Lockdown Longbow - Do shields stop arrows?

The lockdown longbow trials continue with SHIELDS!

Ever wondered if a shield will protect you from arrows from an English Longbow? Well you are in the right place. I accurately made a reproduction 15thC shield, fitted the back with maille and a pork joint and shoot a variety of arrows at it and look at what happens.

Shield was constructed from 15mm thick poplar planks, butt glued, faced with bonded linen canvas front and rear and scraped all over with gesso and the painted. Arm pad was two layers of linen canvas and four layers of a heavy wool cloth.

[Vastin]

Shield definitely isn't proof against heavy war arrows - but if we assume that shield was over center of mass, then *without* it, every single one of those arrows is a mortal wound. With it some of them are serious arm injuries, some are minor, and some might have caused minor injury elsewhere, such as chest or shoulder, though any armor in those other locations would likely prevent them from being significant.
From the standpoint of a commander sending my forces across the field, I can easily see a single soldier taking several shots into a shield before they suffer an injury severe enough to disable them. They might take a bad one right off and go down, but from what we see here it's pretty unlikely. And every shot that one soldier manages to suffer without falling is one OTHER soldier who hasn't been shot at all. So in terms of reducing total casualties suffered from bow fire, I think its fairly safe to suggest that a company holding shields might well take 1/3 or fewer casualties vs the company without when facing massed bow fire, simply because it will often take 3 or more shots to actually stop one soldier, rather than just 1. So shields remain one of the most crucial defenses against arrows, even if they aren't *proof* against them.

[biohazard]

"The fight's over, you can drop the shield now."

"No I can't..."

[thehappyvulcan]

"Are you safe behind your shield?"

Safer than without.

[Thatonedude]

"Hardened in Wine and Salt"
That's a killer album name, maybe pirate metal or something

[hoarder]

i love how this guy is both absolutely excited about what he's doing and at the same time is all about business. No clowning around, no comic relief, just straight to the point. That's what a professional who loves what he's doing looks like. Immediately subscribed. Cheers.

[shadiversity]

Wow, the penetration was way higher than I was expecting, although this is replicating a very powerful bow, would have certainly made an incentive for the medieval archer to be able to shoot them.
I wonder how well a 100lb bow would go, as well as a 70lb, about as low as the warbow category allows.
Man, this raises so many interesting things to consider, like how prevalent it might have been to hold the shield further away from the body, as the shield did technically stop the arrows, just with some scary penetration still. Makes me like boss shields even more, lol. Also, that shield was on the thicker side, anglo/viking style round shields were usually way thinner, so we should expect the penetration to be even higher.
awesome stuff.

[EIixir]

These tests really make you think about how utterly terrifying the battlefield would have been.

[dee-jay]

I imagine the shield is much more effective in less optimal shooting conditions. I mean the distance is quite short and the angle almost a solid 90 degrees.

[WimiBussard]

Yes, that's how my shield in Bannerlord looks after a fight, too.

[eeturopelinen]

Center boss shields just started to sound way more compelling when facing projectiles.
EDIT: Clarifying my thoughts as there were many good comments and I don't want to split this answering each of them on their own.
My thought process behind this was that with a center gripped shield you would have the ability to extend it (not have it against your arm) even if that is not how you would usually fight with it.
You would not be shot at when you were in a melee with the enemy anyway (at least I wouldn't risk hitting my own men in the back).
Even if (and I think when) the boss would not be able to withstand the arrow you would only have your fist right behind the shield instead of your forearm (smaller target).
Being shot at, you would extend the shield and hope that
a) your grip is strong enough that the arrows don't rotate the shield so that the next on can hit you
b) when the arrows would penetrate the shield they would either get stuck or slow down enough so they would not penetrate your armour
c) you would not get hit in the boss as that is what your hand is behind and it is a rather small target.
Are any of these true? I don't know and honestly I don't have any experience fighting with a center boss shield.
It is quite possible that the first hit on the shield would rotate it enough that you would get hit right afterwards.
Or that the arrow would just go through and hit you anyways.
With any bad luck you would get shot right through the boss and that would be bye bye hand.
If you could extend the shield and hold it strongly enough you would still have arrows poking through your shield and hinder your ability to fight but well that would hinder you less than an arrow through your chest.
As for historical overlap (center grip vs specifically English longbow) I simply did not consider this at all as this was more of an interesting idea than a historical consideration.
I was thinking mostly viking/saxon/migration era round shields but as mentioned in the comments Roman Scutum are also center gripped.
For any level of historical accuracy shields should of course be tested against their historically accurate projectile weapons.
Personally I simply don't know if any center gripped shields were used in battle during the time of the English longbow but I presume that someone else does.

[icebot]

Doctor emerges from the operating room to address a desperate family. "I'm sorry, it's a pork shot." Mom breaks down in tears.

Okay, before watching the test, here is a prediction: a good shield+armour ought to stop arrows from a longbow. We may get some damage to the shield, but the pork behind it should be untouched. Now, to see if I'm right :D
EDIT: Ouch!

[spampants]

I have been loving how much glee Tod has had throughout this whole series.

[btrenninger]

Are shields perfect? No. Would I want a shield? Yes.

Also, now to invent the lockdown lance launcher.

[BDAShadow]

The real fun is trying to get the shield off after it's been stapled to your arm with an arrow.

[evilbetty]

Could waxing had originally been intended as a metal preservative? A way to stop the arrow from rusting in storage? And then later on found out that it actually assisted in penetration? I love your videos.

[robc]

Let's be honest the impact is insanely scary just by looking at it. Being on the other side must have been truly terrifying and showcases why well-drilled experienced soldiers were such a valuable military asset. Takes nerves and balls of steel to stand against archers shooting war bows on mass.

[turkeywalker]

About the battle of Carrhae when the Romans fought the Parthians, Plutarch and Cassius Dio wrote:

"And when Publius urged them to charge the enemy's mail-clad horsemen, they showed him that their hands were riveted to their shields and their feet nailed through and through to the ground, so that they were helpless either for flight or for self-defence."

[Nekotaiga]

God, could you imagine being behind the shield when that top one came bursting through? That alone would have been nerve-racking

[NinjaWeazel]

"That was way too high." I think the hypothetical knight that just had your arrow punch through his shield and into his face strongly agrees.