THE MIRROR OF LITERATURE, AMUSEMENT, AND INSTRUCTION.

Vol.  XIX.  No. 538.] Saturday, march 17, 1832. [Price 2_d_.

* * * * *

[Illustration:  The arbalest, or cross-bow.]

The arbalest, or cross-bow.

The Bow would appear to have been in most ancient nations the principal implement of war; and to keep alive this “mystery of murder,” archery, or the art of shooting with a bow and arrow, seems to have been a favourite pastime in days of peace.  In no country, however, has archery been more encouraged than in this island; wherefore the English archers became the best in Europe, and procured many signal victories.  Tributary as have been the bow and arrow to some of the brightest scenes in our history, it is not surprising that its exercise should have become cherished among us as an amusement.  Strutt tells us that in the early ages of chivalry, the usage of the bow was considered as an essential part of the education of a young man who wished to make a figure in life.  Hence the long-bow and cross-bow have been and are playthings in the hands of youth; and would that they had only been the toys of the playground instead of leading men to slaughter each other for the costly toys of the game of life.  It is chiefly to the use of the cross-bow that we propose to confine ourselves upon the present occasion.

The arbalest, or cross-bow, was not only much shorter than the long-bow, but fastened also upon a stock, and discharged by means of a catch or trigger, which Mr. Strutt reasonably enough thinks gave rise to the lock on the modern musket.  The old logicians illustrate the distinction in their quaintest fashion.  Bayle, explaining the difference between testimony and argument, uses this laconic simile, “Testimony is like the shot of a long-bow, which owes its efficacy to the force of the shooter; argument is like the shot of the cross-bow, equally forcible, whether discharged by a dwarf or a giant.”

The arbalest is said by some writers to be of Italian origin.  Verstegan says it was introduced here by the Saxons, but was neglected till again brought into use by William the Conqueror, at the battle of Hastings.  No mention is made of bowmen among the troops of Harold; but we read that the Norman army was fronted by “footmen clothed in light armour, worn over a gilted cassock, and bearing either long-bows or steel cross-bows.”  Harold himself had his eye struck by an arrow, notwithstanding which he continued to fight at the head of his army.  Cross-bows were afterwards prohibited by the second Lateran Council, anno 1139, as hateful to God, and unfit to be used among Christians; in consequence whereof they were laid aside till the reign of Richard the First, who again introduced them, and was himself killed by an arrow or quarrel, discharged from a cross-bow at the siege of the Castle of Chalus.[1]