The American Semi-Longbow...it's definition hidden in plain sight

      It seems that the American Semi-Longbow or "ASL" has been the topic of much conversation in various public forums, social media platforms and the local archery shop get-togethers.  Public opinion of what makes a true ASL is as varied as the different forms the bow has taken over the past 70 plus years.  The following is my personal opinion, based on Howard Hill's own written explanation and drawings, in his book Hunting the Hard Way.  That's pretty much the first place the term showed up, and since it is the type of bow he made popular, it would seem that his definition would be more than accurate enough to set the record straight as to what constitutes an ASL.

    When Hill wrote about the ASL definition on page 91 of said book, he compares it to the long popular and well-known English Longbow, in that the American version, the ASL, "Is not quite so long as it's English prototype, but is a little wider and considerably flatter. At that, the ASL is not so flat as the American Indian short bow..."  That's pretty much the extent of the definition.  Anyone not living in that time and privy to inside knowledge has little to go on, except to read those words.  Everyone then looks at the drawings on page 87 and sees a bow side profile that looks like every rendition of an ASL to come down the pipe since.  We see the ASL or better yet, the Hill-style longbow in Hill's capable hands in video shorts and still photos and they seem to match what bowyers have been cranking out under the guise of an ASL.  But it's not the whole story.

     The Webster dictionary lists one of the definitions of semi as...  a: precisely half of :  forming a bisection of .  

      When people discuss the American Semi-Longbow and how it differs from other longbow styles, or recurves or other traditional style bows, they almost always refer to the drawn profile, or perhaps the strung profile shape. When looking at this profile, the ASL differs very little from the strung or drawn profile of the English Longbow...both complete part of a circle or a radius.  And that is where I believe the entire ASL definition was derailed, and the aura of the Hill style ASL has been mired ever since.

      If semi refers to "precisely half of...or forming a bisection of....what could Hill have been talking about?  Well, he compares it to an English longbow, so let's look at that.   Since it's obvious that if we are thinking along the terms of precisely half or a bisection of, we're not talking about the length of the bow, or even of half a circle limb bend.  Can't see that line of thinking when looking at photos or drawings of the ASL.  However, lets look at the cross section of the bows.  

     Here's a cross section of an English longbow, which is your basic deep limb cored longbow.  

     Notice anything?

     Now let's look at the drawings of how a Hill style ASL bow should have limbs shaped as per Hill's book on page 101.   Notice anything yet?

      How about now?

      My blue line defines exactly what Semi means.  Half of....forming a bisection of.   This also explains what Hill says in that the ASL is a little wider and "considerably flatter".  It sure is flatter...on one side.  Hill didn't explain that the bow was flatter on two sides, but if someone looks at his drawings and pays attention to his words and puts it all together, the explanation is right there to see.  The ASL is about half the thickness of the English longbow and flatter across the back of the bow, on one side.  The belly side is left deep and rounded.  Hill says on page 100 that the back of the bow is to be kept flat.  He says on page 104 that "if figs. 6,7,and 8 are studied carefully, and if the workman will keep in mind the shape of the bow limbs at the three points these figures represent, he will have little difficulty in completing the bow..."  The blue line bisects the English longbow cross section, creating a bow limb cross section that is by definition, a half.   I have only ever heard one person mention this, ever.  If there is anyone else that has taught this or even brought the information foward in regards to the ASL in modern times, I'd sure like to know.

     So here we now can see that one of the very defining aspects of a true ASL and therefore a Hill style longbow is a deep, half circle cross section to the limb, in reality, a flat back and deep crowned belly that tapers from the handle to the tips but doesn't lose that defining cross section of limb.

     Hill also states on page 104 and 105 that limb material / wood is cut away sharply at the ends of the handle and if it is not, there will be a 12-18" section through, above, and below the handle that will be so stiff the bowyer will not be able to achieve the proper bend in the limbs.  If the material / wood is cut away sharply (think short steep riser sweeps) then there will only be 8 - 10" that will be stiff and not working in the completed bow.

     Another very important part of the ASL as per Hill's written instructions.  And these two aspects get overlooked by the vast majority of people wanting to call their bow model an ASL when these bows are clearly not incorporating the very essence of an ASL.  It's time to call spades, spades.

     But ...  Hill was writing during a time when fiberglass facings for bows was in it's infancy and he was writing about building a self or self-laminated bow, not a glass backed bow.  So what then?

    Hill's longbows underwent a change when he started adding backings, especially glass that didn't lend itself to being bent across a side-to-side radiused back or crowned belly.  He liked the added speed and durability of the glass, and instructed his bowmaking students to use it and he himself added glass to his personal bows. So how did he conform to his own definition of the ASL?

      He did so by keeping the back flat, and trapping the belly with a minimal flat surface, maintaining the deep core profile of the ASL as per his definition.  He rounded off the edges of the belly glass, blending it into as close as possible rendition of his earlier self and self-laminated bows.   He taught others to do it this way as well.  This is a cross section of John Schulz's bow "The Original" (quite remarkable name, huh?) which was shown in Schulz's first brochure advertising the newly formed American Longbow company.  However, to my knowledge the bow model never was made enmasse, and actually was not priced in the first price lists.  I don't know how many were ever made for the public.  Notice the rounded edge, trapped belly.

     John told me personally that getting all the power fibers in the laminations of the bow, as he described in the brochure, resulted in a physically heavier bow limb, which actually reduced performance.  Although I didn't discuss this aspect with him, I can assume that he was referring to a bow limb that also included fiberglass laminations because that's the type of bow he was advertising at that time. Having the glass weight and the heavier bamboo power fibers all together, I can see the limb mass weight being too heavy for efficiency and since glass was incorporated, the power fibers of the bamboo were not as important as if the bow did not have glass. Schulz did tell me that when making a bamboo backed bamboo bow, as he did in the later portion of his bowmaking career, it was important to get as many power fibers as possible. So my reasoning is that glass backing negates the need for as many power fibers in the bamboo.  Simple.

      So it is reasonable to deduce that a glass backed true ASL will follow in the tradition of the all wood ASL, having a deep limb core, rounded and trapped belly, and short handles which allow the limbs to bend all the way into the handle.  Adding glass to the design shouldn't allow a bowmaker to make any bow design he / she wants and still call it an ASL or Hill style longbow.

        Nowhere have I ever seen it stated by Hill or his bowmaking students that a flat, rectangular shaped limb, (possibly even deflex/reflex) paired with a long unbending handle and contoured pistol grip can even possibly be called an ASL.  Those characteristics go completely against what Hill defined in his writings and teaching.  To call such bows an ASL is misleading at the least and to my mind, the only reason any bowmaker would call such an offering an ASL is because of ignorance, lack of study, ease of bowmaking, or the reason of trying to cash in on the popularity of the ASL.  It's time to take to task those that do such things and have them relabel their bows to be called simply "longbows".  Nothing more or less.

      Let's leave the ASL as Hill himself defined it...a true Hill style longbow.