognised in illuminated missals by the absence of a stirrup, and by the length, thickness and roughness of their bows (as if wrapped outside with cord to strengthen them). This thickness, their size and rough outline, and especially the absence of the stirrup, plainly show that their bows could not have been of steel, or even of composite construction.

It will here be interesting to give the description of the crossbow of about the time of the first Crusade, as written by Anna Comnena, who attributes its invention to the French. (Princess Anna Comnena, b. 1083, d. 1148, daughter of Emperor Alexis I., wrote the Alexiad (the history of her father, in fifteen books). A s Anna Comnena was only sixteen years of age in 1099, she could not, prodigy though we know she was, have been the authoress of the Alexiad if it was finished in 1099, as stated in works of reference.

In 1118, Anna was banished from court by her brother for intriguing against him. T h e history of her father, she tells us in her preface, was compiled to console and occupy her during her banishment. T h e Alexiad must, therefore, have been produced between 1118 and 1148.

T h e fact that Anna refers to the crossbow as a novelty, shows us, from our knowledge of its antiquity, that its common use in warfare had been discontinued for many years previous to the first Crusade. There is, however, sufficient evidence to prove that crossbows were carried by the Normans at the invasion of England in 1066, p. 45.)

PRIMITIVE CROSSBOW WITHOUT A STIRRUP.

RIMITIVE CROSSBOW WITH A STIRRUP.

This authoress not only gives us an accurate account of the weapon, but also tells us when it was first seen (in reality re-introduced) in warfare. She writes : ' It is a bow of a kind unknown to the Greeks and to the Barbarians. This terrible weapon is not worked by drawing its cord with the right hand, and holding it with the left hand. T h e user rests both his feet against the bow, whilst he strains at the cord with the full force of his arms. It has a semicircular groove which reaches down the middle of the stock. T h e missiles, which are of various kinds, are placed in the groove, and propelled along it by the released cord. W h e n the cord is released, the arrow leaves the groove with a force against which nothing is proof. It not only penetrates a buckler, but also pierces the man and his armour through and through.'

In course of time, the metal stirrup was fitted to the fore-end of the stock of the crossbow, as a more convenient and powerful method of bending the b o w than the original one of resting the feet against the bow itself. T h e stirrup was the same shape as, and was no doubt suggested by the stirrup of a saddle. T h e crossbowman placed one foot (in the case of the larger weapons both feet) in the stirrup of his crossbow, and in this way held its stock tight to the ground, in order to resist the pull of his hands on the bow- string, previous page.

In military records of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, I find many allusions to bolts for crossbows of ' one f o o t ' and bolts for those of ' two feet . ' (October 20, 1301. T h e king wishing to strengthen the town of Linlithgow, commands the Treasurer and Barons to send there six crossbows a tour with 2,000 quarrels, also twelve crossbows of two feet and 3,000 quarrels, and 5,000 quarrels for crossbows of one foot.-From Calendar of Documents relating to Scotland, No. 1250, Edward I. In 1328, Edward III. orders the Sheriffs of London to supply for the defence of the Channel Islands ' a hundred arcubalistiad Pedem, and twenty arcubalisti ad T r o l l ' (Rymer's Fa>dera, iv. 367).)

From this it would appear that the bolts, or the weapons for which the bolts were required, were respectively one foot and two feet long. T h e explanation is, that the words ' one f o o t ' and ' two f e e t 1 refer to the power of the crossbows, the lengths of which were, of course, much more than one or two feet.

T h e larger crossbow of the period, known as ' Arbalista ad duos Pedes,' could only be strung by the soldier inserting both his feet in its stirrup, the stirrup being made wide enough for him to do this, so that he might utilise his entire weight to resist the strain exerted by his arms when bending his bow.

T h e smaller crossbow, known as ' Arbalista ad unum Pedem,' was lighter and of less power. For this reason, sufficient resistance was obtained by the man who used it placing one foot in its stirrup when he stretched its bow-string, the stirrup being duly shaped to this end.

Bolts for crossbows of ' two f e e t ' referred, therefore, to the heavier missiles that were shot from the larger weapon, and bolts for crossbows of ' one f o o t ' referred to the lighter shafts intended for the less powerful crossbow.

When a crossbowman bent his bow with his hands alone, as in the case of the weaker weapons, he wore a leathern guard on each hand to protect his fingers from being cut. These small leathern guards just covered the insides of the fingers when the latter were hooked over the bow-string.

T h e pieces of leather were retained in position, when in use, by placing the thumbs through holes in their ends.

T h e primitive crossbows which were strung in this manner could have been of little power in comparison with those later ones which required mechanical aid to draw their strings, such as crossbows with composite, or steel, bows. T h e former may, however, have been effective at a time when the b o w was little used in Continental warfare, and before the powerful English longbow came to the front.

T h e primitive crossbow was, probably, not only a more accurate arm than the ordinary bow of its period, but also one of a more dangerous nature, as it projected a much heavier arrow than that of a bow.

T h e fact that the primitive crossbow (see Anna Comnena, p. 5 7 ) required the utmost strength of both arms to pull back its string, proves that it must have discharged its missile with considerable force, a force, perhaps, sufficient to penetrate, at a short range, leathern jackets or even coats of mail.

THE THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURY CROSSBOW, WITH A COMPOSITE BOW (OF YEW, HORN AND TENDON), WHICH WAS BENT BY HAND, OR BY A THONG AND PULLEY, OR BYA METAL CLAW ATTACHED TO THE CROSSBOWMANS BELT

ARBALESTE DE COR ET D'lF

WHEN the bow of a crossbow was shaped out of a single piece of wood, as in the earliest weapons of the kind (figs. 24, 25), it must always have been liable to break or warp, or take a 'set,' after being for some time in use. F o r this reason, the crossbow with a beautifully constructed composite bow, composed of horn or whalebone, yew and tendon, superseded the weapon with a solid wooden bow.

T h e crossbow with a composite bow is said to have been brought to Europe from the East by the Saracens, during the Crusades of the twelfth century, and through them popularised on the Continent. A t the time of the Crusades, and for many years after, the Saracens were famed for their construction of crossbows. In a list of crossbow makers compiled by Baron de Cosson, the name of ' Peter the Saracen' is the earliest he can find mentioned, this man being maker of crossbows to King John of England in 1205. It is likely that the weapon used by the Normans in the conquest of England, had a stout bow of solid wood. In the time of Richard I., however, 1189 - 1199 , this king probably hired crossbowmen with composite bows formed of horn, wood and tendon ; crossbows with steel bows being of later date.

In support of the latter contention, I may quote Justiniani, who writes that in 1246 (or 47 years later than Richard I.) ' 500 Genoese crossbowmen whose crossbows had bows of horn, were sent against the Milanese, and that each Genoese who was captured by the enemy was deprived of an eye and an arm, in revenge for the loss of life inflicted by his crossbow.'

T h e composite bow, as applied to the crossbow, was of rather clumsy appearance, and, unless closely examined, might easily be mistaken for a bow of wood in one piece. T h e composite bow was, however, light, elastic and fairly powerful, far more so than a bow of solid wood, and before the days of longbows and steel crossbows, it was probably an effective weapon in warfare.

A FIFTEENTH CENTURY CROSSBOW WITH A COMPOSITE BOW

WHICH WAS BENT BY A CRANEQUIN. (German.)

These composite bows may be recognised in illustrated manuscripts by their short length,

(The composite bow of a crossbow was sometimes as much as 2 1/2 in. wide and 1 1/2 in. thick, though in length seldom over 2 ft. 5 in., more often 2 ft. 3 in. or 2 ft. 4 in.)

great thickness, and smooth outlines, by the presence of a stirrup on the fore-end of...