Bowyer / Bowmaker - Whats the differance?

[perry]

NOTE EDIT : This should have been worded more softly so as not to imply a ridgid line of thinking.

In order to become a Bowyer one must be indenturered to a Master for a period of seven years. This system has origins from medievil England and somewhat reflects today's apprenticeships but went a good deal further in that a boy being indentured was bound to his Master and required to keep his masters secrets and council as well as live under other rules imposed buy his master.

For more details have a look around this link http://www.bowyers.com/history/history.html

Unless you have served such an indenture you can not be called a Bowyer - You should be called a Bowmaker

NOTE EDIT : I made an error buy using one example and not choosing words carefully enough which has detracted from the thread - I appologise , if people would care to contribute further knowledge of examples of historical lines of Master Bowyers, not just English or European but Chinese or Japennese, Bhutan etc

regards Jacko

[kimall]

Interesting post mate I have made a few bows but I would not call myself a bowmaker.Maybe one day but I cringe when I see guys that have made a handful of bows and then put them up for sale and call themselves MASTER BOWYER.
What does blur the lines a bit I think is that there is a certain amount of art that goes into a bow in that it is very much a case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder.One mans dream may be another's nightmare.
I make knives too but I would not call myself a knife maker.I will be interested to hear some thoughts from others.
Cheers KIM

[greybeard]

Hi Perry,

Who was the Master indentured to before he gained the title?

Were the first masters self appointed or had they won favor from the nobility?

Daryl.

[perry]

Good question Daryl, thought about that one before posting and I have not seen any research that addresses this question specifically. Other than speculating nearly 700 years ago at the stroke of a pen a self interested group influenced government to create a series of Guidlines designed to ensure workmanship was of high quality and the English had Quality archery equipment produced in a time of dire need.

I can not imagine a Master gaining favour with Nobility by producing inferior equipment. I do know that the folks that produced the wonderous Asiatic composites operated under the fact of execution if they produced inferior equipment and that the english passed laws restricting the hours Master Bowyers, Fletchers etc and their Indentured worked to daylight hours to assist in the production of quality equipment. So authorities placed great importance on the skills of these craftsmen.


Same question can be fairly asked of any other indentured / apprenticeship based trade. None the less the qualifications where laid down 700 odd years ago by the authorities of the day and they should be respected as a part of archery history

Being a Bowmaker in the 21st century is no slight and should not be interprettered that you do not possess the skills of a Master Bowyer, it simply means you have not been indentured under a Master.

regards Jacko

[Gringa Bows]

i just call myself a hobby bow maker,that likes to make modern laminated longbows-flatbows. .......................Rod

[otis.drum]

i just like to make bows. i certainly wouldn't call myself anything bowyer/bowmaker like and don't think i ever would

[GrahameA]

Morning Perry and Daryl

When the first Guilds were initiated they were just a group of people with a common interest - to restrict trade. The Guilds started circa 1200 and they included a lot of different groups including merchants.

Bowyer/Bowmaker is a bit like Cobbler/Cordwainer - what they originally meant and what they currently mean is vastly different. As to the length of apprenticships - they had as much to do with the regulation of the numbers of people available as they did with learning and they provided an income for the Master for a goodly number of years..

Addenda

I did a search on the eytmology of the word "Bowyer" and it returned:

"bowyer - "maker of bows," attested late 12c. as a surname, from bow (n.1) + -yer (cf. lawyer)."

That would suggest that whilst bowyers at one stage may have been part of the guild system that the originally they were not.

Addenda

This may be of interest.

In Abingdon, William Mills was prosecuted in 1737 for following the trade of a mercer without having served an apprenticeship.

3 One cannot help wondering how much training was actually needed for this occupation; the historian James Sharpe notes in this context that ‘many [crafts] could be learnt in a few weeks’, and apprenticeship for seven years had more to do with controlling adolescent males in the community.

4 The 1765 indenture of Richard Smith of Whitchurch, Oxfordshire, to Catharine Warner of Pangbourne, barge builder, for instance, includes the promise that ‘The Goods of his said Mistriss he shall not waste, nor the same without Licence of her to any give or lend. Hurt to his said Mistriss he shall not do, cause or procure to be done; he shall neither buy nor sell without his Mistress’s Licence. Taverns, Inns, or Alehouses he shall not haunt. At Cards, Dice, Tables, or any other unlawful Game, he shall not play.’

5 Indentures usually included these kinds of restrictions on the apprentice’s behaviour, although they were usually framed in rather less colourful language; another standard provision forbade the apprentice to marry. A child was usually placed at the age of 14 and would thus normally achieve legal adulthood at 21 about the time his apprenticeship ended.

There are, however, a number of exceptions to this; one example is that of seven year old John Berksdell of Englefield, apprenticed to Thomas Clarke, a Reading gardener, in 1709 for 14 years [i.e. until he was 21].

6 The Englefield and Thatcham parish records have several instances also of youths apprenticed until the age of 24, such as Joseph Allen’s apprenticeship in 1761 to Hampshire blacksmith Francis Cottrell.

[longbowinfected]

Seven years learning one basic skill set with perhaps doing a lot of preliminary drudge work with the master earning the profit with no mention of pay scales other than upkeep with heaps of behavior rules smacks of a cross between restrictive trade practices and slavery.

I would be interested Grahame if there were equally strong and restrictive rules for the master and his treatment of the apprentice and perhaps any ad hock rules allowing remuneration or scope/common practice allowing the apprentice to make and sel some gear. Bet it was not as common as the strict stuff......sign of the times.

Basically anyone who makes any sort of bows is a bowyer or a bow maker. Going rabid, radical traditional with the word and its meaning at one point in time is ridiculous. Times change. This sort of exclusive mind set holds traditional archery back. Traditions change. The tradition is handing the dream and the skills down to your son and daughter, not wanting people to serve out time within a more acceptable form of slavery.

If a person makes good servicable bows he/she is a bowyer. If they make great bows they are a bl**dy great bowyer. If they make crap bows word gets around and they do not make so many bows.If you read any of Christian Jacq's novels about Egypt [and he is a qualified Archaeologist/renowned Egyptologist] he talks about bowyers 2000 BC.

[Stephen Georgiou]

Interesting concept.

Indenture is a thing of the past. I was indentured in 1981 in one of the last intakes as an electrical mechanic. After this the apprenticeships where taken on by trade schools and training companies. Today the idea that an apprenticeship guarantees competency is fading.
My father was indentured at the age of seven as a shoe maker and lived with the shoe maker who he was indentured to. His apprenticeship went for seven years. He was never given a certificate but then again most of the people he made shoe for couldn't have read it anyway. His shoes spoke of his skill in their service. I think the same stand for the bowyer and bow.

In the context of a bowyer or bow maker, the craft has been carried on by natural selection. A well made bow speaks volumes of the craftsman who made it. The same goes for a poorly made bow. So the question whether or not a man is a bowyer or bow maker or back yard hack is in the hands of the bow itself. So having said that, to the Bowyers that I know through the excellence of their bows, I tips me hat to you.

[greybeard]

I tend to think of the title ‘Bowyer’ or ‘Master Bowyer’ is more suited to the person who, by displaying excellence in his craft and this excellence has been recognized by his peers.

To qualify the above statement I am referring to selfbows, horn and sinew bows and the like.

In my own situation if I make an excellent selfbow [as judged by my peers] I would like to think of myself as a bowyer, but when it comes to making a glass/wood laminated bow I am merely assembling materials that have been machined to a recipe.

The bows come off the form of being within a gnat’s nut to the correct tiller. Not much art, craft or skill required.

Another scenario, last year I ran fourteen bow making workshops. The clients came from a diverse background and had never made a bow [except maybe as a child when they found a stick and a bit of string].

Under my guidance the clients processed all the materials, laid up the bow, did all the shaping, added the tip overlays and filed the string nocks, final sanding and applied the clear finish.

Although they walked out of the workshop with a well made durable bow would you call them a bowyer?

Would the person who designs/makes one of those contraptions that has cams and steel cables be classed as a bowyer or an engineer?

Daryl.

[Gringa Bows]

well, i'll never be called a bowyer, because i have no interest in any style of bow other than the ones i make, so just call me a laminator ............rod

[Steven J]

A good thread guys.

Darryl, I take no offense but will state my disagreement with the point you make that making laminated bows requires little skill. I have far to many bows gathering dust on a shelf in the workshop at various stages of completion. The only reason they are sitting there is that I stuffed them up and they are not worth continuing with. If skill played no part then they would all be finished and sold.

Mind you, at least half of those bows will still make fine shooters if I get around to finishing them some day. The defects are cosmetic. A bowyer that is proud of his or her craft should not be selling on second rate work.

What about the selfbow that was designed for 50lb and came out at 30lb because you were chasing the tiller all over the workshop? Are they akin to my failures even though they made it out of the workshop to stretch their wings?

As you suggest, engineering may be a better term for some parts of the craft. Sometimes making laminated bows feels like engineering too.

Do I call myself a bowyer? Not sure yet.

Steve

[greybeard]

Hi Rod,

I like the terminology 'laminator', if you don't mind I will borrow that word.

In all seriousness one does have to take time to learn the pitfalls of making laminated bows.

Perhaps I may have tried to over simplify the situation.

Selfbows are still my biggest challenge.

Daryl.

[stringnstik]

Just a thought...

Would these terms have to do with how one earns his keep? Historically, and Im guessing at this, one would have been called a bowyer if thats what he did to keep himself housed and fed? It does not necessarily indicate he was a good maker of bows. Im sure there were good and bad blacksmiths for example. But in a local town, the local blacksmith/bowyer is all you had to get goods from, unless you could afford to go further afield.
Its really only recent days where people have the "leisure" time to become "part time" or hobby bowyers. Another job occupies most of their time and keeps the roof over their heads. I have made plenty of furniture from wood, built a few pergolas etc in my time but Id hardly state I was a carpenter or a chippy.

[GrahameA]

Morning All

I tend to think of the title ‘Bowyer’ or ‘Master Bowyer’ is more suited to the person who, by displaying excellence in his craft and this excellence has been recognized by his peers.

A topic dear to my heart. I am very much in agreeance that the term "Master" when aplied to skills is a recognition by ones peers of the attainment of a high level of skill and knowledge. Note that I added the term knowledge - a person who is a "Master" not only knows how to do it but also why it happens. People who are Masters of the skill designs things that when built perform as expected.

***

As aside:

The earliest mention of the Company is in 1371 when the Fletchers presented a petition to the Lord Mayor, where they agreed that, for the common good, the two trades of Fletcher (the maker of arrows) and Bowyer (the maker of longbows) should be kept entirely separate and no man of one trade should do the other, under a penalty of £4.

Worshipful Company of Fletchers
http://www.fletchers.org.uk/history.html


I am wiling to argue that this agreement was in effect a "restricton of trade" as distinct from anything else.

If you are interested in the background of things like Guilds it is worthwhile having a read about the Hanseatic League which helps to coalesce the concepts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanseatic_League

[perry]

Seven years learning one basic skill set with perhaps doing a lot of preliminary drudge work with the master earning the profit with no mention of pay scales other than upkeep with heaps of behavior rules smacks of a cross between restrictive trade practices and slavery.

I would be interested Grahame if there were equally strong and restrictive rules for the master and his treatment of the apprentice and perhaps any ad hock rules allowing remuneration or scope/common practice allowing the apprentice to make and sel some gear. Bet it was not as common as the strict stuff......sign of the times.

Basically anyone who makes any sort of bows is a bowyer or a bow maker. Going rabid, radical traditional with the word and its meaning at one point in time is ridiculous. Times change. This sort of exclusive mind set holds traditional archery back. Traditions change. The tradition is handing the dream and the skills down to your son and daughter, not wanting people to serve out time within a more acceptable form of slavery.

If a person makes good servicable bows he/she is a bowyer. If they make great bows they are a bl**dy great bowyer. If they make crap bows word gets around and they do not make so many bows.If you read any of Christian Jacq's novels about Egypt [and he is a qualified Archaeologist/renowned Egyptologist] he talks about bowyers 2000 BC.

The purpose of this thread was to demonstrate an interesting historal aspect of Archery not to make folks feel the have to explain themselves. Though some of us know of folks that are worthy of having fingers pointed at that use the term Bowyer for personnel gain and to imply a vast skill and knoweledge. For these folks it's a bit cheeky to breeze in and assume they have a right to call themselves a tradesman when they have not served the official apprenticeship/ indenture call it what you may I'm not having a go at anyone just pointing out a fact of historical significance that should be respected

There is room in Traditional archery for modern technology and attitudes. A source of angst to me is folks that pick and choose which time frame they will honour in Traditional archery and ignore precedent or equipment advances. I have 2 ILF bows hanging up beside my Selfbows and a set of carbon arrows in my arrow storage right next to sets of wood arrows with footings, cresting etc. Room for new ways and attitudes should not be at the expence of established historical practices just as Dogma that surrounds old practices should be questioned and understood.

There is still folks in the UK that have served / are serving there time to become a Bowyer. Do we dishonour the legacy these folks are continuing by disregarding their efforts in preserving a time honoured skill. I have a mate that took the time to go and talk to these folks and was honoured with becoming a registered Bowmaker in their Society. In fact he is the only registered Bowmaker in Australia as recognised by this Society. They are passing down the skills and knowledge of generations past just as surely as those of us with the knowledge to make our own equipment that readily share our knoweledge

regards Jacko

[GrahameA]

Hi Perry

There is still folks in the UK that have served / are serving there time to become a Bowyer. Do we dishonour the legacy these folks are continuing by disregarding their efforts in preserving a time honoured skill. I have a mate that took the time to go and talk to these folks and was honoured with becoming a registered Bowmaker in their Guild. In fact he is the only registered Bowmaker in Australia as recognised by this old Society. They are passing down the skills and knowledge of generations past just as surely as those of us with the knowledge to make our own equipment that readily share our knoweledge.

Which Guild?

[perry]

Your quick off the mark Grahame, just had to take my wife and kids to the shops when I realised my mistake, consider it edited to Society

regards Jacko

[GrahameA]

Hi Perry

Your quick off the mark Grahame, just had to take my wife and kids to the shops when I realised my mistake, consider it edited to Society

Not really, I was/am in the process of doing a bundle of stuff for SQAS and had the site running in the background. I spent a fair of time researching Guilds in the UK and I was thinking I had missed one and I am still thinking I have missed one.

[CraigMBeckett]

I think you will find that a lot of the current crop of internationally recognised Bowyers in the UK did not serve any form of apprenticeship, Pip Bickerstaffe, Hilary Greenland, Steve Stratton to name a few. They are all, I believe , now members of the The Craft Guild of Traditional Bowyers and Fletchers. Would you deny the title to such people as Paul Comstock, Tim Baker, the late Jay Massey, Jim Hamm, Al Herrin, almost forgot Mark St Louis? They certainly did not follow any form a apprenticeship.

Because in the 13th century a group of people decided to introduce a restraint of trade upon all who did not belong to their club, so they could protect their "mysteries", does not mean the club and its rules were necessary then let alone necessary now.

The making of bows is a skill, some forms of bow requiring more skill and skills than others, however at the most its a semiskilled job.

Even if you believe the current so called guilds are a continuous line from those of old the guild structure in bow and arrow making has only been around for less than 800 years, compare that with the 10,000, or 15,000 or whatever number of years it is that man has made a bow.

On another historical note, take a look at the lives of some of the most successful Victorian bowyers, again you will see that they all did not serve Apprenticeships, yet they are all known as bowyers.

I would also suggest that the fact your friend, who did not serve any form of bow making apprenticeship, has been accepted into the society, gives lie to your assertion.

Craig.

[GrahameA]

Hi Craig

The Craft Guild of Traditional Bowyers and Fletchers.

They are a very new organisation, less than 30 years old.

The Craft Guild of Traditional Bowyers and Fletchers

The Craft Guild of Traditional Bowyers and Fletchers was formed in 1987 by a group of craftsmen bow and arrow makers capable of making longbows of marketable quality ...
ref: http://www.bowyers.com/affiliations/craftGuild.html

[perry]

I think you will find that a lot of the current crop of internationally recognised Bowyers in the UK did not serve any form of apprenticeship, Pip Bickerstaffe, Hilary Greenland, Steve Stratton to name a few. They are all, I believe , now members of the The Craft Guild of Traditional Bowyers and Fletchers. Would you deny the title to such people as Paul Comstock, Tim Baker, the late Jay Massey, Jim Hamm, Al Herrin, almost forgot Mark St Louis? They certainly did not follow any form a apprenticeship.

Because in the 13th century a group of people decided to introduce a restraint of trade upon all who did not belong to their club, so they could protect their "mysteries", does not mean the club and its rules were necessary then let alone necessary now.

The making of bows is a skill, some forms of bow requiring more skill and skills than others, however at the most its a semiskilled job.

Even if you believe the current so called guilds are a continuous line from those of old the guild structure in bow and arrow making has only been around for less than 800 years, compare that with the 10,000, or 15,000 or whatever number of years it is that man has made a bow.

On another historical note, take a look at the lives of some of the most successful Victorian bowyers, again you will see that they all did not serve Apprenticeships, yet they are all known as bowyers.

I would also suggest that the fact your friend, who did not serve any form of bow making apprenticeship, has been accepted into the society, gives lie to your assertion.

Craig.

10 000 years ago it was a necessary survival skill for hunters to have the knowledge to make a bow, arrows and other associated equipment. Then as now some folks where better at it that others and would have traded off their skills so that they had better equipment then they where able to make. I know I'd trade a good bow for a good knife in this context.

This thread has it's origins in a time of upheavel, war was common, when a broken bow or poor quality arrows was life and death, a nations future was influenced. As I understand it this is why the Mystery, Guild, Trade etc whatever term you call it was formed - to ensure quality. Them as now shoddy workmanship, self interest and greed where problems. Government then and now use regulation as a tool to protect customers and to cover they're own backsides

By the 17th century the bow was more an instument of recreation and not war due to firearm technology becoming more prominant and social changes made many old trades redundant. This is a very differant circumstance to 300 years previous and many Bowyers of the 17th century turned to more profitable ventures but some stayed on, I'll bet some where the most renowned tradesmen and I'll also bet talented craftmen filled any gaps. I think it possible that old Bowyers passed on their knowledge outside of an indenture / apprenticeship as well.

I wonder how long some of these trademen operated that originated in the 14th century or how long some of their business's had operated beforehand? Would be fascinating to find out!

I have not suggested that any of the People you have mentioned are not eminent in the field, or that they should not be held in anything but the highest regard and recognised for there skills and contribution to archery. The purpose of this thread was to highlight some of the historical aspects of Archery not question peoples qualifications or the prestige they are held in.

I stand behind my belief based on knowledge gained over decades in Archery, talking with folks that are more knowledgeable than I about this specific topic and my own research that Bowyer is not the correct term. It's an academic point I believe in and have no intention of bashing people over the head with , just bring into their knowledge base.

Sure Bowyere and other differant spellings originally meant Bowmaker but the historical fact is that in 1363 the skill of Bowmaking was recognised as indentured / an apprenticeship of sorts and the generic term became a trade. Whether folks agree with the original reasons or add there own interpretation or not is not the intention.

Gives lie to my assertion Craig - Just so I understand - Gives lie to - means reveal to be false . Assertion - means as if no supporting evidence where neccesary. As I was typing this I figured I had left myself wide open to be challenged as I did not go into specific detail or name the Gent concerned. I ask that you accept in good faith that I am not telling stories as I feel you are implying. I will not be giving a name for privacy's sake as this gent is not a member of this forum. Once again I ask you accept this in good faith. I'm sorry if you choose not to take what I say in good faith but welcome your questions.

A little more on the story was that my mate presented his business card to an eminent Traditional Archery personality as it had a address and phone number on it while over in England and was politely told that he should change his card to read Bowmaker not Bowyer and spent a fascinating period being educated with the full history. Wish I could remember who as it may have been one of the eminent english gents you mentioned. It's been years since I was told and I have not been able to reach my mate when I phone to check. I will not guess.

regards Jacko

[greybeard]

Some interesting reading when you have the time.

The chapters are from a book titled 'Turkish Archery and the Composite Bow' authored by Paul E. Klopsteg.

Chapter 03 The Guild Of Bowmakers And Famous Masters.pdf

(28.55 KiB) Downloaded 27 times

Chapter 08 The Turkish Archers Guild And Its Rulers Of Practice For The Novice.pdf

(88.83 KiB) Downloaded 24 times

Daryl.

[greybeard]

A good thread guys.

Darryl, I take no offense but will state my disagreement with the point you make that making laminated bows requires little skill. I have far to many bows gathering dust on a shelf in the workshop at various stages of completion. The only reason they are sitting there is that I stuffed them up and they are not worth continuing with. If skill played no part then they would all be finished and sold.

Mind you, at least half of those bows will still make fine shooters if I get around to finishing them some day. The defects are cosmetic. A bowyer that is proud of his or her craft should not be selling on second rate work.

What about the selfbow that was designed for 50lb and came out at 30lb because you were chasing the tiller all over the workshop? Are they akin to my failures even though they made it out of the workshop to stretch their wings?

As you suggest, engineering may be a better term for some parts of the craft. Sometimes making laminated bows feels like engineering too.

Do I call myself a bowyer? Not sure yet.

Steve

'I have far to many bows gathering dust on a shelf in the workshop at various stages of completion. The only reason they are sitting there is that I stuffed them up and they are not worth continuing with. If skill played no part then they would all be finished and sold.'

Was the above situation caused by a lack of skill or a lack of knowledge?

'Mind you, at least half of those bows will still make fine shooters if I get around to finishing them some day. The defects are cosmetic. A bowyer that is proud of his or her craft should not be selling on second rate work.'

If the bow has integrity, is a good shooter and the 'defects' are purely cosmetic surely they can be fixed.

'Sometimes making laminated bows feels like engineering too.'

You are making a laminated beam; engineering.

Selfbows can still give me grief but I shoot in the bow with gradual increases in draw length and make adjustments as I go rather than chasing the tiller all over the tiller board. Tillering strings do not reflect the true tiller of the bow, the braced bow is more accurate.

I have seen your bows and you do produce a quality product.

Daryl.

[longbowinfected]

One of the above points raised the consideration of a bowyer making markettable bows....not necessarily best quality...........................so..........where does employee no 12434578 stand making the low quality bottom end korean longbow...wouldn't call him a bowyer and yet they full time make markattable bows. Probably even have the job description bowmaker.

master then comes in for knowledge, skill, superior intuitive capacity to predict the whys / wherefores....I'm getting a headache....great thread though.

Kevin

[Goblin]

I can do maths, but I wouldn't call myself a mathematician.

I think the term "Amateur Bowyer" would be appropriate for what I've done so far. Produce amateurish bows. I don't like the term hobby because it conjures up too much of a stamp collecting image. Amateur seems to me to say "I try my best to learn and can do something, but not amazing things, and certainly don't do it for profit."

[Steven J]

Darryl,

I guess that I must concede that the defective bows were borne out of a lack of skill and knowledge. I am certainly still on the learning curve here.

Thanks for the compliment in stating that my bows are a quality product. The truth is that I will only let a quality bow leave the workshop.

As for cosmetic defects, the most forgiving mistakes I have made is in mixing up bookmatched pairs of laminations from back to belly so that the grain in timber no longer seems as harmonious as it should appear (only done this once). The worst is using insufficient glue under the surface laminations so that white bubbles appear under the glass (it has taken a couple of bows to realise that glue is cheaper than time and fiberglass). Neither bow will let go and fail, but I would certainly not want to send them to a customer and have them dissapointed.

Other mistakes I have made include banging the bow blank as I load it into the car to bring it home from the workshop. If you make a mark in the side of the fiberglass you will never get it out.

I once took two perfectly good bow blanks that I had finished shaping and tillering. I slid them into a protective bag to transport them and lifted two huge splinters of fiberglass along the side of each one as the sharp edge caught on the fabric of the bag. Needless to say that I have made sure that won't happen again.

Maybe it is like riding a horse. If you haven't fallen of a dozen times, you really can't say you're a rider.

Another skill of a selfbowyer is in choosing a good piece of timber to begin the project.

Regards,

Steve

[CraigMBeckett]

Perry,

By "gives lie to your assertion" I was not suggesting you were telling lies.

You are asserting that one needs to have served 7 years under a master bowyer before you can be regarded as a bowyer, however you also say your friend has been accepted as one when he did not do a seven year apprenticeship but merely talked to them, the two things cannot both be true. The acceptance of your friend into the society proves you do not need to have had a seven year apprenticeship, one gives lie to the other.

Grahame,

I am aware that the craft guild I referred to was formed relatively recently, however they are, I believe, the only organisation in the UK that claims to oversee bowyery, the Worshipful Company of Bowers defers to them in such matters.

Craig.

[GrahameA]

Morning All

I am certainly still on the learning curve here.

You are not alone.

[CraigMBeckett]

Perry,

One thing I forgot to add to my previous post is that a Bow Maker is usually a maker of violin and cello bows, not archery tackle.

Craig.


The only reason for there being no further need to learn is death.