



Produced by Chris Curnow, Charlie Howard, and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)







  ARCHERY


  PRINTED BY
  SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
  LONDON


[Illustration: Your's truly

Horace A. Ford]




  THE
  THEORY AND PRACTICE
  OF
  ARCHERY

  BY THE LATE
  HORACE FORD

  CHAMPION ARCHER OF ENGLAND FOR THE YEARS 1850 TO 1859 AND 1867


  _NEW EDITION_

  _THOROUGHLY REVISED AND RE-WRITTEN_

  BY
  W. BUTT, M.A.

  FOR MANY YEARS HON. SECRETARY OF THE ROYAL TOXOPHILITE SOCIETY


  LONDON
  LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
  1887

  _All rights reserved_




PREFACE.


No excuse need be offered to archers for presenting to them a new
edition of the late Mr. Horace A. Ford's work on the Theory and Practice
of Archery. It first appeared as a series of articles in the columns of
the 'Field,' which were republished in book form in 1856; a second
edition was published in 1859, which has been long out of print, and no
book on the subject has since appeared. Except, therefore, for a few
copies of this book, which from time to time may be obtained from the
secondhand booksellers, no guide is obtainable by which the young archer
can learn the principles of his art. On hearing that it was in
contemplation to reprint the second edition of Mr. Ford's book, it
seemed to me a pity that this should be done without revision, and
without bringing it up to the level of the knowledge of the present day.
I therefore purchased the copyright of the work from Mr. Ford's
representatives, and succeeded in inducing Mr. Butt, who was for many
years the secretary of the Royal Toxophilite Society, to undertake the
revision.

A difficulty occurred at the outset as to the form in which this
revision should be carried out. If it had been possible, there would
have been advantages in printing Mr. Ford's text untouched, and in
giving Mr. Butt's comments in the form of notes. This course would,
however, have involved printing much matter that has become entirely
obsolete, and, moreover, not only would the bulk of the book have been
increased to a greater extent even than has actually been found
necessary, but also Mr. Butt's portion of the work, which contains the
information of the latest date, and is therefore of highest practical
value to young archers, would have been relegated to a secondary and
somewhat inconvenient position. Mr. Butt has therefore rewritten the
book, and it would hardly perhaps be giving him too much credit to
describe the present work as a Treatise on the Theory and Practice of
Archery by him, based on the work of the late Horace A. Ford.

In writing his book, Mr. Ford committed to paper the principles by means
of which he secured his unrivalled position as an archer. After
displaying a clever trick, it is the practice of some conjurers to
pretend to take the spectators into their confidence, and to show them
'how it is done.' In such cases the audience, as a rule, is not much the
wiser; but a more satisfactory result has followed from Mr. Ford's
instructions.

Mr. Ford was the founder of modern scientific archery. First by example,
and then by precept, he changed what before was 'playing at bows and
arrows' into a scientific pastime. He held the Champion's medal for
eleven years in succession--from 1849 to 1859. He also won it again in
1867. After this time, although he was seen occasionally in the archery
field, his powers began to wane. He died in the year 1880. His best
scores, whether at public matches or in private practice, have never
been surpassed. But, although no one has risen who can claim that on him
has fallen the mantle of Mr. Ford, his work was not in vain. Thanks to
the more scientific and rational principles laid down by this great
archer, any active lad nowadays can, with a few months' practice, make
scores which would have been thought fabulous when George III. was king.

The Annual Grand National Archery Meetings were started in the year 1844
at York, and at the second meeting, in 1845, held also at York, when the
Double York Round was shot for the first time, Mr. Muir obtained the
championship, with 135 hits, and a score of 537. Several years elapsed
before the championship was won with a score of over 700. Nowadays, a
man who cannot make 700 is seldom in the first ten, and, moreover, the
general level both among ladies and gentlemen continues to rise. We have
not yet, however, found any individual archer capable of beating in
public the marvellous record of 245 hits and 1,251 score, made by Mr.
Ford at Cheltenham in 1857.

One chief cause of the improvement Mr. Ford effected was due to his
recognising the fallacy in the time-honoured saying that the archer
should draw to the ear. When drawn to the ear, part of the arrow must
necessarily lie outside the direct line of sight from the eye to the
gold. Consequently, if the arrow points apparently to the gold, it must
fly to the left of the target when loosed, and in order to hit the
target, the archer who draws to the ear must aim at some point to the
right. Mr. Ford laid down the principle that the arrow must be drawn
directly beneath the aiming eye, and lie in its whole length in the same
vertical plane as the line between the eye and the object aimed at.

It is true that in many representations of ancient archers the arrow is
depicted as being drawn beyond the eye, and consequently outside the
line of sight. No doubt for war purposes it was a matter of importance
to shoot a long heavy arrow, and if an arrow of a standard yard long or
anything like it was used, it would be necessary for a man to draw it
beyond his eye, unless he had very long arms indeed. But in war, the
force of the blow was of more importance than accuracy of aim, and Mr.
Ford saw that in a pastime where accuracy of aim was the main object,
this old rule no longer held good. This was only one of many
improvements effected by Mr. Ford; but it is a fact that this discovery,
which seems obvious enough now that it is stated, was the main cause of
the marvellous improvement which has taken place in shooting.

The second chapter in Mr. Ford's book, entitled 'A Glance at the Career
of the English Long-Bow,' has been omitted. It contained no original
matter, being compiled chiefly from the well-known works of Roberts,
Moseley, and Hansard. The scope of the present work is practical, not
historical; and to deal with the history of the English long-bow in a
satisfactory manner would require a bulky volume. An adequate history of
the bow in all ages and in all countries has yet to be written.

In the chapters on the bow, the arrow, and the rest of the paraphernalia
of archery, much that Mr. Ford wrote, partly as the result of the
practice and experiments of himself and others, and partly as drawn from
the works of previous writers on the subject, still holds good; but
improvements have been effected since his time, and Mr. Butt has been
able to add a great deal of useful information gathered from the long
experience of himself and his contemporaries.

The chapters which deal with Ascham's well-known five points of
archery--standing, nocking, drawing, holding, and loosing--contain the
most valuable part of Mr. Ford's teaching, and Mr. Butt has endeavoured
to develope further the principles laid down by Mr. Ford. The chapters
on ancient and modern archery practice have been brought up to date, and
Mr. Butt has given in full the best scores made by ladies or gentlemen
at every public meeting which has been held since the establishment of
the Grand National Archery Society down to 1886.

The chapter on Robin Hood has been omitted for the same reasons which
determined the omission of the chapter on the career of the English
long-bow, and the rules for the formation of archery societies, which
are cumbrous and old-fashioned, have also been left out.

The portrait of Major C. H. Fisher, champion archer for the years
1871-2-3-4, is reproduced from a photograph taken by Mr. C. E. Nesham,
the present holder of the champion's medal.

In conclusion, it is hoped that the publication of this book may help to
increase the popularity of archery in this country. It is a pastime
which can never die out. The love of the bow and arrow seems almost
universally planted in the human heart. But its popularity fluctuates,
and though it is now more popular than at some periods, it is by no
means so universally practised as archers would desire. One of its
greatest charms is that it is an exercise which is not confined to men.
Ladies have attained a great and increasing amount of skill with the
bow, and there is no doubt that it is more suited to the fairer sex than
some of the more violent forms of athletics now popular. Archery has
perhaps suffered to some extent from comparison with the rifle. The
rifleman may claim for his weapon that its range is greater and that it
shoots more accurately than the bow. The first position may be granted
freely, the second only with reserve. Given, a well-made weapon of
Spanish or Italian yew, and arrows of the best modern make, and the
accuracy of the bow is measured only by the skill of the shooter. If he
can loose his arrow truly, it will hit the mark; more than that can be
said of no weapon. That a rifleman will shoot more accurately at ranges
well within the power of the bow than an archer of similar skill is
certain; but the reason is that the bow is the more difficult, and
perhaps to some minds on that account the more fascinating, weapon. The
reason why it is more difficult is obvious, and in stating it we see one
of the many charms of archery. The rifleman has but to aim straight and
to hold steady, and he will hit the bull's-eye. But the archer has also
to supply the motive force which propels his arrow. As he watches the
graceful flight of a well-shot shaft, he can feel a pride in its
swiftness and strength which a rifleman cannot share. And few pastimes
can furnish a more beautiful sight than an arrow speeding swiftly and
steadily from the bow, till with a rapturous thud it strikes the gold at
a hundred yards.

    C. J. LONGMAN.




CONTENTS.


    CHAPTER                                                    PAGE

       I.  OF THE ENGLISH LONG-BOW                                1

      II.  HOW TO CHOOSE A BOW, AND HOW TO USE AND PRESERVE
               IT WHEN CHOSEN                                    17

     III.  OF THE ARROW                                          27

      IV.  OF THE STRING, BRACER, AND SHOOTING-GLOVE             44

       V.  OF THE GREASE-BOX, TASSEL, BELT, ETC.                 67

      VI.  OF BRACING, OR STRINGING, AND NOCKING                 78

     VII.  OF ASCHAM'S FIVE POINTS, POSITION STANDING, ETC.      83

    VIII.  DRAWING                                               94

      IX.  AIMING                                               107

       X.  OF HOLDING AND LOOSING                               122

      XI.  OF DISTANCE SHOOTING, AND DIFFERENT ROUNDS           132

     XII.  ARCHERY SOCIETIES, 'RECORDS,' ETC.                   140

    XIII.  THE PUBLIC ARCHERY MEETINGS AND THE DOUBLE
               YORK AND OTHER ROUNDS                            148

     XIV.  CLUB SHOOTING AND PRIVATE PRACTICE                   279


_PLATES._

    PORTRAIT OF MR. FORD                             _Frontispiece_

    PORTRAIT OF MAJOR C. H. FISHER                 _To face p. 122_




ARCHERY




CHAPTER I.

_OF THE ENGLISH LONG-BOW_


Of the various implements of archery, the bow demands the first
consideration. It has at one period or another formed one of the chief
weapons of war and the chase in almost every nation, and is, indeed, at
the present day in use for both these purposes in various parts of the
world. It has differed as much in form as in material, having been made
curved, angular, and straight; of wood, metal, horn, cane, whalebone, of
wood and horn, or of wood and the entrails and sinews of animals and
fish combined: sometimes of the rudest workmanship, sometimes finished
with the highest perfection of art.

No work exists which aims at giving an exhaustive description of the
various forms of bows which have been used by different nations in
ancient and modern times, and such an undertaking would be far beyond
the scope of the present work. The only form of the bow with which we
are now concerned is the _English long-bow_, and especially with the
English long-bow as now used for target-shooting as opposed to the more
powerful weapon used by our forefathers for the purposes of war. The
cross-bow never took a very strong hold on the English nation as
compared with the long-bow, and, as it has never been much employed for
recreation, it need not be here described.

It is a matter of surprise and regret that so few genuine specimens of
the _old_ English long-bow should remain in existence at the present
day. One in the possession of the late Mr. Peter Muir of Edinburgh is
said to have been used in the battle of Flodden in 1513: it is of
self-yew, a single stave, apparently of English growth, and very roughly
made. Its strength has been supposed to be between 80 and 90 lbs.; but
as it could not be tested without great risk of breaking it, its actual
strength remains a matter of conjecture only. This bow was presented to
Mr. P. Muir by Colonel J. Ferguson, who obtained it from a border house
contiguous to Flodden Field, where it had remained for many generations,
with the reputation of having been used at that battle.

There are likewise in the Tower two bows that were taken out of the
'Mary Rose,' a vessel sunk in the reign of Henry VIII. They are
unfinished weapons, made out of single staves of magnificent yew,
probably of foreign growth, quite round from end to end, tapered from
the middle to each end, and without horns. It is difficult to estimate
their strength, but it probably does not exceed from 65 to 70 lbs.
Another weapon now in the Museum of the United Service Institution came
from the same vessel. Probably the oldest specimen extant of the English
long-bow is in the possession of Mr. C. J. Longman. It was dug out of
the peat near Cambridge, and is unfortunately in very bad condition. It
can never have been a very powerful weapon. Geologists say that it
cannot be more recent than the twelfth or thirteenth century, and may be
much more ancient. Indeed, from its appearance it is more probable that
it is a relic of the weaker archery of the Saxons than that it is a
weapon made after the Normans had introduced their more robust shooting
into this country.

Before the discussion of the practical points connected with the bow is
commenced, it must be borne in mind that these pages profess to give
the result of actual experience, and nothing that is advanced is mere
theory or opinion unsupported by proof, but the result only of long,
patient, and practical investigation and of constant and untiring
experiment. Whenever, therefore, one kind of wood, or one shape of bow,
or one mode or principle of shooting, &c., is spoken of as being better
than another, or the best of all, it is asserted to be so simply
because, after a full and fair trial of every other, the result of such
investigation bore out that assertion. No doubt some of the points
contended for were in Mr. Ford's time in opposition to the then
prevailing opinions and practice, and were considered innovations. The
value of theory, however, is just in proportion as it can be borne out
by practical results; and in appealing to the success of his own
practice as a proof of the correctness of the opinions and principles
upon which it was based, he professed to be moved by no feeling of
conceit or vanity, but wholly and solely by a desire to give as much
force as possible to the recommendations put forth, and to obtain a fair
and impartial trial of them.

The English bows now in use may be divided primarily into two
classes--the _self-bow_ and the _backed bow_; and, to save space and
confusion, the attention must first be confined to the self-bow,
reserving what has to be said respecting the backed bow. Much, however,
that is said of the one applies equally to the other.

The self-bow of a single stave is the real old English weapon--the one
with which the mighty deeds that rendered this country renowned in
bygone times were performed; for until the decline and disappearance of
archery in war, as a consequence of the superiority of firearms, and the
consequent cessation of the importation of bow-staves, backed bows were
unknown. Ascham, who wrote in the sixteenth century, when archery had
already degenerated into little else than an amusement, mentions none
other than self-bows; and it may therefore be concluded that such only
existed in his day. Of the woods for self-bows, yew beyond all question
carries off the palm. Other woods have been, and still are, in use, such
as lance, cocus, Washaba, rose, snake, laburnum, and others; but they
may be summarily dismissed (with the exception of lance, of which more
hereafter) with the remark that self-bows made of these woods are all so
radically bad, heavy in hand, apt to jar, dull in cast, liable to
chrysal, and otherwise prone to break, that no archer should use them so
long as a self-yew or a good backed bow is within reach.

The only wood, then, for self-bows is yew, and the best yew is of
foreign growth (Spanish or Italian), though occasionally staves of
English wood are met with which almost rival those of foreign growth.
This, however, is the exception; as a rule, the foreign wood is the
best: it is straighter, and finer in grain, freer from pins, stiffer and
denser in quality, and requires less bulk in proportion to the strength
of the bow.

The great bane of yew is its liability to knots and _pins_, and rare
indeed it is to find a six-feet stave without one or more of these
undesirable companions. Where, however, a pin occurs, it may