Late Gothic Crossbows and Accouterments

[Micke D]

I will try to write something about these crossbows, before the weekend when I have some time over.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Micke D

I will try to write something about these crossbows, before the weekend when I have some time over.

[Andi]

Archaeological Museum Hamburg is actually excavates some medieval housing sites along a street in Hamburg-Harburg which directs to the former main passage via the River Elbe to Hamurg. At one site they found at least 3 chrossbow nuts made from deers horn as well as a lot of crossbow bolts and musquete barrels dating to approx. 15th century. As they found also lots of other bone and horn objects they suppose that it was a bone carvers house, but the extraordinary high amount of other projectiles may also alow an other interpretation of the houses inhabitants profession.

Here is a photo which I made in August 2012 showing one of the corssbow nuts in comparison with such an object in a reconstructed corssbow. Unfortunately the museum has no information about this crossbow, neither its origin nor its dating. It was found in the museums inventory without any information. They believe it is an early modern reconstruction, maybe of the 19th century.

[David Jaumann]

Thank you for posting Andi! Do you have approximate messurements of the nuts? That would be very interesting!

I´m courios about your information of the Nuremberg-crossbows, Micke


Best wishes,
David

[fernando]

David, you have a PM (private message) in your box.

[Micke D]

Hello David and other interested!

These two crossbows in Nürnberg have inventory number W755 and W1762.

My guess is that W755, Armbrust 1, was made in the later part of the 15th century, probably around 1470-1480. It is a crossbow that was owned historically by the Count family Feldkirch-Montfort from Vorarlberg in Austria. I’m happy to say that there are quite a few crossbows preserved from this family, Inv.-nr. K.Z. 207 in Schweizerischen Landesmuseum in Zürich, Inv.-nr. 1777 in Historischen Museum in Bern, posted by Matchlock in post #54, Inv.-nr. 11464 in Legermuseum in Delft, posted by Matchlock in post #32, and my favorite one from Peter Finer Antiques that Matchlock posted in post #55. That post also shows the pattern of the printed birch bark cover on the bow with what looks like parts of the zodiac, but also other things like a squirrel and the Austrian flag.

W755 is of what I call the “second tiller type” from the 15th century, W1762 is from the “first tiller type”, and the “third tiller type” is the earliest examples of the more robust type of central European crossbows from the 16th to 18th century.

The “second tiller type” has a flat lower part on the underside next to the bow; we can see this in David’s photo “Armbrust 1 GNM_2”. The flat underside, with an inlayed dark piece of horn, changes into a round form in front of the lock. This type of crossbow is shorter and of a more robust type than the “first tiller type”. Inv.-nr. XI.434 in Leeds is a very similar crossbow in shape, style and dimensions, and it also has the skinny trigger that looks like it could come from the same smith.

W1762 is of the “first tiller type”, and is probably from the early half of the 15th century; my personal guess is that it may be from 1430-1440. I don’t have any dimensions for this crossbow, but it looks like it is longer than W755, and it should be that to. The tillers length was reduced during the 15th century from circa 90 cm’s to around 70 cm’s, and sometimes even shorter. It also has an earlier type of decorations on the tiller, and it’s inlayed almost from one end to the other.

The “first tiller type” has a more round bottomed lower part on the underside next to the bow; we can see this, but sadly not too well, in David’s photo “Armbrust 2 GNM 5”. In this photo we also see the white horn/bone inlay piece that ends, as almost always with this type, with an arrow shape.

I’m certain that he trigger is a later replacement; it hasn’t the right shape for a central European crossbow at all. After I have looked at it some more I also think that the tiller and bow probably didn’t belong to each other. If we look at David’s photo “Armbrust 2 GNM 10”, we will see that both the arrow rest and the underside has been restored, but the bow still looks a bit too wide for the tiller. It was originally made or converted later to use a cranequin, as we can see by the lugs in the tiller and not the English windlass it is photographed with now. I don’t know why the museum insist of having it attached to this crossbow as it doesn't fit the tiller.

[Micke D]

Was my answer to your liking gentlemen? 😊 Everything must be cristalclear as nobody have written any follow up questions! 😉

[Andi]

Originally Posted by David Jaumann

Thank you for posting Andi! Do you have approximate messurements of the nuts? That would be very interesting!

Today I have phoned with the museums curator and he told me that dimensions of the finds are normally not taken when inventarizing the objects. The dimensions of the crossbow nuts will be taken when they will be scientifically examined somewhen later.

Hopefully I can try to get them when next visiting the museum. In case I get them I will post them here.

[David Jaumann]

Thank you Andi!
That would be really nice! Is my guess right that this nut was constructed for a weaker crossbow that could be spanned with a belt?

[Micke D]

Yes this family seems to have had some crossbows and they span from middle to late 15th century.

I see now that I was generalizing maybe a bit too much when I said that about the length reduction. As you have seen for yourself, there were also longer crossbows later in the 15th c. The longer crossbows are, as you have also recognized, the ones that was spanned with Riemenrollenspanner. The crossbows that use the Cranequin are in most cases shorter. There are a few crossbows that have used both spanning systems, and a few that started with Riemenrollenspanner and gone over to the Cranequin, the crossbow in post no. 55 is of the latter type.

So I think that both types was made parallel to each other during the 15th c, the longer ones in many cases for war, as they were faster to span, and the shorter ones mostly for sport and hunting.

On page 38-41 in "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" you have an example of what looks like a very early long crossbow spanned with a Riemenrollenspanner, but I think it’s from 1430-1440 also but with an earlier style of inlays on the tiller underside that seems to have been popular around 1400.

I wish I had more info about the crossbow in post no. 55; as it’s one of the most interesting crossbows I have ever seen, I don’t even know if it has gone to a museum or a private collection. I will check with Finer if he can tell.
Yes it has a two-axle-lock, BUT the first axle is hidden/built in. Very strange!

No I don’t think that Peter Finer´s estimation is set too early, I think it is too late! I think this is the earliest known crossbow with a two-axle-lock. I have discussed this with Holger Richter, the author of "Die Hornbogenarmbrust" and he think it can be from as early as 1460, but my estimate is somewhere between 1460 and 1470. The crossbows shown on the St. Veit-Altar is probably the second oldest known crossbow with a two-axle-lock.