About History: Crossbows

Introduction

As its name suggests a crossbow is a bow perpendicularly attached to a stock to form a “cross shape”. One significant advantage of such weapons is that they can be kept in a loaded state without effort from the user. The stock also allows spanning (bending) and releasing of the bow (also called a lath or prod) to be mechanically assisted. All of which results in a powerful and accurate projectile weapon that can be mastered by anyone lacking the skill or physical strength demanded by conventional bows. Crossbows vary according to method of spanning, the material of the bow itself, the release mechanism, the projectile to be shot, and the intended use.

Shooting with a crossbow differs somewhat from that of “conventional” archery. At its simplest, spanning involves drawing the bowstring back by hand until it is held by the nut. Over time improved mechanical aids allowed more powerful bows to be made and used. Fitting a bolt, or quarrel, entailed holding the weapon roughly horizontal, and laying the bolt in the groove cut into the stock for that purpose. The butt of the bolt shaft was placed close to the nut touching the bowstring. A leaf spring was sometimes fitted to hold the bolt in place at any attitude. Crossbows can be aimed like a rifle, at or near the shoulder, and the trigger pressed with minimum disturbance to the aim. Inherently accurate, crossbows could be aimed precisely using the top of the bolt much as the sights on a rifle. Military crossbows typically relied on simple release mechanisms, while greater ingenuity was shown in trying to perfect this mechanism for later target bows.

Compared to an English or Welsh longbow, the crossbow’s rival in 14th- and 15th-century warfare, crossbows were slower to span and shoot. Depending on the source, longbowmen are said to be able to shoot six aimed arrows per minute (or twelve with less accuracy), while a crossbowman using a windlass might only be able to achieve one shot per minute (four if spanning with a belt and claw). Crossbows, however, could outrange longbows. The extreme range of the former was ca. 360 m (380 yds) against the latter’s ca. 255 m (280 yds), although the effective tactical range for both weapons was far less. At said tactical ranges both crossbow bolts and longbow arrows could pierce plate and mail armour with a correctly tempered arrowhead.

It is not clear when the crossbow was invented, but it is believed to have first appeared in China by the 7th-century BC and in Greece around the 5th- or 4th-century BC (the Classical Greek period). In the case of the former, cast bronze trigger mechanisms have been recovered archaeologically in China dating to around 650 BC. As to the latter, the earliest crossbow-like weapon to emerge in Europe was the gast3raphetes which probably appeared around the late 5th-century BC. This particular weapon was described in Belopoeica (Βελοποιικά, “On War Machines”) written by Hero of Alexandria who lived in Roman Egypt. His work, however, draws on an earlier account by Ctesibius (fl. 285–222 BC), a Greek engineer residing in Ptolemaic Egypt. According to Hero, the gastraphetes was the forerunner of the later catapult, thus placing its invention some, as yet unknown, time before 399 BC.

Greek gastraphetes

The gastraphetes (Koine Greek: γαστραφέτης, lit.” belly-releaser”), also called belly bow or belly shooter, was a hand-held crossbow used by the Ancient Greeks. A fairly detailed description and drawing of the gastraphetes appears in the aforementioned Belopoeica. The weapon was powered by a composite bow but unlike later Roman and mediæval crossbows, it was spanned not by drawing back the bowstring.

A dovetailed slider was pushed forward in the lower stock until the two pivoting “fingers” of the trigger mechanism could grasp the bowstring. A trigger bar locked the fingers in place. The weapon was cocked by resting the belly in a concavity at the rear of the stock and bearing down on it using the bowman’s body weight. In this manner the slider would be driven backward spanning the bow. A ratchet and pawl mechanism would prevent unintended discharge. As with other crossbow-like weapons, the projectile is placed against the bowstring in a groove in the slider. Having taken aim, the bowman pulls the trigger bar rearward allowing the fingers to pivot upward releasing the bowstring. The power stroke accelerates the projectile along the slider towards the intended target. The gastraphetes lets considerably more energy to be summoned up than by using only one arm of the archer as in a conventional bow.

According to some authors, the dimensions of the gastraphetes may have involved a prop but there are no surviving images or archaeological finds. Hero’s description is detailed enough however to allow modern reconstructions, one of which is shown above right.

Arcuballista: the Gallo-Roman crossbow

The gastraphetes was superseded by more powerful torsion-driven catapults which, for several centuries, became the standard “artillery” weapons of the Roman legions. In the 4th-century AD the Roman military historian Vegetius makes the sole mention of the arcuballista in his work Epitoma rei militaris [1]. In book II.15, when describing how the ancient legion was drawn up in battle order, he refers to soldiers who shoot bolts with manuballistae and arcuballistae, terms which are typically translated as catapults and crossbows respectively. Yet, as Joseph Needham explains:

“On the textual side, there is almost nothing but passing references in the military historian Vegetius (fl. + 386) to ‘manuballistae’ and ‘arcuballistae’ which he said he must decline to describe as they were so well known. His decision was highly regrettable, as no other author of the time makes any mention of them at all. Perhaps the best supposition is that the crossbow was primarily known in late European antiquity as a hunting weapon and received only local use in certain units of the armies of Theodosius I, with which Vegetius happened to be acquainted.”

In etymological terms, Latin ballista is taken from the Greek βαλλίστρα ‎(ballístra), itself derived from βάλλω (bállō, “I throw”). So, manuballista (the Latin variant of the Greek cheiroballistra) has the sense of “hand projector”. Most scholars [2][3][4][5] seem to agree that this weapon was a torsion-powered bolt-shooter, but debate on its configuration is effectively divided into two camps: those who accept the translation literally and believe the manuballista was hand-held and, conversely, those who see it as a continuation and technological development of earlier stand-mounted catapults as seen, for example, on Trajan’s Column.

As for the arcuballista, its name suggests it incorporated an arcus (“arch”), but whether this refers to the bow of a non-torsion weapon or to the arched-strut (Latin: arcus ferreus) design of torsion weapons from the 2nd-century AD onwards cannot be unequivocally stated.

However, in Book IV of Epitoma Rei Militaris (op. cit. IV.22), while discussing siege and naval warfare, Vegetius continues to make a clear distinction between the weapons “they used to call ‘scorpions’ that are now called manuballistae” and those such as fustibali (“staff-slings”), arcuballistae (“crossbows”) and slings. Rather unfortunately Vegetius does not describe the latter any further assuming that his contemporary readers would be familiar with their form and function. Weapons such as slings and staff-slings are clearly hand-held weapons however and, by implication, so must arcuballistae. Moreover, by repeatedly referring to manuballistae and arcuballistae separately Vegetius, and other authors such as Arrian, seems clear that the latter are different from torsion powered bolt-shooters and stone-throwers. Interestingly Arrian's earlier Ars Tactica, written around AD 136, mentions “missiles shot not from a bow but from a machine”, and that this machine was used on horseback while in full gallop. It is hard not to believe that Arrian was describing some form of crossbow.

So, if arcuballistae are not torsion-powered, then it seems logical that they were very similar to Mediæval crossbows using flexion bows. We turn, therefore, to the crossbows depicted on the Gallo-Roman carved stone reliefs (shown above right) from Solignac and Saint Marcel. These are obviously not a gastraphetes as they lack the distinctive crescent-shaped stomach rests characteristic of such weapons. Nor is there any sign of winching mechanism for spanning the bows. Are these then the elusive arcuballistae?

From a photograph of the Solignac relief in his article [6], Dietwulf Baatz suggests a plausible reconstruction of an arcuballista as shown left.

It is unclear whether the reliefs depict self-bows or composite laths of wood, horn and sinew; both were known and used by the Romans. Any reconstruction of an arcuballista could, quite reasonably, use either. It is unlikely, however, that a steel prod was used as in later medieval crossbows.

No known contemporary spanning devices have been discovered, and none are shown on the surviving French reliefs. To span an arcuballista, a sketch in Baatz shows the arcuballistarius placing a foot on the belly of the bow, either side of the stock, and drawing the bowstring by hand. If correct, the draw weight of the arcuballista cannot be so great that the bow cannot be spanned by hand.

A visual assessment of the Saint Marcel relief suggests the stock was between 600 mm and 700 mm in length using the forearm of the arcuballistarius as a cubit measure; the average cubit being 480 mm (»0.5 m). Likewise, using the same method of measurement, a bow length of c. 1300 mm (tip to tip), as Baatz' suggests, is plausible.

Using the length of the quiver depicted on the relief from Saint Marcel, Baatz assumes that missiles were of similar length to arrows shot from standard bows. Furthermore, with the nut placed toward the end of the stock, Baatz also imagines that the draw length was longer than that of later crossbows, and thus longer arrows could be used rather than shorter bolts.

The Solignac relief depicts a similar hunting crossbow from above. This clearly shows a revolving-nut release for the bowstring, together with a groove for the bolt. It proves the arcuballista is the ancestor of all Mediæval crossbows that use the same revolving nut release mechanism. Finds of objects resembling revolving nuts have been discovered in Britain and dated to the 5th- or 6th-century AD.

Unsurprisingly, these have been attributed to a form of late Roman crossbow. The author’s reconstruction uses a Mediæval-style trigger bar set beneath the stock to release the nut which freely rotates for the bowstring to begin its power stoke along the stock accelerating a bolt toward its target.

Unlike Mediæval crossbows which tend to have a wholly rectilinear stock or “tiller”, the arcuballista has a unique carved handgrip at the rear. Being so distinctive, it has been conjectured that pulling back on this handgrip, if connected to a straight trigger bar, might have been the means to release the revolving nut. Simply pushing the handgrip forward may have engaged said trigger bar into the locking notch cut in the nut. Precisely how this type of mechanism might have operated remains speculative, but one solution is pictured below:

Mediæval

In post-Roman Europe, from the 5th-century until the 10th-century, there are no known surviving images or references to crossbows. However, according to Bishop Guy of Amien’s poem Carmen de Hastinge proclio, which was completed in 1068 and describes the battle of Hastings two years earlier, crossbows were present at the battle but not one is depicted on the Bayeaux Tapestry. William of Poitou also writes that crossbows were carried by Norman soldiers at Hastings (Payne-Gallwey, 2007, 45).

In AD 1098, a mere thirty years later, the ruling class of western Europe petitioned Pope Urban II to ban the use of crossbows because of their “brutality in war”. This apparent dislike of the weapon most likely stemmed from the ease with which the lower classes could be trained to use crossbows and, by extension, kill the nobility. Such actions upset the established mediæval social order and may explain the nobility’s petition. Yet even though the Pope complied, the Papal edict had little impact and certainly did not prevent the merchant guilds in London, Paris, Genoa, and Prague from manufacturing and selling, at a handsome price, thousands of crossbows each year. Once again strongly encouraged by the European nobility, the Church tried to ban the weapon. In 1139 the Second Lateran Council decreed that crossbows were unfit for use by Christians, and that those who used the crossbow against anyone other than infidels (Muslims and heretics) would suffer the penalty of anathema and be eternally damned. The ban was simply ignored and even Pope Gregory IX employed crossbowmen against the Lombard League a year later (1140).

One might argue that the nobility’s fears were vindicated when Richard I, King of England, besieged the tiny, virtually unarmed castle of Châlus-Chabrol in the Limousin region of France. On 26th March 1199 Richard was reportedly inspecting the castle’s defences. The King’s apparent over confidence in the face of the enemy, allied with underestimating the threat posed by the defenders, meant he was not wearing armour. A crossbowman, often said to be a young man named Pierre Basile, shot the bolt that struck Richard in his left shoulder near the neck. Despite initial removal attempts, the wound became gangrenous leading to Richard’s death on April 6th some eleven days later. In a historic twist of fate, Richard was renowned for his military prowess and strategic innovations, with one of his most significant contributions being the use of crossbowmen. Before his reign (1189 - 1199), the crossbow was not widely used in English warfare until, it is said, Richard recognised its potential and incorporated it into his military strategy. How ironic that a champion of the crossbow was killed by one?

Crossbows are not mentioned in Byzantine sources until the 11th-century when Anna Komnene (1083–1153) [7] documented that the crossbow was a new weapon associated with barbarians and was not known to the Greeks:

“This cross-bow is a bow of the barbarians quite unknown to the Greeks; and it is not stretched by the right hand pulling the string whilst the left pulls the bow in a contrary direction, but he who stretches this warlike and very far-shooting weapon must lie, one might say, almost on his back and apply both feet strongly against the semi-circle of the bow and with his two hands pull the string with all his might in the contrary direction. In the middle of the string is a socket, a cylindrical kind of cup fitted to the string itself, and about as long as an arrow of considerable size which reaches from the string to the very middle of the bow; and through this arrows of many sorts are shot out. The arrows used with this bow are very short in length, but very thick, fitted in front with a very heavy iron tip. And in discharging them the string shoots them out with enormous violence and force, and whatever these darts chance to hit, they do not fall back, but they pierce through a shield, then cut through a heavy iron corselet and wing their way through and out at the other side. So violent and ineluctable is the discharge of arrows of this kind. Such an arrow has been known to pierce a bronze statue, and if it hits the wall of a very large town, the point of the arrow either protrudes on the inner side or it buries itself in the middle of the wall and is lost. Such then is this monster of a crossbow, and verily a devilish invention. And the wretched man who is struck by it, dies without feeling anything, not even feeling the blow, however strong it be.” Anna Komnene

During the 12th-century the crossbow superseded hand bows in many European armies, except in England where the longbow remained more popular. Archers, however, had to train for many years and from an early age to gain the strength, stamina and skill needed to master the longbow. Crossbow use on the other hand could be learned far quicker and did not require the physicality. Crossbows were the obvious weapon of choice for commonfolk. 

The laths of the first mediæval European crossbows were made of wood, usually yew or olive wood. Composite lath crossbows began to appear around the end of the 12th-century, while crossbows with steel laths (also known as prods) emerged in the 1300s. With much higher draw weights the latter, sometimes referred to as arbalests, required mechanical aids for spanning. In the 13th-century, European crossbows started using winches, and from the 14th-century an assortment of spanning mechanisms such as winch pulleys, cord pulleys, gaffles (such as gaffe levers, goat’s foot levers, and rarer internal lever-action mechanisms), cranequins [8], and even screws. Yet, even for a practised crossbowman, using these tools took time reducing the number of bolts shot to two per minute compared to the six or more arrows of a skilled archer. With spanning taking more time, crossbowmen carried a large shield, characterized by its prominent central ridge, known as a pavise (pavis, pabys, or pavesen). The pavise was primarily used by archers and crossbowmen, especially during sieges, to protect themselves as shown. It was carried by a pavisier, usually an archer or, for the larger versions, by a specialist pavise-bearer. The pavise was either held vertically in place by the pavisier or set in the ground with a spike attached to the bottom edge and braced with a support. While reloading, archers and crossbowmen would crouch behind them taking shelter from incoming missiles (www.metmuseum.org).

Crossbowmen recruited in Genoa and other parts of northern Italy were renowned mercenaries in the pay of many armies throughout mediæval Europe. As professionals such crossbowmen often earned higher pay than other foot soldiers, including equivalent mercenary archers. The extra stipend reflected that longbowmen did not have to pay a team of assistants and that his equipment was cheaper. However, with one crossbow team being more expensive to hire it made sense to engage three longbowmen for the same fee, which may explain why English armies favoured the longbow.

At the battles of Crécy in 1346, at Poitiers ten years later (1356) and again at Agincourt in 1415 French forces employing the composite crossbow were simply outmatched by English longbowmen. After these humbling defeats the use of the crossbow declined sharply in France, and the French authorities made attempts to train longbowmen of their own. The experiment did not last long as the French largely abandoned the use of the longbow after the Hundred Years’ War ended. Subsequently, the military crossbow saw a resurgence in popularity continuing in use in French armies by both infantry and mounted troops until as late as 1520. From that point on however the crossbow would be largely eclipsed by the increasing use and popularity of handgonnes across continental Europe. Even with its widespread demise, Spanish forces in the New World made extensive use of crossbows. That said, crossbowmen participated in Hernán Cortés’ conquest of the Aztec Empire and accompanied Francisco Pizarro on his initial expedition to Peru. However by the time of Pizarro’s conquest of Inca Empire in 1531-1532 he would have only a dozen such men remaining in his service.

Modern applications

From their inception crossbows have played a significant role in military history, particularly during the mediæval and early Renaissance periods. They offered common soldiers a weapon that required less training than longbows. Their mechanical advantage allowed for the spanning and holding of heavy draw weights, resulting in considerable power capable of penetrating armour at shorter ranges. Yet no modern military issues crossbows (or bows) as standard combat weapons. That said a surprising number of armed forces around the world still keep them in their arsenals for specialised tasks. For example a special operations team might use a crossbow for a specific mission requiring absolute silence, such as eliminating a guard dog or deploying a rope across a chasm. The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is known to use crossbows as “non-lethal” option in countering public disorder. But these are extremely rare circumstances. Today, in many parts of the world, crossbows are more likely to be used for hunting. They are particularly effective for hunting deer, elk, and other large game animals at shorter ranges. Bon appétit!

References:

Blumberg, A., (2003), “The Medieval Crossbow: Redefining War in the Middle Ages”, Warfare History Network, available online (accessed 26 March 2026).

Payne-Gallwey, R. (2007), “The Crossbow: Its Military and Sporting History, Construction and Use”, Chapter IX, Ludlow: Merlin Unwin Books.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, “Crossbow (Halbe Rüstung) with Cranequin (Winder)”, available online (accessed 30 March 2026).

Endnotes:

1. Milner, N.P. (1993), “Vegetius: Epitome of Military Science”, Liverpool University Press.

2. Baatz, D. (1978), “Recent finds of ancient artillery”, Britannia 9, pp. 1-17.

3. Gudea, N., and Baatz, D. (1974) “Teile spätrömischer ballisten aus Gornea und Orşova”, Saalburg Jahrbuch 31, pp. 50-72.

4. Marsden, E.W. (1971), “Greek and Roman Artillery: Technical Treatises”, Oxford.

5. Wilkins, A. (2003), “Roman Artillery”, Shire.

6. Baatz, D. (1991) “Die Römische Jagdarmbrust”, Archäoligisches Korrospondenzblatt 21, pp. 283-290.

7. Anna Komnene (1 December 1083 – 1153) was a Byzantine Greek princess, scholar and historian. She is the author of the Alexiad, an account of the reign of her father, Byzantine emperor Alexios I Komnenos. Her work constitutes the most important primary source of Byzantine history of the late 11th- and early 12th-centuries, as well as of the early Crusades.

8. For heavy crossbows the most practical spanning mechanism was the cranequin, consisting of a rack and reduction gear with handle. The gear box is usually almost circular, with a heavy loop of hemp rope attached to the underside. This loop would be slipped over the butt end of the crossbow stock and brought to rest against the transverse pegs to the rear of the release mechanism. The double claw of the rack, in extended position, would be slipped over the bow string, to be pulled back by turning the handle of the gears. The gear ratio of this winder is twelve to one.