Archery

[Lucas]

Sorry all my typos I'm on a phone and I suck at texting

[bawang]

major problems faced by enemies of mongols were their arrows could not bring them down. mongol cavalry were reported to fight normally while being covered in 50+ arrows. the same problem was problem was faced by jin archer conscripts who could not penetrate the 4 inch thick tower shields of general yue feis army, and likewise chinese archers who could not penetrate double lamenar armor of jin iron tower cataphract and hammer cavalry. this was what pushed for the development of firearms

[boxerbilly]

in ancient battlefields the longest range archers win. they will always be out of range of enemy archer. archers are light skirmishers and archers first engage other archers. they will also use focus fire, where multiple units of archers shoot at one unit.

small cavalry groups can also enter the gaps between formations with a thin column called centipede or dragon formation and snipe the general. this is how japanese lost many of their samurai officers when ming army brought their elite cavalry units from liaodong

major problems faced by enemies of mongols were their arrows could not bring them down. mongol cavalry were reported to fight normally while being covered in 50+ arrows. the same problem was problem was faced by jin archer conscripts who could not penetrate the 4 inch thick tower shields of general yue feis army, and likewise chinese archers who could not penetrate double lamenar armor of jin iron tower cataphract and hammer cavalry

Bawang, please tell us more about Mongol battlefield tactics.

[bawang]

Exactly. They are called WarBows for a reason. They were not used any where else ! There would not be a Englishman alive then tamping through the woods with sucha monster. 6feet plus.

thats why only someone using a warbow skillfully deserves to be on tv. this is the whole point of why that norwegian guy is a pathetic failure. he is like one of those nerds on youtube always talking about european sword fighting pretending to be expert, because european martial arts is dead and there is no one to put them in their place.

Bawang, please tell us more about Mongol battlefield tactics.

i only know about chinese tactics

[boxerbilly]

I disagree concerning Lars. He started late and is sort of old. I have no doubts we had fast, lighter bowmen on the battlefield. Horse Archers. When the horse goes down, now they are foot archers already closed.

European Martial arts are not dead, they evolved like probably every country more or less. US Marines were still using swords in the late 1800s. European offshoots. Other countries the same. I guess you have issue with people trying to replicate how they believe a weapon was used. Fairly similar from country to country Id wager. So, how hard could it be to figure out usage if there is some country with a group of guys still training in some archaic weapon technique ? Clever people draw from all sources available to find answers.

I think to discount Lar's ideas is wrong. In my opinion, The English heavypull longbow was not the ultimate battlefield weapon. It was an intrical part and the decisive weapon a couple of battles. I would rather have faster mobile bowman and let the pikeman worry about the Knights. Which I am sure later was a tactic used.

[bawang]

I guess
if
I think
I would

can u go to a krate or samurai fetish forum for that kind of sh1t, for circlejerks where you refute historical fact with opinions

[boxerbilly]

Oh we are going to use Historical Facts , because they are always correct and truthful to debate this. Okay. Then, the longbow was simply an impossible weapon to bring into combat for the simple matter that it took a lifetime to be able to use. That's your HISTORICAL FACT !

Go ahead and circle jerk that around your crew, dude !

[Cataphract]

major problems faced by enemies of mongols were their arrows could not bring them down. mongol cavalry were reported to fight normally while being covered in 50+ arrows. the same problem was problem was faced by jin archer conscripts who could not penetrate the 4 inch thick tower shields of general yue feis army, and likewise chinese archers who could not penetrate double lamenar armor of jin iron tower cataphract and hammer cavalry. this was what pushed for the development of firearms

Cloth and especially silk is surprisingly good at deflecting or at least stopping arrows. Samurai messengers dragged "parachutes" made of silk. Mongols wore silk shirts. Arrows would often penetrate their flesh but could be pulled out by the surrounding cloth without doing much damage. Crusading knights wore long overcloaks. They are reported to have looked like needle cushions after battles.

[boxerbilly]

Fact is, until the MaryRose I do not believe their was a single surviving LongBow from that time period. And prior to that I am unsure anyone believed top weight of longbow went about 110lbs. Most agreed within the 70-90lb range. They possibly base these weights off of bows that survived from latter periods.

So, now , sure why not, we found a Ship with some rather large men, ( again well above average standards for men of that time frame) who happened to be holding a bit more than 100 bows. At larger weights. 100+ and up. All of a sudden we toss common sense out the window and credit people whos life did not revolve around a bow , with abilities of massive pulls and the deadliest archers ever. Over glorification in my opinion. Yet, these same people seem to have not read they considered those men on that ship the very TOP of the heap for HeavyBowmen. That gets chucked and now everysingle English farmer that touched a longbow can pull 165 100s of times during battle. Also failing to understand war cost and that FACT not enough arrows were ever issuedan archer to achieve that volume PERIOD ! Nope, numbnuts run with same base numbers and recreate things that never happened.

Now, long forgot is the guy on the battlefields with his tiny little bow of 50 or a smaller 70 because ALL LONGBOWS NOW had to be over 100+ pounds.

And don't use logic to try and debate often inaccurate and incorrect HISTORICAL FACT.

How about this, Who started WW2 and Who was the most evil people during that time period? I know the poster boy. WE ALL DO ! Now, remove your emotions, pride and things sold you prior. THINK !!!

[sanjuro_ronin]

So yesterday when I took my eldest to archery class ( Sofia loves archery since she saw Hunger games), I asked the guy there if they have any serious bows, with heavy draw weights and he gave me a 75 and 100lb bow.
So I did what any red-blooded Portuguese- Canadian MA with an attitude would do, spend half n hour shooting like an englishman !!
LOL !

Observations:
Not as hard as I thought and it got easier as time went by as I a got some pointers about drawing big bows ( push and pull, not just pull for example).
Accuracy was not as good simply because, as I was told, this is not the type of bow you draw and HOLD while aiming. The analogy of a shotgun VS a rifle is good:
You AIM a rifle but you POINT a shotgun.
Now, I am a strong boy as most of you know but truth be told, technique was more important.

In short, drawing a 100lbs bow is NOT a big deal and you can draw and shoot for 30 min with no problem, though not at the rate as you would with a lighter draw weight of course.

[Cataphract]

Accuracy was not as good simply because, as I was told, this is not the type of bow you draw and HOLD while aiming. The analogy of a shotgun VS a rifle is good:
You AIM a rifle but you POINT a shotgun.

In Kyudo you learn how to aim with your toes. Imagine a line through the tips of your toes and the target. Then draw the bow. Accuracy comes from repeating these movements.

Stone age bows such as Ötzi's and the Holmegaard bow were long bows over 1.80m btw.

[boxerbilly]

I read further. So, odds are the very best archers were outlaws. For all intent purpose illegal hunters like Robin Hood. Now, what weights do most hunters hunt with? What range do most hunters drop their prey at ? About 50lbs and 20 yards. I suspect the same then.

So, would you take men that can actually use their weapon effectively and not use them in positions that would benefit their attributes and tactics of elusiveness? As I stated long ago. Shooting up in the air at a distance is shooting? Or is aimed archery shooting? Which requires the greater skill? Standing back and being strong lobbing arrows or getting in close to take your shots and doing your best to escape after you dropped your targets and coming back around next opportunity? Which over all would be more effective? At Agincourt do to the conditions of the field. Hanging back worked great.

Funny I read others that said the shortbowman was the lowest soldier on the field. I doubted then and now we read those standback foot archers were basically that, yet, most believe in the legend because they read longbow oh, Those things are 50thousand pounds of pull and those guys were serious. When more than likely these guys used more 20-40 pounds over what they could be capable of using for hunting but aside from amount of cash they had they probably were not very good archers. But we can get them to shoot slightly heavier bows and land arrows along that line. The better archers got much closer. These were hunter/killers. SKILLED Outlaws. With differing levels of skill amound the professional soldiers who were archers and farmers who likely became the heavy longbow men with bows not as heavy as the pros on the Rose. Those guys probably show up and taught these Farmers tactics and technique.

Anyway, unlike Bawang I believe the best archers used much lighter weights at closer range. Things got twisted and weights got thrown around and everyone wants to believe the strongest.

Longbow does not always mean- 150lbs. It is a type of bow with heights and weights that VARIED! But people see 6ft+ and 110+ inside their minds eye. All of England bowmen common and pro somehow were the strongest archers ever. Simply a fallacy. And Id take a weaker skilled I can hit my target archer over a strong I can get it close to the target archer. Almost always he is the more needed archer.

[boxerbilly]

Sorry all my typos I'm on a phone and I suck at texting

Hi Lucas.

Archers in general have that skeleton issue. Even Olympic archers that use less than 50lb bows. It could be consider similar to baseball players also having skeleton changes from throwing a ball. It does not show up in Soccer ( football for the offended) players. The ball is light. Weight is not the real issue of the malady. Doing a motion over and over and I assume one sided is the cause.

[Lucas]

Hi Lucas.

Archers in general have that skeleton issue. Even Olympic archers that use less than 50lb bows. It could be consider similar to baseball players also having skeleton changes from throwing a ball. It does not show up in Soccer ( football for the offended) players. The ball is light. Weight is not the real issue of the malady. Doing a motion over and over and I assume one sided is the cause.

True, but not to the same degree by any means. It would be akin to comparing Mike tysons fist to pan qing fu's iron fist deformity. An English longbow of this calibre man was a one sided archer. It's surmised, based off skeletal remains, that the average longbow man trained and grown in the traditional manner would likely have been able to lift a 200lb weight with their draw arm easily above their head, one handed. The deformity is extreme in these cases. There are records of those arrows punching through oak trees. Their bows were crafted on an individual basis by the village bowyer

[boxerbilly]

Empirical.

This is FACT. I appreciate you doing you experiment. So, we have one. By his own admission, he is rather strong. Bawang, I don't believe you are a very large man. Got a 100 pound bow and a half hour?