Medieval Fletch Profile

[GrahameA]

Good Morning All

This is a bit obscure but what the hell.

The medieval re-enactors longbow arrows that are sold in the UK all use a low profile wedge shaped fletch.

Is this historically correct?

An example of what I mean:


The reason behind the question is that I am not aware - and I may well be wrong - of any fletches surviving form the period.

[hubris]

Grahame, I've just finished making up a set of new arrows, and I fletched one of them in that style out of curiosity of how it would work.

I found that the arrow travelled a little slower (ever so slightly) than those with turkish style fletching, but it did two interesting things:

1. It REALLY spins, and bores into the target - always penetrating a lot deaper. So even with the speed drop, I'd say it'd really deliver a nasty wound. I'd like to try this comparison in hunting.

2. The sound is REALLY cool! The end pointy bits on the feathers get a curl after a few shots and they flap at a high speed as they travel through the air - much like the plastic motorbike trick that Butch and Strowy use on their bikes. It's a really freaky "CLAKKER CLAKKER CLAKKER CLAKKER!". Louder than othe flu-flus I've used. I imagine the sound of thousands of these flying about you in a battle would have been very un-nerving.

I'll post some pics later.

[hubris]

You can see the last one started out similar to the medieval profile but after shooting a few times, the ends have become curled and "clakker" through the air. I'll try another profile with a steeper lower profile.

I find the parabola style feathers "shoot" (note Dennis!) much faster, and more silently than other profiles I've used.

http://www.ozbow.net/phpbb2/album_pic.php?pic_id=1142

[yeoman]

The style of fletch that you mention is indeed historically accurate.

Though not many real examples survive (I think there were some found in London Tower but I can't be sure) our main evidence is medieval art. Most, if not all, paintings of batle from this period show low, angular, concord like fletches. Some paintings even show the fine thread wrapping.

There is a copy of 'Toxophilus' or however it is spelt by Roger Ascham in the uni library. I shall check with him to see what he says. He did write in the 1600's, but I think he'd have some idea.

Saul, the sound might cause the game to jump the string. I agree, it does sound cool though.

The first arrows I made were full height feathers, nearly 2 inches. They sounded like a helicopter from my (ahem) compound.

ave

[GrahameA]

Hi Hubris and Yeoman

There is a French equivalent to the saying, "raining like cats and dogs".

It is something like, "The rain was like English arrows".

You now have me intrigued with the sound part. I will have to build a set, which makes them #3 on the immediate arrow build list - right after my set of whistling arrows.

My understanding is that parabolics are the most efficient shape, ie stability for drag. At the moment though all, except my FITA carbons, are getting feathers and anything new has shield cuts - looks good. Anything that is making noise is slowing the arrow quickly as the noise represents energy being removed from the arrow.

I just finished a set for my newer Longbow, miniature tree trunks, and was thinking of making a set of "Medieval looking arrows" for the fun of it.

(It is interesting to note how one seems to go from one fishing rod used for everything to a plethora of them. It seems to be same with arrows. There are 11 sets sitting in the corner at the moment. )

I am still interested in finding out how authentic they are though. All opinions considered.

Yeoman

Thanks for that - even thoung Roger was Tudor he would have to be close.

I had a look at the bits and pieces I had around the house an generally there was nothing that I could see that confirmed that was the definite shape.

Full height fletches are easier/quicker to make and I was thinking that when you look at the number of arrows used in some of the battles/campaigns I was starting to have doubts. But I suppose it was only an extra cut with set of shears.

[hubris]

Saul, the sound might cause the game to jump the string. I agree, it does sound cool though.

Well... I'll wait until the pigs all get into a tightly packed troop formation and shoot into the centre of the mob where they won't be able to run!

from my (ahem) compound

hahahaha... we all have skeletons! You're forgiven!

Grahame, I'm not sure how you make your flecthes, but I cut two identical plates from thin metal ( I actually use white ant capping plates). Then, after cutting the feathers down to the length, I bulldog clip the plates either side of the feather, make a rough cut, and burn the remaining bits with a small candle. It means you can carry the profiles in your hunting pack, and make your fletching by the campfire. Bugger off all those heavy fletching jigs. Just tie them on!

[GrahameA]

Hubris

Similiar method.

Two plates and a pair of very sharp scissors. No burning cannot stand the smell. If I was keen I would make a die but at this stage I do not go through that many - although that could change.

I usually us a fletching jig but I have been known to pin them in place and then put some glue down each side.

[hubris]

No burning cannot stand the smell.

ahhh... I find it blends nicely with the subtle wiff of salted skins and drying sinew, and after a few days out in the bush... doooooooooesn't matter

[Dennis La Varenne]

To all,

Here is Roger Ascham’s view on the shape (couling) of feathers in his day (1540s). It comes from page 128 of my Simon Archery Foundation copy of Toxophilus (1985).

“To sheer a shaft high or low, must be as the shaft is, heavy or light, great or little, long or short; the swine-backed fashion maketh the shaft deader, for it gathereth more air than the saddle-backed; and therefore the saddle-back is surer for danger of weather, and fitter for smooth flying. Again, to sheer a shaft round, as they were wont sometimes to do, or after the triangle fashion, which is much used now-a-days, both be good. For roundness is apt for flying of his own nature, and all manner of triangle fashion, (the sharp point going before) is also apt for quick entering; and therefore sayeth Cicero, that cranes, taught by nature, observe in flying a triangle fashion always, because it is so apt to pierce and go through the air withal. Last of all, plucking of feathers is nought, for there is no surety in it; therefore let every archer have such shafts, the he may both know them and trust them at every change of weather. Yet, if they must needs be plucked, pluck them as little as can be, for so shall they be the less unconstant. And thus I have knit up in as short a room as I could, the best feathers, feathering and couling of a shaft.”

Is this any help on the question of the authenticity of triangular feathers????

My own experience of couling my own feathers is that a feather of any design which is higher than 5/8 of an inch is noisy. The noise increases as the height increases. Triangular feathers are quiet when they are no higher than 5/8" and if the pointed tails are clipped off a little a la Saxton Pope's design.

I coul my own feathers from full length blanks by cutting to length first, then holding them against a sheet metal template with my fingers and couling to shape using sharp scissors. It takes a certain amount of nimbleness of fingers, but is readily learned. My preference is for 15cm (6 inch) x 15 mm (5/8 inch) white parabolics with a straight offset of about 2 mm . . . quiet and good steerers.

Dennis La Varenne

[GrahameA]

Good Morning Dennis

Thank you for that.

It implies that the fletches are triangular.

I seem to remember several comments regarding the noise of the english arrows so they may have been a little taller.

Thank you for that.

So for the moment the shape depicted does look reasonably correct.

PS - Strange for you to mention it but I was re-reading "Hunting with the Bow and Arrow" in bed this morning.

For memebers of the forum who do have a copy of this work it is available as part of project Gutenberg:

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/8084

[Dennis La Varenne]

Aftenoon, GrahameA.

Ascham talks about saddle-backed feathers as well as triangular feathers in this extract as if the two are different.

I have often read that the triangular is thought to be the same as the saddle-backed feather, but the extract above seems to be discerning a difference between the two. Perhaps the saddle-back is part of the family of triangular shapes.

To us, Ascham is not very clear on this matter, but obviously he was talking to an afficionado of the times who was familiar with any differences in terminology. He was not talking to later generations like us who have lost the usage of much of the original terminology unfortunately.

With clipping the tips of the triangular feathers, Saxton Pope's shape shows this clearly and possibly/probably he did so to stop the fluttering noise these points make which can be quite a racket and would be a dead giveaway to game of something unusual approaching. Novophobia in animals is one of their basic defence mechanisms.

I haven't re-read Hunting With the Bow and Arrow recently, but I believe that Pope regarded these triangular feathers as an English pattern. Certainly, for a military application where efficacy combined with easy production is paramount, a straight cut is much easier to do quickly than a curved cut.

I don't think there was anything ballistically superior in the shape. I think it was just easy to produce quickly and in quantity. Also, leaving them rather tall with the larger surface area would have allowed for a multitude of form faults in archers under duress of battle.

I cannot prove any of this of course. I am just trying to approach the issue from a common sense standpoint using efficacy and minimum effort as baselines.


Dennis La Varenne

PS: For those unfamiliar with the term, to COUL feathers is to cut out the shape using scissors as they did in those days.

[GrahameA]

Hi Dennis

Reading of the sheer quantity of arrows that were demanded to maintain the English arsenal it would follow that they would settle on something which was quick and easy to manufacture.

Which was one of the original reasons behind why my curiousty was aroused.

I had just finished reading some material on the Hundred Years War and then observed the style of arrows that were being offered as "Medieval replicas".

You know what it is like you start thinking about one thing and it leads to another.

One of the problems at looking older works is the lack of diagrammes and when they are present they tend to be stylised.

Anyhow, now you me intrigued as to if there was any difference between Saddle Backed and Traiangular shaped and if so just what it was? Need to pour over a few more illustartions.

Speaking of the shape. By coincidence I did a few checks today with a series of arrows that were fletched with large shield cuts and small parabolics and at 30 metres there was no discernible difference in the point of impact. (I would expect some difference at longer ranges though.) See PM

Re Pope.

I had not looked at Saxton Pope for ages but it was part collection of books that were returned and I was thumbing through it.

Addenda

With clipping the tips of the triangular feathers, Saxton Pope's shape shows this clearly and possibly/probably he did so to stop the fluttering noise...

I did have a look and Pope, in his part on Arrow making said he did so the fletches cleared the fingers.

[GrahameA]

Dennis, Dave, Hubris, et al

First off I have just finished a dozen medieval style arrows. They have high fletches approx 1" and hopefully should make lots of noise.

On a similiar topic my copy of "The Great Warbow" arrived yesterday. I will make the prophecy that this will become one of the 'must have' books for those interested in the English Longbow and its history. From a quick perusal extremely well written with heavy referencing back to the original documents or source. (I will write a review of the book after I have ploughed my way through it.)

(Dennis and Dave start saving, if you have already purchased a copy - three weeks delivery from Amazon. If anyone does buy from them consider grabbing something else at the same time to offset the postage.)

With regard to fletches what I did find interesting where a couple of drawing that showed the fletches as being almost triangular in shape and further depicting what appears to be a high fletch.

Perhaps the arrows I have made are not that different after all.

Will post photos later.

[Dennis La Varenne]

Grahame,

I did not know that it was published yet. Are you talking about Robert Hardy's new volume, or did he not write it?

How much??????

Lastly, I just noticed your motto at the bottom of your posts. Was Occam wrong after all?

Dennis La Varenne

[rapsod]

How many part of Toxophilus exist? Is there on internet place when I can read this Toxophilus?

[GrahameA]

Good Morning Dennis

The Great Warbow: From Hastings to the Mary Rose.

This is the "Matthew Strickland & Robert Hardy" masterpiece. Or as Strickland says, the "quintessential" book on the longbow. Published 2005

Price from Amazon:

Book USD$29:67
Shipping and Handling: USD$11:98.
Total USD$41:95.

You will love the Appendix which has all the experimental data from test firings of longbows.

The Footnotes and the Bibliography themselves are 100 pages in total in what is coffee table format book. Thus there is constant references to the original source material.

I went to Amazon for the purchase as once again I was underwhelmed by the eagerness of Australian booksellers to meet my request.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Do not read the following if you like simple answers.

With regard to William and his razor. "Nils multiplicanda sans est." I think that was he wrote.

He was right. He did say that the simplest answer is most likely the correct one and he was referring to question of technology/science.

However, I find that in many cases such an approach does resolve complex problems. Problems that appear on the surface to be simple often have extremely complex underlying causes and components.

As an example consider the current scream about the so called "skills shortage". The simplistic approach to a resolution by gov't is to train more people - if they can get them. A more detailed study may indicate that what we are seeing is not a skills shortage but rather a labour shortage and a skills upgrade approach will not resolve the issue. With additional influences driven by changing(ed) social values and rapid and drastic demographic changes.

All the current Gov't approach is doing is shifting the problem around work areas. Bit like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. And the Labour issue itself is an extremely complex issue with many different long term and short term outcomes dependent upon the what is chosen.

(Note to PM: Dear John, is it really a good move to give money to people to have babies? What will be the long term result of this and what provisions have you put in place?)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[yeoman]

I asked at Angus&Robertson bookworld, and they said that the book in Australia would cost around $65, with a waiting period of up to 2 months. Currency converter tells me that it's cheaper to buy from amazon!!

Dennis: Yes, I do beleive that this is the title from Robert Hardy. Released in July, I think it was.

I've put it on my chrissie wishlist.

Does it cover only the history of the longbow? 600 pages makes for some really in depth study!!

looking forward to the review.

Rapsod: All of toxophilus survives. It isn't available to read on the internet, however. National or state libraries may have copies, and maybe some university libraries. Mine has two!! Otherwise, start saving, 'coz a new copy starts pretty high, I'm lead to beleive.


Dave

[GrahameA]

Hi Dave

It tries to cover all the history of the longbow up to Tudor It is very strong - Hasting to Tudor - as the title suggests.

Spent the first few hours just looking at the pictures. Now I am halfway through the first chapter.

Make certain to read the introduction as they recommend reading, Chap 17 before 16, I think.

If you have ever read The Grey Goose Wing you will have an appreciation of this - and this time it only covers one bow type.

Makes my soul feel good that Angus and Robertson treated you so well. Another Bookseller who seems to specialise in underwhelming its customers with it lack of service. Delivery from Amazon. I ordered on July 14 and received it on Wednesday Aug 10. 3-4 weeks. The post is slow but still faster than the 2 months quoted - they obviously ship theirs by especially slow methods. Or it might have something to do with their quill usage.

(I am all for "Buy Australian" but would someone mind telling the other side to pull their fingers out - get off soapbox.)

[Dennis La Varenne]

Rapsod,

Toxophilus is a small book written in 1544 in parts or chapters. The first part is a learned discussion between two 16th century intellectuals on various virtues to be had through the practice of shooting with historical and philosophical justifications for it, and the second part concentrates the disussing the actual practice of shooting and the care and use of the equipment.

As you can see from my earlier post, modern readers will find it heavy going because it is in the English of Shakespeare's time, and many of the words are not used any more in modern English, or had an entirely different meaning to what they do today.

I have not checked a website to see if it can be read on the internet, but you should easily be able to locate a copy of it on Amazon. Just look for Toxophilus by Roger Ascham, or either of those names in a search engine should locate it for you.

Dennis La Varenne

[GrahameA]

All

Thanks for the help with the arrows especially Dennis, Hubris and Dave. This is them.

Hubris, the arrows spin like "WOW". Make that extra WOW. The natural curve of the feather produces a helical fletch.

Shot them for the first time today. They spine at around 80lb AMO and have been fitted with 125gn field points. The timber is tropical unknown hardwood. Arrows are 31" from end of shaft to start of point (std English livery). The extra length is for shooting them Medieval style out of the other bow.

Today I was shooting them out of a 40 lb self longbow. (shoulder is still recovering so the big bow is resting)

The were not made to be target quality but I was still surprised how well they group. The group shown was shot at 20 paces.

Tried them on some mini-clout and the do look the part and had no trouble pushing them out to 120 metres.

They are not as noisy as I thought they would be but they are definitely not quiet. It will be interesting to see what they sound like when I can arrange for a few people to shoot them at the same time.

Photo 1

The 1st dozen. The other half of the sheath is resting in the car.



Photo 2

A close-up of the fletches.



Photo 3

The group at 20 paces after a few (30) minutes practise. Consistently shooting low and left (they were heavily overspined for the bow being used.



Next step is to make more.

[erron]

I just love the look of these traditional arrows, well done Grahame!



Erron

[yeoman]

I ordered my copy of Hardy's book the other day, cost about $65-70, and will be here in a few weeks.

I'm looking forward to this!

Dave

[GrahameA]

Hi Dave

You have some heavy reading ahead of you. Do not fall asleep whilst reading this book in bed - you may break your nose

The Arrows

These are some arrows I am in the process of making. The fletch profile is the standard parabolic which more or less matches that in the Luttrell Psalter. IMHO the Luttrell profile may be closer to what is called "Old(e) English" but these are close enough for me.



The binding is "Rod Binding Thread" from my days of making fishing rods. It is a nylon thread and very strong. (I have scars to prove that when I have tried to break it )

Of interest, perhaps, to Cameron is that the start of the fletch just has the thread bound up over it - there is no seperate blank quill section.

The 2 arrows on the right and the single on the far left (as looking at the screen) have two grey flecthes and a white. The mid 2 have 2 grey and a black. The binding is a single continuous bind start before the shaft and continuing to the nock.

Postscript:

The shafts are Victorian Ash shafts from Keith Forrester.

[stace]

GrahameA
Youve put some time in on those beauties
They look great ,so how do they shoot
stace

[Stickbow Hunter]

GrahameA,

Lookin good! The fletches look close to 6" to me, what size are they?

Jeff

[GrahameA]

Hi Stace

Don't know how they shoot yet - they should be fine. I will be taking them with me on Sunday.

Hi Jeff

They are 5" Fletches - Gateway feathers.

All

I am very happy with them. The look really nice - and will look even better in a target.

The rod binding thread is very easy to use as being thinner than the linen thread I use on the Livery Arrows it slips between the barbs without distorting them.

I actually stuffed a shaft when I was cutting the self nocks as it slipped down the slot on the Triton. I have fixed that by taping the slot on the Triton. Will post some photos of the setup tomorrow.

On the plus side I now have a shaft for centreing the self-nock cutting jig.

Regards
Grahame

[Mick Smith]

Grahame

Your rod binding skills have come in handy mate. How about a nice chevron patterned arrow?

Many years ago you could buy either die cut or full feathers in what they called undyed white. They were just plain "dirty" white feathers, nowhere near as bright as the normal white ones you get these days. I used to like them because they looked natural and unprocessed. I haven't seen them for years. They'd be great for your "old time' arrows I reckon.

Mick

[GrahameA]

Hi All

As promised.

Most of the literature suggests that you cut self nocks by hand. Essentially you place the shaft in a vice and then cut down the shaft using a number of hacksaw blades taped together.

Machine methods usually suggest hand feeding the shaft into some sort of cutting arrangement.

This is my method of doing it.

I already had the Triton fitted with a old, circa 1983, Skil saw. (The Skil was bottom of its range in its day but it has survived being abused for 20+ years by me. The saw blade is a Triton fine cut blade.

The block of timber has a number of holes to suit various sized shafts. You need to drill the holes vertically and I did it in a drill press. You also need to get the size right so that the shaft fits snugly - not tight nor loose. I drilled the holes to the nominal size and then used a number/letter drill set to enlarge them slowly till I got the correct fit. You could alternatively sand them.



As can be seen the block is just clamped to the Triton slide. Setup is relatively easy. Centre the slot over the saw blade and use it to set the depth of cut of the saw blade. Then clamp the timber to the slide, take a test cut and adjust laterally so that the nock is cut central in the shaft.

The black tape is to cover up the wide slot that is present in the Triton as it is wider than 5/16". Under the tape where you can see the cross taping is a thin piece of card which reinforces that area - stops it sagging from continually loading shafts.



This is the view down the bench and you can see the shaft in the slot ready to be fed through the saw.



The end result. Neatly cut self nock.

From this point I cross drill at the base of the slot to give a clip on effect and then sand and slighty round the end. The the area below the nock is bound and eventually the bidnding and end either varnished or if the arrow is to be wax finished coated with PVA before the wax finish is applied.

The saw blade does cut 'undersize' nocks and I suggest that people file them out to suit their bowstring/preference. In my own case I just leave - I am happy with the amount of grip they have.