- sidered a stroke of poetical justice that Richard's own death should have
been brought about by a bolt discharged from such an engine.
Matthew Paris, in his XIIIth-century writings, constantly refers to the arbaleste, though he gives no accurate description of it. Certainly the earlier crossbows were charged by the pull of the arm and not by any mechanical means, but the stirrup at the fore-end of the weapon figures in the very first representations. In this was thrust the foot, and the string was then drawn back until engaged in the notch, or barrel, from which it was afterwards released. The penetrating power of the bolt, arrow, quarrsel, or quarrel, shot from the crossbow was great; but its range, if we can trust the records, was short. Roger Ascham, the chronicler, tells us there were three essential parts in the composition of the arrow— "the steel (or wand), the feathers, and the head. Steels are made of divers wood, blackthorne, beeche, elder, aspe, salowe," etc., etc. "Sheaffe arrowes should be of ashe, and not of aspe, as they be nowadays." Bolts and arrows were variously fired from the crossbow. From the ordinary bow only the arrow.
In the XIIIth century the pay for a bowman was threepence a day; but if mounted, he could depend upon sevenpence to fifteenpence, according to the steeds he possessed.
It is interesting to note that in the first years of the XIVth century the mechanical arbaleste was almost entirely superseded by the earlier long-bow, only to be again revived at the beginning of the XVth century. This falling out of favour of the arbaleste was only apparent to any extent in England, and was probably due not to any want of superiority in the arbaleste itself as an instrument of war, but to the temporary revival in popularity of the long-bow which, in the hands of the Normans, had always proved a most effective weapon, and had naturally won for itself a good deal of sentimental regard. The fascination, too, of acquiring proficiency in the use of a weapon like the long-bow, which necessitated such expert handling, kept it in favour for a number of years until the simple mechanism and effective penetrating qualities of the arbaleste bolts once more proclaimed its superiority.
From an incised Chertsey tile of the third quarter of the XIIIth century (Fig. 154) we are able to show the mounted archer habited in complete chain armour covered with the short surcoat; on his head is a cylindrical helm of the time, which to us appears an extraordinary impracticable head-piece for an archer. Our illustration (Fig. 155) of a mounted archer of rather later date is quite knightly in appearance; for over a complete hauberk and chausses of chain mail he wears the long knightly surcoat,
