Another important thing to remember: History records the unusual. The usual is taken for granted and often they don't bother writing it done, because they can't conceive of a time when these things would not be obvious to everyone. So if it's noteworthy for Gerald to tell this story it's probably because a thick oak door almost always stops arrows usually.

I think because of the nature of the experimental historical tests like this, its providing new information not just explaining old information like 99% of history content is, which I think attracts a lot of people who already know a lot about history like professional historians who wouldn't watch most history channels much because they often just summarise primary sources, but here there is new info. I think this is why your comments have so much good info. :D

I was intrigued by how specific this account seems to be, and went to look up transcription of original latin text, and something is definitely wrong. Either the transcription or translation is wrong, and I suspect that the culprit is translation. This isn't the first time I found very creatively translated terms (where lorica cucualta - hooded armor - was translated as leather armor for some damned reason), it seems the historians sometimes like to spice up the accounts. Anyhow, here's the text and my translation, line breaks are where commas are. I transated the entire sentence, and if you know medieval sentences, you are already braced for a ride. in praetaxata castri proditione - In the capture of aforementioned castle militibus duobus in turrim - soldiers placed in the tower cumulato terrarum agere sitam - built on a mount of earth per pontem transfugientibus - were passing over a bridge Gualenses - the Welsh ut ipsos a tergo percuterent - taking them in the rear saggitas arcu mittentes - send arrows with their bows portam turris iliceam - over to the tower gate palmalis ferre spissitudinis - which was a palm thick transpenetrarunt - was penetrated ad tantorum ictuum vehementiae perpetuam memoriam - in the memory of so many strong blows saggitis in porta ferro reprecusso reservatis - arrows were perserved in iron gate So, to translate it properly: In the capture of said castle, soldiers were returning to their position in the tower on a mound of earth over a bridge, when the Welsh attacked them from the rear, and shot them with bows, arrows of which penetrated an iron door a palm thick, where they were then left in memory of such strong blows. Here's a translation I found floating on the internet, without naing the translator: In the last capture of the aforesaid castle, which happened in our days, two soldiers passing over a bridge to take refuge in a tower built on a mound of earth, the Welsh, taking them in the rear, penetrated with their arrows the oaken portal of the tower, which was four fingers thick; in memory of which circumstance, the arrows were preserved in the gate. As you can see, the translation takes some liberties there - some may be taken from previous or following sentences, but still. The most important bits are: - while translation states four inches, original indicates a palm, both of which amount to 10 cm, it was probably changed to be more understandable to modern UK and US readers - original refers to an iron door, porta ferro, not oak This means that the door in question was likely made from a strong wood and reinforced with iron bands, but the thing is we don't know if it really was oak, or what kind of oak. Oak is the most strategic choice, yes, but also pretty expensive, so we can't discount the possibility of this particular porta ferro being made with ash or something else entirely.

In the next video, Tod goes around England shooting castle doors. "We'll get to the bottom of this!" as he legs it from security guards.

Working at Guedelon castle in france as a timber framer I spend some time doing some recherche on doors. the withs waries form door to door, but having 2 1"1/2 board naild together is comun, with a side were the boards are horizontal and the other vertical. ah note also is that a hand split and hewn borad has usualy less grain runout then sawn timber.witch I think would make it harder to split with an arrow that hit it on the side of the board. But I have to admit I would have never taught the arrows would go that deap ! great videos don't stop! (sorry my english is not perfect )

Maybe Gerald just had small hands. "Gerald of Wales" sounds much better than "Small Hands Gerald"

I am a wood workers so I am talking from that experience, I don't have any real archery experience and while I love history and learning about it I haven't formal education on that subject. Laminated boards cause a separation in between the grains. This is will stop any split dead in its tracks. Laminating or gluing multiple boards together is a much better way to make doors or just about everything else. By having conflicting grain patterns from the laminated boards you stopped a lot of the arrows energy from continuing. This is because it took the energy of the first split and transferred it to a large area on the board behind it. Energy over an area does less damage than energy at a point. I wouldn't doubt you would have gotten a lot deeper if your wood was one thickness of 3 inches. It is why I no longer make canes out of a single piece of wood. I laminate 3 pieces of wood together every time now. It prevents catastrophic failures in the wood.

So, you're testing how arrows perform when shot at oak doors and classify the arrows accordingly. You could call it... the Oakeshott typology.

Wood that is seasoned outside while exposed to the elements tends to loose it's density much faster. It would be terrifying being on the other side of a three inch door watching arrow points pop out at you.

It's plausible for sure, a wooden door that's exposed to the elements won't be as dense and it'd almost certainly be getting hit by more than three arrows. Sooner or later the structure of the wood would be such that arrows would start getting through as they hit existing cracks, get that extra bit of penetration and open it up more.

When you’re that close to penetrating to oak, you have to wonder what kind of effect grain pattern and density as the precise location of the arrow impact would have on penetration. If it hit somewhere where the grain was less dense (or otherwise more favourable for penetration) through the thickness of the board, it might go further than if it happened to hit a portion where the grain is dense, or if it hit a portion where there was a buried knot, etc.

It's this sort of get-to-the-bottom attitude that I come to this channel for!

perhaps a old slightly rotten door, with the grain lined just in the right way could be pierced with ease

Gerald talks in the same bit of text about the bows: _Yet the bows used by this people are not made of horn, ivory, or yew, but of wild elm; unpolished, rude, and uncouth, but stout; not calculated to shoot an arrow to a great distance, but to inflict very severe wounds in close fight._

Now grease them up and see if they go through. You might be able to get some solid evidence for waxing arrows if it works as it will match medieval evidence.

In astrophysics we would call this sort of result an "order of magnitude estimate". We don't have all the details, we can't make a totally accurate prediction of what's going on, but we can get *some idea* of how this works. If you'd shot your arrows and they had barely scratched the surface (like stuck in 5~10 mm) you could say "Assuming Gerald is right, we're missing some pretty crucial information. Either that or Gerald is wrong." If on the other hand you'd blown clean through (unlikely given last video) you could say "Gerald is more likely right than wrong, but we can't say for 100%." Either way, interesting result. I'm sure you're already aware of many of the flaws of this test (double-layer will absorb kinetic energy better than single-layer; screws binding the layers likely limited splitting; having something behind the "door" rather than having it freehanging may also be absorbing kinetic energy, etc etc etc) but very cool. Love your channel!

The big question is, "How can anyone thumb down a video that gives us real answers to centuries old questions?" This is content we will not find anywhere else.

Hey Todd, I want to recognize how much better you're doing. Comparing the energy you display right now to your old videos is astounding. You seem happier, more focused, and more confident in your ability to test the myths we all want to see tested. You smile so much more, you're obviously enjoying what you're doing. Just wanted to point out that we all appreciate you and seriously think you're doing a right bang up job.

The first thing that went through my mind was "what condition was the door" in Gerald of Wales' account. It could have been an old tough gnarly door or half rotten. It might be possible to find out by going through the castle accounts to see if the door was replaced but that could take a month of Sundays and still give no result. Something makes me suspect there is more than meets the eye to this.

Interesting results. It would be more interesting with one piece of oak and perhaps doing a comparison between waxed arrows and non-waxed. Always looking forward to your videos!

I think the two layers of wood will resist penetration more than a single plank. The arrowhead deforms in the direction the grain is running, and eventually splits those grains apart. The second board will have a different grain structure, and will resist penetration as the arrowhead is now deformed in a non-optimal direction for the second layer. What I learned from this: Laminated doors are good. I'd like to see the test again with a single 3 inch thick board!

A 3" thick oak door would be extremely heavy, on the order of 400 pounds without iron furniture. Such a door would have to be supported by three or more substantial iron hinges, which would extend across most of the width of the door to spread the load. These hinges would be fastened to the door either by heavy nails or by iron bolts peened against the hinge. The mere existence of the bolted or nailed iron hinges across the door would have the secondary effect of holding the wood so that it could not be split easily. The iron furniture would prevent expansion around the arrow head, limiting cracking to little or none at all. A door that would split as dramatically as your test sample when struck by a few needle pointed arrows would be useless as a defensive barrier, and I very much doubt that an unreinforced wooden door would be used in a castle where it was intended for that purpose.

Another brilliant video. 2 things: I shot an arrow from a target now through my front door 30 years ago. Oops! Stopped by the flights, but hit the glass and punched a hole. Secondly, doors, especially old castle doors, were crossed plank design. You can see plenty of them to this day across the UK. So, the two planks would've been clinch nailed extensively, with crossed grain. This was done to minimise wood splitting under the axes of attackers. So, nail two together and bang the ends over, then it'll be more realistic. As for a rotten door? Unlikely in a castle!

Arrows go through lots of things! That's why historically oak doors were covered in silk shirts. >_>

Roses are red Violets are blue; If you don't paint your door; Wood will rot & arrows go through 🤓

I doubt Gerald of Wales had a ruler on him at the time. It's entirely possible that the door in question was two and a half inches thick, but he eyeballed it as three.

I wish more youtubers were as Transparent and honest as you. Quality Channel

"I'm an oak man myself, that's what I've got in my bedroom. What about you, Jimmy? You an oak man?" "Oak...oak is nice."

Great test and very interesting results. This is why you get a lot of viewers in my opinion. You go out there and do tests and shoot arrows on all kind of stuff with an open mind and challenge yourself and accepted opinions. As you probably have realized, the devil is in the details. If you change one variable just slightly, you might get a completely different result. I have to say, your pronunciation of my surname was really good. Spot on in fact. Here is small piece of advice on my first name. "Ei" in Eirik can be pronounced as "I", as in "I am". So it's basically "I rick", just drawn together as one word. But Erik is fine, it's very close. In my dialect "Ei" is a diphthong.

Two boards glued together is stronger so the arrow might even have gone trough a single board.

videos like this are what brought me to this channel in the first place, the Agincourt armour test was my introduction and yeah it is great fun watching reproductions of historical myths and urban legends. With that said I would love to see this tested again with different samples of door construction, I presume that we don't know exactly how this door was constructed but I imagine that even in the 11th century carpenters and woodworkers understood how wood behaves in certain environments and had their own ideas for how to make something like a door (specifically a gate, given the translations) to continue being a door for many years without needing to be replaced or repaired every year.

Your humble attitude and your honest search to sate your curiosity inspire me to be better. Thank you for what you do! Your study on arrows vs armor of various types is influencing my novel. We already have an archer intentionally breaking/skipping arrows to get under the joints of a giant’s heavy plate. In another place his friend uses goose feathers to remove a goblin’s barbed arrow from his leg. Again, thank you!

The longbows on the Mary Rose went up to 200lbs pull weight. Arrows from your 160lb longbow equivalent almost went through. Gerald of Wales is looking quite believable to me.

Maybe it was the grain in the 2 pieces of Oak not matching up perfect that slowed the arrow down just enough :O lol

Genuinely some of the most interesting content I’ve ever watched, love these videos Tod 🤙

I like your mix of knowledge and humility. You are a scholar who likes to do it instead of read about it. You have the knowledge and skills in applied physics to do this...and you’re not afraid to get your hands dirty. BTW, I really love your trebuchet…I’ve always wanted one!

Is that a Robertson screw? I'm feeling a surge of pride as a Canadian. We stand on guard for thee!

The glue adds a good amount of compressive strength. Good test, just letting you know.

Yet more fantastic content, thank you for all the effort you put in!

Tod, one important thing to consider is that oak is a ring-porous wood, and the density, hardness, and strength of ring-porous wood can vary widely dending on the growth rate of the tree it came from. Old growth, slow-grown oak can be much less dense and strong compared to much of the oak that is available today. The ease of penetration will also depend on the direction that the growth rings are oriented relative to the surface that is being impacted. If you shoot at a quartersawn face of ring-porous wood, whose growth rings are perpendicular to the face of the board, it will penetrate more easily due to the fact that it is easier to split in this direction.

I thought Gerald of Wales was going to be another KZfaqr. I was expecting some channel vs channel drama.

Am I right in thinking that having two thinner pieces of wood layered together would make the door harder to penetrate, compared to a single, thick piece of wood? My thinking is that would be the case as their grains wouldn't line up and create more resistance for the arrow the work through? In which case, that makes this legend that much more plausible! Another consideration is the state of the wood. Would exposure to the elements and moisture across a prolonged period of time cause wood to rot and therefore soften? How common was it for wooden doors, etc to be infested with insects, etc? Could the incident described by Gerald of Wales be explained by the wood having been unusually soft?

I simply was not expecting those arrows to be so destructive to solid oak like that. Not just penetration, but the splitting. That really surprised me.

You may or may not be aware of this but they made a door at guedelon castle. For construction the boards are rabbited at 1.5in, 37mm thick for about 2 in or so for additional strength and have a support frame board high and low running inside the planks. The door is loosely assembled and then left to season for a year. They then take the seasoned door, tighten the boards in and staple them in with giant 6in 15cm nails that go through the plank are bent and nailed into the adjoining plank. The iron staples combined with the pre seasoned oak makes for a very sturdy door.

"Toss a coin to your Witc-..." No? Wrong Geralt? "oh, valley of plenty, oh valley of plenty, oh ohohohohh!"

Another interesting factor: Range. Gerald says the arrow penetrated a 3" door. OK, from what range? You're shooting a crossbow of equivalent force to a Welsh longbow, but at a range of... 20 meters? It would certainly have more power if shot from 10 or 5 meters, though how much more I don't know. So perhaps the combination of old wood, shorter range, and the right angle would get you an arrow that pokes through a half inch or so on the other side, easily. Given the test, it certainly seems plausible.

Splitting oak can be done with your fist (splitting along the grain) so I'm not too surprised lots of force concentrated at such a small point would split the wood. Have to admit I never thought an arrow would go so far through wood--you assume "it's just an arrow, that can't happen" but to see it? Wow. That was very cool.

Doors are always perfect vertical (especially the heavy ones). You shot an angled plank which result in an even greater thickness (probably a minimum of 85 mm). Of course we expect another video on this matter.:)

Having grown up in Wales I can attest to it being quite damp, and 3 inches sounds like an exterior door. Any moisture would probably open up the grain quite a bit/ lubricate the passage of the arrow. A shorter stubbier bodkin might actually penetrate further also- split the wood without binding in it, like an axe, the profile is so much wider. Would be stronger too

One of the many good things about this channel is the way you are open to admitting you might have been wrong and redoing tests to get closer to the truth. Keep it up :)

So this has gone from ludicrous to plausible. Fantastic! You tested against modern kiln-dried straight-grain oak, that even if 10 years old does not look to have seen ten years in the rain and sun. - Love the science!

It definitely looked like they were getting further and further each time they hit. Likely due to the splitting weakening the door as a whole. Perhaps a fourth or fifth arrow would have done the trick?

You have to consider too the bowmen of the day were probably pretty strong men who could overdraw their bows too. Very interesting video and pretty amazing results. I certainly enjoy your channel for sure Tod.

I’m trying to write a fantasy story that has special fantasy wood that’s stronger than average wood by a considerable amount & used as armour on occasion. This video has given me a better sense of how much tougher it’d have to be to be actually useful as armour in comparison to iron & steel. Also it’s just plain fascinating as a historical experiment. Great work dude. Love your channel. P.S. I own two of your Tod Cutler daggers & an eating knife & I’m in love with them.

Thanks to Tod, i've been keeping my bowie knives constantly oiled. Getting very good cutting, penetration results from oiled clip points and blades.. Kinda like the waxed arrow heads...

I think some people are going too far! Tod has "busted" a presumed impossible account to ... an "It could have happened" one! I call that a result! For those calling for retests .... I am sure that if you donated some of the arrows needed Tod would give it a fair go ;0)

Correct me if I’m wrong but the inch wasn’t standard size up until recently (in terms of history, it’s been standardized for at least 100 yrs) so it’s possible that the door’s thickness could have been more or less than what we would measure as 3in. It’s likely that the door’s thickness was less than modern 3in as the inch was commonly measured by the size of your thumb (I think not 100% sure). So if the guy telling the story had small hands and measured the door it’s actual thickness could have been closer to 2.25-2.5in giving more truth to the myth

I cannot believe I've been watching your channel all this time and failed to subscribe. Problem corrected, your work is outstanding.

I absolutely luv these tests.

Perhaps the arrows hit between panels? Technically, that is still going through a 3 inch door.

And then if you pepper that "door" with 30-40 arrows some will go through a 75mm door

Spectacular. I wouldn´t have thought. Thank you very much for carrying through with this. Things that make you go "hmmmm..."........

I just love these experiments and the interest they generate.

You need to grease the shaft ;"D

All these door references and not a single Hodor comment? GoT didn't end well but that scene was crushing. Edit: you may have hit your car door, Tod.

Outstanding video and I really enjoy reading the comments from people who appear to be more knowledgeable of these facts than I. Please keep up the good work and I look forward to more videos.

I am angry at myself for having heard of this channel but never checking it out or subscribing until now. Bad on me, absolutely good on you Tod for such fine work both on your craft & this channel.

There is a lesson here for all historians and archaeologists, modern academia has a bad habit of poo pooing historical accounts and myths. Troy was a myth till they found it, we still do it today with aboriginal oral history, we think we know better because we're modern. Great video, the more videos you do about long bows, the more impressive they become!

Weren't inches also a larger measurement back then? I remember someone telling me the Napoleon short myth came from different measurement standards on inches.

Similar to other comments here, you do need to remember that Gerald likely didn't even measure the door, and since the doors were all handmade, they wouldn't have measured to some exact standard anyway. The arrow could have hit a join between two boards, or the door could easily have been thinner than a full three inches. I agree with Tod on this one: the arrows got close enough that any other factor contributing likely would have let an arrow at least poke through.

I too have 10 year old oak- it's rotting in the woodpile in my backyard. Great video Tod!

I have an idea-what about a 20-30 arrows already in a door. That have weakened it so the arrow 31 would penetrate it enough

My immediate reaction to this (aside from STOP BREAKING MY ARROWS) is that the crossbow is calibrated to equal Joe's 160lb bow. Joe used bows of that weight in our original tests because it was the average weight of the Mary Rose bows, as that's our only benchmark. If Gerald was writing in the 1100s, it's highly unlikely the bows being used at that time were also 160lb. They simply wouldn't need to be - armour of the time wasn't effective enough to require bows to be 160lb, and the arrowheads found from that period are not 1/2" socketed, but 8, 9 and 10mm socketed which means the bows were much lighter. This means that the test done with what is essentially a 160lb bow is possibly quite overpowered for the myth itself - I'd imagine bows from the 1100s to be in the 95-115lb range, which would result in far less penetration of the oak. That combined with softer iron heads (I did water-quench these Type 7s which although only mild steel does make a difference to their toughness) will give a very different reading, I think.

Only half an inch from glory, not bad. I love how well-researched this community is, what an interesting theory to even dare hold a candle to.

I believe the two boards actually made it stronger. It's splitting down a grain only to hit another board with a different grain would stop it faster. There's also the question about what kind of weather the door was in. You have to also consider what he meant by sticking through. Does he mean is stuck through the door, or the board of the door? If you just met the door, there could be arrows that went into the gaps. You can see how the wood got damaged as you shop more. Perhaps some arrows got through that damaged part and stuck through further. You also need to wonder how he measured. Was it from the outside of the door, or the inside? Was it finger to wrist, pinky to thumb, or front to back? It's coming for people to say something that is not very impressive in a way that makes it sound a lot more impressive. I have some raptors that hang out outside my house. They even follow us around. Roadrunners are raptors.

Again, Great Video! Can't wait for the next one.

Wow this test is so cool, it really shows how your expectations can be misleading. Apart from all the differences in the door, the wood etc. you are shooting a 160 lb lockdown longbow. Maybe the door was shot with a 200 lb longbow and that would have penetrated deeper. All we can say is that this "myth" is definitely plausible. You make history so exciting to watch Tod. If you ever have the chance to let Joe Gibbs shoot in your video's again, letting him shoot 1 arrow with his 200 lb longbow at this thickness of wood would be so interesting.

I just remembered something that might have some bearing on this story . Abergavenny is surrounded with hills . One is called the Derry . Derry in Welsh , meaning oak, oak grove or oak trees . Theses trees, that still grow there , are the original ancient forest . They are not at all like the stately oaks that are found in the grounds of large manor houses in Britain today . But much smaller about 15 to 25 feet tall . I'm no expert on trees , but I very much doubt they would be able to be make planks long enough to be used as a door to a castle . By the way the name of the city in northern Ireland called Derry comes from the same root .

This is slowly turning into medieval Demolition Ranch

If we suppose the Welshman was a boss, his bow and draw strength may have been greater than the control

Imagine Andre the giant shooting a long bow as that’s probably what mercenary archers would look like on the front lines. Archers were for hire and you hire the biggest for the front line

A couple ideas. Solid plank shot near the end of vertical grain. Put plank in the freezer, as frozen wood will split easier.

weathering would also play a huge part in how difficult it would be to penetrate the wood, i replaced a door to a church steeple once, the frame was totally solid because it was shielded from the elements by the stone work of the church itself, the door (admittedly a thin ledge and brace door) was shot to pieces, faded, splitting along the grain too which i can only assume was due to the swelling and drying with the rain and season change. and to give context this door and frame went in during the early part of the 1900's so close to 100 years old when it needed replacing, but as i said. frame was completely sound

I think you're underestimating the door. Gerald was describing a door that was shoot up in a battle. Given that, it was most likely designed to withstand the weapons with which it was likely to be attacked. The carpenters who built the house I live in made a fire door between the garage and living area with 3 cross laid layers of 3/4" fir boards. I had occasion to try opening it with an 8lb splitting maul and only marred the surface. I think 1154 carpenters were as smart as 1954 carpenters. Faced with a threat of attack they would design a layered door because it would be stronger and less apt to sag or warp.

One thing not mentioned in the video, but probably brought up somewhere in the >1.000 comments somewhere, is that "three inches" of oak is a good place to start with questions. A lot of people I know can't tell 3" from 2 or 4 or even 5 inches, or simply don't care to. I once took someone's word that a vise had 6" jaws, when really they were 4-1/4". So with an arrow penetrating 2-1/2", I'd say that it likely confirms the story, what with the thickness being off by only half an inch.

Super interesting. Please take into consideration that gluing up the boards adds resistance, the glue is a strong connection and stops the splitting effect of the needle point. Keep it up please! 😃

As others have said, a single 3 inch plank would likely by easier to penetrate. The discontinuity between the planks changes the grain of the wood halfway through the door. This prevents crack propagation from one plank into the next. Since the arrows are also following the grain structure of the first board, that grain basically stops in the second or abruptly changes direction. This makes the second board much more difficult to penetrate.

I’m curious about the effect of having the oak backed by a large, energy-absorbing archery butt. Does a plank in a frame, without any backing, splinter and crack more, or less? Awesome video...really love this channel. Thanks Tod for so much thought provoking material and thanks to the community for such great discussion.

Interesting , I'm from Abergavenny and have known this story all my life . As it was told to me , it was four fingers thick timber , but no mention of oak . So roughly 3 inches or 8 cm thick , of course it depends on how large a hand . The rest of the story is, the Normans were so amazed , that they left the arrow in place for some years to show to others . There is another story , that you may like . In one of the skirmishes with the Welsh at Abergavenny castle . As the Welsh ran off , towards the hills and tree cover. A Norman knight raced after them on horse back in chain armour . A arrow fired at him, penetrating his armour going through his thigh into the poor beast . As the horse wheeled round in pain . A second arrow fires , on the other side pinning him to his horse . There was a lady from Abergavenny at that time . Who's story you may like also. womenofhistory.blogspot.com/2017/02/bloody-alice-of-abergavenny.html

Well hot damn, I didn’t expect to see one of m ancestors in this video. That is if he’s indeed related to the Fitzgeralds at Kildare

Very interesting, so many variable to go over and test. The premise certainly seems plausible under the right conditions.

Yet again, a great video,, I just looked down, and remembered, I'm wearing my Tod's tee shirt,, lol.. Keep em coming,,

I remember a modern longbow test done by Mark Stretton with a 120 pound yew bow that showed a bodkin penetrating 8 inches of oak wood. EDIT: Rechecking, it was 2 inches of penetration with a type 7 bodkin into a 8 inch seasoned oak post with a 144 lb longbow.

Yes, there are a lot of variables including the arrowheads, but it does show that it's plausible, interesting. I really want to see an arrow flying through the door, it would be fun.

A solid piece of oak is much easier to split than the laminated construction that you've tested, both because of the properties of the glue, which are resistive to splitting, but also because the grain isn't continuous, which means that: 1. As the first board splits, the energy isn't carried over to splitting the second board, because the grain that's being split stops half way through, so the arrow has to start again from scratch, after losing a lot of energy. 2. When the arrow hits the 2nd board, it can't twist to pass through the new grain, because it's locked into the grain of the first board. 3. It's a bit harder to split even the first board, because it's slightly reinforced by being glued to a structure which has a different grain, however minor the difference. You can test this with a plain 1 1/2" board and a laminated one. You can also see by looking at the side of this test that the cracks terminate when they reach the glue, so the arrow is splitting it from that boundary, not off to infinity as it would on a "self board".

Absolutely fascinating! Multiple hits on the door could cause splitting as we saw allowing follow up shots to penetrate further. Also we know what we call an inch is different from the mid evil inch. So the oak door may have indeed be 2 or 2 1/2 inches thick.

Two 1" 1/2 boards was a common construction method, outer layer vertical, inner layer horizontal. Maybe if you were shutting it quickly as the arrows hit it'd give it the last half inch. Good luck finding a volunteer.

Worth baring in mind that if the door was hit with multiple arrows all causing the wood to split to various degrees, it is entirely possible that a later shot arrow took advantage of a prior crack in the wood from a previous arrow.

Just a heads up a hand is a unit of measurement for measuring horses. A hand was 4 inches and an inch was 3 barleycorns So the solution is to find 12 barleycorns line them up and measure how long that is in modern inches or cms and see if it matches or is close to your distance. Also the layering effect provided by the two 1.5 inch plans will have effected penetration even if they're flush.

I watched the lead up to this, and I like the way you always handle things with honesty... Now, leading up to this, you have done a few interesting things ... so why not try this test again,. with waxed tips? That may be quite interesting. Also, getting hold of a 3" piece of oak might not be so easy, but try clamping the two pieces together ... I think you understand what I mean ... Anyway, enough armchair advise from me, you know what to do, better than me anyway :) Thanks for the knowledge and entertainment.