Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • Free Essays • My Term Papers • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - Sports & Recreation archery archery The crossbow is a weapon of antiquity. There is plausible evidence that the Chinese developed the weapon as early as 1500 BC Surviving examples exist in China from as far back as the third century BC These Han dynasty relics display a great deal of sophistication. The lock (chi) is comprised of a cast bronze box which holds a rotating nut and a two-lever seer and trigger that locks the release in a set position. Roman soldiers captured and ransomed in Sogdiana in central Asia in the first decades of modern reckoning are credited with bringing the technology of the crossbow to the West. Though little remains of the tillers or prods of these early Roman crossbows, at least one nut has been found intact. This nut is cylindrical, with fingers cut into the top to hold a string, and a seer notch cut into the underside. It is center-bored for an axle. The cuts are more severe than on later examples, thus making the nut flatter than those found on more modern pieces. This artifact, with its easily recognizable geometry, proves the technical similarities between these and much later crossbows. One other artifact is a turned knob that is thought to be the handle end of the tiller. Depictions in column carvings and stone reliefs at Solignac France help confirm this speculation. These images show short, carbine-type tillers with lathe turned handles fitted with massive prods, often stylized in keeping with artistic representation of the period. These prods were not likely to be the severe recurves shown in these depictions. They were more probably simple wooden straight bows. It is likely that at least some of these were of simple composite construction, as the horn or horn and wood composite technology was known to both Roman and Greek craftsmen for many years previous. More information on the Roman-Celtic crossbow is provided in the appendices. With this background information at hand, we can now concentrate on the period from the fall of Rome to the middle of the seventeenth century. Although the crossbow is not well documented in the period from the fall of Rome to Hastings, at least a little is known. Much confusion is caused by the lack of specific vocabulary pertaining to the crossbow. For example, the Latin balista and the French arbaleste each refer to both the small hand held weapon and the large siege engine with a similar action. Often we can only judge by context. In cases where references are made to large numbers of devices, and where such devices are described as highly mobile, we assume the meaning to be the crossbow. Another ambiguous clue, riddle 17 of the Anglo Saxon chronicle The Exeter Book, refers to a mechanically released bow-type weapon, some say a crossbow while others say a siege engine. "I am the protector of my flock, fast strengthened with wires...I often spit forth deadly spears...missiles of war fly from my belly." The French chronicler Richerus records that arcobalistae were used in the siege of Senlis in 947 AD and again at Verdun in 985. Their presence was known at the battle of Hjorungsvag, Norway in 986. Primitive examples have been discovered in digs at Lillohus, Kristianstad, Sweden. Some experts attribute these bows to the later Middle Ages, but the fact that Scandinavian peasants used this type of weapon for many centuries with little development makes determining the earliest date of use difficult. This Scandinavian primitive bow differs in release from the Roman bow, instead showing similarities in release to the simple African and Southeast Asian trap-bows still in use today. The use of the crossbow at Hastings and before is uncertain. We can make some solid assumptions based on human nature, and try to justify our theories using deductive reasoning. Taking a clue from military history, we see that in general military leaders have always used effective weapons, providing that the use of such weapons did not guarantee large-scale destruction of their own forces (for instance, modern nuclear weapons). Though the crossbow was often the cause of injury or death to its user, the military has always held that individual soldiers are replaceable, and as the crossbowman was a low-class of infantry, his fate would not have been much of a factor in the decision to use crossbows. Neither would the social distaste for the weapon as a military arm. Because they were such effective weapons it is likely that crossbows were used militarily in some capacity for as long as there have been crossbows. During this period a few secular chronicles were written to honor certain individuals for their prowess at arms in close combat. These chronicles documented battles and tournaments. The contents of such chronicles were determined mostly by the personal bias of their patrons and sponsors, not necessarily by the facts. Girard de Viane wrote that the bowman was `brave in waging war with beasts, in nought besides` and his bow `that weapon of a dastard`. This is not to say that medieval writers did not pride themselves on documenting the truth. More error was in omission than in misinformation. Therefore, negative incidents, those which seem to show crossbowmen as cowards and fiends, were often the only incidents recorded in writing. Chronicles from non-chivlaric cultures, such as the Norse and the Oriental, show much higher regard for the archer as an integral part of a successful military effort, and more respect is granted to the archer in these cultures than in any early chivalric realm. It must be remembered, however, that some records provide facts that hold little or no bias, even in these early feudal kingdoms. It has always been important for a ruler who relied on might to control his realm to have a clear accounting of his military resources. There have almost always been some form of military pay records or inventory and inspection logs. Also looking to the occupation of witnesses on format charters, treaties, and elevations. We can get a good idea of when crossbows were used by looking in these records for mention of crossbows, bolts, strings and other items pertaining to the crossbowman. In 1060, a witness to a charter between William I and Richard de Redvers identifies himself as Fulcher the crossbowman. The term used at this time is arcibalister which leaves no doubt about its translation or meaning. Soon after this, more treachery was recorded, when Judith attacked her father Henry I with a crossbow. It was not long before the language developed specific vocabulary for this device, the first of such words being the french arbaleste. With this new set of words, the work of the researcher becomes much easier. We will look at two primary sources for information on the use of the crossbow at Hastings. First, it should be noted that this battle was the first in which Archery can be proven to have had significant results. This is documented by William of Poitiers, the conqueror`s chaplain, in The Deeds of William. Also the Carmen de Hastings Proelio (Song of the Battle of Hastings), either written by or based on the verse chronicles of Guy of Amiens. The first of these is a military log, written by a knight who became a chaplain, and is thus more technical when describing equipment and troop placement and movements. It provides the needed information to form a skeleton of ideas that can support pieces of other less literal sources. First, William of Potiers states that men using balistae are sent forward with the bowmen and are moved away to make way for the cavalry. Though the term balistae is vague, the mobility of these men assures that it was the hand weapon we call crossbow. They were light infantry, front rank, using speed and mobility to make up for lack of armor. They were moved out of hand combat range when the heavy infantry and cavalry engaged. In adding details from the Carmen we can identify not only the type of weapon (crossbow) but the four sided bolts used. Historians are probably right in figuring that the Carmen was composed sometime after the battle, but even the most liberal dating places it no later than 1100, only 34 years after the fact. Added to William of Poitiers account and use of the term balistae it is fairly certain that this piece of information is true. One of the critical incidents in the battle is the death of Harold. The most compelling evidence as to the manner of his death is the Bayeux Tapestry, which shows Harold with an arrow in the eye, or at least in the head. It is not clear as to what type of arrow did this deed. It is known through William of Malmesbury only of Harold 'receiving the fatal arrow from a distance, then yielding to death.' This fatal blow could have been dealt by any of the archers, perhaps a even a crossbowman. As for the Welsh and English, the lack of vocabulary or entries in chronicles about crossbows until well after 1100 is evidence to corroborate the theory that crossbows were not used by the Saxons at Hastings. Even the tapestry, which shows only one English archer, without mail or even a helm, helps to confirm the lack of Saxon archers with any kind of bow. The disdain of the crossbow extended only to its use as a military implement. From the 11th century on the crossbow became a favorite toy of royalty and nobility. Local and regional competitions were held frequently for great honor and even grander prizes. Pageants were held, crossbow societies were formed, and the general public was treated to spectacular productions replete with heraldry, fanfares, and all the trappings of a faire. Ceremonial guards in spectacular uniform accompanied royalty and dignitaries. The nonmilitary crossbow, with its carvings and inlays, provided the visually spectacular show of decorum so necessary in any procession. In the Angevin period, more is known from magistrate texts and incident reports. For example, in 1163 the Abbot of Lagny was shot in the eye. In 1209 a woman was wounded by stray fire at a practice range. Jordan Fantosme makes reference to both bowmen (archiers) and crossbowmen (arbelastiers) in the invasion of Ireland; archers were active in Henry III`s Baron's Wars in the Weald of Sussex; the Melrose Chronicle mentions crossbows (balistarii) at the Battle of Lewes outside of London in 1264; and stipended specialist arbalesters participated in Poitou in 1242. Even literature starts paying more attention to the crossbow in later years. In a chronicle on the death of Richard Caerliant (Lionheart) at Chaluz, William Breton wrote of a visit by one of the Fates to the crossbowman responsible for the king`s demise. She hands the bolt to the crossbowman and says "This is how I want Richard to die, for it was he who first introduced the crossbow into France." This claim is certainly at least part fiction, but it does serve to show the close association of the crossbow with Richard. And the disdain in which France held both. But at least as important is the mention so specifically of crossbow in Literature. One would think that the crossbow suddenly found favor in the later 12th century, but that is not entirely true. The relative explosion of information is in part due to the development of specific words relating to the crossbow, where little was done to develop vocabulary to differentiate between handbow types. Thus suddenly the crossbow became a more specific device, more easily recognizable and written about. Though the English were loath to use the crossbow as a military weapon themselves, English kings often hired and used trained companies of crossbowmen. Not only did Richard I use crossbows in his landing at Cypress and in his battles and sieges in the Third Crusade, but their use was so successful that the chronicle of the Englishman Bury St Edmunds credits the failure of the unsuccessful crusade of 1250 to the lack of crossbows. At Damietta a force of three hundred crossbows was used. Matthew Paris shows crossbowmen in illustrations from his manuscript and even states the distance between the English and Welsh in terms of 'a crossbow shot'. Feudal tenure was given to crossbowmen. From Mendlesham in Suffolk John de Cordebof held 'by serjanty of staying with his crossbow in the army for forty days at his own cost.' In the north William le Arbalester held four carucates by virtue of his outstanding crossbow service, forty days at his own cost and more at the kings, transporting revenue throughout the realm. Eventually a pattern of pay developed. The English archer was paid more than his Welsh counterpart, and the crossbowman was paid more than the ordinary archer. In battle, the Welsh king Edward I gave preference to his Gascon crossbowmen. On August 26, 1346, the English and French engaged at Crecy-in-Ponthieu. The English took up defensive positions on high ground. The carts and baggage were protected at the rear of the formation, and the three units of cavalry and heavy infantry were placed in an open v in front of the baggage. The archers were ordered in two companies, one on either side of the infantry, so as not to impede hand-to-hand combat. This allowed the archers to set up both long range fire and cross field cover. The French forces were larger but less organized. It is clear that the Genoese mercenary crossbowmen began the battle, advancing in ranks three deep, each rank firing, then pausing to reload as the next ranks advanced past. Each time they would stop to shoot, they would shout a halt, and the English would step forward and return fire. Normally, with the crossbows used at this time, the range advantage would have allowed the crossbowmen to force the confrontation. The English would either have had to attack or remain and be slowly decimated. However, the rains had caused the crossbow strings to stretch and lose power, and the range was severely limited, so the Genoese found themselves in range of the English longbows well before they were themselves in range. The crossbowmen, holding no allegiance except wealth, turned and ran in panic. Philip VI then ordered his infantry to ride over and through their own crossbowmen, only to ride into the English longbows and infantry, and into their defeat. The French still call that day 'le desastre'. From the late 1300's on a full scale change in usage of the crossbow began. Numerous companies of citizen crossbowmen were formed in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries for the protection of their individual hamlets and towns. These societies held frequent competitions for the entertainment of the populus and the honor of their villages, but these were really just excuses to keep up practice for the day they were needed for defense. Many of these societies of skilled crossbowmen, such as the Company of St. George, were held superior in rank to other soldiers, as they were employed to guard the person of the Soverign in peace and war and at all state occasions. As such they were also granted rank, title and privelage and even landed estate. Etude sur les Anciennes Compagnies d'Archers, d'Arbaletriers, et d'Arquebusiers by L.A. Delaunay lists all known companies of crossbowmen that formally existed in France and Belgium. To close our time-line, it seems fitting to convey the tale of the Grand Lodge of Brussles and how the Archduchess Isabella became 'Queen of the Crossbowmen' by her own skill. The Archduchess was invited to the competition of the lodge in 1615, and as was her penchant, she sought entrance into this recreation. After taking aim for a short time, she let fly a bolt at the leather popinjay and pierced it, though it was set as high as a steeple. Amidst the applause she accepted the Kingship of the Confraternity, and was decorated with the honor on the altar of the Sablon Church. She then presented, in token of her kinship to her newfound company, a silk robe heavily embroidered with gold to each member of the company. She also had a lodgehouse built for the company near her palace, in order that she might more actively participate in their meetings, feasts, and competitions. In her honor, a medallion was minted to celebrate the occasion. Bibliography: Word Count: 2728
Copyright © 1998-2008 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved. DMCA Notifications and Requests