Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Roleplaying in General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-05-2019, 06:54 PM   #31
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
You will find possibly isolated individuals of very great size all through history and perhaps especially through Northern Europe with "everybody knows" stats like the average Roman Legionary being only 5'2.
Sure, but the issue is the average archer size. This appears to have been studied (I find references to "Raising the Dead: the Skeleton Crew of Henry VIII's Great Ship the Mary Rose"), but don't have access to that.

The other thing is that we don't actually know that modern archers don't have skeletal deformation.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2019, 02:38 AM   #32
Ashley
 
Ashley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London, England
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

OK. Here's the thing.

The Mary Rose represents longbows that were using less than optimal wood.

The study of the skeletons quoted is now known to be due to familial relations: they share the same deformation due to genetics.

Bows are limited by string size. Arrow knocks define useful bow weight.

I recommend reading: Pip Bickerstaffe's books.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=pip+bic...ref=nb_sb_noss
__________________
One cannot always win – but one cannot always lose either.

Blogs:
http://panther6actual.blogspot.co.uk/
http://ashleyrpollard.blogspot.co.uk/

Last edited by Ashley; 09-06-2019 at 02:39 AM. Reason: line spacing
Ashley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2019, 08:07 AM   #33
Polydamas
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak_aramis View Post
guys who shoot 150-160 lb bows regularly do not show the bilateral asymmetries to the degree of the English longbow men of the middle ages.
Even ten years ago, there were only a handful of archers using high-draw weight bows. Give them another ten years for the archers who started at puberty to mature and we will see what happens. In addition, modern athletes train in modern systems which stress equal development of both sides. Its likely that the ancients didn't always bother (look at a strong farmer, who often has a much lumpier body than someone who jogs and lifts weights but can perform similarly on practical tasks).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley View Post
Bows are limited by string size. Arrow knocks define useful bow weight.

I recommend reading: Pip Bickerstaffe's books.

I had not heard that name before. I poked around, and I can't find anyone well-regarded who recommends his books, but I did find one Will S:

Quote:
One thing to note - keep him away from anything written or said by Pip Bickerstaffe. I've had many conversations with Pip recently, and he is adamant that the warbows found on board the MR are much lighter in draw weight than they really are. His reasoning is based wholly on the fact that the nocks in the arrows are 1/8" wide, and yet he believes that no natural string (Hemp, linen) that's 1/8" thick could support a bow over 100lbs. However, in recent years many bowyers and stringfellows have made natural linen string 1/8" thick that have supported bows up to 170lbs, and done very well in terms of cast and longevity. Pip also believes that a bow of a draw weight 100lbs+ would break very quickly, or lose it's cast and thus be useless for battle. Again, this has been proven totally untrue by bowyers and warbow archers who are using massively heavy bows for many years with no detriment to their performance. The trouble is, he wrote all of this down in a very early book and with all the new evidence being discovered by people actually shooting the bows, his information is dated and wrong but he can't go back on his printed word so will stick to it stoicly despite it's untruth.
For now, I will stick with Hardy and Strickland and Karpowicz.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper

This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature
Polydamas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2019, 01:42 AM   #34
Ashley
 
Ashley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London, England
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

I mostly agree with the above about training today being different to how people trained back 500 years ago. And I understand recent DNA result showed that the two skeletons aboard the Mary Rose were related and shared a genetic defect.

Now, as regards the rest, the internet allows everyone a voice.

I've shot on the line with the archers that pull 140lbs bows. So no denying that it can be done. They are not average men, and they're driven to prove that they can pull a "warbow." As such they're outliers on what can be done, and proof that diet and lifestyle are major factors in health and strength.

The average man back in the days of the Tudors and earlier was a lot shorter, and lived a harder life. That can work both ways, in that those that survive to become adults will be exceptions, but the average will be less than the best that we can train today.

Also, technology has improved. We can make things, and more importantly share that knowledge widely in ways that our ancestors couldn't have imagined. What we can make today far exceeds the quality of what could be made back then.

We can make linen strings worth a Kings ransom now.

As for the staves to make bows, England had to import good quality staves because we'd used up all our best stocks. The way a bowyer accounts for poor wood is to make the bows thicker. If you use the same quality wood as found on the Mary Rose (measured by the size of the growth rings) you don't get 140lbs bows.

So yes, you can make 140lbs. Yes, you can make strings that don't break, but what we can do now is not necessarily what was done then. Law of averages.
__________________
One cannot always win – but one cannot always lose either.

Blogs:
http://panther6actual.blogspot.co.uk/
http://ashleyrpollard.blogspot.co.uk/

Last edited by Ashley; 09-07-2019 at 01:43 AM. Reason: Line spacing
Ashley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2019, 02:21 AM   #35
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Bear in mind that, while your average archer likely didn't have much over average innate talent (they'll be slightly above average simply because part of the bottom of the curve flunks out, and thus what remains is a bit above average), they were professional soldiers who spent quite a large amount of time learning their profession, and thus, at least at the thing they were trained for, they would be considerably above average strength, simply because the average person doesn't train those muscles to the same degree.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2019, 08:06 AM   #36
Flyndaran
Untagged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley View Post
...

The average man back in the days of the Tudors and earlier was a lot shorter, and lived a harder life. That can work both ways, in that those that survive to become adults will be exceptions, but the average will be less than the best that we can train today.
...
People in the middle ages were a bit shorter than today, not a lot. The average height was shortest during the industrial revolution.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check.
Flyndaran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2019, 05:08 AM   #37
Polydamas
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley View Post
Also, technology has improved. We can make things, and more importantly share that knowledge widely in ways that our ancestors couldn't have imagined. What we can make today far exceeds the quality of what could be made back then.

We can make linen strings worth a Kings ransom now.
In my experience it is the reverse. There is a rule of thumb among makers that any ferrous alloy today will be better than was typical before the 20th century, and anything of wood or textile will be far worse. So a number of people have planted groves of yew trees in what they think is the right microclimate, but they have not yet matured, and until then most bowyers have to use New World species. Once the groves mature they will have to discover all kinds of things about coppicing, selecting the right wood for the purpose, and so on which historically every bowyer just absorbed during their apprenticeship. The Internet is letting us stupid rich-country people slowly and painfully rediscover some things about crafts which villagers in Mexico or Turkey or India take for granted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley View Post
As for the staves to make bows, England had to import good quality staves because we'd used up all our best stocks. The way a bowyer accounts for poor wood is to make the bows thicker. If you use the same quality wood as found on the Mary Rose (measured by the size of the growth rings) you don't get 140lbs bows.
Who says so? What are their qualifications? Do other experts agree with them?
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper

This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature
Polydamas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2019, 05:35 AM   #38
Polydamas
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Also, in my view experts show you the range of what is possible. If they say "you can't do that" they are likely to be proved wrong by someone who knows different things than they do, but if they say "I can do that in half the time with a tenth the tools and here is how" everyone should pay attention.

So I find the people who can make, string, and shoot heavy bows which look like the Mary Rose finds good evidence that Kooi's mathematical model of the bows was approximately correct. (And I think he is the first to say that his estimates are only as good as the data which went into them, and that there is at least a 10% margin of error).
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper

This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature
Polydamas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2019, 02:25 PM   #39
ak_aramis
 
ak_aramis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Alsea, OR
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Bear in mind that a modern human is significantly larger than ancients; 160 lb today is probably comparable to something like 130 lb for a 14th century man (I wasn't able to find exact numbers on brief checking, but the trend is certainly there). Also, the people who choose to use heavy bows today may be outliers, while average medieval was presumably for people of average size (at least for their status).
The difference isn't a factor of height, it's a difference in musculature between the bow and draw arms. Different muscles side by side, and archers from then can be readily ID'd by the bilateral differences in muscular attachments.

Essentially, the archer's bow arm has the major bulk on the extensors and the draw arm on the flexors. the stronger the muscles, the larger the attachments, and the attachments are visible in bone and detailed MRI and CAT-Scan. Differences in the wrist; bow arm repeated compressive stress, draw arm tension stress, both of which are also distinctive.
ak_aramis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2019, 04:58 PM   #40
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Video of arrows vs. armor using period materials

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak_aramis View Post
The difference isn't a factor of height
Muscles that can draw 160 lb on a 6'2" frame are less out of proportion to the rest of the body that muscles that can draw 160 lb on a 5'8" frame, not because the muscles themselves are smaller, but because they're closer to normal size for the frame as a whole.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.