ON ANCIENT ENGINES OF WAR.

War a painful topic.

The Utopian may shrink from the contemplation of so painful a subject as War, the Moralist may raise his voice against the justice of it, but the practical philosopher can see very little chance of its cessation, and actuated with the very best intentions, Advantages of war being destructive.will endeavour to render War as terrible as possible, well knowing, that as soon as certain death awaits two rival armies, princes must fight their own battles, or war must cease.

First missile weapons, sticks and stones.

Man’s first rude attempts at missile weapons were doubtless limited to throwing sticks and stones by the mere aid of his hands; acts in which the monkey, the bear, and even the seal are very successful emulators. A desire of more successful aggression, together with increased facilities for the destruction of game and wild animals, doubtless soon suggested to man the use of projectiles more efficient than these. Javelin.By a very slight change of form, the simple stick would become a javelin, capable of being hurled with great force and precision. Sling.An aid would suggest itself for casting a stone, by means of a fillet or band, subsequently called a sling, Bow.and next would be invented the bow, which, in process of time by subsequent additions Arbalest.would become the arbalest or cross-bow.

Axes used as projectiles.

It appears that axes have been used as projectiles: for Procopius, describing the expedition of the Franks into Italy, in the sixth century, tells us:—Among the hundred thousand men that King Theodobert I. led into Italy, there were but few horsemen. The cavalry carried spears. The infantry had neither bow nor spear, all their arms being a sword, an axe, and a shield. The blade of the axe was large, its handle of wood, and very short. They hurl their axes against the shields of the enemy, which by this means are broken; and then, springing on the foe, they complete his destruction with the sword.

Tomahawk used as a projectile.

A hatchet or tomahawk is used as a projectile weapon by the North American Indians. The difficulty of throwing such a weapon with effect, would of course consist in causing the edge to strike the object aimed at. Now, such a hatchet as they usually make use of, if thrown by its handle, will revolve in a perpendicular plane about once in every three yards, irrespective of the force with which it moves. An Indian judges his enemy to be distant from him any multiple of 3 yards as 15, 18, 21, and strikes him full with the edge of his weapon accordingly.

“Chuckur” or disk used as a projectile.

A circular disk or quoit is in use in India amongst the Sikhs, particularly that sect of them called Akali, as a weapon, and in their warlike exercises; the species used in war have a triangular section, those thrown for amusement are flat with a sharp edge. A skilful man will throw one of these chuckers or quoits to a distance of a hundred and thirty yards, or more, with very considerable accuracy, the quoit being at no period of its flight above six feet from the ground. The sharpness of edge, combined with the rotatory motion of these quoits, and the difficulty of avoiding them, renders them formidable weapons in skilled hands. The Akali wear them on their turbans, of several different sizes and weights; a small one is often worn as a bracelet on the arm. Many of these fanatics took part in the last Sikh war, and severe wounds made with these weapons were by no means uncommon.

Armour and fortifications.

By the time portable weapons would have been brought to some degree of perfection, man’s increasing sciences and civilization would have led him to make armour, to build cities, and enclose them with walls. Now would arise the necessity for other projectiles of greater force, inasmuch as in the event of war, the armour should be penetrated, and walls, &c., would have to be demolished.

Improved projectiles.

The transition from portable projectiles to those of a heavier class was obvious enough. Change to heavy projectiles.Enormous javelins and darts were hurled by cross-bows of corresponding size, termed Catapulta.Catapultæ, (plate x.), and stones, &c., were thrown by Balistæ.Balistæ (plate ix. and xii); and secondly, Sling principles.instruments formed on the principle of the sling.

Projectiles used with Catapulta.

These machines threw not only large darts and stones, but also the bodies of men and horses. Athenæus speaks of a Catapulta which was only one foot long, and threw an arrow to the distance of half a mile. Other engines, it is said, could throw javelins from one side of the Danube to the other. Balistæ threw great beams of wood, lances twelve cubits long, and stones that weighed three hundred pounds.

Millstones, &c., used in England.

Our forefathers used to cast forth mill-stones. Holinshead relates that when Edward I. besieged Stively Castle, he caused certain engines to be made, which shot off stones of two or three hundred weight.

The first intimation of trees being cut down “to build bulwarks against the city till it be subdued,” occurs in B. C. 1451.Deut. xx., 19, 20, but the earliest precise mention of Artillery is in B. C. 809.2nd Chron., xxvi, 15, where we are told that Uzziah “made in Jerusalem engines invented by cunning men, to be upon the towers and upon the bulwarks, to shoot arrows and great stones withal;” and Josephus relates that Uzziah First mention of Artillery.“made many engines of war for besieging cities, such as hurl stones and darts with grapplers, and other instruments of that sort.” He must therefore be considered the inventor of them, and from that time they began to be employed in attacking and defending towns.

Balistæ at Regium, B. C. 388.

The earliest instances of projectile machines in profane history appear to be at the siege of Regium and At Motya B. C. 370.Motya by Dionysius, where, having battered the walls with his rams, he advanced towards them towers rolled on wheels, from whence he galled the besieged with continual volleys of stones and arrows, thrown from his Balistæ and Catapultæ.

At Rhodes B. C. 303.

The next memorable instance is the siege of Rhodes by Demetrius Polyorcetes, who brought forward a newly invented machine, called Helepolis, (taker of Cities), with a variety of other engines, and employed 30,000 men in the management of them.

Balistæ at Cremona.

Tacitus mentions an extraordinary engine, used by the 15th Legion at the battle of Cremona, against the troops of Vespasian. It was a Balista of enormous size, which discharged stones of weight sufficient to crush whole ranks at once. Inevitable ruin would have been the consequence, had not two soldiers, undiscovered, cut the ropes and springs. At length, after a vigorous assault from Antonius, the Vittelians, unable to resist the shock, rolled down the engine, and crushed numbers of their assailants, but the machine, in falling, drew after it a neighbouring tower, the parapet, and part of the wall, which afforded the besiegers easier access to the city.

Balistæ at siege of Jotapata.

Josephus relates that at the siege of Jotapata, “a stone from one of the Roman engines carried the head of a soldier, who was standing by him, three furlongs off;” that “lances were thrown with great noise, and stones, weighing 114lbs. troy, “together with fire and a multitude of arrows.” Dead men and horses projected.The dead bodies of men and horses were also thrown at this siege, and at that of Jerusalem, A. D. 70, to inspire terror.

Form of Balistæ.

The earliest form of Balistæ appears to have been a very long beam, suspended in a frame on a centre of motion, one end being considerably longer than the other. To the short end was attached a great weight, such as a chest filled with earth or stones. To the longer end a sling was affixed, in which, after being drawn down, a stone was placed, and on being suddenly let go, the long end flew up, and discharged the stone with great violence.

Form of Catapultæ.

Catapultæ were sometimes constructed to discharge a flight of arrows at once, by placing them on a rack, and causing a strong plank, previously drawn back, to strike against their ends. The more perfect engines of the Romans were all dependent on the elasticity of twisted cords made of flax, hemp, the sinews or tendons of animals, from the neck of the bull, or legs of the deer species, and ropes formed of human hair were preferred to all others, as possessing greater strength and elasticity. Catapultæ were immensely powerful bows, drawn back by capstans, levers, or pulleys, having only a single cord for the arrow, (plate x.), but the Balistæ had a broad band, formed of several ropes to project the stone, which was placed in a kind of cradle, like a cross-bow. (plate xii.)

Balistæ at battle of Hastings 1066

The Normans appear to have introduced a kind of Field-Artillery, consisting of instruments or machines, from which darts and stones were thrown to a considerable distance, as they occur at the battle of Hastings. They also employed arrows, headed with combustible matter, for firing towns and shipping.

Fiery darts, A. D. 64.

We read in the Scriptures of “Fiery Darts.” Ephns. vi., 16.

Fire from Balistæ.

Our ancestors derived the knowledge of some composition from the Saracens, which resembled Greek-fire, and was often thrown in pots from the Balistæ.

Fire by Arabs commencement of 13th century.

From a treatise on the “Art of Fighting,” by Hassan Abrammah, we learn that the Arabs of the 13th century employed their incendiary compositions in four different ways. They cast them by hand; they fixed them to staves, with which they attacked their enemies; they poured forth fire through tubes; and they projected burning mixtures of various kinds by means of arrows, javelins, and the missiles of great engines.

Bombs of glass, &c.

Vessels of glass or pottery, discharged by hand or by machines, were so contrived, that on striking the object at which they were aimed, their contents spread around, and the fire, already communicated by a fusee, enveloped everything within its reach. Fire-mace.A soldier, on whose head was broken a fire-mace, became suddenly soaked with a diabolic fluid, which covered him from head to foot with flame.

Bombs from Balistæ.

Bombs were also thrown from Balistæ. An engine was constructed at Gibraltar, under the direction of General Melville, at the desire of Lord Heathfield, for the purpose of throwing stones just over the edge of the rock, in a place where the Spaniards used to resort, and where shells thrown from mortars could not injure or annoy them.

Onager.

Of machines formed on the sling principle, that called Onager (plates vii. and viii.) may be regarded as typical of all the rest. Its force entirely depended upon the torsion of a short thick rope, acting upon a lever which described an arc of a vertical circle. The lever had attached to its free extremity a sling, or sometimes it merely terminated in a spoon-shaped cavity. When bent back, it was secured by a catch or trigger, and charged with a stone. On starting the catch by a blow with a mallet, the lever described its arc of a circle with great velocity, and projected the stone to a considerable distance.

I shall now briefly describe some of the portable missive weapons which have been used by different nations.

Javelin.

The Javelin, or dart, variously modified, is known under several names. The ancients were well acquainted with it. In the Scriptures, we have frequent notice of it; and the ancients instituted javelin matches. It would appear that the javelin used on horseback was about five feet and a half long, and headed with steel, usually three-sided, but sometimes round. Arms of the early Romans.The Roman Cavalry, after the conquest of Greece, were armed much like the Infantry, carrying swords, shields, and javelins with points at both ends. Aid to projection.Sometimes, in order to launch it with greater force, it was not propelled by the unaided arm, but by the assistance of a thong fastened to its butt end; and we are informed that the Greeks and Romans projected darts and javelins by the assistance of a sling or strap, girt round their middle.

Djereed.

At the present time, a javelin, termed Djereed, is used with considerable effect by certain oriental nations, who invariably employ it on horseback. Pilum.The Roman infantry possessed a weapon of the javelin kind, termed Pilum, every man of the legionary soldiers carrying two. The point of this weapon being very long and small, was usually so bent at the first discharge as to be rendered useless afterwards. With every improvement that the javelin was susceptible of, it never could acquire a long range; hence we find, that as Archery became developed, the use of the weapon declined. Amongst savage nations, the use of the javelin is very common, Australian mode.but the inhabitants of Australia have a manner of throwing it altogether peculiar to themselves, not throwing it while poised at the balance, but projecting it by means of a stick applied at the butt end. This contrivance accomplishes a great increase of range, but does not contribute to accuracy of direction. At short distances, the penetrating force of the javelin is considerable, as is learned from the act of harpooning a whale, Harpoon.a harpoon being merely a javelin.

THE SLING.

Means by which stones would be thrown by greater force than the hand, would naturally be resorted to; accordingly we find the sling ranks amongst the first of ancient offensive weapons. Slings mentioned in Judges. B. C. 1406.Numerous examples are mentioned in Scripture, as in Judges xx., 16, Slings used B. C. 1406.“Among all this people, there were seven hundred chosen men left-handed; every one could sling stones at a hair breadth and not miss;” and also that of David and Goliath, &c.

Siege of Troy between 800 and 900 B. C.

At the siege of Troy, the masses were organized into two kinds of infantry: one light and irregular, carrying horn bows, short darts, and slings; the other regular and heavy, armed with spears. Battle of the Granicus B. C. 334.At the battle of the Granicus, B. C. 334, Alexander the Great had in his army light infantry, consisting of slingers, bow-men, and javelin-men. First Punic war 241 to 263 B. C.The Carthagenians had slingers in their pay before the first Punic War.

Slings common in Greece.

The Sling was very common in Greece, and used by the light armed soldiers. Arrows, stones, and leaden plummets, were thrown from them, some of which weighed no less than an Attic pound. Seneca reports that its motion was so vehement that the leaden plummets were frequently melted!!! Slingers in Roman armies.The Romans had slingers in their armies, for the most part inhabitants of the Islands of Majorca, Minorca and Ivica.

Invention ascribed to Phœnicians and also to inhabitants of Balearic islands.

Pliny ascribes the invention of slings to the Phœnicians, but Vegetius to the inhabitants of the Balearic Islands, who were famous in antiquity for using them. It is said, those people bore three kinds of slings, some longer and others shorter, to be used as their enemies were nearer or more remote; the first served them for a head band, the second for a girdle, and the third they always carried in their hands. In fight they threw large stones with such violence, that they seemed to be projected from some machine, and with such exactness, as rarely to miss their aim; being constantly exercised from their infancy, their mothers not allowing them to have any food, until they struck it down from the top of a pole with stones thrown from their slings.

The Latin for our English word farm is fundus, which originally signifies a “stone’s-throw of land,” or as much land as could be included within the range of a stone thrown from a sling. Materials of slings.The materials of which slings were composed, were either flax, hair or leather, woven into bands or cut into thongs, broad in the centre to receive the load, and tapering off to the extremities. Slings with cup.Slings have been made with three strings, with a cup let into the leather to hold the bullet or stone, and were called “Fronde à culôt.” In plate xiii, fig. 3, there is a representation of a slinger of the early part of the thirteenth century, whose weapon differs from that of the Anglo-Saxon or common sling, in having a cup for the reception of the projectile. Slings were sometimes attached to sticks to increase their power, as, besides the ancient cord sling, there appears in the manuscripts of the thirteenth century a variety of this arm; the Staff-sling.“Staff Sling.” (plate xiii, fig. 2.) It seems to have been in vogue for naval warfare, or in the conflicts of siege operations.

Force of slings.

The slings projected their missiles with such force that no armour could resist their stroke. Slings never appear to have been much used by the English, Used for the English, A. D. 1342.although Froissart mentions an instance of their having been used for them by the people of Brittany, in a battle fought in that province during the reign of Philip de Valois, between the troops of Walter de Manin, an English knight, and Louis d’Espagne, who commanded six thousand men on behalf of Charles de Blois, then competitor with the Earl of Montford for the Duchy of Brittany. Froissart says, that what made Louis lose the battle was, Bullets out of slings.that during the engagement the country people came unexpectedly and assaulted his army with bullets and slings.

According to the same author, slings were used in naval combats, when stones were also sometimes thrown by hand.[2] Slings at the siege of Sancere, 1572.Slings were used in 1572, at the siege of Sancere by the Huguenots, in order to save their powder. They were also used by the people of Brittany to such an extent against the Roman Catholic party, that the war was called “Guerre de Fronde.” Range.With respect to the range of this projectile, it is said, that a good slinger could project a stone 600 yards. This seems doubtful. Slings last used, 1814.The most recent instance of slings being used in war, occurs in “Straith on Fortification,” page 121, and which contains an extract from the siege journal of Serjeant St. Jacques of the French Corps de Genie, who was most successfully employed with a small French garrison in the defence of the Castles of Monzowin, Arragon, against the Spaniards, 1814.

THE BOW.

The bow almost universal.

This weapon under some shape or other was employed by most nations of antiquity, but not always as a warlike instrument. Scarcely any two nations made their bows exactly alike. The Scythian bow we are told, was very much curved, as are the Turkish, Persian, and Chinese bows (plate iv. figs. 1 & 2) at the present day, whilst the celebrated weapon of our ancestors when unstrung was nearly straight.

It is now used among those savage tribes of Africa and America, to which fire-arms have not yet reached.

Bows in Scripture.

We frequently read of the bow in Scripture, and the first passage in which the use of the bow is inferred, is in Gen. xxi. 20, where it is said of Ishmael, “And God was with the lad, and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness and became an archer.” Bows B. C. 1892.But in the 16th verse it is said that Hagar his mother, “sat her down over against him, a good way off, as it were a bow shot; for she said let me not see the death of the child”:—this verse implies an earlier practice with the bow than can be adduced by any profane historian. B. C. 1760.In Gen. xxvii. 3, Isaac directs his son Esau: “Now therefore take I pray thee thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me some venison; and make me savory meat, such as I love, and bring it to me that I may eat, and that my soul may bless thee before I die.” The overthrow of Saul was particularly owing to the Philistine archers; and “David bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow.” The companies that came to David at Ziklag were armed with bows, and “could use the right hand and the left in hurling stones and shooting arrows.” (I. Chron. xii. 2.) B. C. 1058.The bow is of very high antiquity among the Greeks, whose bows were usually made of wood, but sometimes of horn, and frequently in either case beautifully ornamented with gold and silver; the string generally made of twisted hair, but sometimes of hide. Manner of drawing the bow.The ancient Persians drew the strings towards their ears, as is the practice still with the English. The ancient Greeks, however, drew the bowstring towards their breast, and represented the fabled Amazons as doing the same, and hence the tradition of these people cutting off their right breasts, in order to give facility for drawing the bow. First used by Romans.Until the second Punic war, the Romans had no archers in their armies, except those who came with their auxiliary forces. Subsequently they became more employed, although as far as we can learn, not by native troops, but by Orientals in their pay.

Bows of Britons.

The early Britons had merely bows and arrows of reed, with flint or bone heads. Bows of Welsh.Arrows were used by the Welch in Norman reigns, who were famous archers; their bows were made of wild elm, but stout, and not calculated to shoot a great distance, but their arrows would inflict very severe wounds in close fight. Their arrows would pierce oaken boards four inches thick. Bows of Anglo-Saxons.The bow was also a weapon of war among the Anglo-Saxons. The Salic law shows that both the sling and the bow were used by the contemporary Franks; and they even used poisoned arrows. The Anglo-Saxon bow was of the form of the Grecian, but it was only under the Normans that the bow became a master weapon; the Saxons principally using it, like the people of Tahiti of the present day, for killing birds.

No bows in France A. D. 514.

During the reign of Clovis, the French made no use of the bow in their armies, but it was employed during the reign of Charlemagne, who flourished in the end of the eighth century; as a Count is mentioned, who was directed on conducting soldiers to the army, to see they had their proper arms; that is a lance, a buckler, a bow, two strings, and twelve arrows.

A. D. 1066. Harold shot with an arrow

William the Conqueror was a skilful archer, and the battle of Hastings was decided by the bow, and we hear that Harold was shot with an arrow. Known by Danes and Saxons.Although the Anglo-Saxons and Danes were well acquainted with the bow from the earliest period, it appears to have been only employed for obtaining food, or for pastime, and we are perhaps indebted to the Norman Conquest for its introduction as a military weapon. As a military weapon at the battle of Hastings.The Normans at the battle of Hastings are said to have used the arbalest or cross-bow as well as the long bow. Ever after this, the bow became a favourite weapon. During the reign of Henry II., archery was much cultivated, and great numbers of bowmen were constantly brought into the field; Archery encouraged by statute.and to encourage its practice, a law was passed, which freed from the charge of murder any one who in practising with arrows or darts, should kill a person standing near. This appears to be the first regulation to be found in our annals, and was probably founded on the old law of Rome. Long bow in conquest of Ireland 1172.The English conquests in Ireland during the reign of Henry II. were principally owing to the use of the long bow in battle, which the Irish wanted. The Invasion of Ireland was headed by Richard de Clare, Earl of Pembroke, surnamed “Strong-bow.” His force was numerically very small, consisting chiefly of archers, and it is stated that such was the advantage their superior arms and military skill gave the invaders, that 10 knights and 70 archers defeated a body of 3000 Irish opposed to them, on their landing near Waterford.

The exact time when shooting with the long-bow began in England is unsettled, A. D. 1199.our chroniclers do not mention archery till the death of Richard I.

During the reign of Henry III. there were among the English infantry, slingers, archers, and cross-bow men.

It seems that the long-bow was at its zenith in the reign of Edward III., who appears to have taken great pains to increase its efficacy, and to extend its use. Cressy 1346.The terrible execution effected by the English archers at Cressy, Poictiers 1356.and at Poictiers ten years after, was occasioned by British archers.

Homelden 1403.

The decisive victory over the Scots at Homelden was entirely achieved by them, and the Earl of Douglas found the English arrows were so swift and strong, that no armour could repel them; though his own was of the most perfect temper, he was wounded in five places. The English men-at-arms, knights and squires, never drew sword or couched lance, the whole affair being decided by the archers.

Shrewsbury 1403.

They again did terrible execution at the battle of Shrewsbury, in 1403, where Hotspur was slain, Agincourt 1415.and the battle of Agincourt was their undivided conquest.

20,000 bow-men 1455.

During the reign of Henry VI., the Parliament voted an army of 20,000 bow-men for service in France. The battle of St. Albans, 1455, seems to have been entirely won by the archers. Bow preferred to fire-arms.Although fire-arms had attained no inconsiderable degree of perfection in the reign of Henry VIII., yet the long-bow was still the favourite weapon. Indeed, in the reign of Elizabeth, the musket was so unwieldy, and slow to charge and discharge, that the bow was considered superior by many. We find that Queen Elizabeth, 1572, engaged to furnish Charles IX. of France with 6,000 men, part to be armed with long, and part with cross-bows; Bows at Isle of Ré, 1627.and in the attack made by the English on the Isle of Ré, 1627, it is said some cross-bow-men were in the army. In 1643 a company of archers was raised for the service of Charles I.; Bows against Scots, 1644 to 1647.and in a pamphlet printed in 1664, there is an account of the successes of the Marquis of Montrose against the Scots; and bow-men are repeatedly mentioned as in the battle. Bows in William 3rd’s time.The Grenadiers of the Highland Regiments, in the time of William III., when recruiting, wore the old red bonnet, and carried bows and arrows with them.

The Highland bow was very short, and by no means powerful.

MERITS OF THE LONG BOW.

Range of long-bow.

The English could not accomplish more than 600 yards, except on a few extraordinary occasions; our modern archers not more than from 300 to 500 yards. The Turkish ambassador when in England in 1795, sent an arrow upwards of 480 yards; and there are two or three instances on record since archery has been merely a pastime, which have exceeded it by twenty or thirty yards. Accuracy of long-bow.It is said of Domitian, that he would cause one of his slaves to stand at a great distance with his hands spread as a mark, and would shoot his arrows so correctly as to drive them between his fingers. Commodus, with an arrow headed with a semi-circular cutting edge, could cut or sever the neck of a bird. The story of William Tell, who struck an apple placed upon his child’s head, is well known, and generally regarded in the light of an historical fact. It is stated that Robin Hood could split a hazel wand.

In a journal of Edward VI., His Majesty relates that 100 archers of his guard shot before him two arrows each, and afterwards altogether. The object aimed at was a well-seasoned deal board, one inch thick. Penetration of long-bow.Many pierced it quite through, and some struck in a board on the other side. The distance is not mentioned, but we know that Henry VIII. prohibited any one above the age of 25 to shoot at a mark at a less distance than 200 yards.

Advantages of the long-bow.

The long-bow was light, inexpensive, and unaffected by weather, as the strings could be removed. Moreover, 12 arrows could be fired with accuracy in one minute. Two feathers in an arrow were to be white, and one brown or grey, and this difference in colour informed the archer in an instant how to place the arrow.

Disadvantages of the long-bow.

Although arrows could be shot from a bow with far greater rapidity and precision than balls from a musket, yet in damp weather the bow and string might become so much relaxed that the efficacy of the instrument became much impaired. A side wind deflected the arrow exceedingly in its flight, and even against a moderate wind, it was difficult to shoot at all.

Our Forefathers encouraged to acquire skill in archery by legal enactments, and by the founders of our public schools.

1ST. BY LEGAL ENACTMENTS.

Henry 2nd from 1154 to 1189.

We have previously stated that the first law encouraging the practice of archery was passed in the reign of Henry II.

Richard 2nd from 1377 to 1399.

An Act of Parliament was passed in the reign of Richard II., to compel all servants to shoot on Sundays and holidays.

Edward 4th from 1461 to 1483.

In the reign of Edward IV., an act was passed, Every man to have a bow.ordaining every Englishman to have a bow of his own height, and during the same reign butts were ordered to be put up in every township for the inhabitants to shoot at on feast days, and if any neglected, the penalty of one halfpenny was incurred. The same monarch also passed an act, that bows were to be sold for 5s. 4d.

Cross-bows prohibited by Henry 7th & Henry 8th.

Henry VII. prohibited the use of the cross-bow, and Henry VIII., less than twenty years after, renewed the prohibition. He forbad the use of cross-bows and hand guns, and passed a statute which inflicted a fine of £10 for keeping a cross-bow in the house. Every man, being the King’s subject, was obliged to exercise himself in shooting with the long bow, and also to keep a bow with arrows continually in his house. Fathers and guardians were also commanded to teach their male children the use of the long bow.

Encouraged by Philip and Mary.

A statute of Philip and Mary mentions the quantity and kind of armour and weapons, to be kept by persons of different estates, viz:—“Temporal persons having £5 and under £10 per annum, one coat of plate furnished, one black bill or halbert, one long bow, one sheaf of arrows, and one steel cap or skull.”

Prices fixed by Elizabeth.

An act of Elizabeth, fixed the prices for long bows, at 6s. 8d., 3s. 4d., and a third sort at 2s. each bow.

Encouraged by monarchs from Henry 8th to Charles 1st.

Numerous statutes were passed to encourage archery in the reigns of Henry VIII., Elizabeth, James I. and Charles I. in whose reign the legislature interfered for the last time in 1633, when Charles I. issued a commission for preventing the fields near London being so enclosed, “as to interrupt the necessary and profitable exercise of “shooting,” and also a proclamation for the use of the bow and pike together:—Proclamation by Charles 1st.“A. D. 1633.—Whereas in former tyme bowes and arrowes have been found serviceable weapons for wars, whereby great victories and conquests have been gotten, and by sundry statutes the use thereof hath been enjoined, &c. &c.—and we expect that our loving subjects should conform themselves thereunto, knowing the exercise of shooting to be a means to preserve health, strength and agility of body, and to avoid idleness, unlawfull disports, drunkenness, and such like enormities and disorders, which are too frequent among our people.”

2ND.—BY THE FOUNDERS OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

Estimation of archery by founders of schools.

The founders of our Grammar Schools appear to have considered that the acquirement of skill in archery by their scholars was no less worthy of attention than their moral and intellectual improvement. They provided by their statutes sound learning and a religious education for all, but secured the removal of such as shewed no aptitude or disposition to learn. They also prescribed the amusements and exercises of the scholars, and prohibited such as were calculated to lead to idle and vicious habits. In fact, as true patriots, they understood how the sons of free men ought to be educated in youth, and that “a complete and generous education is that which fits a man to perform justly, skilfully, and magnanimously, all the offices, both private and public, of peace and war.”

Harrow School, founded 1571.

The founder of Harrow School, Mr. John Lyon, prepared a body of statutes to be observed in the management of the School. By one of these he limited the amusements of the Scholars “to driving a top, tossing a hand-ball, running, shooting, and no other.” By another he ordered:—“You shall allow your child at all times, bow-shafts, bow-strings, and a bracer, to exercise shooting.” On the entrance-porch to the Master’s house are two shields, the one bearing the Lion rampant, the other, two arrows crossed, an ancient device which had its origin in the design of the founder. This device is also impressed on the exterior of all books which are presented by the Head-Master as prizes to those scholars, whose improvement entitled them to such rewards. The practice of archery was coeval with the foundation of the School, and was continued for nearly two centuries. Every year there was a public exhibition of archery, when the scholars shot for a silver arrow. The last silver arrow was contended for in 1771.

St. Albans School.

At St. Alban’s Grammar School, one of the articles to be recited to such as offered their children to be taught in the School was,—“Ye shall allow your child at all times, a bow, three arrows, bow-strings, a shooting glove, and a bracer, to exercise shooting.”

Wilton School.

Sir John Dean, who founded, in 1558, the Grammar School of Wilton, in Cheshire, framed a body of statutes for the School. One of them provides:—“That upon Thursdays and Saturdays, in the afternoons, and upon holidays, the scholars refresh themselves, and that as well in the vacations as in the days aforesaid, they use their bows and arrows only, and eschew all bowling, carding, dicing, cocking, and all other unlawful games, upon pain of extreme punishment to be done by the Schoolmaster.”

Dedham School in Essex.

The Free Grammar School of Dedham, in Essex, was endowed in 1571, and confirmed by a Charter of Queen Elizabeth in 1574. Her Majesty’s injunctions to the parents of the boys who should attend the school at Dedham were:—“That they should furnish their sons with bows, shafts, bracers and gloves, in order to train them to arms.”

St. Saviour’s School in Southwark.

One of the statutes at the Grammar School of St. Saviour, in Southwark, decrees that “the plays of the scholars shall be shooting in long-bows, chess, running, wrestling, and leaping:—players for money, or betters, shall be severely punished and expulsed.”

Camberwell School.

A statute in the same words is found in the rules and orders framed for the government of Camberwell Grammar School, which was founded in 1615, by letters patent.

MEANS BY WHICH SKILL IN ARCHERY WAS ACQUIRED.

An archer made by long training, &c.

A successful archer could only be constituted by long training, strength, and address, we need not therefore wonder that the practice of the long-bow was not more copied by our neighbours, as the French pertinaciously adhered to the use of the cross-bow.

Every man had arms.

Etienne di Perlin, a Frenchman who wrote an account of a tour in England in 1558, says:—“The husbandmen leave their bucklers and swords, or sometimes their bow, in the corner of the field, so that every one in this land bears arms;” and it is also stated that all the youth and manhood of the yeomanry of England were engaged in the practice of the long-bow.

Public matches.

Public exhibitions of shooting with the bow continued during the reigns of Charles II. and James II., and an archer’s division, at least till within these few years, formed a branch of the Artillery Company. The most important society of this kind now existing is “The Royal Company of Archers, the King’s body-guard of Scotland.” The exact time of its institution is unknown, but it is referred by the Scottish antiquarians to the reign of their James I.

Causes of bad shooting.

Roger Ascham, in “Toxophilos,” states that the main difficulty in learning to shoot, arises from having acquired and become confirmed in previous bad habits; so that, “use is the onlye cause of all faultes in it, and therefore children more easelye and soner may be taught to shoote excellently then men, because children may be taught to shoote well at the first, menne have more paine to unlearne their ill uses than they have labour afterwarde to come to good shootinge;” and after having enumerated a long list of faults ordinarily committed, he thus proceeds to describe the secret of shooting straight with the long-bow.

Shooting depends on the eye.

“For having a man’s eye alwaye on his marke, is the onlye waye to shoote straighte, yea, and I suppose so redye and easye a waye, if it be learned in youth and confirmed with use, that a man shall never misse therein. Men doubt yet in loking at the marke what way is best, whether betwixt the bow and the stringe, above or beneath his hande, and manye wayes moo. Yet it maketh no greate matter which waye a man loke at his marke, if it be joined with comlye shooting. The diversitye of mens standing and drawing causeth divers men loke at their marke divers wayes; yet they all had a mans hand to shoote straighte if nothinge els stoppe. So that cumlynesse is the onlye judge of best lokinge at the marke. Some men wonder whye in castinge a man’s eye at the mark, the hande should go streight. Surely if he considered the nature of a man’s eye, hee woulde not wonder at it. The hand obeys the eye.For this I am certaine of, that no servaunt to his maister, no child to his father, is so obedient as everye joynte and peece of the bodye is to do whatsoever the eye biddes. The eye is the guide, the ruler, and the succourer of all the other parts. The hande, the foote, and other members dare do nothinge withoute the eye, as doth appear on the night and darcke corners. The eye is the very tongue wherewith witte and reason doth speake to everye parte of the bodye, and the witte doth not so soone signifye a thinge by the eye, as every part is redye to followe, or rather prevent the bidding of the eye. This is plaine in manye thinges, but most evident in fence and feighting, as I have heard men saye. There every parte standing in feare to have a blowe, runnes to the eye for help, as younge children do to the mother; the foote, the hande, and all wayteth upon the eye. If the eye bid the hand eyther beare of or smite, or the foote eyther go forward or backeward, it doth so. And that which is most wonder of al, the one man lokinge stedfastlye at the other mans eye and not at his hand, wil, even as it were, rede in his eye wher he purposeth to smyte next, for the eye is nothing els but a certain windowe for wit to shoote out her heade at. This wonderfull worke of God in making all the members so obedient to the eye, is a pleasant thing to remember and loke upon: therefore an archer may be sure in learninge to loke at his marke when hee is younge alwayes to shoote streight.”

The following description of the English archer is from an ancient treatise on Martial Discipline:—

Archer to wear easy dress.

“The yeoman hadde, at those dayes, their lymmes at libertye, for their hoseyn were then fastened with one point, and their jackes were long, and easy to shote in, so that they mighte draw bowes of great strength, and shote arrowes of a yarde long. Captens and officers should be skilful of that most noble weapon, Captains to see that bows &c., were in good order.and to see that their soldiers according to their draught and strength have good bows, well nocked, well strynged, everie stringe whippe in their nocke, and in the myddes rubbed with wax, braser and shuting glove, some spare strings trymed as aforesaid, everie man one shefe of arrows, with a case of leather defensible against the rayne, Twenty-four arrows to each man.and in the same shefe fower and twentie arrows, whereof eight of them should be lighter than the residue, to gall and astoyne the enemy with the hailshot of light arrows, before they shall come within range of their harquebuss shot.”

Encouraged from the pulpit.

The subject of archery was not deemed, in those days, an unsuitable theme for the pulpit, as may be seen by the following extract from one of the seven sermons (the sixth) preached before Edward VI., within the preaching place in the palace of Westminster, on the 12th of April, 1549, by that patriotic reformer, Bishop Latimer. With honest, plain spoken words, in the midst of his discourse he breaks off—

“Men of England, in times past, when they would exercise themselves, (for we must needs have some recreation, our bodies can not endure without some exercise), they were wont to goe abroad in the fieldes a shooting; but now it is turned into glossing, gulling, and whooring within the house. The arte of shooting hath bene in times past much esteemed in this realme, it is a gift of God that He hath geven us to excell all other nations withall, it hath been God’s instrument whereby He hath geven us many victories against our enemies. But now we have taken up whooring in townes, instead of shooting in the fieldes. A wonderous thing that so excellent a gift of God should be so little esteemed. I desire you, my Lordes, even as ye love the honour and glory of God, and entend to remove his indignation, let there be sent forth some proclamation, some sharpe proclamation to the justices of peace, for they doe not thier dutie, justices now be no justices, there be many good actes made for this matter already. Charge them upon their allegiance that this singular benefite of God may be practised, and that it be not turned into bolling, glossing, and whooring within the townes: for they be negligent in executing these laws of shooting. Training of Bishop Latimer.In my time my poore father was as diligent to teach me to shoote as to learne me any other thing, and so I think other men did their children. He taught me how to draw, how to lay my body in my bow, and not to draw with strength of armes as other nations doe, but with strength of the body. I had my bowes bought me according to my age and strength, as I encreased in them, so my bowes were made bigger and bigger: for men shall never shoot well except they be brought up in it. It is a goodly arte, a wholesome kinde of exercise, and much commended in phisicke.”

The following is another extract from the same sermon:—

How estimated by the people.

“I came once myself to a place, riding on a journey homeward from London, and I sent word over night into the towne that I would preach there in the morning, because it was a holiday, and methought it was an holidayes work. The church stood in my way, and I took my horse and my company, and went thither, (I thought I should have found a great company in the church,) and when I came there, the church door was fast locked. I tarryed there halfe an houre and more, at last the key was found, and one of the parish comes to me and said: ‘Sir, this is a busie day with us, we cannot heare you, it is Robin Hood’s day. The parish are gone abroad to gather for Robin Hood. I pray you let them not.’ I thought my rochet should have been regarded, though I were not: but it would not serve, it was faine to give place to Robin Hood’s men.”

PROOFS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF ARCHERY.

There is little at the present day in England to afford any adequate idea of the high importance, the great skill, and the distinguished renown of the English archers. By names of places.Some few places still retain names which tell where the bowmen used to assemble for practice, as “Shooter’s Hill,” in Kent; “Newington Butts,” near London; and “St. Augustine’s Butts,” near Bristol. The Butts will be found applied to spots of land in the vicinity of schools, as for instance, the College School of Warwick.

The fields situated to the east of the playing-fields at Eton, and known by the name of “The Upper and Lower Shooting-fields,” were probably so named from the ancient exercise of archery on these grounds.

Armorial Bearings.

Many of the noble and county families of Great Britain and Ireland have the symbols of archery charged on their escutcheons; as, for instance, the Duke of Norfolk, the Marquis of Salisbury, Lord Grey de Wilton, the Earl of Aberdeen, the Earl of Besborough, the Earl of Portarlington, the Baronetal family of Hales, Sir Martin Bowes, and also on the arms of Sydney Sussex College, in Cambridge, and the seal of the Sheffield Grammar School.

Government brand.

The mark or brand used by the Government of the present day, to identify public property, is an arrow-head, commonly called “The King’s broad arrow.”

Surnames of families.

There are also existing families which have derived their surnames from the names of the different crafts formerly engaged in the manufacture of the bow and its accompaniments; as, for instance, the names of Bowyer, Fletcher, Stringer, Arrowsmith, Arrow, Bowman, Bowwater, &c.

National proverbs.

If reference be made to our language, there will be found many phrases and proverbial expressions drawn from or connected with archery; some suggesting forethought and caution, as “Always have two strings to your bow;” “Get the shaft-hand of your adversaries;” “Draw not thy bow before thy arrow be fixed;” “Kill two birds with one shaft.” To make an enemy’s machination recoil upon himself, they expressed by saying, “To outshoot a man in his own bow.” In reference to a vague foolish guess, they used to say, “He shoots wide of the mark;” and of unprofitable silly conversation, “A fool’s bolt is soon shot;” and as a proof of exaggeration, “He draws a long bow.” The unready and unskilful archer did not escape the censure and warning of his fellows, although he might be a great man and boast that he had “A famous bow, but it was up at the castle.” Of such they satirically used to remark, that “Many talked of Robin Hood, who never shot in his bow.” Our ancestors also expressed liberality of sentiment, and their opinion that merit belonged exclusively to no particular class or locality, by the following pithy expressions, “Many a good bow besides one in Chester,” and “An archer is known by his aim, and not by his arrows.” To these may be added, “Testimony is like the shot of a long-bow, which owes its efficacy to the force of the shooter; argument is like the shot of a cross-bow, equally forcible, whether discharged by a dwarf or a giant.”

MILITARY AND POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES OF SKILL IN THE USE OF THE BOW.

Commenced at the battle of Hastings.

From the time of the battle of Hastings the English archers began to rise in repute, and in course of time proved themselves, by their achievements in war, both the admiration and terror of their foes, and excelled the exploits of other nations. Achievement lasted through a period of 500 years.The great achievements of the English bowmen which shed lustre upon the annals of the nation, extended over a period of more than five centuries, many years after the invention and use of fire-arms. England had a voluntary army.England, therefore, in those times, possessed a national voluntary militia, of no charge to the Government, ready for the field on a short notice, and well skilled in the use of weapons. Hence sprung the large bodies of efficient troops which at different periods of English history, in an incredibly short time, were found ready for the service of their country. These men were not a rude, undisciplined rabble, but were trained, disciplined men, every one sufficiently master of his weapon to riddle a steel corslet at five or six score paces, or in a body, to act with terrible effect against masses of cavalry; while most of them could bring down a falcon on the wing by a bird-bolt, or with a broad arrow transfix the wild deer in the chase.

Archers defeated men-at-arms.

Before the simple weapon of the British archer, itself but a larger form of the simplest plaything of a child, all the gorgeous display of knighthood, the elaborated panoply of steel, the magnificent war-horse, the serried ranks, the ingenious devices of tacticians and strategists, at once gave way; nothing can withstand the biting storm of the “cloth-yard shaft.” Value in sieges.It was equally efficacious in the field and in the siege. The defender of town or castle could not peep beyond his bretèche or parapet, but an English arrow nailed his cap to his head. In a field, provided the archers were, by marsh, wood or mountain, secured from a flank attack, they would bid defiance to any number of mounted men-at-arms. Their shafts, falling thick as hail among the horses, soon brought them to the ground, or threw them into utter disorder; then the armed footmen advanced and commenced a slaughter which was scarcely stayed but by weariness of slaying; the archers meantime continuing their ravages on the rear of the enemy’s cavalry by a vertical attack, prolonged, when the ordinary supply of their quivers had been exhausted, by withdrawing them arrows from their slain enemies, to be sent forth on new missions of death:—here is encouragement for our modern marksmen who are armed with a far more deadly weapon.

Opinion on English archers by Napoleon III.

The most complete and philosophic digest, which relates to the system of British archery, considered from a military point of view, is that given by the present Emperor of the French in his treatise “Sur le Passé et l’Avenir de l’Artillerie.” That the British victory at Cressy was wholly attributable to the prowess of British archers, is well known; not so well, a circumstance pointed out by the Emperor of the French, that thenceforward, and in consequence of that victory, Destroyed the prestige of cavalry.the prestige of cavalry declined. Now, there is a political, no less than military significance in this lowering of the esteem in which cavalry had previously been held. Horsemen were gentlemen, and infantry men of inferior degree. Whenever and wherever British archery were not brought to bear, horsemen were omnipotent, and infantry of little avail. Estimation of infantry by continental nations.During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries—the golden age of archery in this land, when yeomen or archers were in such high repute,—France and continental nations generally, treated foot soldiers with disdain. The Emperor of the French, in his systematic book just adverted to, mentions several examples where foot soldiers were ruthlessly cut down and ridden over by their own cavalry—the men-at-arms; not that the infantry fought ill, but that they fought too well. They were slaughtered lest the men-at-arms should have no scope for the exercise of their skill.

English men-at-arms never sullied their fame by cruel acts like these; not that they were better at heart: seeing that human nature is everywhere, and under all circumstances, pretty much alike. English infantry, mainly composed of archers, were far too valuable to be thus used. They bore the first brunt of battle, and not unfrequently decided it. At the time when every other foot soldier in Europe was the merest serf, Archer a yeoman.the British archer was a yeoman. He had a fixed heraldic rank; the first of low degree. He was above the handicraftsman, however skilful,—above the merchant—taking his rank immediately after the gentry. Political results.The excellence of British archery, then tended to bring about a political result; helping to establish that middle-class which, ever since its consolidation, has been one of the sheet-anchors of our glorious constitution.

THE ARBALEST, OR CROSS-BOW.

Cross-bow, modification of long.

In process of time a modification of the bow was invented. In place of the original instrument, a much shorter and stiffer bow, usually of steel, was placed transversely in a stock, bent by a lever, and discharged by a trigger, after the manner since used for a gun.

Invented in Crete or Sicily.

The cross-bow, or arbalest, called in Latin, arcus balistarius, or balista manualis, and in French arbalèt, is said by some to be of Sicilian origin; others ascribe its invention to the Cretans. It is supposed to have been introduced into France by the first crusaders, and is mentioned by the Abbé Suger in his life of Louis le Gros, as being used by that Prince, in the beginning of his reign, which commenced in the year 1108.

To England by Saxons.

Verstigan seems to attribute the introduction of this weapon into England to the Saxons, under Hengist and Horsa, but cites no authority in support of that supposition. In a print representing the landing of those generals, the foremost of them is delineated with a cross-bow on his shoulder, and others are seen in the hands of the distant figures of their followers, landed and landing from their ships.

The Normans got cross-bows from Italy.

It would appear that the Normans derived the cross-bow, with its name, from Italy. In Domesday Book mention is made of Odo, the arbalester, as a tenant in capite of the king of lands in Yorkshire; and the manor of Worstead, Norfolk, was at the time of Domesday survey, held of the Abbot of St. Benet at Holme, by Robert the cross-bow man. The names show them to have been Normans, and these instances are sufficient to prove the introduction of the weapon, though the few that may have been used at the battle of Hastings might occasion its not being represented in the Bayeux tapestry.

No cross-bow among Romans.

The absence of the cross-bow in early Roman monuments leaves it a matter of doubt, whether an arbalester would not simply mean the engineer of a catapult. There is no mention made of the hand cross-bow in very ancient authorities.

William II surnamed Rufus, from 1087 to 1100

The cross-bow has been used in England (at least, on hunting excursions) in the time of Rufus, for Wace tells us, that “Prince Henry, going the same day to New Forest, found the string of his cross-bow broken, and taking it to a villain to be mended, saw an old woman there, who told him he should be king.”

Henry I, 1100 to 1135.

During the reign of Henry I. the cross-bow seems to have been principally used in the chase. The projectile was in form of a short arrow, with a pyramidical head, called a quarrel, (plate 14, fig. 2 and 4). Cross-bow in war.Simeon of Durham speaks of it in the time of Henry I. thus:—“He raised a machine from whence the archers and cross-bowmen might shoot.”

Genoese celebrated for the use of.

The Genoese were at all times most celebrated for the skilful management of the cross-bow. The success which attended the Christians at the siege of Jerusalem, 1100, is attributed principally to the mechanical talents of this people.

Use of forbad.

The use of the cross-bows was general in Italy in 1139, for at that time Pope Innocent II. particularly forbad them. The German Emperor Conrad did the same, as we learn from William de Dole, who lived in the latter part of the 12th century, they not being looked upon as a fair weapon.

Richard I from 1189 to 1199.

It is said of Richard I.:—“Truly he revived the use of this kind of shooting, called cross-bow shooting, which had long since been laid aside, whence he became so skilful in its management, that he killed many people with his own hand.” Siege of AcreIt is supposed that Richard I. first used the cross-bow as a weapon of war at the siege of Acre. Universal in Crusades.In every action, however, of which we read in the history of the second crusade, as well as the third, in which Richard participated, cross-bows, as well as other bows, are repeatedly noticed. Richard killed by.It is stated that he was killed by an arrow, said to have been shot from a cross-bow at the Castle of Chaluz.

Genoese cross-bow men.

From the beginning of the 13th, and until the middle of the 15th century, cross-bow men are uniformly mentioned as part of the Genoese troops. From Justinius we learn, that in 1225 Mounted Arbalists 1225.“Twenty Arbalestes mounted, and one hundred on foot, with cross-bows of horn, were then employed in the army of the state.”

The cross-bow man was an essential component of the host during all this period. He was in the van of the battle.

Battle near Damietta 1237.

In the battle near Damietta, in 1237, “more than a hundred knights of the Temple fell, and three hundred cross-bow men, &c., &c.”

Campaign in Italy 1239.

The Emperor Frederic, in 1239, giving an account of his Italian campaign to the king of England, writes: “After we had, by our knights and cross-bow men, reduced all the province of Liguria,” &c.

Genoese 1245.

Five hundred Genoese cross-bow men were sent against the Milanese in 1245, and these unfortunate men being placed in front of the line, were taken prisoners by the enemy, who, to revenge themselves for the havoc done by their bows, Treatment of.cruelly punished each with the loss of an eye, and amputation of an arm.

Cross-bows at Cressy 1346.

There were 15,000 Genoese cross-bow men in the front rank of the French army at the battle of Cressy, 1346.

At siege of Le Roche de Rién.

The next year we find that Charles, Earl of Blois, had at the siege of Le Roche de Rién no less than 2,000 in his army.

Corporation of Arbalisters 1359.

The “Corporation des Arbalestriers de Paris,” in 1359, consisted of two hundred members. In 1373, their number, as fixed by a royal ordinance, was eight hundred. They were not bound to serve beyond the limits of their district without the consent of the Provost of Paris. There were both foot and mounted cross-bowmen in this body.

Cross-bow encouraged by Edward III.

Edward III., though he wished principally to encourage the long-bow, could not help seeing the advantages which might be derived from the cross-bow, from the accuracy of its shot, and its convenience on horseback. No English in wars of Edward III.It does not appear that, in the long wars of Edward with the French in this century, cross-bowmen were raised in England, Genoese mercenaries.though they were supplied by Genoese contractors on various occasions for service at sea. In 1363 the king caused public proclamation to be made, in order to encourage its use.

Matches.

There were also matches made in different parts of Europe, at which prizes were given to the most skilful cross-bowmen.

Mounted cross-bow men in France 1373.

In the list of the Grand Masters of the Arbalesters of France under Charles V., in 1373, appears “Marc de Grimant, Baron d’Antibes, Captain-General of Arbalesters, both foot and horse, in the service of the king.” And a similar notice occurs in the reign of King John, Baudoin de Lence being Grand Master; but it would appear that the mounted cross-bowmen were retained in much smaller numbers than the foot.

“Pavisers.”

During the reign of Edward III. cross-bowmen seem first to have been protected by “Pavisers,” (plate 15), or men who held before them a large shield called a “Pavise.”

Pavisers by English 1404.

On the attack by the French and Spaniards upon the Isle of Portland in 1404, the English formed pavisers to protect themselves from the cross-bow bolts, by taking the doors from their houses, and fixing them upright by props. Under this cover the archers plied their arrows.

Cross-bow not esteemed by English.

The English never had much esteem for the cross-bow in the field. Among the 10,500 men led out of England by Henry VI., in 1415, there were only ninety-eight Arbalesters, of whom eighteen were horsemen; Forbad by Henry VII 1508 & 1515.nevertheless, Henry VII. found it necessary to prohibit the use of the cross-bow in 1508, and, seven years after, another statute was passed, renewing the prohibition. This interference, however, of the legislature does not seem to have produced the intended effect, for in less than twenty years later the use of the cross-bow had become so prevalent, Forbad by Henry VIII 1535.that a new statute was judged requisite, which inflicted on every person that kept one in his house, the penalty of twenty pounds. It is from this period, therefore, that we may date the decline of the arbalest in this country, as these statutes produced by degrees the reformation sought for. Decline of cross-bow.Not a single cross-bow man is to be seen in the paintings belonging to the Society of Antiquaries, nor at Cowdray House, representing the battles of Henry VIII., and painted at the period; and, to give a finishing blow, another statute soon followed, still more decisive.

DESCRIPTION OF CROSS-BOW.

Description.

The ancient cross-bow, which differed in many particulars from those of late times, is thus described by Father Daniel, who formed his description from one or more then before him.

The cross-bow was an offensive weapon, which consisted of a bow fixed to the top of a sort of staff, or stock of wood, which the string of the bow, when unbent, crossed at right angles.

Stock.

The handle or bed, which was called the stock of the cross-bow, had towards the middle a small opening or slit, of the length of two fingers, in which was a little moveable wheel of solid steel; through the centre of it passed a screw that served for an axis; this wheel projected a little beyond the surface of the stock, and had a notch, or catch, which stopped and held the string of the bow when bent. Trigger.In the opposite side of the circumference was a much smaller notch, by the means of which the spring of the trigger kept the wheel firmer, and in its place; this wheel is called the nut of the cross-bow. Under the stock, near the handle, was the key of the trigger, like that of the serpentine of a musket; by pressing this key with the hand, to the handle of the cross-bow, the spring released the wheel that held the string, and the string by its motion drove forward the dart.

Back-sight.

Upon the stock below the little wheel was a small plate of copper, which lifted up and shut down, and was fixed by its two legs, with two screws to the two sides of the stock; this was a back-sight; it was pierced above by two little holes, one over the other, and when the plate was raised, these two holes answered to a Fore-sight.globule, which was a small bead, no bigger than that of a chaplet, that was suspended at the end of the cross-bow by a fine wire, and fastened to two perpendicular columns of iron, one on the right, the other on the left, and this little globule, answering to the holes in the plate, served to direct the aim, whether for shooting horizontally, upwards, or downwards.

Cord.

The cord or string of the bow was double, each string separated by two little cylinders of iron, equi-distant from the extremities of the bow and the centre; to these two strings in the middle was fixed a ring of cord, which served to confine it in the notch previously mentioned when the bow was bent. Between the two cords in the centre of the string, and immediately before the ring, was a little square of cord, against which was placed the extremity of the arrow or dart, to be pushed forward by the cord.

Bent by hand.

The smaller cross-bows were bent with the hand; By footthe larger ones were at first bent by the soldier placing his foot in a stirrup, attached to the end of the bow; a cord was then fixed by one end to the butt of the stock, the other end being fastened to a waistbelt. By pulley.A pulley, running upon the cord, was hooked to the bowstring, and the bow was then bent by raising the body and keeping the leg firm.

By moulinet.

The cross-bow was afterwards furnished with the moulinet and pulleys, (plate 13) which after the bow had been bent, could be removed for the discharge; these consisted of an iron cylinder in a frame of the same metal, made to turn by two moveable handles in opposite directions, and having a cap likewise of iron to fit on the butt end of the stock. On each side of this cap was a small pulley, the wheel of which was one inch and a half in diameter, having attached to one of its arms a strong cord that passed thence round an equal sized wheel, returned over the first, and then went round one double in diameter, situated beyond the second, and so passed to the cylinder of the moulinet, by winding which, the power required to bend the bow was lessened to one fourth. Attached to the arms of the greater wheels was a double claw, made to slide on the plane of the stock, which, catching hold of the bowstring, drew it up to the nut. An improvement of the moulinet was, that the handles of the cylinder were both made in the same line, instead of being one up and the other down.

By windlass.

At a later period the cross-bow was bent by a windlass, which consisted of a bar of iron, shaped at its end into a claw, and having teeth the whole length of one edge. This slipped through an iron box, containing a wheel, the cogs of which fitted the teeth of the bar, and as a handle was fixed to the axle, on turning it the string was wound up. This apparatus was attached by a loop, which slipped over the stock, and was kept in its place by two iron pins, that projected from the side, and then, when bent, it could be easily removed.

By steel lever.

Another mode of bending the cross-bow was by means of a steel lever, called the goat’s-foot lever, which was moveable. This was formed of two legs, a catch and a handle, all acting on one pivot. The legs were applied to the projecting pieces of iron on each side the stock, and then the purchase was very great.

Latch.

There were two principal varieties of cross-bows, viz., the “Latch,” with grooved stock, for “quarrels,” Prodd.and the “Prodd,” for bullets. (Plate 14, fig. 1 and 2.)

Dimensions and form of latch.

In the reign of Henry VI. the stocks of cross-bows were made of hard wood, ornamented with ivory. They were about three feet three inches long, the bow of steel, about two feet eight inches from end to end, weighing in all about fifteen pounds. The length of the groove for the quarrel about one foot four inches. Quarrels viretons.The arrows discharged were called both quarrels and viretons, (plate 14, fig. 2 and 4,) some with feathers, others without. The vireton is a French name; the feathers being set on a little curved, made it spin round as it passed through the air.

It is stated by Captain Panôt, that the Arquebus was in use before the invention of powder, and was but an improvement on the arbalest, or cross-bow. Arquebus or barrelled cross-bow.The Arquebus, like the cross-bow, had a stock, upon which was fixed a tube, intended to receive the projectile. Slit in tube.This tube was split, for the passage of a cord, which was held back by a kind of sheave or pulley, which communicated motion to the projectile, on the trigger being pulled. Fired leaden balls.In general, leaden balls were fired from the arquebus. The barrelled cross-bow was suggested by the “balista grossa de arganellis,” which was furnished with tubes for ejecting Greek fire.

Repeating cross-bow.

In the United Service Museum, Whitehall, there is a cross-bow of Cingalese manufacture. It strings itself, and discharges two arrows each time in rapid succession, until the magazine is exhausted, which contains twelve arrows, and may be replenished in a moment.

Range in Henry V.

It is evident that the different sizes and various powers of cross-bows occasioned a great diversity in the distance of their range. Thus, in Henry 5th’s time the range of the cross-bow is stated to have been forty rods (220 yards), and it never appears to have been more powerful than at that period.

Range in Elizabeth’s.

M. de Bellay says that the cross-bowman will kill at 100 or 200 paces, which gives a great range to the arbalests of Elizabeth’s time.

Sir John Smith, however, in his observations, not long after this, very much contracts the distance of their shot, for he says that “a cross-bow will kill point-blank between 40 and 60 yards, and, if elevated, 120, 140, or 160 yards, or further.”

The former probably alluded to the prod, the latter to the latch.

COMPARATIVE MERITS OF THE LONG AND CROSS BOW.

How inefficient the cross-bow was found, when opposed by English archery, appears in every page of the histories of the fourteenth century.

Why long-bow superior.

The superiority of the long-bow mainly depended upon the strength and skill of the archer, while a greater amount of accuracy at shorter ranges could be had out of the cross-bow, with much less training; and the success of the English archers when opposed to cross-bowmen may be mainly ascribed to the more “rapid” fire of the former.

Celerity the great advantage of the long-bow.

It is generally conceded that the long-bow could deliver at least six shafts while the cross-bow discharged one; and, “with such odds against them, it became impossible for the bravest and most expert troops, whether at Cressy or elsewhere, to make a stand against their opponents”.

Cross-bow best on horseback.

On the other hand, the cross-bow was decidedly a more convenient weapon on horseback than the long-bow.

COMPARATIVE MERITS BETWEEN BOWS AND EARLY FIRE-ARMS.

The invention of gunpowder, and its application to artillery and small arms, did not produce that sudden change in the art of war, or in weapons, that might, on a first consideration, have been expected. Many of the old soldiers were much divided in their opinion of the superiority of fire-arms, nor does it appear that the government of those days were decided upon it, as the strongest statutes for enforcing the practice of archery were enacted after their introduction.

Long-bow preferred in Edward III.

Joshua Barnes, in his life of Edward III., observes, that “without all question, the guns which are used now-a-days, are neither so terrible in battle nor do such execution nor work such confusion as arrows can do; for bullets, being not seen, only hurt where they hit, but arrows enrage the horse, and break the array, and terrify all that behold them in the bodies of their neighbours. Not to say that every archer can shoot thrice to a gunner’s once, and that whole squadrons of bows may let fly at one time, when only one or two files of musqueteers can discharge at once. Also, that whereas guns are useless when your pikes join, because they only do execution point-blank, the arrows which will kill at random may do good service even behind your men of arms.”

Long-bow the favourite in Henry VIII.

Although fire-arms had attained no inconsiderable degree of perfection in the reign of Henry VIII., yet the long-bow was still the favourite weapon.

Merits balanced in Queen Mary’s reign.

So indifferent were the ministers of Queen Mary respecting them, that in her ordinance respecting armour and weapons, the alternative is left to the choice of the people, whether they should find a long-bow and sheaf of arrows, or a haquebutt, in every case where they were by law charged with the latter.

The lighter ammunition of the harquebus an advantage.

In the reign of Elizabeth, the musket was so slow to charge and discharge that the bow was considered superior by many; and Mons. de Bellay states that if archers and cross-bowmen could carry their arrows, &c., as easy as harquebusiers do their ammunition, he would prefer the former weapon over the latter.

Arrows make more severe wounds than bullets.

The effects of arrows sticking in horses, are said to have been frightful. This can be easily imagined. A fire-arm bullet can be shot quite through a horse without causing the animal to show one sign of anguish. He goes steadily on his previous course, and makes no sign. However fatal of necessity, a fire-arm bullet gives no immediate pain. Not so the arrow. Planted never so lightly in a horse’s neck or flank, the animal grew furious. Starting off into a wild gallop to escape the barbed sting, the animal had no respite for his agony. The wilder the pace, the greater the pain. Far from the serried squadrons where he fain would be, sore against his will, rushed the mail-clad knight. Plunging and rearing, the steed would throw him at last, amidst the dead and dying; himself to die.

Though comparatively few men or horses were killed by arrow wounds at once, few, nevertheless, recovered. The barbed arrow-head was immeasurably more dangerous, imbedded in the flesh, than a mere lump of lead. Hundreds of men, hale and well to-day, have had fire-arm bullets imbedded in their flesh for years. Not so in the time of archery. The arrow-head must be extracted, or mortification came on, and soon a cruel death. Neither was the surgical process of extraction often happy in the results. It would not be easy to extract a barbed arrow-head even now, with all the appliances of modern surgery at hand.

Arrow wounds more fatal.

Another fatal consequence of arrow wounds on the field of battle was this: men wounded thus were rarely taken prisoners. Arrows were expensive ammunition. The battle over, detachments were sent out to collect them; and the collection was not done too tenderly. To regain an arrow seemed a far more meritorious act than to save the life of an enemy. The throat of many a wounded wretch was mercilessly cut, that he might be quiet whilst the arrow was being extracted.

Bows useless in wind.

The defects of archery were these:—the ammunition was expensive, and when lost, not easily replaced. The flight of arrows is never correct on a windy day, from whatever direction the wind may blow. In rain.Rain relaxes the bow and bowstring, so that archery then is of little use. All these are serious defects; but there was another of more importance still. When the archer’s ammunition was all expended, he was nearly powerless. A sword, indeed, he carried, for close fighting; and each archer stuck into the ground before him a sharp pointed stake as a protection against cavalry.

Hand-gun most penetration.

Silent discharge in favor of bows.

The great advantage of the hand-gun was from its penetration, as no armour could keep out balls, but the silent discharge of the cross-bow rendered it superior in the pursuit of timid animals, and the prodd has continued in use to the present day, for the purpose of killing deer, rooks, and rabbits.

Note.—The articles on ancient Engines of War, and upon the Bow, are principally taken from the following works, viz:—“Military Antiquities,” by F. Grose, Esq.; “A Critical Inquiry into Ancient Armour,” by Sir S. R. Meyrick; “Ancient Armour and Weapons in Europe,” by John Hewitt; “Projectile Weapons of War,” and “Report of the Rifle Match at Wimbledon Common,” by J. Scoffern, M. B.; “Engines of War,” by H. Wilkinson, and “The Long-Bow of the Past and the Rifle for the Future,” by H. Britannicus.