[solved]Skane/Lillohus crossbow thread

First topic message reminder :

Evening all!  I would like to start a thread dedicated to the Skane crossbow.  I have been sent a fab set of photos from the museum at Kristianstadt  I will need to resize and which I will attempt to store here in the hope someone will try an accurate reconstruction.  It is on my to do list but I am not going to be able to get to it for a little while

Thanks.  I think the presence of compression wood might help explain the use of timber that most bow makers wouldn’t even look at twice.  A pair of matching crossbows is significant though.  It seems to me they’ve come from a workshop, so not a home made peasant multipurpose bow.  That would make them some kind of military issue weapon.

If not military issue, certainly a stock item at Ye Olde Village Crosse Bowe Shoppe.

I know the pinlock will work with at least 300# prods -- the one in my Avatar  close to that, and IIRC there is a note somewhere of a whaling harpoon crossbow.

True, I should swap would for could, they could have been a military bow.  So many “ifs”.  If they are Danish and if they are from mid 14th century.  I guess all we can say is a standard pattern .  No metalwork on the crossbows fits with a post Black Death period, where Denmark lost half its population including many skilled workers in metal.  Simple all wood crossbows would be necessary if you needed new crossbows and didn’t have many blacksmiths

I realise the lock lever (tickler/tricker/trigger) is located in a fork type thing up front, and, I have seen a reconstruction on line that uses the pin locating in a socket on the lever with a little thread to prevent things falling apart but I can’t see that is true to the original.  Any ideas on how the original lever was mounted?

The lever seems to be doweled to the prod at the front end.  But only "seems". 

It could be simply wedged.  It could be that the trigger pin was attached (glued? in a socket?) to the lever.  If, by geometry,  the slightly overlong but slightly flexible  lever/pin would hold the pin at the other end with a friction fit, still allowing the pin to drop down the diameter of the string or so.  The pin could still move up and down while the forward end of the lever 'floated' in that notch.

I didn’t understand the floating front end but it’s actually quite ingenious .  One of the minor issues with a pin lock is the pin goes up and down but the lever travels in an arc.  This set up allows the lever to move back a tiny amount and smooth out the pin movement.  Your comments very neatly explain the shoulder and narrow bottom tip of the pin as this would locate in a hole in the lever.  The drawing suggests the possibility of such a socket.  I imagine a leather sleeve or rope loop would keep the lever closed and protect the lock when not in use

Additionally, securely fastening the pin to the lever stops the pin getting lost

From the paper Norra Åsum, Härlöv and Lillö
Farm, castle and castle.
ANDERS ÖDMAN


google trnslation of image description


Montage of Drawings of one of the two identical wooden crossbows found in the moat when it was excavated. The crossbow is of an archaic model and is attributed in the rest of Europe to 1200 -
14th century. The crossbow arrow, at the bottom of the picture, was on the bottom of the moat pointing,
according to the catalog of finds, against the bailey.
(After measurements by Sten Faste in 1941.Ekomuseum Kristianstads Vattenrike.)


So the close-up shows the pin is splt at its base - in effect a wedged tenon.  I also like it that the pin is "waisted" - I wonder if it would have been tallowed - the waist would create a pocket for tallow as well as reducing contact friction

Well, I built an almost exact replica prod, 38mm wide by 30mm thick at centre, constant tapers to 28mm by 15mm tips.  Sapwood content is very high at 12mm thick.  Draw weight is a bit disappointing at 150lb @12”.  I ended up with just over an inch of set. It will draw to 14” but the tiller was made to a 12” draw, so the bow is mounted for a safe, long life, not to maximise performance.

Apart from my inexperience, I think the quality of my yew must be a factor in the draw weight: it’s not compression wood, nor is it reflexed nor Baltic/slow growth yew.  Anyone got a 95cm length they can lend me???

So, a utility bow for hunting, something maybe around 180lb but not less than 150lb but definitely not a war bow.

Kenh was right about the tickler, the forked front end does in fact float in a twin socket arrangement.  The tickler pin is long enough that it binds in the pin- hole after it drops about 10mm as the tickler pushes back on it.  The arrangement is very secure and no danger of losing the pin.  It’s really ingenious,

I’m onto sanding then got to apply a finish and bind on the bow.  Will post some pictures in a week or so.

Been a bit more than a week!  well, been a fun ride, big surprise with the draw weight which came in at 150lb. Even allowing for inaccuracies the original couldn't have been much more than 200lb. I can't see how anyone would attack a fortress defended by black powder weapons with a crossbow that could barely shoot across the moat... surely it must have been a hunting bow, something it would be perfect for.

"week"..... "year and a day"...   it's all the same.   Congratulations on a job well done!!  You should document the whole build and publish it through Academia.edu!!

Glad I was able to offer some useful insight to your build.  You're right, this probably was never a military crossbow, but rather a close-medium range hunting weapon.

Hi Ken, thankyou, funny you should say that but much of the year and a day have gone into writing a paper for Jens Sensfelder, although there are rambling thoughts to be found in my occasional blog posts too.  The biggest issue is the date, and total lack of dating evidence - it just feels like a bow from the 1400s- long tiller, and no bolt clip; a mid 16th century date doesn't feel right

Village craftsman made rather than "military factory" product?

A scrappy piece of yew and a softwood tiller, along with zero metalworking suggest limited resources, or a model for those on a tight budget.  But there's a lot of cleverness here. For instance that awful looking piece of yew is compression wood, leaving on the inner bark could look like the maker was being slapdash but it acts as camouflage and protects the sapwood from accident damage and I think the level of simplicity only comes from a lot of development time.  The trigger mechanism is so clever - no axle, no string, and yet it is impossible to lose the pin.  I tried all sorts of designs to find a way of preventing the pin falling out of my lockbows and nothing came close to this.  Then there's the flat front to the bridle. Whoever thought that was a good idea? No-one that's who, but it works really well.  Then there's the cut away tiller behind the pin reducing weight and a curved lever - I don't know of another lockbow using a curved wooden lever, all the other wooden levers I know of are straight. All I can come to is this was built by someone who REALLY knew what they were doing, someone with a lot of skill, military workshop, village shop or home-built, I have no idea, it could be any of the above.

Just an uneducated opinion: this was made on the location by a siege engineer.
It is too cheap and too well made to be a working man's hunting bow. A farmer might have been lacking in tools and crafting skills but he would have known how to choose the best pieces wood for a dependable tool. 

 But there is one little detail in the original that seems to have been ignored.
The bolt table is not level. This looks like a pseudo-trackless crossbow. The bolt groove does not seem to be decayed, rather it seems to have deliberate vertical slant making it really  just a short recess that lowers the bolt on line with the string.
 The tallest point of the bolt table behind the bridling hole would have been the bolt rest, giving possible idea about original brace height.

Being made on site is, I think, entirely possible, especially since it is one of two examples found.  Looking back at the drawing, that shape to the bolt table is something I missed, but it is very interesting and would do as you say, mmm, I have a copy of the original drawings, I'll go and check them and report back

As you say, the bolt table does drop a few mm, though the photos show the bolt groove was cut very deeply. I think the dip was a way of reducing string contact, and so friction was greatly reduced.  Also, as you say, the groove does end behind the bridle hole and the smooth surface could well suggest the brace point, since the wide contact patch at this point would help slow the string reducing stress on the bow.  I think I'll modify mine and see what happens.