Two fingers up to English history…

Archers, Luttrell Psalter

Archers at the butts – from the Luttrell Psalter, c1320-40

[Update – October 2020 – I’ve tweaked the conclusion to correct my old assumption that the gesture was modern; it’s actually at least 120 years old, and probably is hundreds of years old in one form or another. But it’s almost certainly NOT from medieval archery.]

Throughout history, events have been interpreted and spun to suit a variety of agendas, often a patriotic or nationalistic one. This is why a good scholar, if in doubt, always goes back to the sources. It’s hard enough to tackle speculative interpretation and outright falsehood in print, but when a myth reaches the public consciousness, either via oral tradition or by today’s mass media, it’s well on its way to becoming an established “fact”. One of my favourite myths is that of the origin for the famous British two-fingered salute – the V-sign. The origin myth, as given here, goes like this:

This salute dates back to the English Longbowman who fought the French during the Hundred Years War (1337 – 1453). The French hated the English archers who used the Longbow with such devastating effect. Any English archers who were caught by the French had their Index and middle fingers chopped off from their right hand- a terrible penalty for an archer. This led to the practice of the English archers, especially in siege situations, taunting their French enemy with their continued presence by raising their two fingers in the ‘Two-Fingered Salute’ meaning “You haven’t cut off my fingers !”

Even the BBC give this etymology. Huzzah! It’s all very affirming if you have even the slightest romantic or patriotic leanings (and happen to be an Anglophile!). The story even makes superficial sense; archers were skilled and professional warriors, and able en masse to seriously disrupt enemy formations. We’ve all heard of their fearsome reputation, and seen how modern-day archers will indeed draw their bows with those first two fingers. We also think of medieval warfare as particularly brutal. Add a dash of casual jingoism and we can easily imagine the old enemy having an informal policy of cutting off those fingers. With this in mind, it seems perfectly logical that the English archers might make the famous gesture to show that they still had their bow-fingers, and would shortly be putting them to use. The story of this “archer’s salute” is oft-told by modern-day proponents, especially within the re-enactment/living history community. They will even sell you “archer’s pendants” inspired by it! Readers may also be familiar with an email version (originating in the USA) involving the rather more obviously fake phrase “pluck yew”. As Snopes points out, this permutation is palpable nonsense (and probably intended as a mildly xenophobic “cheese-eating surrender monkeys”-style joke). But is there any truth at all to the story?

It was that very Snopes entry that started me thinking critically about this tale. It points out several criticisms, including the unlikely prospect of low-status archers being captured for ransom (a common medieval practice where individuals were known to have the means to pay). The nail in the coffin for me was the realisation that medieval longbows would have required the use of all three main fingers on the strong hand to draw them. As I became more familiar with the retrospective way that origin myths for common memes are constructed (in a similar way to urban myths), I consigned this story to the same mental bin as the fuller on a sword being a “blood-groove“. This was further reinforced when I attended a lecture by the medieval historian Professor Anne Curry, who mentioned the story in passing, saying that she had been unable to find any reference to such a gesture in the primary sources usually suggested (e.g. Froissart).

Whilst reading the fascinating “Blood Red Roses” on the subject of medieval battlefield archaeology, I became aware (as Prof. Curry and many others no doubt already are) of a genuine inspiration for this myth, in the shape of contemporary Burgundian chronicler Jean de Wavrin (or Jehan de Waurin), as referenced in Prestwich’s “Armies and Warfare in the Middle Ages” (1996). I was pleased to discover a PDF version of Wavrin’s chronicle, hosted by the quite wonderful people at La Bibliothèque nationale de France. The quote that seems to have started this whole myth; appears in the English translation (found in the Fifth Volume of Book One – page 203 of this PDF document) as follows:

“…And further he told them and explained how the French were boasting that they would cut off three fingers of the right hand of all the archers that should be taken prisoners to the end that neither man nor horse should ever again be killed with their arrows. Such exhortations and many others, which cannot all be written, the King of England addressed to his men”.

Whilst the Middle French original reads like this:

“En oultre leur disoit et remoustrait comment les Francois se vantoient que tous les archiers Anglois qui seroient prins feroient copper trois doitz de la main dextre adfin que de leur trait jamais homme ne cheval ne tuassent. Teles admonitions et pluiseurs autres que toutes ne puis escripe fist lors le roy d’Angleterre a ses gens.”

..and carries a rather amusing modern French footnote, amounting to “this is really anti-French, but hey, all’s fair in love and war!”.

As you can see, the quote gives us the probable origin of the V-sign tale as a contemporary suggestion by the English that captured archers would be mutilated by the enemy. At the same time it strikes a fatal blow to the myth as it makes clear that the number of fingers said to be at risk is clearly three, not the two famously used in the modern gesture. The war-bows of the time, with a draw weight of around 100lb, would certainly have required all three. Interesting that this medieval myth, probably intended to spur on the archers by the demonising of the enemy, should give rise to the modern myth of a nationalistic origin for the two-fingered insult. To me this shows the real value of going back to the source material. Wavrin was actually at the battle, although we should remember that he was present on the French side, and so is unlikely to have heard Henry’s speech first-hand. He was also writing more than twenty years after the fact. But on the plus side, he’s about as impartial as medieval chroniclers get, having ties to both sides in the conflict (his father and brother fought and died on the French side, whilst he fought for England later on).

Neither Wavrin nor any other contemporary source mentions any manual sign of defiance associated with this, and the Agincourt archery story didn’t become popular until the 1990s. It can be seen as both innocent post-hoc rationalisation, and as a conscious attempt to ascribe great antiquity to a culturally distinctive gesture. Either way it’s pretty unhelpful in our understanding either of medieval history, or of the genuine origin of the “V-sign”. Any positive evidence for the latter seems to have been lost, and this myth has been constructed to fill the gap. We do know that the gesture is old – it appears in this 1901 footage, and there’s a very old form described in ‘Gargantua And Pantagruel’ (1532) that involves pointing the fingers at the person. This makes it even less likely that it could have originated as an English gesture of defiance, as the author Francois Rabelais was French! However it really came about, we can be pretty sure that it’s bugger all to do with medieval archers.

262 thoughts on “Two fingers up to English history…

  1. Geni at the JREF forum has pointed out that I uncritically swallowed the “Icons” websites’ claim that the earliest recorded reference of the “V-sign” was post-1970. Not so – Geni reminded me that the famous production/publicity still from the film “Kes” has the lad holding up his two fingers to the camera.

    Anecdotal evidence suggests it was in use at least as far back as the early ’60s. It would be nice to disentangle the real origin of this one, one day.

    1. In reference to the “V” sign being early 1960’s, please listen to the record album “Peter, Paul and Mary Live,” specifically the track “Paul Talk” where he mentions the “V” sign being used in “Drag Racing” and referencing Winston Churchill.

  2. Me again, replying to my own posts… well, it’s easier than working it in to an edit.

    Check out this recent episode of the wonderful Q.I., at around 7:28:

    There’s an old mid-20th Century bit of video showing a worker flicking the old V’s at the camera in what seems to be the same gesture of cheeky irreverence we know today. To me, this looks to have been filmed before Churchill popularised the same gesture as a positive “Victory” symbol in the mid-’40s. It may not have originated with medieval archery, but just how old is this insult?

    1. It’s not an insult. It is has three seperate options those being an enquiry, a salute and a directive. Everyone delves into the historical backlogs believing everything they digest. Whoever says what you accept is correct, just because the proposer is regarded & respected doesn’t prove accuracy.
      You’ll probably tell me that you accept and trust the trickle of news that the government permits to be proffered to the masses.

      1. Absolutely no point commenting anymore. One vacuum is very much like another.
        You’ve all lost the opportunity of being privy to the reincarnatlon of a lost art, now again about to into hibernation once more.
        Probably permanently this time.
        Their is no difference .between unedicated and educated fools they’re all still fools!

      2. No we have NOT been informed of anything. , you have just posted a series of unitelligible ramblings which make no sense. you appear to think you have knowledge which no one else in the world has, but you lack the wit to explain it.and you talk in riddles . You speak of purchased educaton being useless when it is free. LIFE is education.
        And DO tell me – how in the name of goodness does an archer “outshoot” a bow? Does he wave two fingers at it?

      3. I would never use Snopes for anything (except to possibly wipe my backside). Shortly after Snopes first started, I wrote to them concerning a story that was broadcast on a “very major” Broadcast Network radio station in San Francisco. I heard this story “on the air” while driving to work. This story would later become a quite well known “Urban Legend”. At the time, the reply I received from Snopes was that I was a complete “liar” and made the whole story up They said that no reputable network radio station would ever broadcast a story like that and I was just lying to them! THAT WAS THE LAST TIME I EVER PAID ANY ATTENTION TO SNOPES FOR ANYTHING! THEY HAVE THEIR OWN AGENDA AND CAN NEVER BE TRUSTED AS TO HONESTY! END OF STORY!

      4. Robert clearly has Dyslexia. What a mess of quasi, faux-intelligent, self satisfactory condescension.

  3. Nice article. I like a good v-sign (I’d even go so far as to call the Kes one ‘iconic’).

    There’s some interesting snippets here: http://www.icons.org.uk/theicons/collection/the-v-sign/biography/v-for-get-stuffed
    Apparently, “[t]he first solid evidence of the rude V-sign dates from 1901, when the Edwardian film-makers Mitchell and Kenyon were filming workers outside Parkgate ironworks in Rotherham. A surly young man, unhappy to be filmed, can be seen making the gesture aggressively to the camera. A photograph of a 1913 football crowd also shows a man making the sign”.
    I guess the Mitchell & Kenyon footage is what was shown on QI. They speculate that the v-sign may have been of working class, Victorian origin.

  4. There’s a Will Hay movie “The Goose Steps Out” from 1942 which clearly implies that the knuckle-out “V-sign” is an insult. Will Hay’s character teaches the gesture in Germany to would-be Nazi spies, so that they would use the sign in England when greeting people.

  5. Thanks all for your comments. The 1942 sighting is our “terminus post quem” at this point. Can we take it any earlier I wonder?

  6. im not sure of the actual origin, but its got nothin to d with the french bowmen. its a myth. it means the same as sticking out ur first and little finger (similar to the new “Rock on”/ metal sign) in spanish – the two fingers represent horns which means that ur partnet or spouse is cheating on you 🙂 (i saw it on QI)

  7. English bowmen. And yes, I know it has nothing to do with archery – that’s what this piece is about, in fact. 😉 I’ve checked, and the QI episode said “Some people *think* that this might be to do with the cuckold.” It’s speculation, but plausible at least, so thanks for reminding me of it.

  8. I just saw an episode of a (Michael Palin?) British series that debunked a lot of the myths about medieval life. It said that before ID cards the only way to keep track of criminals was to mutilate them. Lots of things were cut off such as ears and fingers. Hence the gentry would often greet each other with gestures that showed that they had all their fingers.

    1. Hi John,

      Interesting – I haven’t seen that one. As an explanation for the two-finger salute, this doesn’t hold water though (IMO).

      +Mutilation was certainly a punishment in many countries in medieval Europe.
      +One reason for doing it was indeed ready identification of convicted criminals.

      -The ID card idea doesn’t hold water – we still don’t have them.
      -Dress, jewellery, transport etc – all more reliable means of demonstrating one’s status than how many fingers you had.
      -Gentry would know each other anyway, or would be introduced to each other by other high status people.
      -No evidence of criminal’s index and middle fingers being removed.
      -No evidence (that I have seen anyway) of two-fingered hand gestures amongst this social group at this time (in fact, not for anyone, anywhere, until the 20th century).

      To me this sounds just as much of a retrospective explanation as the Agincourt version.

      1. Could the index finger have been cut off because it is needed to take an arrow from the quiver?

  9. Ok, so I checked a little more: The British series is called “Medieval Times” with Terry Jones (the other Python). The episode is named “The Outlaw”.

    ID argument aside (ever get ID’s as someone who missed a court appointment?) apparently there were a lot gentry who were notorious outlaws: Sir William Chetulton of Shropshire, Sir Gilbert Middleton of Duram and Sir Henry Leyborn of Kent, not to mention the Folville and Cogrel gangs. All had wealth, connections and thugs on tap. Status by dress or jewelry display alone was not enough to certify one’s character. There is an example of a certain John deRooten who carried a note to certify that his missing ear was due to a medical condition.

    As for the fingers, there are two points (ha): After the Conquest it was fairly normal to be branded an outlaw simply because around 1350 there were so many laws governing every little detail of daily life.

    Also, draconian forest law often gave more rights to the deer than the local people. As such, poaching the king’s greenwood was often considered a capitol crime (Henry I) or resulted in various mutilations. Cutting off the fingers was considered standard, although it might make more sense to take the two middle fingers so there were no two adjacent digits needed to pull 100lbs or so for the long bow.

  10. More plausible than the archery idea, certainly, and plenty of evidence of mutilations as criminal punishments, including fingers IIRC (and as you say). But it’s quite a stretch from that to the two finger gesture. For a start you’d need references to specific string-pulling fingers being removed. Even then it’s hundreds of years before the actual gesture is recorded.

    It’d be fun to find evidence of the first two fingers being cut off as punishment though.

  11. a) FYI you reference p 212 as the source of that quote in the pdf. It is actually p. 203 (screen 212)

    b) Who are you exactly? I’m not asking to be a dick, I just had hoped to find a brief bio about you/by you somewhere on your site… maybe I’m not looking in the right spot?

    1. Firstly, thanks for the correction – I have no-one proofreading this stuff but my readers.

      Secondly, I like to maintain my anonymity, partly because it’s just less hassle, but mostly because if I start plastering ‘credentials’ all over things, I’m inviting people to attack me rather than my arguments.

  12. I’m surprised you (and the snopes article) rashly conclude that archers were unlikely to be held for ransom (worse yet the snopes article makes an unsubstantiated claim that they are more likely to simply have been killed). This article covers a lot of interesting facts about the treatment of prisoners in medieval warfare, and makes clear that it wasn’t just the noblemen who were captured, but also the common foot-soldiers (and presumably therefore also archers).

    As for the two vs. three fingers argument, it’s brings little that can be considered conclusive, since while a man might require three fingers for the draw, cutting off two of them rather than all three would be quite sufficient to prevent him from doing so, which is the supposed to point. One may even speculate that leaving the thumb would have the advantage of leaving the person able to do manual labour which would otherwise be difficult, and as pointed out in the above article a prison may have to work for his ransom if he couldn’t pay in cash.

    Finally, it’s dangerous to use the absence of evidence as the evidence of absence, as you have discovered and corrected in regards to recorded use of the symbol (1901 vs 1970). One thing to note here is that the 1901 film may give a clue as to the fact that this might have been a working-class or ‘common’ gesture which there may be little reason to think would be recorded under other circumstances. It is said that Churchill had to be told to invert his original version of the V sign to make the palm face out, so maybe there was a class divide here which could explain the relative lack of recorded use.

    The case against is not clear-cut as it appears, but nor is the evidence for particularly convincing, but unproven rather than proven false.

    1. Actually, it’s possible that Churchill knew exactly what he was doing. John Colville, Churchill’s private secretary, noted in his diaries that “The PM *will* give the V-sign with two fingers in spite of representations repeatedly made to him that this gesture has quite another significance”.
      https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=nRJpcSW5BaYC&pg=PA225&dq=%22representations+repeatedly+made+to+him+that+this+gesture+has+quite+another+significance%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAGoVChMIgaaRsfuoyAIVR-wUCh3LcglA#v=onepage&q=%22representations%20repeatedly%20made%20to%20him%20that%20this%20gesture%20has%20quite%20another%20significance%22&f=false

      1. Highly dimming, nobody has grasped the meaning and significance. So sad, the programing goes on. Education?

      2. in response to calmhead:

        I’m surprised you (and the snopes article) rashly conclude that archers were unlikely to be held for ransom (worse yet the snopes article makes an unsubstantiated claim that they are more likely to simply have been killed). This article covers a lot of interesting facts about the treatment of prisoners in medieval warfare, and makes […]

        As perhaps your only contributor who (1) actually saw Churchill in the flesh (so to speak),* and (2) caught Snopes in two errors myself** — I submit that, like many or most European conflicts during the Middle Ages, only the nobility or other captives of wealth (i.e., men in costly armor and/or on horseback) were held for ransom if captured. It wasn’t worth the winners’ time or effort to spare their worst enemies . . . especially those commoners who killed from a distance (hardly sporting where close combatants were concerned).***

        * My younger brother and I were in London’s House of Commons’ visitors’ gallery (1951 or early ’52) when an ancient Winston Churchill entered from the rear of the chamber, tottered up to the front bench, whispered a brief message to a colleague (perhaps the PM), and then turned and tottered out. — No “V” of either sort.

        ** Snopes usually has the most extensive evaluations of claims that reach them, but I noticed (in a piece about Elvis Presley) that a decimal was in the wrong place, thus misrepresenting the “real” number. Snopes answered that they deal only with messages that cross their deck, so I forwarded three such (with the correct number). Snopes neither replied nor changed its verdict.
        Secondly, in response to a claim (from a Viet vet) that John Kerry’s Vietnam medals were wrongly earned (this was during his 2004 campaign), Snopes’s verdict was “False.” I noticed that, even a few years later, Snopes had used only supportive sources, omitting both Swift Boat veteran John O’Neill’s book “Unfit to Command” (also in 2004) and the post-election narrative “TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT: How Swift Boat Veterans, POWs and New Media Defeated John Kerry,” which “connected a lot of dots” — on both sides — while fully covering the “medals” issues. I e-mailed Snopes twice, citing these sources — to no avail.
        So they’re not perfect, even though I agree with them on this issue.

        *** There weren’t no Geneva Conventions in those days, now often euphemized as the era of chivalry. Come to think of it, they are ignored by most of our enemies to this day.

        Cheers,
        JMyer
        (Pontificator Rex)

      3. You make two conflicting statements, which one are we to believe ?

        You say..
        1) I’m surprised you…. rashly conclude that archers were unlikely to be held for ransom (worse yet the snopes article makes an unsubstantiated claim that they are more likely to simply have been killed).

        2) I submit that,.., only the nobility or other captives of wealth (i.e., men in costly armor and/or on horseback) were held for ransom

        So which is it, ? 1) – we are all wrong to assume archers were not held for ransomed but were killed or 2) only the rich were held for ransome Both these statements cannot be correct they are mutually exclusive.

  13. Pingback: Anonymous
  14. Hi there – I’m doing a bit of research for a design feature on the V sign at the moment (for a UK arts magazine), and wondered whether the discussion on this page ever got any closer to working out the origins of the sign – or at least the first public sighting? I’d be interesting to learn a bit more about your research into the subject. Best, H

  15. Pingback: The BS Historian
  16. Pingback: crafts
  17. I was born in 1940 and can remember using the v sign with my friends as an insult when at primary school in west London ie when I was 10 years old in 1950.

    1. I was born in 1941, also in west London, Fulham and we used the up-flicking V sign as an insult before the time I entered primary school. In fact, street gangs, yes we had them back then, often used the sign as an insult to members of other gangs in an attempt to cause indignation and start an instant provocation.

      As for the so-called American single digit sign, that is traceable to ancient Greece.

    1. Snopes remains an excellent source, but it’s hardly my only one, for this or any other of my posts. What’s your vested interest for wanting this myth to be true, I wonder?

  18. Have heard this story many times. Then one dat got to thinking about the practicle side of it. I seem to remember hearing somewhere that the English Longbow could be effective at up to 300 yards. So presumably the enemy would be stood further away than this. I would doubt that they would be able to clearly see two fingers from such a great distance.

  19. Two finger salute a typical and original welsh gesture to english and like all english history full of lies

  20. I always assumed (as an ignorant ‘merican) that the two-finger salute had a lewd origin, just as the one-finger or the fig. I’m surprised no one here has said anything for or against that one yet.

  21. Just a thought, by removing three fingers the French would have ensured that an archer was rendered harmless however if the archer still had his two smallest fingers plus his thumb, then he could still fire a bow albeit less effectively.
    I disagree re your comment re an archer requiring three fingers to draw a 100 lb bow. Firstly, these men were highly trained and strong and secondly, when the bows retrieved from the Mary Rose were tested, the researchers concluded that the archers were exceptionally tall for the age at circa 6 foot. When tested, the bows were pulled using two fingers – Instron in High Wycombe, UK tested the bows.

    1. The archers from the Mary Rose averaged 5’8″, only one of them was the full 6ft. I’m not sure to what degree height would confer enough advantage to compensate for a two-fingered grip, but it’s irrelevant, as Henry himself specified that the enemy would cut off three, showing that a three-finger grip was the standard and still giving the lie to the idea that the two fingers gesture originates in the 15th century.

    2. reading is good but no substitute for experience. No way could anyone draw back the string of a 100lbs plus warbow with their two little fingers. If the thumb were placed over them as support then a lighter bow might just be managed.
      Yes testing has been done using two fingers – the index and second. But members of the English Warbow Society who have tried it found it difficult and not to their liking and reverted to 3 . There is tremendous strain on the ligaments of the hand when drawing a heavy bow, that strain needs to be spread by using three fingers.

      Examination of old artistic representations of archers in battle shows a wide variation – some using two some using three, But there are so many strange stances and other ‘wrong’ things depicted – clear to anyone with a knowledge of shooting the bow, that such old pictures cannot all be relied upon as being totally accurate.

      1. I can barely draw an 80lb-er with three fingers, but then I have the upper body strength of a small child 🙂

  22. Sorry, another point I forgot to mention was that I read once that the English foot soldiers were distressed by the order to kill the prisoners during the battle of Agrincourt as it didn’t bode well for them if there were more battles of this campaign. Sorry, I can’t remember the source. Richard the Lionheart is noted for his extreme treatment of prisoners during the crusades so perhaps it wasn’t the norm by Agrincourt.

  23. My original post hasn’t materialized so here goes again! A highly skilled archer could fire a bow with his thumb and two smallest fingers hence the need to remove three fingers. Secondly, on testing the longbows retrieved from the Mary Rose, the researchers concluded that the archers were exceptionally tall at circa 6 foot – Instron, High Wycombe, UK provided the testing rigs. These bows were tested and fired by being pulled with just two fingers.

    1. That’s because comments are moderated due to spam and daft comments, and I don’t check the site as often as I’d like. Again – it doesn’t matter if it’s possible or not, because Henry specified *three* fingers.

  24. I grew up in the UK and recall very well being corrected and taught the difference between the Vickers (v for victory) and the knuckle out “up yours”.

  25. …Steve McQueen gives this salute to his rival driver at the end of the movie LeMans….it seemed so right at the time, now I don’t know.

  26. There’s a 15th century depiction of an archer giving the archer’s salute. Of course, that’ll be late 15th century and Agincourt was early 15th century, but it’s getting rather close isn’t it?

  27. Even if the French cut off all three fingers needed to fire a bow it is extremely difficult to actually hold up three fingers on one hand and is much easier to use two – holding the third finger down with the thumb.

  28. Pingback: rummy games
  29. judging by the normality of the 1901 fellow’s use of the gesture in the video, I find it safe to presume that it’s true origin does indeed go back a few hundred years at-least. For if it was inspired from the victorian era, then surely it wouldn’t be lost in history.

    I would like to start hunting down a mention of this in literature. Also, If i were to speculate my own myth, then maybe it origionates with pistols. cause people make a pistol with those two fingers and thumb… perhaps it’s a more diplomatic way of gunning someone down with sign language… i dunno… like a defused firearm.

  30. Long bows are long, having a long draw which doesn’t require three fingers to pull, not for an experienced bowman. Besides if they only cut off two fingers, three fingers would be remaining, allowing the bowman to adapt.

  31. ‘Up yours’ might explain it? Seeing as the fingers are ‘brandished’ in a way that could be a sexual insinuation.

    Perhaps it started with the fingers together and then developed into them being apart?

    In my mind is someone who is quite drunk and using it as an instinctive response to someone else..

    Pure speculation obviously.

    Great site.

  32. Calmhead makes good points.

    I was a teen in the early 60s and I can confirm that by the late 60s the ‘up yours’ V sign was in general use, but before that I’d never seen one (having grown up in genteel surroundings in the Home Counties).

    It was generally understood to signify the female mons pudenda, so was just too ‘rude’ a gesture for the middle and upper classes. By the late 60s all that class stuff had gone out of the window of course, and being vulgar was a badge of honour.

  33. As a post-War II British schoolboy, I was familiar with both the “Victory V” and the “insult V.” Over to the U.S. in 1952 (for good), I saw two “F-you” examples you haven’t included above:

    1. In 1960, I saw the British film “I’m All Right Jack” open with a VE-day celebration, during which one exuberant shinnied up a Union Jack flagpole, and after the title appeared gave that two-finger “salute,” punctuating the common expression “I’m all right, Jack – F… you!” (An early cameo appearance by Anthony Newley? As he’s not listed in the cast, I can’t be sure.)

    2. During his 1968 presidential campaign, Richard Nixon was interviewed on the Huntley-Brinkley Report. (I don’t recall the date.) When he mentioned a meeting with Winston Churchill and saying, jowls wobbling with intensity, (something like) “. . . and when I saw that indomitable old man giving his famous . . .” and Nixon flashed a “V” . . . only his hand was facing the wrong way! Nixon had just told the American people to go F- themselves — on national TV! I was sure there’d be an uproar next day, but I never learned of any reaction. . . . Perhaps, in retrospect, he’d seen an earlier example . . . before Churchill had been (ahem) educated by his staff?

    As attributed to George Bernard Shaw: “The Americans and British are two peoples separated by a common language.”

  34. Hi, i just finished to read this and i want to make my own comment. But there is a problem, i’m french and i’m not that good in english to show you my position about this. So i would like someone to translate my french message in english, i promess you it’s very interesting and should probably make you see everything diferently anf my arguments are different than every post i have read.

    Je ne suis pas d’accord du tout avec cet article. Depuis toujours les signes sont modifiés mais parfois les connotations restent les mêmes.
    Si les archers anglais utilisé deux ou trois doigts on s’en fiche car pour moi le signe remonte bien de cette période. Dans l’hypothèse la plus connu où les français coupaient les deux doigts, il n’y a rien à démontré car tout serait expliqué et logique. MAIS ! Imaginons que les français coupaient bien trois doigts, pourquoi le signe V serait ma ? Trois doigts ressemble plus a un W. La réponse est simple … avez vous déjà tenté de lever simultanément les trois doigts du milieu de votre main sans lever les autres ? Si vous avez déjà essayé, vous savez que le quatrième doigts et comme relié au cinquième. Or levée quatre doigts ne veut rien dire, et lever trois est trop compliqué à cause de ça. Je pense donc que par déformation, levée deux doigts est resté comme signe le plus connu et a donné suite au fameux V d’aujourd’hui. Je pense que l’a expliqué plus tard en remarquant que le V est proche du U est qu’on l’aurait appelé ” Up yours ” car au fil du temps tout ne reste pas et peut contribué hélas à déformer la chose. De nos jours beaucoup de signes subissent ça et les personnes peu ouvertes d’esprit contribue avec l’éducation donné au enfant à modifier l’histoire.
    Si vous n’êtes pas convaincu j’ai une autre piste qui pourrait remonter beaucoup plus loin que ça, mais tout se que je vais dire n’est qu’hypothèse, je vous laisse le plaisir de chercher.
    Depuis toujours les gens volent ( pas comme des oiseaux !!! Mais comme les voleurs bandes d’anglais que vous êtes 😉 ). Imaginons qu’à une certaine époque, les gens volaient beaucoup, pour survivre, subvenir à leurs besoin. Imaginons maintenant qu’à une certaine période l’autorité pouvait être mal perçue par les gens pauvres. Ajoutons à ça la vilaine connotation du V. Vous aurez compris la ou je veux en venir. On sait que les voleurs à une époque étaient punis en leur coupant la main. Mais que pouvaient ils faire après ? Sans travail, une personne inutile. Je pense donc que quand les gardes ou les gens riches arrêtaient un voleur, ils leur coupaient les deux doigts. Un voleur perdait ainsi sa dextérité mais pouvait encore travaillé. En ajoutant à ça que les voleurs étaient souvent pauvres, que le V est du langage populaire, je pense que bien avant les archers anglais le V était symbole de mécontentement, de provocation, de refus d’autorité.

    J’espère que mes théories vous plaisent, n’hésitez pas à réagir dessus. Et désolée encore une fois de ne pas avoir le niveau d’anglais suffisant.

  35. Just found this site while researching something else – as one does – and what an interesting list of comments on a “myth” which I as an archer historian have been trying to deal with for years.
    Most of what BSh says is quite right and reasonable, as are the majority of comments below it.
    A few points: 1) archers NEVER fire a bow, that is what you do with a gun or cannon “give fire” being the order.
    2) Those suggesting that an archer could shoot using a thumb and two little fingers are clearly not archers. He might manage a fairly light bow, or perhaps use an oriental thumb lock, but I don’t believe he would be considered of much use in battle.
    3) old paintings can be found where a character appears to be waving two fingers, but they are usually fairly close together; and a moments reflection will show that it is a sort of “this is so” or “thus it is” gesture, It can be clearly seen being made by the instructor in the Lutrell psalter image above, and is a gesture shown being made by priests and also – in one painting – by God himself. Clearly not a rude sign.

    One suggestion is that the palm outwards says “peace” the palm inwards says”war” but I am not wedded to that as a theory
    I am with the poster who suggests “up yours/F…you” – or as one said “go F….yourself” It might be remembered that many many folk using this sign had probably never heard of the archer battles of old.

    The discussions will no doubt continue as long as there are archers and websites

  36. Regarding the origins of the V-sign- I cannot vouch for the veracity of this claim at this time (although I will be doing some follow-up research), but I recall being told that it was an easier-to-see variant of an Anglo-Saxon gesture, meaning “woman”. The person who relayed this theory to me claimed that a pair of fingers extended and splayed with the tips pointing to earth was a crude depiction of a woman’s legs/genitals, and would have been used to insult the masculinity of those gestured at. Raising the hand up, so the fingers point to the sky, would make it easier to see.

    1. There is a drawing known to me, dating I believe from the sixteenth century,showing two archers in front of a castle wall,one has his right hand outstretched upward with two fingers extended,- the other has his hand extended with the thumb uppermost. I take each to be a gesture of derision. bogaman aka Hugh Soar.

  37. Absolute poppycock, if you actually understood the dexterity needed to pull a Longbow correctly you would comprehend its V signs real meaning,
    Plus you’d understand how touch wood and crossed fingers were derived?
    You are just starting another myth, another so called expert just like the ones you are belittling.
    Are you and everyone so naive to believe that it took such a long time for an English (not Welsh, another myth) archer to become proficient at this weapon launcher just by building up upper body muscle.
    You’ll be telling me next that the Trebuchet at Warwick castle is actually set up to knock castle walls down as just like all the other Trebuchet’s reproduced. With the parabola trajectory imposed it would take months. Maybe you should go to one of the American universities that specialise in getting their students to build one and then issue them a pass mark for getting it completely wrong.
    You’ll be telling me that you can push next.
    Bo-Jangles

    1. The ‘dexterity’ needed to use the bow has nothing to do with the veracity of the claim at hand.

      I have to thank you though for giving me another two myths to debunk; I’d not heard ‘touch wood’ or ‘crossed fingers’ in this context before. ‘Poppycock’ indeed…

      1. juts popping in as I re-read the whole debate. Touch wood is generally believed to refer to the wood of the cross of the crucifixion; . and cross fingers may have a similar relevance – although it is more likely a sign from one of the many other beliefs of earlier times.

      2. The fingers do not grip the string, they hook the string. In so doing so you are unconsciously affording the string/s the ability to grip the finger/s (Grippe or Griffe). Which will belie the fallacy that the arrow is pushed from the bow? An entirely inane proposal which has gone down in history as an actuality. It’s not history or education, but programming! History is only for the promotion of the so-called elite and to cow-towing the Oikes!
        Nearly all could be allocated to the Sagas Of Noggin The Nog or Der Sturmer.

  38. I am quite puzzled by Roberts comments and do not understand what points he is trying to make. I assume that you understood them bsh ? Is his derision aimed at you ? I wonder if he is an archer and if he shoots the heavy war style longbow.

    1. Well, not really, but I took the gist to be;

      1) From his personal experience, the war bow was difficult to draw.*
      2) It therefore required X number of fingers to draw it.
      3) These fingers were therefore important to an archer.
      4) He might therefore have waved them at his enemy.
      5) ????
      6) Profit.

      *As I cannot even string a 100lb war bow, I can vouch for this.

  39. On the way to making the “fig of Spain” [thumb wiggled between first two fingers, referenced by Pistol in Henry V] it is necessary to raise those fingers in a V-gesture…

  40. The image Hugh Soar referred to dates from the late 15th and early 16th century and is by Diebold Schilling. Apart from the archer’s salute (fingers not close together) the other man is probably ‘biting his thumb’, a insulting gesture made immortal by William Shakespeare.

    1. Ah, thank you for that. A wonderful image showing bow against handgun, and I would have to say easily the best evidence for those claiming this as the ‘archer’s salute’. Perhaps if there were a written reference to back it up…

  41. HI
    Miscomprehension, our accepted beliefs and reliance on the ordained norm is the problem here.
    Oh and yes I am an archer, but my love of toxophily stems from the original, which was then superseded by another, before being supplanted by the bow and arrow.
    Or to put it into context, “being led up the garden path”!

    1. Robert – From the original ? You used an atl atl ? or perhaps a so called “Swiss” throwing arrow?
      In my book the origin of toxophily was and is archery – with a bow and arrow. It was only in Victorian times it was called toxophiliy; they loved long words. Before that in England it was bowskill

  42. Just to fill out the 1940s context, although the Parkgate film record does renders it somewhat unecessary, I have seen photo and newsreel images of cheerful British soldiers and sailors making Churchill’s “V for Victory’ but with some wags slyly holding up two fingers the ‘wrong’ way round, their gleefull smiles clearly showing this is no accident. I can’t give you references, but I _promise_ you they’re there!

    How the two-finger ‘V’ transformed into the peace sign of the Vietnam War era is another matter. I should be interested to know. Boodhism?

    1. Agreed, However you prove my point h Who ever said that the original scholar, which in this scenario should be interpreted as the tutor, was correct. Crossed fingers i.e. the Archer, is a classic case, because its not what you’re seeing and certainly not what the archer senses. .

      1. I would definitely say ”
        More water with it,” but of course that is just an opinion.

  43. PS. There are definitely two instances of British 1st Airborne Division soldiers, captured in the aftermath of the Arnhem operation, giving unambiguous V-signs to the camera, one in a group shot where the men are determined to show they are not cowed; the other a soldier who, being marched past the camera, turns and walks back into shot to give an emphatic ‘F- you’ into the lens.
    So it goes.

    PPS. There’s no direct indication that the Schilling figure with his three digits extended is an archer or that the alleged taunt is the reason for his making that gesture. At best, ‘arguable.’

  44. Welsh Archers, the legend of the 2 finger salute is about Welsh archers. the Welsh the commended and were considered the finest in the world. It became law that Englishman had to practice with a longbow, because the Welsh had proved so effective against the French crossbow. The English had also started using the crossbow rather than a longbow by that point, until the Welsh won Arincourt. Of course the Welsh fought on the English side and for England.

    1. Arincourt? If you mean Agincourt, then regardless of who invented the longbow, I’m afraid there were many more English archers at that battle than Welsh (see, among others, the work of Anne Curry, who has done the research on the pipe rolls and other sources). Only 400 compared to some 6000 Englishmen. That’s just Agincourt though; archers used in English armies could be from either country, and both were equally respected. No need to mythologise/nationalise things.

      1. Good and accurate info But did you also know that Lieutenants John Rouse Merriott Chard and Gonville Bromhead are wrongly given credence for their command at Rorke’s drift It is far more interesting to know that the person that should have received the full recognition of organising the defence of the Drift, was acting assistant commissary James Langley Dalton of the transport department, Who incidentally was the last to be recognised and to receive his VC. Political shenanigans abounded here and continue to this day! As by today’s standard of military awards, there would and should have been twelve VC’s awarded, However at this time posthumous awards were not given. Had private Joseph Williams, B Coy, 2nd/24th Foot, who died defending the hospital survived he would most certainly have received a VC, he was however mentioned in despatches! Which beggars the question of how “if this be true”; that prior to Rorke’s Drift we got our arses kicked at Isandlwana due entirely to Lord Chelmsford’s incompetence and arrogance, two VC’s were awarded to Lieutenants Melville and Coghill who tried to carry off the Colours? They were obviously unsuccessful and died in their endeavour. It smacks of hypocrisy. It obviously means that only officers could be awarded posthumous awards. As for Chelmsford he was never brought to book, he got away with it, probably because he was very good friends with Queen Victoria. After 9 years in Zululand you find these little things out and it’s not in any book only passed down from Zulu descendants!

  45. Sadly you have all missed the point, everyone appears to be concentrating on the V sign where it is the touch wood and the crossed fingers that are more Imperative.
    All or beliefs are fundamentally swayed by the powers that be, so therefore whatever is proffered by the head cheese is taken as sacrosanct !
    In the case of the Medieval archer (and before,) the sign was used to greet a fellow archer and to confirm if the saluted archer was indeed Kosher?
    If your returning salute was erroneous, You would probably been taken to the local ale house and been plied with mead and generally had a good time.
    You would not have made it back to the camp.
    Archers were proud of their prowess and extremely violent. Nobody messed with these toxophilites.
    All those that saw the sign of crossed fingers would have had their throats cut.
    What you observe is not what you see.
    The sign goes way back before the middle ages.and was highly significant in the bows two predecessors.

  46. You misunderstand . The v sign has evolved. Yes., all three primary fingers were used, needed , too properly draw and control release of longbow arrows….yet ,being that prisoners were commonly used as laborers it was not productive to totally handicap a hand by removing two or even three fingers , .however, by removing the middle finger only ,the amputee could still be useful as slave labor, and obviously the missing digit left the appearance of the v Sign when the archers drawstring fingers were displayed without it. The middle finger is therefore displayed to show the individual has the ability , and intent to pluck a yew.

    1. Oh purleeese, cease perpetuating the idea that an archer “plucks yew.” The yew is the bow, the string is of hemp. He does not “pluck” the string, he is not playing a banjo. he hauls back the string and let’s it go

      1. Unenlightened

        (Oh purleeese, cease perpetuating the idea that an archer “plucks yew.” The yew is the bow, the string is of hemp. He does not “pluck” the string, he is not playing a banjo. he hauls back the string and let’s it go)

        You can’t perpetuate on something you haven’t even scratched the surface of.
        What you condescendingly wrote is probably what everyone believes, i.e. the archer just hauls (pulls) back on the bow (bough) and lets go.
        Are all the so called aficionados thoughts, this way inclined.
        Do you honestly believe that the years of training with a longbow was solely to build up upper body muscle, in order to draw a 110 lb bow.
        please don;t insult your own intelligence.
        This was not one of these bows (machines) that they use in the modern era.
        Even the true archer realises that the longbow is made up of one piece, but it is comprised of two arms; a shame they do not take the concept a little farther.
        Just like another common run of the mill instrument used for hundred of years and completely msconstrued
        The scissor!!!!!!!

      2. Robert you seem to inhabit a strange world where you are totally incapable of making a point which is relevant to the post. There is no scratching of the surface to be done. My post said stop perpetuating a silly idea. Nothing to do with two arms. nothing to do with years of training, simple fact THE ARCHER DOES NOT PLUCK YEW.

      3. Hello V
        You may regard my tone or approach as insulting, that is a pity and so be it, however I can’t apologise for what is fundamentally your problem.
        The whole post was started as a slur on English history i.e. “Two fingers up to English history”!
        Correctly pointing out that a lot of the information is brought about
        through national pride, patriotism etc etc.
        Basically “To the Victors the spoils”
        Henceforth and therefore everyone delves into the written word and apparently checks their facts through the celebrated and respected, for proof. (Those that are to be believed),
        However there are things in history that aren’t given any credence whatsoever.
        The part about the V sign as being used to bait the French most definitely holds water, however it has a more practical significance.
        What the archer did, but did not comprehend, is all encompassing, Even today it is not understood.
        People are to set in their ways and indoctrinated to follow a certain path, programming didn’t start with the invention of computers.
        You must believe what is obvious and then learn the truth when it’s far too late.
        I wish you well

      4. Robert – I did not find your comments insulting in the least just largely incomprehensible You speak in riddles and expect people to understand. You imply that YOU have secret knowledge which no-one else has. You imply that all writers are liars (except you of course)

        I did not say YOU have missed the point I asked what point you think WE have missed.

        I do wonder, since you live in S.Africa, just how much you know about England and English history – specifically anything to do with English archery and archers. I do not – as you suggest – comment on something I know nothing about – far from it. I know a great deal about the history of archery.

        If – as you say – this action is a greeting between archers then why do they no longer use it as a greeting and have not done so for several hundred years. Why did they stop ? tell me that

        It is well known that whoever writes history puts their own slant on things. It is rare that a writer is totally unbiased. But if you read many authors it is possible to draw a balanced conclusion …..And Shakespeare did not write history, he was a dramatist he wrote plays – totally different thing We know that much of what he wrote was inaccurate, we do not go to his writings for a history lesson.

      5. Artemis
        I was not going to reply to your offering. but after due thought I have relented.
        Firstly as for the implication that I have a secret knowledge, this is indeed fact.I will not elaborate on this so do not ask. Suffice to say I can prove it at any time!
        I will respond your remarks in the order they appear, however you won’t like the answers, because they’re the truth; largely undocumented, but still the truth!
        Firstly I no longer live in S.A. I have returned to the country of my birth, I’m English and extremely proud of it. My adventures in S.A. were almost entirely educational. Not everything is written.
        If you state you know a great deal about the history of archery then who am I to contradict. Lets try to enlighten some people just a little.
        We will include three other weapons which predate the Bow and arrow, I refer to Sling, Throwing board and the Viking arrow
        Before you think I am side stepping the issue, may I point out that these three are the forerunner of the B&A. The all use the same two identical delivery types. One being Parabola, not Parabolic, “there’s no such word”, the other Linear. Both call for a different approach, a different mindset. Most anyone could use the parabola approach, which was used at Agincourt on a stupid enemy that tried to gallop into a bog.
        Crecy was the domain of the Linear where the English archers (not Welsh, they used a short bow) were actually firing down onto the French. The linear is applied in a different way and from these linear archers rose the sharpshooters of the day. They did something different which is where the crossed fingers has erroneously originated from. Mainly because It was what onlookers saw, but mistakenly so.
        These toxophilites didn’t do crossed fingers nor did they do the insult of showing the first two fingers with the palm towards the archer nor the Winnie Church victory sign with the palm away.
        They did however do something that resembled the crossed fingers and insult V sign. But it was a salute that set them apart from the others, it signified to other top notchers what they were and that they were proud of their prowess. Other top notchers would reply in kind.
        What this sign implied was that they could extend the range and the accuracy by applying Rifling to the arrow. Unfortunately I do believe most earnestly that although they used the action they were unaware of its significance and over the years familiarity fuelled contempt and they basically forgot even how to do it.
        Their expertise suffered and it has laid dormant.
        Incidentally as a historical buff you must be well aware that the recurve Archers are mindful that the bow consists of two arms, can you please explain to me why they don’t fathom that a bow also has two strings.
        We won’t speak of the compound bow of today’s olympics and such
        as it is nothing more than a machine. The yumi would be different as it also holds the secret of the archers paradox.
        As you say writers do have a tendency to garnish the lilly everyone is aware of this. However a lie is a lie, it makes no never mind if the lie is intentional or unintentional; a lie, is a lie, is a lie!
        It ventures onto subliminal persuasion then to paradoxes and enigmas.
        There is another ancient weapon which must be categorised with the above. The Trebuchet, as with the others also has two means of delivery however every Trebuchet that is constructed today uses the secondary, the lesser parabola approach that was used cast whatever is required over fortified walls, not to knock them down, Whoever devised this war machine was an absolute genius and the secret stayed with him and the guyners.
        As for Willy Shake he was a propagandist pure and simple.
        He did a real beauty on MacBeth, one of Scotland’s greatest Kings
        Fact
        I bid thee adieu forever

      6. I really must address some of your points….

        “We will include three other weapons which predate the Bow and arrow, I refer to Sling, Throwing board and the Viking arrow”

        A Viking arrow went with a Viking bow. Do you perhaps mean the arrow thrown by means of a string? variously called the French, Dutch or Gypsy arrow. Vikings were not prehistoric, they certainly did not pre-date bows and arrows. You do not mention the atlatl – or is that what you call a throwing board ?

        “Most anyone could use the parabola approach, which was used at Agincourt…….. Crecy was the domain of the Linear where the English archers (not Welsh, they used a short bow) were actually firing…….!

        Archers do not fire, it is not necessary to set light to a bow for it to work.

        “…….down onto the French.. “

        It matters not whether you are shooting a long distance, a short distance, uphill or down hill, the effect on the arrow is that it always rises from the bow in a parabolic or ballistic curve. Any missile will travel in a ballistic curve, even if only a slight one which cannot be seen by the naked eye. .

        “They did something different which is where the crossed fingers has erroneously originated from.”

        Crossing ones fingers is a sign to ward off bad luck. It is well known and still used today and not just by archers.

        “.These toxophilites………did however do something that resembled the crossed fingers and insult V sign.”

        And you obviously have documented evidence of this sign, such as images produced at the time ? Do let us all see them

        “What this sign implied was that they could extend the range and the accuracy by applying Rifling to the arrow.”

        WHAT !! An arrow does not need to be rifled, it will rotate quite naturally due to the effect of the fletchings. This is the reason they are all from the same wing of the bird,

        “Unfortunately I do believe most earnestly that although they used the action….……they basically forgot even how to do it. Their expertise suffered and it has laid dormant”

        So how come you know about it ?
        .
        “Incidentally as a historical buff you must be well aware that the recurve Archers are mindful that the bow consists of two arms,”

        Limbs

        “can you please explain to me why they don’t fathom that a bow also has two strings”

        Not nowadays. The two strings to your bow idea meant having a spare one available, in pouch or under hat, Today it is kept in the tackle box. There IS an old image of a bow with one string in use and another hanging loose, but all this would do is get in the way and spoil the shot. – It has been tried.

        “We won’t speak of the compound bow of today’s olympics and such as it is nothing more than a machine”

        True – but then so is a trebuchet. And compound bows are not used in the Olympics, only in the Paralympics.

        “ The yumi would be different as it also holds the secret of the archers paradox.”

        There is no secret to the paradox. The forces at play when an arrow is released cause it to bend one way and then the other in decreasing amounts, this action enables it to clear the bow and still travel toward its intended target
        .
        “As you say writers do have a tendency to garnish the lilly everyone is aware of this. However a lie is a lie, it makes no never mind if the lie is intentional or unintentional; a lie, is a lie, is a lie! “

        A very famous man once said “What is truth?” and this was a very insightful comment, since one man’s truth is another man’s untruth – and vice versa.

        Adieu ??? are you going somewhere ?

      7. Hi
        This is now starting to get a little laborious,through no fault of yourself; or me for that matter.
        However I will address the issues without divulging too much
        No there was no bow for a Viking arrow, that is absurd!
        The name is just that a name, they were also called French, Yorkshire, Dutch, Gypsy, Devon-Bung, Poachers arrows and this is just a small selection. I would more inclined to the romanticise and call it Whispering Death.
        You get Brownie points for realising that Vikings were not prehistoric and the arrows were thrown using twine or sinew or catgut, (string?)
        Did not predate the bow, of course they did, what a silly notion!
        Yes anyone and their dog could use the Parabola approach, there is no such word as Parabolic!
        Adapting to use the linear approach took years and years.
        I do accept that I used the wrong wording of firing an arrow also the terminology of the ballistic curve understood and accepted I would rather call it gravity, a pull!
        incidentally the correct terminology is to loose an arrow, which actually sums it all up, if you digest its meaning!
        Yes the archer did something,
        It originally was not a sign to ward off bad luck, thats just one of the many explanations it has degenerated into, just like flattery has become to mean a compliment as opposed to its original meaning of false praise “an insult” or to pull a punch has now descended into its opposite explanation!
        I don’t do documented evidence just as I don’t get programmed by the media or politicians.
        The rifling is correct, I will not argue the point!
        You ask how I know about it?
        I know about it because I can do it, just as I can correctly throw a poacher’s arrow, and its predecessor, which stems back into antediluvian times, into the prehistory of prehistory.
        People use it today in most sports, however they don’t know they use it. Some do know they do something slightly different, invariably their summation is wrong, they usually get it wrong by mistaking the action or in a lot of cases the area it originates from.
        Which Is quite feasible as the whole process appears illogical too the way we think.
        This is what happened with the crossed fingers and the archer.
        Today in some cases, it makes the great champions, unfortunately because of the erroneous thinking of these sportspeople when something goes amiss they rely on a mistaken philosophy, their trusted and ardent memories.
        They will blame everything, anything and anyone when they still can’t do what they were idolised for. They will resort to medical procedures and psychologists. They believe the gurus and the written word, because they are respected. Ardent proof?
        The weapons mentioned all use the identical application there is no doubt about it.
        The archers paradox lies in the way it is loosed, on nearly every archery website or in many publications the tutor, coach or doyen states that the arrow is pushed from the bow, think about it !
        The yumi archer because of tradition is forced into applying the correct procedure. However, again it is a mystery. Nothing t do with the inscrutable oriental mind or the teachings of Zen.
        An even more famous man said
        When you have eliminated the impossible
        Whatever remains
        No matter how improbable
        Must be the truth!
        As for adieu; I’m going nowhere, I wish I could say the same about the human race

  47. Everyone has missed the point,. It’s staring you all in the face you observe but you do not see.
    You read little books and accept the doctrine because of the pre eminence of the author.
    So be it.

    1. What on earth are you jabbering about. Missed what point ? read what little books? What doctrine? What author ?

      It is you who seem to have missed the point. We are discussing a particular and specific hand gesture = not anything else. If you want to discuss touch wood and crossed fingers, tap head or stick tongue out then start a new thread.

      1. I haven’t missed any point, you and yours have missed the significance of this so called gesture,
        It is not a gesture, it is an action. An action that is mistaken and is being maligned by the so called intelligentsia, because they as you, do not comprehend.
        Not only was It was done in a specific way that made a good archer a top flight archer it was also used as a greeting to other archers, stating that you were a top archer and knew what you were about.
        If you had proffered then, what is the now accepted as the salute, you would have probably had your throat cut.
        As for an author? No author therefore all authors, you can’t and shouldn’t comment on something you know nothing about.
        History is rubbish written by dipsticks and propagandists including William Shakespeare. Henry V was right to do what he did on the day Chivalry died.

  48. This is absolute rubbish backed up with a total of nothing just like the V-Sign claim itself, except the V-Sign has cause, reason & logic Behind it. Just because there is no documented evidence of the V-Sign doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. The ONLY documentation back then was Royal or Christian. The V-Sign was a lower class insult. Fowl & associated with the peasants. The records of Agincourt were written by the Monks & Royals. Monk & Royals wont have recorded the vile insults of the lower class. It would be shameful. The Victory was recorded as ‘One of God’ first & Henry V second. The Archers wont have been handed the glory not at all. The lowly peasant? haha. Not going to happen.

    The French DID single the English Archers out for specificity gruesome ends if captured. This is in no doubt. They spread the word of this to terrify the ‘English’.

    If you torture & humiliate a man how do you do it? You attack his faith, occupation & people. If he betters you in something you target that too.

    Of course fingers were cut off. Of course disfigured English Archers were put on display in the French Hamlets as a weapon of fear. Knowing this would get back to Henry’s men.

    Just as a thieves hands are cut out & a liers tongues cut out…. an archers fingers will have been cut off.

    You really don’t understand the era or even mankind if you cant see this.

    You need to try harder at History.

    1. Ignoring the insulting tone, I’m afraid that isn’t how history works at all. Just because something is plausible doesn’t mean that it happened. Those of us who actually study the past professionally rely upon evidence, not conspiracy theories about the suppressed working class archers. Otherwise, what’s to stop anyone from just making things up?

      This is the first principle of academia. Give me one piece of historical evidence for this claim. One. I won’t hold my breath.

    2. “Monk & Royals wont have recorded the vile insults of the lower class. It would be shameful. ”

      I’m not a historian, but I don’t believe this to be true. I remember reading at secondary school a passage from one of the invasions of England (possibly by the French?). As the invaders approached the walls of a particular English castle or fortress, one of the soldiers / archers on the ramparts pulled a moonie – that is, exposed his backside to the invaders below – and farted.

      I can’t provide a reference, as this was 25 years ago. But suffice to say it stuck in my mind, childishly entertaining as it was.

      So, I’m not terribly sure such things as the V-insult wouldn’t have been recorded.

      I have no theories, personal or researched, to offer on the origins of the insult V gesture. But I’d love the archery defiance theory to be true. Why does that theory assume it had to be against the French? Why not against other English warring factions or houses?

      1. To add to your point about mooning. There is more than one actual image – which I have seen – of such happening in the medieval period.,

    1. Neil. The full paragraph from Cornwell seeks to answer the question “Why do we remember it ?” (Agincourt) and intimates that we remember it because of the tales of those who thought they were done for but who won.
      The next sentence moves on to the suggestion that the two fingers MIGHT be true.- NOT that it was mentioned in the tales brought back. .
      There is no real evidence other than a record that Henry SAID the French would cut off fingers. The French have always denied that their forebears ever said any such thing.

      Even if we do accept that there were tales brought back that does not makes it true. We only have to look at the tales brought back from 1st World War about the Angels of Mons – pure fabrication but lots of folk at the time believed it.

  49. To start with, it is completely unnecessary to chop off all 3 to disable the bowman. One would suffice. It probably varied from one to three in reality. Simply maiming did the job. It simply got codified and refined over the centuries. All it says is “You ain’t got me yet, mate!” And as such works just fine.

    1. The number of fingers is only one of many reasons why this is BS. Chief among them being the total lack of evidence for it. No historian of the period makes this claim.

  50. In response to V Soar
    A viking bow went with a viking arrow, Very sad!
    I would advise that you study more ardently your supposed incontestable writings,
    Also have a butchers at that massive work of dramatised rubbish that is described as the Bayeux tapestry, which isn’t a tapestry but an embroidery.
    It has lost an original length of eight feet and it has been altered incessantly over the centuries (maybe to enhance the Falsehood). What is interesting is that the area of Harold’s head has not been disturbed. I know Halley’s comet went across on that day, but get real, the arrow that felled Harold was never loosed from a bow!
    I suggest you delve more deeply into your esteemed books and literature and then tear it up.
    To the victors go the spoils!
    You get Brownie points for realising that Vikings were not prehistoric and the arrows were thrown using twine or sinew or catgut, (string?)
    These projectiles did not predate the bow, of course they did, what a silly notion!
    Yes anyone and their dog could use the Parabola approach, there is no such word as Parabolic!
    Adapting to use the linear approach took years and years.
    I do accept that I used the wrong wording of firing an arrow also the terminology of the ballistic curve understood and accepted I would rather call it gravity, a pull!
    incidentally the correct terminology is to loose an arrow, which actually sums it all up, if you can mentally digest its meaning!
    Yes the archer did something,
    It originally was not a sign to ward off bad luck, thats just one of the many explanations it has degenerated into, just like flattery has become to mean a compliment as opposed to its original meaning of false praise “an insult” or to pull a punch has now descended into its opposite explanation!
    I don’t do documented evidence, just as I don’t get programmed by the media or politicians.
    The rifling is correct, I will not argue the point!
    You ask how I know about it?
    I know about it because I can do it, just as I can correctly throw a poacher’s arrow, and its predecessor, which stems back into antediluvian times, into the prehistory of prehistory.
    People use this (sign if you like) today in most sports, however they don’t know they use it. Some do know they do something slightly different, invariably their summation is wrong, they usually get it wrong by mistaking the action or in a lot of cases the area it originates from.
    Which Is quite feasible as the whole process appears illogical too the way we think.
    This is what happened with the crossed fingers and the archer.
    Today in some cases, it makes the great champions, unfortunately because of the erroneous thinking of these sportspeople when something goes amiss they rely on a mistaken philosophy, their trusted and ardent memories.
    They will blame everything, anything and anyone when they still can’t do what they were idolised for. They will resort to medical procedures and psychologists. They believe the gurus and the written word, because they are respected. Ardent proof?
    The weapons mentioned all use the identical application there is no doubt about it.
    The archers paradox lies in the way it is loosed, on nearly every archery website or in many publications the tutor, coach or doyen states that the arrow is pushed from the bow, think about it !
    The yumi archer because of tradition is forced into applying the correct procedure. However, again it is a mystery. Nothing t do with the inscrutable oriental mind or the teachings of Zen.
    And an even more famous man said/wrote
    When you have eliminated the impossible
    Whatever remains
    No matter how improbable
    Must be the truth!
    As for adieu; I’m going nowhere, I wish I could say the same about the human race

    1. Ok wow…has nobody picked up on the fact that this guy (Robert B White) is clearly insinuating that he has first-hand knowledge of the things he’s talking about?
      “Firstly as for the insinuation that I have a secret knowledge, this is indeed fact. I will not elaborate on this so do not ask.” I mean, I was just randomly curious about why the British folk add an extra finger when they flip the bird, and instead I find the passionate ramblings of an immortal Vampire-Archer?? This has been a good day.

      1. Sickening isn’t it?
        Somebody without any accepted and recognised educational background, knows something that you and all the purported inteligencia on this pebble of a planet can only scoff at.

      2. MICK – don’t be fooled We have been hearing for a long time about all this special knowledge he has but refuses to prove and the truth is he knows nothing, which is why he will not/can not say what it is. He is just being crafty dafty

      3. I do not bite, but I do wonder if there exists anyone who hasn’t
        been sufficienly programmed to recall common sense?

  51. The sign on the (rather interesting) Diebold Schilling drawing happens to look a lot like the Latin rite blessing used since pope Innocent III (three fingers, not two, in line with the line of sight instead of orthogonal, which both differs from the insult we know).
    Compare: Christ blessing by Hans Memling.
    If so, it could be understood as signing “You are about to die”…
    As for the insult, I’d consider it maybe a variant of the mano cornuta, but that’s just guessing.

  52. The sign on the (rather interesting) Diebold Schilling drawing happens to look a lot like the Latin rite blessing used since pope Innocent III (three fingers, not two, in line with the line of sight instead of orthogonal, which both differs from the insult we know).
    Compare: Christ blessing by Hans Memling.
    If so, it could be understood as signing “You are about to die”…
    As for the insult, I’d consider it maybe a variant of the mano cornuta, but that’s just guessing.

    (Alas, there is no feedback at all on the attempts to post. Feel free to delete these brackets and double posts if these attempts cause multiple posts.)

  53. Just a curious ignorant question-
    Does this have any known relation to the “Peace” handsign?

    I could see that forcibly establishing peace through eliminating “firepower”
    would be interestingly ironic,
    even if it is only an indirect connection.

    From what I have seen so far,
    The “V for Victory” sign was appropriated as the handsign for “Peace”.

    Of course,
    the Japanese started used it as a friendly sign in photographs-
    they didn’t exactly experience
    peace OR victory during WW2…

    Your thoughts?

    1. It’s something I’ve meant to research myself, but just from a cursory look you would appear to be correct; V for Victory began in Belgium in WW2 (forming an interesting hybrid gesture in the UK!), and was adopted by everyone else as a result of that, then it got hijacked by the peace movement later on.

      1. Thanks for the reply!

        As for BS history….
        Is there really any other kind?

        You sound more like a REAL historian…
        or at least an honest one!
        😎

        I’d like to make a short satirical film about running the world on BS
        (cow manure through biomass generators)-
        After all,
        If we could run the world on BS we’d never lack for fuel!

        Of course,the only problem would be
        “hot air”…
        dirty emissions AND
        political obstructionism.

        Anyway,
        thanks for posting!

    2. The capacity amongst the self opinionated inteligencia is quite staggering. You have been informed as to where the V sign originated and its significance (by an underling or a serf). You do not wish to listen. Just as today when a top British sniper has outshot his rifle and claimed three ferminal hits, The archers salute ‘V Sign’ enabled the archer o outshoot his bow in years gone by.
      Stupidity personified !!!!!!

      1. Am I crazy?

        NO-
        the world is crazy!

        Let me elucidate-

        When people that you cannot trust
        that you do not even like
        tell you to go kill
        people that you have never met
        that have never threatened you or your family….
        Is that not crazy?

        It is only because it appears to happen simultaneously from both sides that people go along with it…

  54. I have read that they would cut the thumbs off captured rowers of war ships before releasing them as prisoners. Seems to make military sense. In the same way, it would be logical to cut off the fingers of expert enemy bowmen. However, neither scenario directly accounts for thumbs up or v-sign gesture.

    However, the mere mention and depiction of fingers in connection with bowmen in medieval images and records suggests they might be used in an offensive gesture.

    I guess this debate is one of human condition vs absolute historical fact.

    1. Depending on the period, it would seem more practical to put captured rowers to work in your own galleys.

  55. Just my two cents… the myth might have been created when, if it has happened, the King of England said to his archers that the French will cut up their fingers if they were caught. Knowing well about rumors, it might even have been an new young archer that started a rumor about what the king said it was enough for everyone to believe it and create the gesture. It is a bit like the contemporary soldiers getting the “infidel“ tattoo to challenge Muslims… 99+++% of them will be sad because you have no faith but won`t kill you for that… the other fraction will try to kill you because they heard they will get 40 virgins in the afterlife if they die fighting infidels (i.e. another rumor). Yet many soldiers will get the tattoo based on “myth“. A good rumor is just something that might happen… not that it has or ever will. If it did start that long ago (not saying it did) than it would be easy to see how people came to believe it to be a“real“ insult over time. pollice verso… is it up or down?

  56. I get the difference between two and three fingers, but I don’t see that the reference to three automatically allows us to draw the conclusion that two fingers don’t represent the three. if we hold up our hand to give the two fingered V sign we can notice that to give a three finger sign is anatomically difficult where as the two fingered sign is easy. As a practical man I would probably use two fingers to sign as they can dramatically indicate my meaning from afar.

    1. That’s a fair point, but the number of fingers is only one aspect of my criticism. As ever with these stories, it’s not about how plausible the claim is, it’s about what actual evidence there is for it.

  57. “the Agincourt archery story didn’t become popular until the 1990s.”
    And your sources for that claim are? Or is that just another myth created for whatever political purposes you can think of?

    1. You don’t get sources for an absence of evidence, funnily enough. Why, do you have evidence for it earlier? Happy to post it if you do. As for politics, I’m not sure what you mean. If you’re talking about patriotism, I prefer my country’s history to be based in reality rather than fantasy.

  58. Ah Robert. good old Common Sense

    Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as; Knowing when to come in out of the rain; Why the early bird gets the worm; Life isn’t always fair; and Maybe it was my fault.

    Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don’t spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge).

    His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but
    overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

    Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children.

    He declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

    Common Sense took a beating when you couldn’t defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

    Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

    Common Sense finally departed this life, after a woman failed to
    realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in
    her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.

    Common Sense was preceded in death, by his parents, Truth and Trust, by his wife, Discretion, by his daughter, Responsibility, and by his son, Reason.

    He is survived by his 4 stepbrothers;
    I Know My Rights.
    I Want It Now.
    Someone Else Is To Blame
    I’m A Victim.

    Not many attended his funeral because so few realised he was gone.

    If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and
    do nothing.

    1. Veonica-Mae ….. that is priceless! Now if we could just get that pompous prick Robert b to use some common sense, learn to write English and come down from his self-assumed pedagogic perch this thread might have a LOT more interesting shit to read.

      1. Firstly I agree with Veronica-Mae Soar, however she doesn’t go far enough.
        As for you Sir?
        Programming did not start with the invention of the computer it’s been around especially for the English for at least 950 years.
        It’s really great fun knowing something that no one else does.and to be quite candid I don’t care if I come across as a “pompous prick”, That type of appraisal is always bandied about by the trusting unenlightened!
        I do not care to acquaint you, or people of your ilk why the arches sign is both an enquiry and a command . Suffice to say that when it does come to light with all its ramifications, it will destroy everything that you and everyone else believes.

      2. Robert – DO tell us all – . how can you PROVE that no-one else knows what you know ? Even if you were capable of asking every single person in the world, as soon as you said “Do you know xxxx” you would have told them what it is. Hoist by your own petard

  59. At this stage, I feel impelled to say- What a bleeding fiddle- if it was going to happen, wouldn’t it have been simpler just chop their fecking hands off,
    -or at least all the fingers in one swipe?

  60. I thought I posted this before, but I’ll have another go.

    I’ve been thinking (I know). If the French or anyone else wanted to disable, intimidate or otherwise interfere with British archers, wouldn’t it have been simpler just cut all the fingers off? Or take the whole hand with one chop? Why fiddle about with three or two?

    “Holdez out trois finggerrs”
    “Two fingers? ”
    “Non, _trois_!”
    “No.”

    – times two, three, four hundred. What a faff.

    1. Is everybody completely devoid of all intelligence, what is written here you can read in almost every respected manuscript and tome, but the only thing of any substance is the statement,
      ” Throughout history, events have been interpreted and spun to suit a variety of agendas, often a patriotic or nationalistic one. This is why a good scholar, if in doubt, always goes back to the sources”. Yes lemmings usually do!
      As is further stated, It is hard to tackle speculative interpretation and outright falsehood!
      Yes once again correct!
      Especially when eventually you realise that their and therefore everyones respected and accepted analysis, is a complete and utter travesty of the facts which were.originally penned to satisfy a need and to fit an agenda.
      The original thesis if you like, is a complete lie.
      Next in the grand scope of things of will be man’s ability to do two actions I.E to push and pull whereas one accepted ability is a complete impossibility. Which in its own benign and hidden way leads on to explain the two fingers.

  61. He does not seem to realise that there IS no “original thesis” nor an “accepted analysis” this is something we shall never be able to state with absolute 100% accuracy (as with most of our history) we can only make educated guesses based on very little written or pictorial evidence.

    He does have a smidgin of knowledge about the thrown arrow being (probably) the forerunner of the arrow cast from a bow. Despite reading his very lengthy bit abouty darts, I have still not managed to get to the bottom of the fact that to shoot an arrow in a straight level line instead of its normal physical ballistic cuirve, you need to to cross your fingers !! . (or perhaps it is your legs – or your eyes) I think if he could demonstrate ANY missile following a level direct line he would have physisists beating a path to his door. He does not appear to have much idea of the effects of gravity. .

  62. Salutations.
    I see that the maneuvering has begun, Should have been a politician!
    “He does have a smidgin (smidgen) of knowledge about the thrown arrow being (probably) the forerunner of the arrow cast from a bow. Despite reading his very lengthy bit about darts”
    Nobody recognises the fact that the so called art of archery is merely a follow on and a combination of the Viking, Gypsy, Bung Arrow (just three names of the cord thrown arrow (dart) and the throwing board projected dart (arrow) which is laughingly called the Atlatl (Americanism).
    Both types developed from the hand thrown dart. Both forms are a sling , no matter how you look at it, just as the original was and is.. Later the two, redeveloped and merged to form the Bow (bough) of bow and arrow fame. Sorry to burst the balloon of the glorified Toxophilist, but the glorious Bow is nothing more than a sling!
    In this context the original sling is man and the hand thrown dart.
    As for the parabola and linear deliveries, I have never said a level and direct line, unfortunately gravity sees to this (Gravity = Pull) “He does not appear to have much idea of the effects of gravity”
    Definite politician in the making or is that bottom scraping? I suggest you read a little more and try to digest!
    Which brings us back to the two fingers or the instruction. Used to devastating effect at at Agincourt (not at Poitiers or Crecy as it was not needed). Nothing to do with Henry V. It was called self preservation by the English archers, the true band of brothers who related this unbehnown ability to Henry V . The French in all their splendour, “Le chevalier” were out for a good days slaughter and got exactly what they deserved.
    By the by, have you booked your summer holiday on the nice jet aeroplane yet?

    .

  63. “Used to devastating effect at at Agincourt (not at Poitiers or Crecy as it was not needed)”

    What- the longbow not needed at Crecy or Poitiers? Oh, dear God,

    1. I assume you trying to be glib,
      No. It was the two fingers adaptation that was not used at Crecy or Poitiers, they didn’t even use it at the battle of the Herrings when France’s long time ally joined in!
      (Pre Brexit Scots). Tells you a lot.

      1. Robert unless you were there, in person you cannot possibly state that something was or was not done at any battle. .

      2. Any more of that, young man, and I’ll not approve any more of your comments.

      3. I accept the reprimand and am suitably penitent.
        I offer my apologies to you, the membership and especially to Veronica-Mae Soar. The lady was not meant to be the target, only peoples ardent belief in the accepted historical doctrine or propaganda if you would prefer.
        I really do appreciate the young man descriptive and will try to live down to it.
        Programming; don’t you just love it?
        R.B.White

      4. The respected, excepted and adhered to preachings are mostly from people that were certainly not there. Although it wouldn’t ​have made any difference whatsoever, because as an observer you can’t differentiate between correct and incorrect, except by trajectory. It was this application that took so long for the archer to master, not the building of muscle tissue. Unless you know you can’t possibly hope to comprehend.

      1. It is a great wonder to me that – since you have magic powers and great secret knowledge of a special application which improves an archer’s skill – why are you not coaching the GB Olympic archery team ?

      2. Maybe because it’s not actually archery. The bows are machines and the only part of the whole process these so called archers add is to pull the string. Sad really !

  64. Another thought… Something that we haven’t considered is the significance of the flicking part of the V-sign gesture.

    During WWII people may have posed for the camera with the hand held still and the fingers extended, but when being deployed in anger, in my experience we most commonly see the V-sign being given with the fingers flicking from the horizontal to the vertical. Admittedly the alternative sees them simply being hoist vertically in an unmistakeable “Up yours” gesture. Perhaps an evolution of the original.

    In either case, it seems to me that the action is as important as what the posture represents. Could the raising of the fingers represent the raising of the legs from the horizontal to the vertical, a flashing of the crotch area- with connotations that would seem to be obvious; a first cousin of the fig gesture mentioned somwhere in an earlier post.

    A shame that the old gesture is being overshadowed by the transatlantic ‘spin on this’ single finger. The yin to the V-sign”s yang. or is it the other way round?

  65. My English mother was known to use the under handed two finger salute in the fifties, and said it had similar meaning to the American one finger salute.

  66. I learned about this when studying Auslan – Australian Sign Language. Deaf people were using this sign long before the hearing picked up on it and its meaning. Same with the middle finger gesture. It’s surprising and interesting the things the hearing learned and integrated into their culture from Deaf culture.

    1. No offence, but I think I’d need to see some evidence that these gestures originated with deaf signers. It could very easily be coincidence.

      1. I must say I agree with bshistorian about the sign language. There is no evidence that the sign language used today has any ancient historical background. Deaf sign language in any case varies considerably from country to country and even different parts of a country. (I learnt BSL by the way) In one part of the UK you can use a sign seen as perfectly normal, which in another part is very rude.

  67. ‘Two fingers to English history’. The sort of carefully chosen title to delight any pompous, self-hating English ass with a lifetime among left-wing academics. I say this irrespective of the merits of the case. There is no institution outside government and the BBC more implacably anti-English than an English-taxpayer dependant university full of ‘professional’ historians, and perhaps no-one more implacably anti-English than a taxpayer dependant English historian. You seem pleased with yourself, but I suppose you wouldn’t need a web presence if you weren’t impossibly vain. A short rope and a long drop to all your kind.

    1. Is the vague threat really necessary? I am not left-wing (not by British standards anyway), an historian, a university academic, self-hating, nor anti-English. If I could find one little bit of evidence that this was true, I would shout it from the rooftops.

    2. Ah, I see the confusion. The title was meant to suggest that the pedlars of the myth are (albeit unintentionally) giving a proverbial ‘two fingers’ to English history, not me! It’s only just occurred to me that this is what you’ve homed in on to criticise. I suppose ‘Two Fingers to English Mythology’ might have been clearer, but I would hope that reading the full article would make my intent clear. Anyway, if you or anyone else has more evidence, as I say, I would gladly reproduce it here.

      1. Loads of evidence, practical and provable! Not the written unsubstantiated ideology accepted as history.

    3. Jack. the (IT) world is full of folk who cannot be bothered to read something carefully i.e. further than the title, before sounding off. I am not sure why you seem to hate historians so much. Is it because of your limited knowledge in that department? May I suggest you read the whole article and educate yourself a bit, or take your nastiness somewhere else.
      An archery historian

  68. Just wanted to say that I found the article interesting and provocative, and some of the comments made scrolling down to read more a positive and illuminating experience (which let’s face it, is very rarely the case these days anywhere on the internet!)

    Unfortunately the multitude of patronizing, insulting and ill-informed comments by Robert B White (who appears to be nothing more than a classic conspiracy nut preaching his nonsense and accusing any that show skepticism of being brainwashed sheep) drove me completely up the wall. To that poster, I am currently flicking the Vs – I am only thankful to him for providing his full name, as I can thus avoid his inane babblings more easily should I encounter them elsewhere

    1. Could hardy have put it better. We tried, we really did, but he seems to be on a different planet.
      In archery circles this debate has been trundling on for donkey’s years – and the truth is that, like much of history we will never really KNOW – unless we were there. We can only make educated guesses based on the best evidence

  69. If the story is true there should be many graves found of archers with their fingers removed or missing during the period of the edict. Even with that information we should be able to compare other era’s
    with their tombs and burials with missing limbs to see if the practice became widespread.
    You would clearly notice a trend if all the Soldiers and Archers had the same limbs missing.

    1. A good thought. I am not sure how many archers have been dug up though. The only people we know for certain were archers are those from the Mary Rose and as they had not been captured all their fingers were intact, It was Conan Doyle who perpetuated the myth in his book The White Company, One of his characters lacks some fingers.

      1. Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan-Doyle. Now your getting close! Very clever individual and a massie thorn in the side of intellectuals. He knew and held the secret of two fingers, he still holds it!

  70. It’s very possible that the archers only had two finger cut off. You can not possibly dismiss the theory on the idea that the French boasted that they would cut off three fingers. Surely if they cut off just the two fingers a long bowman wouldn’t be able to draw back the bow so the “myth” still carries weight!
    They possibly sympathised with the men being more disabled without three rather than two fingers…….

    1. I haven’t dismissed it on that basis, I’ve dismissed it on the basis that there’s no evidence for archers using the gesture. The fact that the number of fingers don’t agree is just the icing on the cake (not that I take pleasure in the lack of evidence, I think it’s a great story).

  71. There seems to have been some confusion in certain contributions to this thread between the gesture that is its subject and the ‘Victory’ sign popularised during the Second World War by Churchill. They are two completely and distinctly different gestures: with the ‘Victory’ sign (and for that matter the slightly similar Boy Scout salute), the forearm (usually but not I believe necessarily right-hand) is positioned vertically, motionless, and – crucially – with the palm facing outwards. The (alleged?) bowmen’s gesture under discussion here (which I distinctly remember from my childhood in 1960’s Yorkshire but have never encountered in any other country I have visited) not only has the right-hand palm facing inwards, but also involves a vigorous upwards thrust and, usually, some degree of facial contortion . . . .

  72. So you’re boldly countering hypothesis of the many with hypothesis of the… you. The two fingers would more likely be those guiding the arrow and not any used to draw the string. Great article premised in trying to debunk something generally accepted for no good reason.

    1. It’s not remotely ‘generally accepted’ by people who actually study the history. It’s modern folklore. Read Anne Curry, or ask any actual medievalist. It’s bunk. The number of fingers thing is one small aspect. The total lack of any evidence is the kicker.

      1. I’ll let you take this one 🙂 You know, this is by far the most popular article on my site. It’s a real hot button issue for some people, for some reason.

    2. Richard III. (or is that Dick the —-) love the humour.!
      So you’re a Trekkie. Nice turn of phrase
      However, I prefer ‘The knowledge of the many, fails to outweigh the knowledge of the few; or the one’!
      As to trying to debunk something regarded as sacrosanct for no good reason. The reason is that the connotations are astronomical and also that man is a stupid animal! living by a doctrine bestowed on him by his so-called betters.
      Be they Royalty, Politicians, Judges, Scientists, Bankers, theologians, professors, etc. You know, those that have to be obeyed. THE EXPERTS!
      Spock also offered
      “Computers make excellent and efficient servants, but I have no wish to serve under them”.
      What is a computer, basically it is a follow-on to the written word!. if it’s on the computer it must be Kosher, the same is true, regarding the Immense amount of Tomes that have been unleashed on us for centuries. Who says they are correct. Once it’s stated it becomes omnipresent.
      We have mention of a certain Anne Elizabeth Curry, a professor of
      Medieval History among other things. Undoubtedly regarded as a highly intelligent and capable lady. Respected in her field and brimming with accolades. Nevertheless, she undoubtedly gleaned her appraisal from the written word or computer. Lavished on her and us by some previous esteemed expert.
      The Two fingers,
      The apportions another way of loosing the arrow from a bow. It was definitely used at Agincourt. Many historical aficionados have proved to themselves and others that the shaft could not have penetrated the French armour on St Crispen’s day.
      Of course, it couldn’t, they shot parabola style. It had to be released linearly.
      The Bassinet they wore did them no favours either!.
      There are some very old secret societies in the world. The oldest is the Archers and so secret you didn’t even know you were part of it.
      When you have eliminated the impossible.
      Whatever remains.
      No matter how improbable.
      Must be the truth!

      1. I only realised I was a member of the Archers when I turned 25, boy was I suprised.

        Programming, I’m lovin’ it.

  73. You know – as an archer – that is one who actually shoots and who know how to – and who also knows the various styles used throughout the world and at different times. I do find many of these comments strange. They bear little or no relation to the actual use of the bow, but seem to have arisen in the poster’s imagination.
    Also, as a historian, I can tell you quite categorically that no decent researcher depends on one source or even two, they search the records, they follow leads, they follow lines of enquiry through the ages, checking on where someone might have copied or reported something incorrectly. They go back to source. You will also find that they seldom if ever state something as a fact, but write that the evidence suggests that…..or it would appear that…. or it is likely that…Unlike your clever posters who are convinced that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

    1. Salutations Ms V-M Soar.
      I read your comments with relish, digested and then regurgitated them.
      All you say is invariably true in your eyes and as such, is without contestation, as obviously, you are an archer of some apparent experience.
      Also being a writer, you’ve penned on many differing subjects during your travels around this sphere!
      Unfortunately, I am not privy to any of your epistles so I cannot and would not comment.
      Your reported vast toxophilites expertise is all gleaned from the chronicles from those, who you and many others believe to be, beneficial observers?
      The word in question here is, observers.
      To extend the thought process a little more perhaps a little consideration could be applied to the Archers statement, that the arrow is pushed from the bow.
      This must furnish you with enough information, but sadly a dearth of nuance to fathom your own cited “Archer’s Paradox”!
      Which isn’t palpable because of everyone’s apparent enigmatic comprehension.
      As an observer, you can only describe what you see; or more to the point, what you think you see?
      As an archer, you can only report on what you feel; or once again, what you believe you feel.
      If you only use the power of the bow you will get a parabola arced arrow, it’s inevitable!
      A top class archer imposes his tuppence worth on the power of the bow. He can and does impart extra velocity to the arrow and invariably a linear trajectory.
      The secret was nearly destroyed by the actions of Henry V after Agincourt.
      He was an abysmal leader and tactician and never had anything to do with the outcome on St Crispin’s Day. Apart from being there!
      History is Guano.
      Written by the victors to glorify the so-called elite.
      Know your enemy!

      The Normans bought over a much more Toxic element than
      the invasion.
      Oh, by the way, Newton’s third law of motion is wrong.
      However, he didn’t write what we read!

      1. The power which comes from the bow cannot be more than what is stored there. – in fact there is some potential energy which is lost during the shooting action, as not all of it becomes kinetic energy..The ratio depends on the quality of the bow and the skill of the archer.

        Have you ever watched slow motion film of an arrow leaving a bow, and how it bends, how the bow reacts, and the string ? The many things you suggest are not possible as they defy the laws of physics.

        Have you read the French accounts of Agincourt ?

      2. Salutations, V Soar.
        Let me respond to your assertions, gleaned from the massive array of expert knowledge abounding in our magnificent archives?
        !,- “The power which comes from the bow cannot be more than what is stored there. – in fact”.
        I am not disagreeing with this synopsis, except t say that it is basically a two-dimensional appraisal. All you see and observe is the action of the bow. You and everyone else never consider the input of the archer.
        Simply put, what everyone sees is the string pushing the arrow point towards the target. Whereas in fact the bow, (bough), string and archer, all pull the flight of the arrow towards the target.
        2- “There is some potential energy which is lost during the shooting action, as not all of it becomes kinetic energy.
        The ratio depends on the quality of the bow and the skill of the archer”.
        Yes, to be very simplistic, it’s called friction. Nevertheless, it’s only applied by new archers, the true action only manifests itself after years of endeavour, but sadly only a few artisans can and do adopt the mindset.
        If you watch a true artisan of archery with a real bow, a longbow.
        You will observe the bowman pull the bow to its extremity, however, just before (what everyone calls the release) he appears to pull it again. What do you think he was actually doing?
        3- “Have you ever watched the slow-motion film of an arrow leaving a bow, and how it bends, how the bow reacts, and the string ?”
        Yes, but which one are you referring to.
        The only difference is I can see what the bow and the arrow (as separate entities) working in conjunction are doing and what you believe the bow is attempting to do. The thing you overlook is what the archer is applying to aid the bow!
        When you have eliminated the impossible.
        Whatever remains.
        No matter how improbable.
        Must be the truth.
        4- “The many things you suggest are not possible as they defy the laws of physics.”
        There is only one thing you have to know about physics.
        The universe is governed by one action and law!
        5-Have you read the French accounts of Agincourt?
        I know all the Azincourt (Agincourt) appraisals inside out.
        The French specious account is even more fanciful than the Engish, mainly because there is no way that dear ol Froggie could ever admit to the fact that these buffoons were suckered into the carnage that was awaiting them.
        This was the day that their preposterous concept of chivalry died.
        However, it wasn’t the English that destroyed it. It was the French, Just as General Louis-Joseph de Montcalm would do once again at Fort Henry in 1757.
        History and its chroniclers are rubbish.
        Just as in Brexit,
        Know your enemy!
        They are not who we think!

      3. “Yes, to be very simplistic, it’s called friction. Nevertheless, it’s only applied by new archers, the true action only manifests itself after years of endeavour, but sadly only a few artisans can and do adopt the mindset.”
        No it is not called friction. The lost energy which cannot be imparted to the arrow is that which is required by the bow in order for it to move = it is called hysteresis. This has nothing to do with new or old archers, it is a physical phenomena . Exactly the same thing happens when the bow is shot using a machine. .

      4. Hysteresis, very adroit and my compliments.
        Most explanations of this widely regarded phenomenon delve into magnetism and the so called B-H loop. Which will inevitably focus all and sundry onto metallic elements.
        However, what if you could create a magnetic field on a non-metallic substance. Say, as in in archery instead of gripping the arrow (Two-fingers up to British History), How about getting the arrow to grip you?
        How about fooling the bow and the arrow into believing the arrow is travelling down the outside of the bow as a Kyudo or Yumi archer does,
        How about pulling the flight and not pushing the point.
        How about turning right to left, top to bottom and back to front and vice-versa in all cases?
        It’s not in any book and has nothing to do with Zen although the inscrutable oriental will have you believe it.
        Actually it’s the inscrutable Englishman!

  74. You said – “Say, as in in archery instead of gripping the arrow (Two-fingers up to British History), How about getting the arrow to grip you?” My response is Just to point out that no fingers “grip the arrow” the fingers grip the string and pull it back against the pressure of the bent bow which is trying to return to rest. As soon as the fingers release the string the bow limbs leap forward, taking string and arrow with them. .

    1. Valid point, I was trying to simplify matters which was unintentionally misleading. I apologise! However, the word grip is very deceiving to mostly everyone a grip is a grip is a grip and that’s the end of it, or so you would think.
      Just as you mention the string and everyone comprehends this, but I ask which string, The first or the “second” string. Likewise, you also mention the bow or (bough) most people only see the one stave on a bow, not the two arms as an Archer does. If you have two arms you must have two strings. As for the grip (griffe), it does happen.
      My regards.

      1. I am trying to find the source of a quip I read in trivia book about Normans cutting off thumbs not fingers. Thus a bow could not be drawn without the ability to hold the bow. Impairing the holding of the bow is much easier don by cutting thumbs than fingers. The trivia question said that the origin of “thumbs up” was based on victors showing their thumbs to prove they won after returning home. I would hope some medievalist historian could find reference to such a practice in medieval times. Any thoughts?

      2. The idea of the thumbs being removed has some credence, but would (I believe) refer to the fact that some types of draw utilised the thumb as well as the fingers, There are numerous ways to draw back the bow string and ancient images depict many of them. In the past there does not seem to have been much conformity. and I am sure many archers made their own decisions as to how they pulled back the string.

      3. It would seem that way, however, it is a fallacy. All that happens over the years is the manifestation from a poor archer through mediocrity until excellence is attained.with the materialisation of the grippe. A somewhat mysterious progression that the archer never did and still does not comprehend.
        A bit like passing your driving test, which only means you are capable of handling the vehicle: now all you have to do is, learn how to drive?

    1. Let’s firstly put the Bow into its correct classification and destroy the romance.
      A Sling.

  75. I’ll never change, why would I want to be wrong. There are enough quintessential cretins as it is, don’t you think?

  76. Please note that the two fingers, 2nd and 3rd together, sign is present in the ancient synagogue mosaic of Sepphoris in Israel. One of the two boys left by Abraham at the bottum of the hill – Ismael, being an archer who uses these two fingers to shoot, makes this two-fingers sign. This came to my mind only today…The synagogue mosaic is dated back to the 5 th century. probably the oldest 2 fingers sign in art.

    1. I have looked most carefully at all the images of Sepphoris I can access and cannot find the one you mention, only the one with the ass, with its rein being (it seems ) handed from one person to another

      1. I cyte from the book written by the two archeologists of the site: “the left-hand panel shows the two servants who remained at the bottom of the mountain with the ass. The Midrash (comments on the bible from the 3-5th century) identifies them as Eliezer and Ishmael… One of the servants… In one hand he holds a spear, while the other hand is slightly raised towards the center of the scene, w i t h the m i d d l e and the i n d e x f i n g e r s raised in a gesture that signifies benediction in Christian art”.
        To me, and I have deciphered many of the left open issues in this whole mosaic, this is Ishmael who was according to the bible “roveh kashat” or in english “one who throws (and) archer”

      2. Thank you I thought it had to be that one, but none of them is clear when viewed on screen. There are many images in old manuscripts in which a priest or a king is raising those two fingers in what is either a benediction or possibly making a point. I even have one with a cloud from which God (presumably) is making this gesture..

      3. Er, sorry, but ‘benediction’ is exactly what that gesture is. The fact that he’s an archer is not relevant. Unless you’re suggesting that the popes got the gesture from archery?

  77. I have two images I would like to post = how do I do that ? They show two fingers being raised but NOT palm outwards as a benediction would be, but palm inwards -. more (as I suggested) like making a point or declaration

      1. Oh dear far to complicated for me. Is there no easier way. I don’t want to post them on an open space for the whole world to see. just attach them to my message here.

      2. I tried I really did. After about half an hour of going round and round trying to satisfy the registration requirements – THIS is not right THAT is not right. THIS name is not available, your password must contain a number – ad infinitum. I found myself in the middle of a Dolly Parton concert. and still unregistered and unsigned in.

      3. I don’t understand, sorry – you don’t need to register, you just visit this page – https://imgur.com/upload – and click “Choose photo or video”. If it’s not working like that for you, it must be something to do with your browser, or… I don’t know, sorry! You could try photos.google.com, but you will need a Google/gmail account to use that. This host is free and doesn’t require signup, so perhaps try that? Equally, I don’t blame you for giving up in exasperation 🙂

      4. I may try again But how do I “just click on choose a photo” if I have not yet uploaded it to the site ?

  78. https://i2.wp.com/www.heraldicclipart.com/catalog/hand%20in%20Benediction.GIF?zoom=2

    1. benediction holding a spear in the left hand?
    2. I copied the following from a site from which I took the above picture: “If we look at the hand of benediction we find that three digits are pointing up. They are pointing towards heaven, to God and symbolize the divine trinity.

    Please magnify the mosaic above to clearly see that it is definitely a “two-fingers-only” sign.

    1. The very source that you quoted stated that it was a gesture of benediction; “the left-hand panel shows the two servants who remained at the bottom of the mountain with the ass. The Midrash (comments on the bible from the 3-5th century) identifies them as Eliezer and Ishmael… One of the servants… In one hand he holds a spear, while the other hand is slightly raised towards the center of the scene, w i t h the m i d d l e and the i n d e x f i n g e r s raised in a gesture that signifies benediction in Christian art”.

      So is it a) a benediction gesture and a spear or b) bow fingers and… a really long arrow without a bow? Sorry, I’m just unclear on what you’re trying to say.

  79. “…cannot find the one you mention, only the one with the ass, with its rein being (it seems) handed from one person to another”.
    I brought up the archeologists just for their description of the hand gesture in response to Artemis statement above that this was just a picture of the rein being handed from one boy to the other.
    Archeologists do not study in-depth religion in the faculty of archeology; therefore I suggest treating as reliable only their description of the pictures of the mosaic but not their interpretation. They are right that looking carefully at the fingernails of the first, 4th and 5th fingers show clearly that only the remaining two fingers are stretched straight.
    In addition, benediction gesture is quite out of context in this mosaic story, as opposed to archers’ gesture to help identify the first archer in the bible which fits very well in. By the way, one religion scholar whom I have asked years ago to help me with explaining this finger gesture with no apparent success says now that “Ishmael the archer” is a brilliant idea. This discussion with you, have helped me to understand the full biblical description of Ishmael being a warrior with two specialties “thrower archer” – spear and arrows.

    1. OK, well I’m afraid I think this is speculative at best. The association with medieval archery is, as I have made very clear, not based on any real history; so why project the association further back in time? I accept that the gesture is probably not one of benediction, but what proof is there that it’s archery-related? Why would Ishmael be holding a *spear* whilst gesturing with his ‘bow’ fingers? Finally, it is far from clear that the mosaic *does* depict Ishmael;

      Ancient Mosaic Pavements: Themes, Issues, and Trends
      Rāḥēl Ḥaḵlîlî · 2009
      pp. 59-60

      Click to access mosaic.pdf

      “The two figures of the lads left behind are rendered distinctively in a prominent space in the composition, which might indicate their imperative position in the biblical story, although they are mentioned only as נעריו ,his [Abraham’s] youths. …Some scholars propose that the two young men are Ishmael, Abraham’s son, and Eliezer, the loyal servant, who are engaged in a competition or confrontation on the question of the heir to Abraham if Isaac is sacrificed (Yahalom 2000).1 Accordingly, Ishmael holds the spear in his left hand and raises his right hand in a gesture of delivering a speech whereas Eliezer swings the rope tied to the ass. E. Kessler (2000: 80) presents an unlikely suggestion that the figures are Abraham instructing his servant. However, the Beth “Alpha and Sepphoris depictions were accompanied by the figures’ names and other explanatory inscriptions, so if these boys were identified as suggested, their
      names would certainly have been added (see also the Binding of Isaac legends collected by Ginzberg 1947, I: 274-286).

  80. Unlike the translation written in the Mosaic book you thankfully provided, the word by word translation to what is written in Hebrew is as follows: “Abraham woke up early in the morning, saddled his donkey and took his two young men with him and his son Isaac”. The Midrash being sensitive to every chosen word in the bible understands that these are two specific young men who are close as possible to Abraham, namely Ishmael his other son and his personal assistant Eliezer. The main biblical commentator, Rashi, provides only one interpretation: “his two young men” – Ishmael and Eliezer.
    Ishmael and archer are synonyms for most Jewish theology scholars. Yesterday another scholar was thrilled to hear from me the interpretation to the finger gesture in the mosaic.
    Please take a look at the picture linked above. It is so beautiful. It comes from a Christian blog.
    I must admit that all commentators combine the words “thrower archer” into one ancient military specialty – a thrower of arrows with an arch. However “shooting” is the correct verb, also used in the bible, for arrows. “Throwing” suits much better to a spear. So, last week with your assistance I understood that the scholars who provided the instructions to the mosaic artists of Sepphoris ancient synagogue interpreted “thrower archer” as “thrower (of spears) and archer (who shoots arrows)”.
    Please magnify the picture and note that the two archer fingers are exaggerated in length as compared to the palm. Also the archer finger gesture is well centered in the scene to draw one’s attention to it. The interpretation of the “mosaic book” you provided that this is a “gesture of delivering a speech”, is very unlikely because Ishmael being “a man of wilderness” would rather shoot than talk.

    1. Well, you’re clearly convinced. I’m not, I’m afraid. The lack of depiction of a bow, and the *thousand year* gap between this 5th century mosaic and the claimed 15th century English gesture – *for which there is no evidence* – means that even if there was somehow a two-fingered gesture associated with archery in the 5th century, it is merely coincidence.

      1. Ah, excellent, thank you (you didn’t do anything wrong, I just hadn’t logged in for a while to see and approve your earlier comment). Eerily familiar, aren’t they 😉

      2. The point of these is that they are none of them archers (one is God) yet the hands are all palm towards the person (the so called V sign) a benediction would be palm outwards towards the other person This is why I suggest it is neither, but a generalised sort of “thus it is” or “now hear this” or something similar Are you able to post them here for other people ?

      3. Anyone reading the comments will be able to click your link. I’m looking at a followup post though, in which case I will certainly use them. If you could supply the sources, that would be great. I completely agree with you, by the way.

  81. Dear Artemis
    All the drawings you have enclosed show the benediction gesture – three fingers open two fingers folded. We were discussing here the archers’ two fingers gesture which has totally different meaning – shooting an arrow. This is with only two fingers open and three closed with the palm facing forwards exactly like in the mosaic of the Sepphoris synagogue depicting Ismael the archer.
    By the way, because according to the Midrsh Ismael tried in his childhood to kill Isaac with an arrow, the artist presumably refrained from showing here the real bow and elected to show only the “archers sign”.

    1. Not sure which images you are looking at but every one I posted is two fingers – and the palm is toward the person making the gesture – that is palm inwards – look where the thumb is You cannot raise two fingers in benediction with your thumb on the outside, it would be on the inside. Try it. And the gesture we are discussing – the so called archers “salute’ – is always with the palm inwards. Are you not familiar with the rude V sign ?

  82. I reasoned that the finger gesture of Ishmael in the mosaic of Sepphoris synagogue was taken by the artist from a gesture used by the Byzantine soldiers who ruled Israel at that time of the 5th century. Above shown a drawing of a Byzantine soldier (symbolizing Joshua the great biblical conqueror of Israel) from the 10th century (drawing from the 12th) , extremely similar to Ishmael with a spear in his left hand and the two fingers gesture in the right hand. I guess we should explore the origin of this gesture in the Byzantine army.

    1. If you google medieval gestures (images) you will find – as I did – that there has been a great deal of research into the symbolism of a wide variety of them – although mostly religious. So I think we can say that many gestures in old images meant something very specific to people of the times, which we are still working out. A sort of secret code.

    2. This may be a two finger gesture but it is NOT a V sign. We are supposed to be discussing whether early images of two fingers raised – WITH THE PALM TOWARDS THE PERSON RAISING THEM had any connection with the so called “archer’s salute”

Leave a reply to Jack Cancel reply