Arbalest à Tillolles

To discuss research into and about the middle ages.

Moderator: Glen K

Bertus Brokamp
Archive Member
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Bertus Brokamp »

I like this book on horn crossbows:

'Die Hornbogenarmbrust: Geschichte und Technik'
by Holger Richter
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bGqxqn4b_SMC&dq

Sean M wrote:Since we are moving away from the late 15th century ...

The books by Joseph Alm (1947, even if the English translation came out in 1994) and by Egon Harmuth are getting pretty old. Are there any recent publications which focus on crossbows from the high and late middle ages, before we have all those beautiful ones in collections? Archaeologists in eastern Europe are digging up all kinds of things, and museum-based scholars don't always know the written sources so well. I don't know if I have ever seen an original belt hook ...

Giovanni Monticolo published the Latin rule of the crossbow-makers of Venice in 1896, there are probably some French rules if you dig for them. David Bachrach published a pair of articles called "Crossbows for the King" on crossbows in English royal administrative texts, and Jack Gassman has something on mounted crossbowmen in one of those $300 volumes from Brill. Its fun to hear about Peter the Saracen and Benedict the Moor turning up in England in 1204 making crossbows for King John.

Given a choice, artists often prefer to show less bulky weapons which don't get in the way, and the people buying illuminated manuscripts in the 12th/13th century wanted to see knights not town militia, even if the illuminators' guild had a proud contingent of crossbowmen in the town militia. Maybe that is why its so hard to find two-foot crossbows and windlass crossbows in 12th/13th/14th century art?
Bertus Brokamp
Bertus Brokamp
Archive Member
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Bertus Brokamp »

It must be, I have only been to that museum once and those are the only crossbows I shot there.
Tom B. wrote:
RandallMoffett wrote: The Biggest I know of is one Bertus got me photos of and it from the Bayerisches Armeemuseum in Ingorstadt, and it must have been off the top of my head about 5.5-6 feet across for a prod, easily 2 times the size of the crossbows around it.


RPM
Is this the one?
Image
Bertus Brokamp
Bertus Brokamp
Archive Member
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Bertus Brokamp »

Sean M wrote: Am I right that in the late medieval/early modern European crossbows, the only parts which really work better in iron are the trigger and maybe the stirrup? So we would not expect a lot of archaeological finds, but there are some deep muddy bogs in the Low Countries and Lithuania/Poland.
Apparantly the foundations of a late 15th century (text sources: 1489-1498) crossbowmaker's house have been excavated in the town of Aalst in Belgium. They found waste material from his production in his cesspit and in the cattle drinking place on the market square outside his house.

Here is the full publication. Yes in Dutch, but the photo descriptions have English text as well.
https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/858 ... 591190.pdf
Bertus Brokamp
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Bertus Brokamp wrote:I like this book on horn crossbows:

'Die Hornbogenarmbrust: Geschichte und Technik'
by Holger Richter
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bGqxqn4b_SMC&dq

This is a good one.

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

I would really like to sit down with ten or so crossbow books and decide which are Fashion in the Age of Datini worthy, but for a couple of reasons that is not an option right now :( here is my placeholder

On Saturday I will post a translation of the first paragraph of the rule of the crossbow-makers of Venice with comments.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

I. Iuro ad evangelia sancta Dei quod omnes ballistas quas laboravo vel laborare fecero, vendam vel vendi fatiam cum suo nomine et dicam veritatem si erunt de cornibus stambicorum vel de aliis cornibus, omnes pro suo nomine de quo sunt. et omnes ballistas quas fecero vel laborare fecero de cornibus stambicorum, non mittam nec mitti faciam in ipsis de aliis cornibus nisi de stanbicis. et si sciero quod aliquis de ista arte fecerit contra ordinem suprascriptum et non habeat factum hoc sacramentum, quam cicius potero iusticiariis manifestabo.

I.  I swear on the sacred gospels of God that I will sell or have sold all crossbows which I have worked or have had worked with his/its proper name, and I shall speak truly whether they are of steinbock (Alpine Ibex) horn or of other horns, all for their own name from which they are.  And all crossbows which I have made or have had worked of steinbock horn, I shall not send nor have sent into them anything of other horns except of steinbock.  And if I should know that anyone else of this art has made something contrary to the above ordinance and has not made this sacrament, I shall make this known to the Justicars as soon as I am able.

Comments
This is such beautiful notary's Latin that it reminds me of how much I do not know about medieval Latin.

balista and ballista: I translate this feminine word as "crossbow."  Sometimes they use the masculine balistus, I am translating that as "arbalest" just in case there is a difference in meaning.  Italian often uses masculine and feminine forms of the same word with different meanings, like coltello "knife" (masculine) but coltella "cleaver" (feminine)

Latin grammar nerd alert: most of this chapter is either in the future tense (independant clauses) or the future perfect (dependant clauses).  I think this is a sequence of tenses thing but its not in Allen and Greenough.

evangelia: I think this is "gospels" as in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John

cum suo nomine "with its own/their own name": I think this is about describing the product accurately and not selling an ash crossbow as yew or a light crossbow as heavy (but why is it singular when the crossbows are plural?  In Greek, a neutral plural like "works" can agree with a singular verb)

Monticolo noticed a similar phrase in the rule of the jupers from 1219 (p. 24 lines 12 and 13)
et omnia opera que fecero ad vendendum tam de banbatio novo et veteri quam de stupa et peciis, vendam et fatiam vendi cum suo nomine secundum quod fuerint ...
And all works which I shall make for sale, whether of new cotton and old or of tow and pieces, I shall sell and have sold with its own name according to that which they were, whether of new and old cotton or of tow and pieces, whether I am asked about it or not.
laboravo: I think this should be laboravERo in the future perfect indicative active, if the original manuscript was abbreviated the editor could have guessed wrong what letters to fill in

make or have laboured: I think these clauses mean that if it comes out of your shop, its your responsibility even if you say a journeyman did it or you subcontracted a big order to another master.

non mittam nec mitti faciam "not send or have sent": mittere usually means something like "send, put forth, speak, let go."  It shows up in a few other clauses.  What is the right 'shop talk' in English? In other clauses they use the verb ponere "put, place"

art: Italians called what the English called a guild an art like Germans called it a Kunst and French called it a mastery.

Justicars: I don't know enough about medieval Venice to know who these officials are

cicius: classical Latin would write ciTius, but c and t switch in medieval Latin, probably /ti/ and/ci/ were pronounced almost the same
Last edited by Sean M on Sat May 02, 2020 11:42 am, edited 4 times in total.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

II. Hec omnia attendam bona fide sine fraude, nisi remanserit per maiorem partem iusticiariorum.

II. I will pay attention to all these things in good faith without fraud, unless one should be discontinued by the greater part of the Justicars.

Comments

This chapter is 'boilerplate.'  The verb in the second clause is singular, while the things in the first clause are plural.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
John Vernier
Archive Member
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:57 pm
Location: south central Indiana

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by John Vernier »

(snip) " non mittam nec mitti faciam "not send or have sent": mittere usually means something like "send, put forth, speak, let go." It shows up in a few other clauses. What is the right 'shop talk' in English? In other clauses they use the verb ponere "put, place" "

I think for clarity I would allow a slightly freer translation, "I shall not make nor have them made of any other horn except of steinbock."

I can't think of any other way of putting it in english which isn't clunkier.
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

I am surprised to see how much emphasis is laid on the idea that ibex horn is the only honest thing to use. When we see cross sections of composite bows, we often see horn of different colors mixed in. I think of ibex horn as honey colored, but perhaps it is more variable than I expect. If not, then it looks like we have an admixture of bovine (?) horn. I wonder if deception was more or less routine.

Image

Image

Image

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
User avatar
Ernst
Archive Member
Posts: 8824
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Jackson,MS USA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Ernst »

Since all of the compound bows are covered, this reminds me of the numerous regulations for mattresses. The potential for fraud beneath a covering is serious. It's not fraudulent to sell a bow of mixed horn if you label it as such, but to demand a higher price by mis-representing what's beneath the leather needs regulation and penalties.
ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

It sounds like I need to flip through Richter, I have never seen anything like those photos except for the diagrams in Bertus' article. They scare me.

It is good to know that the barbarians in their so-called towns north of the Alps stole the Italians' markets by offering lower-grade versions of what the Italians were making for significantly less money, using unfair tricks like letting Bauern who were not even paying members of the guild do some tasks.

They sure do seem to think that if you say this is a steinbock crossbow, all the horn has to be from Steinböcke, and that "other horns" are inferior. We will get to one specific type of horn which you are not allowed to use in chapter 4.

For the bowyers and hornbow shooters out there: what are the advantages and disadvantages of different horns (other than that if its too short or shaped wrong you have to assemble the bow out of even more little pieces that will shift with temperature and humidity)?
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote: For the bowyers and hornbow shooters out there: what are the advantages and disadvantages of different horns (other than that if its too short or shaped wrong you have to assemble the bow out of even more little pieces that will shift with temperature and humidity)?
I don't know if there is anyone alive who can really answer that. There are only a couple of people currently making horn and sinew composite crossbows, and I suspect that they are using water buffalo.

It certainly sounds like Ibex must be thought to be better than the alternatives (whatever they are). In any case, it must be more expensive, or they would not have to specify it.

There are people making horn-wood-sinew composite hand bows. As far as I can tell, they all use water buffalo. That's what's used in all of South and South East Asia, and I think it's also the preferred horn of the Middle East. If I remember what I read correctly, they think that cattle horns are inferior to those of water buffalo. That doesn't necessarily mean that they are inferior, but that they are thought to be.

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote:It sounds like I need to flip through Richter, I have never seen anything like those photos except for the diagrams in Bertus' article.
It's an excellent reference..... even if (like me) one only has 300 words of German :oops: . I don't even know what goodies you might find in the text.


Sean M wrote:They scare me.
And well they might :shock:

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Has anyone got the full quote about the supplies for "Peter the Saracen"? I found something here which says he was "To make 25 bows of composite construction the document lists 25 pieces of yew, 12 "rams horns" and 4lb of shredded ox sinew".

I wonder if these "rams horns" are from domestic goats, or male ibex.

The other thing I wonder about is the use of yew in these bows. It sounds like these are horn-wood-sinew bows, rather than horn-sinew bows. It seems to me that there is a technological leap from one to the other, even if they looked more of less the same to the guys who illuminated manuscripts.

Where I am headed with that later point is this. We see "wood" bows persisting in inventories long past where we see them in art. What if the distinction between "wood" and "horn" bows is not about whether or not they are composites, but rather, whether or not those composites have a wooden core?

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

Mac wrote:Has anyone got the full quote about the supplies for "Peter the Saracen"? I found something here which says he was "To make 25 bows of composite construction the document lists 25 pieces of yew, 12 "rams horns" and 4lb of shredded ox sinew".

I wonder if these "rams horns" are from domestic goats, or male ibex.
Its not in the two David Bachrach articles I have, so it might be in:

David S. Bachrach, "The Origins of the Crossbow Industry in England," Journal of Medieval Military History 2

That journal is only available on paper (the US medievalists are pretty brutal about not supporting anything to do with war or knights) and we do not have it (I have a couple of volumes back in Canada).
David Bachrach, Crossbows for the King, part 1 wrote:"As early as 1204, a crossbow maker named Gerald was employed by King John at Windsor castle to build these weapons. A writ of liberate issued on 29 January 1204 required the constable there to provide Gerald with the glue, sinews, and horn he required for his work." Hardy, Rotuli de Liberate, 79 https://archive.org/details/rotulidelib ... 8/mode/2up

Rex etc. constabulario Windelsour’, salutem. Praecipimus tibi quod facias habere Gir’ Balistario liberationes suas, scilicet, in die iiii. d. et oble, et praeteria facias habere husce, et nervos, et cornu ad balistas faciendas ...
The volume with Bartholomew the Moor is https://digitale-bibliothek-mv.de/viewe ... 631250/62/ (I can't see it on that page) and the first mention of Peter the Saracen is https://archive.org/details/rotulidelib ... /mode/2up/ That does not talk about materials though, just his wage of 9d a day.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

Re-reading the Primitive Archer thread ... I think kiwijim has mixed up the documents about Peter the Saracen in 1204 and 1215, and a French document from 1358 cited in the article by Baron de Cosson: de Cosson, Charles A. "The Crossbow of Ulrich V. Count of Wurtemburg [sic], 1460, with Remarks on Its Construction." Archaeologia 53, no. 2 pp. 445–64, pl. 34

The crossbow of Ulrich V of Würtemburg is now Metropolitan Museum of Art, Accession Number: 04.3.36

This lists things provided to Robert l'Artilleur to make 25 crossbows (arbalestres) for the castle of Rouen in October 1358:

25 staves of yew, 5s. each, worth £6 5s
25 staples (estaples), 25s
25 nuts for arbalests, 2s each, worth 1s (!)
25 stirrups (éstriefs), 1s [the price for a similar order in 1361 suggests that this should be 1s each-ed.]
25 triggers (clefs "keys"), 1s [the price for a similar order in 1361 suggests that this should be 1s each-ed.]
12 pounds of hemp thread (fil de chanvre), 30s
1 pound of wax, 6s
1/2 pound weight of resin (livre de pois raisiné), 10d
4 pounds of tallow (sieu), 5s
charcoal (carbon de bose), 10s
4 pounds of glue (colle), 24s
4 pounds of shredded/carded ox sinew (ners de beuf carpis), 40s
1 pound of varnish, 8s
12 ox? buck? horns (cornes de bouc), 12s 6d
Total 21 livres 16 sous 4 deniers, at the exchange rate of one florin of gold à l'éscu for 20s tournois. [the math does not work for me- ed.]

I am not certain what a bouc or boue is, it looks like one way of saying Latin bos, bovis "cow, ox" but they also write beuf.

Edit: The Anglo-Norman Dictionary has buc, boc; bouc, bouk; buk, buke "he-goat". The font they used makes c and e look similar.

Edit 2: On the subject of drying time ... Master Robert was to deliver the crossbows at Easter 1359 (so he had about six months).
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote:Re-reading the Primitive Archer thread ... I think kiwijim has mixed up the documents about Peter the Saracen in 1204 and 1215, and a French document from 1358 cited in the article by Baron de Cosson: de Cosson, Charles A. "The Crossbow of Ulrich V. Count of Wurtemburg [sic], 1460, with Remarks on Its Construction." Archaeologia 53, no. 2 pp. 445–64, pl. 34
I suspected that there had been some confusion and conflation. Thank you for sorting it out!

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote: This lists things provided to Robert l'Artilleur to make 25 crossbows (arbalestres) for the castle of Rouen in October 1358:
Let's discuss the items a bit.
25 staves of yew, 5s. each, worth £6 5s
I wonder if this is the normal price for a full sized bow staff, or if these are special "shorties" for crossbows. If they were full sized, I would expect to get two crossbows from each. But, perhaps that's optimistic.

25 staples (estaples), 25s
Every time I come to this item I expect it to be the stirrups, but clearly it's something else. Does anyone have an idea what these estaples might be?

25 nuts for arbalests, 2s each, worth 1s (!)
It's interesting that he doesn't have to make the nuts. Presumably they are the work of some specialist. Would that it could be thus today!

25 stirrups (éstriefs), 1s [the price for a similar order in 1361 suggests that this should be 1s each-ed.]
25 triggers (clefs "keys"), 1s [the price for a similar order in 1361 suggests that this should be 1s each-ed.]
It's less surprising that these iron parts would be made by another craftsman.

12 pounds of hemp thread (fil de chanvre), 30s
I wonder if this is for the string or the binding, or both. In any case it's about 7 1/2 oz (213g) per bow.

1 pound of wax, 6s
1/2 pound weight of resin (livre de pois raisiné), 10d
4 pounds of tallow (sieu), 5s
These clearly go with the hemp thread. It would be interesting to know his recipes for using them. I presume that the treatment of the string and the bindings are different, but I really don't know.

charcoal (carbon de bose), 10s
I wonder if this is enough to heat the shop, or if it's just to run a brazier for heating the work. Traditional Korean boyers make a great use of charcoal braziers for bending the horn and heating the parts prior to gluing. They also do a certain amount of tillering of the completed bow with heat.

4 pounds of glue (colle), 24s
I presume that most of this will be used in assembling the bow, but some may be for work on the tiller. In any case it's only 2 1/2 oz (70g) per weapon.

4 pounds of shredded/carded ox sinew (ners de beuf carpis), 40s
It's nice that it comes processed. Breaking tendon up into fibers is a pain in the ass. This amount gives him 2 1/2 oz (70g) per bow. that's the same as weight of glue. I have not done enough sinew backing to know whether this is normal.

1 pound of varnish, 8s
This is unexpected. If it is varnish as we know it, I suppose it's to be used as a finish on the weapon. It may be another type of glue, though.
12 ox? buck? horns (cornes de bouc), 12s 6d
Even if this it 12 pounds, it doesn't seem like enough horn to be part of the basic structure of the bows. Divided into the 25 weapons, it's only 2 1/2 oz (70g ) each. Perhaps it's for trimming out the tillers.



Sean M wrote: Edit 2: On the subject of drying time ... Master Robert was to deliver the crossbows at Easter 1359 (so he had about six months).
This is a very interesting datum! It takes months for sinew backing to dry, so he'd best have gotten the bows started soon and made the tillers later.

Speaking of which... we don't have any wood mentioned for the tillers. I wonder what's up with that.

Mac
Last edited by Mac on Sun May 03, 2020 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

So.. reflecting of that list, ther are two items that seem conspicuously absent.

The first is the wood to make the tillers.

The second is antler or dense bone to line line the nut-wells.

Could either of these be the mysterious (and @ a shilling each, expensive) estaples? It does not seem like the sort of word for either of the missing parts.....

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Zanetto
Archive Member
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Canonsburg, PA , USA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Zanetto »

I just checked Thom Richardson's " The Tower Armoury in the Fourteenth Century.". In the section on crossbows he lists and account from Mildenhall dated 10 June 1345. Here is a list of materials purchased to make 40 composite crossbows:

40 bowstaves
40 staves for the tiller
12lb of sinew for the composite bows
20lb of fish for glue
20lb of coarse twine
40 pairs of stirrups
50 nuts for the tiller
12 pairs of hooks, clasps, and rings for the baldricks
120 nails called "somernails" for the tiller
4lb of varnish, one horsehide
100 horns for the composite bows
4lb wax
100 "botes" for the tiller
3 pieces of balleen
2 bronze pans for heating the fish for glue
1 skin
600 small racks and nails
6 pairs of "paces" of white cow horn for the tiller
2 dogfish skins
Bronze for the "braels" of the tiller
Parchment for covering the bows
2 chests.
All if these material cost £20 15s 4d or just over 10s 4d per crossbow.

So according to this, they only needed 20lb of fish for glue for 40 crossbows. It is hard to know how much glue 20lbs of fish will produce. 100 horns means that they were only using 2 1/2 horns per crossbow. That doesn't seem like enough, unless the "40 bowstaves" made up a larger proportion of the structure of the lathe than what we are seeing in 15th century bows. They also bought 50 nuts for 40 crossbows. It seems like the making of the nut was a separate craft? And they bought ten extra?

What are your thoughts Mac?

Rob
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

I can't find the Latin of that passage in Richardson's thesis and I don't have a copy of his new book. Its possible that we just have his English summary I want to know what word he translates as "tiller" because I do not know what the medieval English name for the "stock" or "tiller" was.

Edit: pages 123 and 211 of the thesis has a document from Mildenhall in 1353:

c iiij xx ij balist’ quarum xij gross’ de cornu de brake ad tendend’ cum hancspeez, xvij gross’ de ligno ad tendend’ cum hancspeez, iiij parv’ debil’ de cornu, lix communes
de ligno veter’ et debil’ quarum iiij fract’, iiij xx vj de ligno nov’, j pro domino Rege et ij bastard’ depict’ quarum teller unius separata est de coster’


182 crossbows, namely 12 great of horn de brake to be spanned with a hance-piece, ... one for the lord king and 2 bastard painted, of which one's teller is separated from its coster

C. L. Kingsford, "Two Forfeitures in the Year of Agincourt," Archaeologia 70 (1918) p. 99 has "Item, iiij Tillers pur Crossebowes, pris xvj d."

Knyghthode and Bataile, line 2237, a Middle English verse retelling of Vegetius' de re militare, has "Nerf is to haue or senewis aboundaunce, / The crosbowyng to stringe and bowe of brake." I think that means "There should be nerf or sinew in abundance to string and bow the crossbowry of brake."

The accounts of Edward III do mention vice, hauce-piece, and baudric as three different devices for spanning crossbows. Quoth Richardson: "The name hancepes may possibly suggest goat’s hind leg and foot, and if this identification is correct, the privy wardrobe accounts give new evidence for the widespread use of the gaffle on English crossbows in the middle of the fourteenth century." Maaybe ...
Last edited by Sean M on Mon May 04, 2020 5:12 am, edited 3 times in total.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote: ... "The name hancepes may possibly suggest goat’s hind leg and foot, and if this identification is correct, the privy wardrobe accounts give new evidence for the widespread use of the gaffle on English crossbows in the middle of the fourteenth century." Maaybe ...
That would be quite a surprise. I can't think of any examples in art till the last quarter of the 15th C.

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote: The accounts of Edward III do mention vice, hauce-piece, and baudric as three different devices for spanning crossbows.
I wonder if it will help us some to look at what spanning devises we see in the military treatises. They are a mixed bag, of course. We don't know if the things shown were common or whether they were wild ideas that never caught on. On the other hand, there they are, and we might be able to understand what was common practice by distilling down the crazy stuff.

I am going to presume that the baudric is the commonly seen hook and belt.

The treatises typically show some variant on the belt hook. This usually have a little side hook for the user to loop a finger around. We don't see that feature in other art, or in extant hooks.

Image Image



The word vise is used in French as we would use "screw" in modern English. The military treatises give us several things that span bows with screws. It's sometimes difficult to tell whether these are spanning machines, or weapons in their own right.

Image Image

Here is one from outside the military treatise tradition, where it's clearer that we are seeing a spanning machine.

Image

It's difficult to know if this is any different from the crossbow maker's draw bench.

Image Image Image Image

Another spanning machine we see in the treatises is based on a lever that draws a hook on a strap.

Image Image Image Image

This last example comes from the Loeffelholz codex, which it thought to be a pretty "no nonsense" source.

Image

Then there are the spanning engines that use a cord and pulleys. These typically have a hand crank, and the spindle is tapered to increase the mechanical advantage gradually as the bow is spanned.

Image Image Image

There are also some spanning which seem to use a flat strap in addition to pulleys. I have not understood these yet.

Image Image

Alongside the spanners/weapons which use a screw, we also see ones that use a capstan to draw up a cord or flat strap.

Image Image

In addition to the stationary spanning engines, there are some small devises that are intended to be applied to the weapon. This first one uses a crank and cords.

Image

These others have a rather obscure mechanism with a strap and ratchet wheels. I'm not sure what's happening here, but most of the military treatises have a variation on this theme.

Image Image Image

The last spanning devise I want to include here is another one that "they all have". It's a simple loop or cord attached to the belt and passed over the crossbow's string. In theory is should yield a 2/1 mechanical advantage, minus friction, of course. I have never tried it, and have no idea if it really works.

Image Image Image

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

I like the idea that the tour and the vice (and maybe the hance-thing) are some of the big bench-like devices we see in the engineering books from 1400 onwards.  They are not the kind of thing that painters had reason to paint, even if they knew the Secrets of the Castle.  Then the tillolles could be the removable windlass which we see in late 15th century French paintings and a few collections of arms and armour. 

Of course, that brings us back to whether the tour which spans crossbows is a "turn" or a "tower":(  My working assumption has been that the vice is a screw-powered device.

I notice that several of the crossbows being showed with Super Secret Spanning Devices also have a cross-pin in the tiller for a cranequin or doubler belt.  I wonder if that was just an 'expected feature' by that date?
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
User avatar
RandallMoffett
Archive Member
Posts: 4613
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: SE Iowa

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by RandallMoffett »

Tom and Bertus,

Yes that is the one.

There is some good general info in that book the RA put out, Springalds and Great Crossbows I think.

https://www.amazon.com/Springalds-Great ... 0948092319

I will have to reread this later when I can take it slower but I'm with Mac. Really early for a goatsfoot. Perhaps one of those pulley belt hooks?

Best,

RPM
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

There are some composite bows for crossbows carbon dated to c. 1215 in the Qatar Museums Authority in Doha (originally probably found somewhere west of the Euphrates in the 1970s or earlier). David Nicolle in "Leather Armour in the Islamic World: A Classic Problem" (2013) does not say that they have been published anywhere. I think the issue was that the dealers did not want to say where they came from, and the museums did not want to pay as much as the dealers wanted for something with such fishy provenance that is not sexy like Red Figure vases or silverware or ancient bible fragments.

The executors of Raoul de Nesle's estate in 1302 also divided bows into crossbows (arbalestes) and hand bows (arcs maniers)

Since none of us can read Arabic, I am worried that the "double hook" in the Arab manuals is just the translators flipping through Payne-Gallway and deciding that this Arabic word must mean the double hook in his nice drawings. Kelly's article on the estate of Raoul de Nesle informs us that "Other appliances for the same purpose (of spanning the crossbow) are the double-hook (Ger. 'Spannhaken') attached to the archer's girdle, the 'goat's-foot lever' (of which examples are at Hertford House), and the 'cranequin' or 'cric,' the latest in order of time and the most powerful." Back then there were not such good dictionaries for all these old languages, and the translators were not always interested in arms and armour.

This weekend I will only translate one chapter.

III. Item, ballista veterem non potest conciare si cornum fractum est; si lectum vero mittatur totum, et etiam si aliud lectum non mittatur, illa ballista nichil valet et non debeat conçari.

III. item: an old crossbow cannot be conciare-ed if the horn is broken: if the whole bed is set, and if also another bed cannot be set, that crossbow is worth nothing and may not be conciare-ed.

Comments

Suddenly we have switched from a first-person vow to a general statement about what may and may not be done (and from the future tense into the present tense).  It might be that they were pulling together rules they already had, and the oath new masters had to swear, and they did not bother to harmonize all the language.

grammar nerd: possum "to be able" does not usually have a passive, I think Cicero would have said nemo ballistam veterem reficere potest "no one can repair an old ballista ..." or said something with licet or nefas est.

conciare / conçari: this word shows up in chapters 3 and 6, I have trouble finding the dictionary form in Italian (it could also be conzare).  The biggest Italian historical dictionary is print-only (one big volume per letter!) so our copy is locked away during the pandemic.  Since it is something you do to an old crossbow, I am guessing it means something like "repair."

TLIO lists it under CONCIARE http://tlio.ovi.cnr.it/voci/011373.htm

ballista: this should be ballistam, accusative singular, to agree with veterem, probably they forgot they were writing Latin and Latin has case endings

mittere "set": this is the difficult verb from chapter 1, in this chapter I am translating it as "set" but I might chose "put" or "place."

bed: is this part of the bow, or part of the tiller?  Is it the wooden, horn, or whalebone skeleton of the bow or what Iolo calls the table, the end of the tiller which takes the bow?

worth nothing: I think a mechanic today would say "is a write-off."

It would be good to know how the horn can be broken (impact from falls?  strain from repeated spanning and loosing? expansion and contraction from changing heat and humidity?) and when a bow is in such poor condition that it needs to be conciare-ed.
Last edited by Sean M on Fri May 08, 2020 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote: bed: is this part of the bow, or part of the tiller? Is it the wooden, horn, or whalebone skeleton of the bow or what Iolo calls the table, the end of the tiller which takes the bow?
My impression is that we are indeed talking about the place in the tiller where the bow is seated. Harmuth shows some X-ray pics of 16th C bows which are broken here. It is common to see tillers with an iron rivet securing this area, but I don't know if they are original equipment, or repairs.


Sean M wrote: It would be good to know how the horn can be broken (impact from falls? strain from repeated spanning and loosing? expansion and contraction from changing heat and humidity?) and when a bow is in such poor condition that it needs to be conciare-ed.
This begs the question of how the boyer can tell if the horn if broken.

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

Have you ever heard of a bow with a horn reinforce in that area? I am trying to decide whether "horn" and "bed" refer to the same part of the bow.

Sometime in May I will try to work through that Italian dictionary entry for conciare.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

Sean M wrote:Have you ever heard of a bow with a horn reinforce in that area? I am trying to decide whether "horn" and "bed" refer to the same part of the bow.

.
If "cornum" can be "antler" as well as "horn", then we might be talking about the nut-well*. I'm referring to the bearing surfaces that the nut turns on. They are normally made of dense antler. If these were broken, it would be pretty easy to see by taking out the nut. They could be replaced, but it that turned out to be too much trouble, than the weapon is indeed trash.

*this is "Nussbrunnen" in German. If we have a word in English, I do not know it, so I translate the German word.

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

I think cornu can refer to horn, antler, or beak at least in poetry. Ok, "nut-well" is a third possibility for the 'bed'.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

I. Iuro ad evangelia sancta Dei quod omnes ballistas quas laboravo vel laborare fecero, vendam vel vendi fatiam cum suo nomine et dicam veritatem si erunt de cornibus stambicorum vel de aliis cornibus, omnes pro suo nomine de quo sunt. et omnes ballistas quas fecero vel laborare fecero de cornibus stambicorum, non mittam nec mitti faciam in ipsis de aliis cornibus nisi de stanbicis. et si sciero quod aliquis de ista arte fecerit contra ordinem suprascriptum et non habeat factum hoc sacramentum, quam cicius potero iusticiariis manifestabo.

I. I swear on the sacred gospels of God that I will sell or have sold all crossbows which I have worked or have had worked with his/its proper name, and I shall speak truly whether they are of steinbock (Alpine Ibex) horn or of other horns, all for their own name from which they are. And all crossbows which I have made or have had worked of steinbock horn, I shall not send nor have sent into them anything of other horns except of steinbock. And if I should know that anyone else of this art has made something contrary to the above ordinance and has not made this sacrament, I shall make this known to the Justicars as soon as I am able.
Looking back at this, I'm now seeing it in a slightly different light. I had thought that it meant that only ibex horn may be used, but now I see it more two prong rule about honesty in materials.

I think it means that the crossbow maker...
-- must state truly the types of horn that are used in the bow.
-- may not mix other sorts of horn in with ibex.

If that's right, then he may use other suitable horns, so long as he is upfront about it. Presumably, that means he can make or sell a bow which is made entirely or some other species of horn. Also that he can use more than one sort of horn within such a bow. He can not, however, mix other species in with ibex and call it an ibex bow.

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Mac
Archive Member
Posts: 9952
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Jeffersonville, PA

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Mac »

III. Item, ballista veterem non potest conciare si cornum fractum est; si lectum vero mittatur totum, et etiam si aliud lectum non mittatur, illa ballista nichil valet et non debeat conçari.

III. item: an old crossbow cannot be conciare-ed if the horn is broken: if the whole bed is set, and if also another bed cannot be set, that crossbow is worth nothing and may not be conciare-ed.
Let's look at this one again. Since we are talking about an old weapon, perhaps the mysterious verb is about the process of resale. I wonder if the rules are telling us under what circumstances an old crossbow can not be refurbished and resold.

The other thing I wonder about is whether the horn and the bed are at all related, or if these are two different problems. If they are different, it might tell us something like "if an old weapon has a bow with broken horn, or a bed which is not right and can not be made right, it is NFG, and can not be resold".

Mac
Robert MacPherson

The craftsmen of old had their secrets, and those secrets died with them. We are not the better for that, and neither are they.

http://www.lightlink.com/armory/
http://www.billyandcharlie.com
https://www.facebook.com/BillyAndCharlie
Tom B.
Archive Member
Posts: 4532
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:15 am
Location: Nicholasville, KY
Contact:

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Tom B. »

Mac wrote:
III. Item, ballista veterem non potest conciare si cornum fractum est; si lectum vero mittatur totum, et etiam si aliud lectum non mittatur, illa ballista nichil valet et non debeat conçari.

III. item: an old crossbow cannot be conciare-ed if the horn is broken: if the whole bed is set, and if also another bed cannot be set, that crossbow is worth nothing and may not be conciare-ed.
Let's look at this one again. Since we are talking about an old weapon, perhaps the mysterious verb is about the process of resale. I wonder if the rules are telling us under what circumstances an old crossbow can not be refurbished and resold.

The other thing I wonder about is whether the horn and the bed are at all related, or if these are two different problems. If they are different, it might tell us something like "if an old weapon has a bow with broken horn, or a bed which is not right and can not be made right, it is NFG, and can not be resold".

Mac
Image
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

Three chapters this week, I will get around to Tom's and Mac's posts later.

IIII. Item, nullus magister sit ausus facere et ballista de cornum de beco, sed in tenet mittere potest.
4th item: no master shall be so bold as to make a crossbow of buck (beco: some kind of male cervid) horn, but/unless he is able to put in tenet (in tenure?)

beco: this seems to be a male cervid, possibly the same one as is mentioned in the French document from 1358. Domestic he-goat?

in tenet: this is gibberish ("in he/it holds").  I have a feeling that either there was a misprint, or he guessed wrong about how to fill in abbreviations and tenet is really a noun and the object of the preposition (tenetura "tenure, holding" would fit).   http://ducange.enc.sorbonne.fr/TENERE01

Aside from these horn bows, the bow which John Clements of Liverpool (not John Clements of ARMA) dissected for Baron de Cosson in 1893 is of whalebone and yew. 

Ralph Moffat, James Spriggs and Sonia O'Connor's article "The use of Baleen for Arms, Armour and Heraldic Crests in Medieval Britain" p. 212 reports that "At Harlech in 1341 there were three pairs of (baleen) gauntlets (iij paire des gauntz de baleyne) as well as baleen crossbow staves (iij costes de arblastes de baleine non suffisantz; iij costes de baleine pour arblastes). The aforementioned inventory of Sir John Fitz Marmaduke viewtopic.php?f=4&t=180611&p=2749577 also included a baleen bow (j arcus de  Balayn).

I am not so sure as them and Richardson that the coste or coster is a "bow" or "bowstave" in French.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Sean M
Archive Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: in exile in Canada

Re: Arbalest à Tillolles

Post by Sean M »

V. Item, nulla ballista bastarda aliquis magister conçare potest.

5th item, no master shall be able to repair any bastard crossbow whatsoever.

Comment

This introduces another difficult word, the bastard crossbow. There was a "bastard painted crossbow" in the Tower of London in 1353 (Richardson, "Medieval Inventories," pp. 123, 211). Bastard can often mean in between (a bastard sword is neither a one-handed sword nor a two-handed sword) but what does it mean here? Do any other texts mention bastard crossbows?

VI. Item, si aliquis aportaverit ballistam occasione conçiandum et postea voluerit conçare, unusquisque ballistarus facere teneatur signum suum ⁜ super illud ballistam.

6th item, if anyone has brought in a crossbow for repair (conciare-ing), and afterwards wants it repaired, every single crossbow-maker shall be held to make his own sign ⁜ upon that crossbow.

Comment

This rule seems to imaging bringing in a crossbow, talking it over with the people in the shop, and then deciding what to do. My understanding is that at least in England, makers' marks start to be common in the 13th century. Datini knew some of them, just like he knew which masters in which city did good work in a given trade (and could meet his price points).

It looks like they want to hold accountable anyone who conciare-s a crossbow, so it must be a serious level of maintenance or refurbishing, not the equivalent of de-rusting your bike chain, applying some silicon lube, and patching the chipped paint. It also sounds like a process which several masters and journeymen may be involved in.

We are back to future perfect in the subordinate clauses (aportaverit, voluerit) and present subjunctive in the main clause (teneatur)

illud: that should be illam, feminine accusative singular.

The next rule comes with a date in 1304/1305, so there was probably a gap of a few decades where they were satisfied with the rules as they stood.
DIS MANIBUS GUILLELMI GENTIS MCLEANUM FAMILIARITER GALLERON DICTI
VIR OMNIBUS ARTIBUS PERITUS
Check out Age of Datini: European Material Culture 1360-1410
Post Reply