|
Post by Atabeg on Dec 18, 2007 21:46:02 GMT 3
I just read that the Ottoman bow of the 1700's and 1800's are considered the best Asiatic (recurved) of any time by most experts
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Dec 20, 2007 18:41:02 GMT 3
Yes, I heard so too.
|
|
|
Post by Panthera on Jan 17, 2008 15:09:06 GMT 3
For dismounted archers, the foot bow was quite a formidable weapon. It was used by Chinese Kingdoms, as well as by other Central Asian armies. Of course, it was not used en masse because of the high percentage of mounted men, but it was utilised in some situations. For instance, it was used by the Seljuq Sultan Kilij Arslan at the Battle of Civitot against Peter the Hermit. He placed footbowmen along the ridge, and rained hell down on the unsuspecting crusading forces. "A deviation from the norm in Asian archery was a tool called the "Foot-Bow". These were often preferred because they could fire arrows a lot faster, and at a longer range than most conventional bows or crossbows. The technique to use a foot-bow was for the person to lie down on their back, with the bow at their feet, then they would put the arrow between their feet and pull the string on the bow back with both of their hands and use their back and legs to bend the bow. It was said that the aim was not very good, but with the combined weight and velocity of the five foot long arrows, that became less important." (Source: www.redsofts.com/articles/read/483/57845/Archery_Three_Noted_Histories.html)~ Panthera
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 18, 2008 17:32:48 GMT 3
Looks like the description of the arrow shooting scene at the Chinese movie "Hero"
|
|
jbl
Är
Posts: 3
|
Post by jbl on Dec 31, 2008 7:03:00 GMT 3
This is one of my favorite debates of all time. "Best" is based on many factors but one that is down played is how the composite bow and the English Longbow (a selfbow) were constructed and the effect weather had on each. There is no doubt in my mind that the composite bow was the "better" bow as a fighting weapon however because of its construction it was much more effected by the weather. I own a sinew backed bow and the draw weight can lose as much as ten pounds in humid weather and gain ten pounds in dry/cold weather. In England I think that a composite bow would have turned into a "wet" noodle. Another factor was the English longow could be built much quicker than the composite bow. A composite bow could take up to a year to build, my bow took six months for the sinew to cure before final tillering. Another factor is shorter bows are less forgiving accuracy wise than a longer bow; couple that with a different draw i.e. thumb ring draw vs. three finger a Steppe Archer probably had a harder road to go as far as training. That being said when I shoot I perfer my short Crimean Tartar bow over any English Longbow I just find it a little rocket.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Dec 31, 2008 10:33:21 GMT 3
Greetings jbl, welcome aboard Indeed, the composite bow was way more sensitive to weather conditions, especially rain and snow.
|
|
|
Post by ALTAR on Dec 31, 2008 14:07:02 GMT 3
Jbl, Welcome to SHF. What do you think about Arbalets?
|
|
jbl
Är
Posts: 3
|
Post by jbl on Jan 1, 2009 0:40:54 GMT 3
Thank you all for welcoming me to the forum. I am finding alot of this information very informative and just plain fun. I have always been fascinated by the arbalet but to me there was a few of issues rate of fire, weather (many were compostite or strings were sinew), and time of manufactoring was realitively slow compared to a selfbow.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Mar 1, 2009 10:05:09 GMT 3
The Ottoman bow was the best bow, The Crimean Tartar bow very similar to the Ottoman bow. A little bigger At the time of the mongol empire i think their bow sure were the best bow. A longbow itself wasent good, they just made good use of it tacticlly in battle and therefore famous. What i read about the lonbow, it did not last long. You had to make new ones all the time. while a composite bow can keep its power for a real long time. And i dont think you can say a bow is better just becuse its fast to make. I am sure the mongols had bows in making all the time. And they all seemed to have enough of them. heard a warrior often carried more than one. In Flight Archery the ottoman bow has shoot up to 800 meters i read, and the record with modern bows are just around a 1000 meters. A Ottoman bow was about one meter, and a longbow around 2 meters. Thats a huge benefit. half the lenght but still the drawlenght was about the same. They needed the lenght of the bow to get up to that drawlenght. How could one pieace of straight wood get better than the development of the composite bow throw thousend of years I dont know much about japanese bows but they seem to be a joke, been watching u tube they are so long and weak, draw weight around 20-40 pounds. And the master said its not important to hit the target its about the concentration Maybe the bows were diffrent when they really had to kill someone with them. But the Korean bow was really good. About firing rate at skilled horse arhcers. One Hungarian man has (if it still stands) a record of of 1.5 seconds per arrow, aimed, but i think it was made standing and not from a horse. Short bow beeing less forgiving? the longbow archers dident need to aim really in war. And the steppe warriors probably had the skills requierd to make a good use of their effective short composite bow.
|
|