Ancient/medieval archery - a rethink

[Nord]

Interesting video to see on youtube



Looks like we might need some new sculpt poses.

[Dewbakuk]

Yeah, watched this the other day and he makes some very good points. As an archer myself I would never even consider a back quiver and we've definately lost the ability to move rapidly while shooting.

He looks like an idiot though in most of those 'poses'.

[Pappa Midnight]

Thanks for posting. Some really interesting info there.

PM

[Mick_in_Switzerland]

Amazing Video and very thought provoking - he makes Peter Jackson's Legolas a reality.

[epmoretto]

Though his skills are impressive and showy, I am willing to bet that this is, at least in the context of Western medieval archery, largely rubbish. The bow he is using is manifestly not of any worthwhile draw weight, and his insistence that battlefield archers were somehow apt to "machine-gun" their arrows is based on very evidence, from what I see.

Still, a very talented man!

[Emir of Askaristan]

Impressive. Trick shooting in many cases, but not tricks which do anything to underrate his skill and proficiency and which illustrate the techniques of holding arrows in the hand and a hip quiver.

Like the modern yabasume samurai horse archery competition and the mounted archery of Kassai I think this shows us what can be achieved by a skilled archer using ancient techniques.

Thanks for sharing.

[pocoloco]

Though his skills are impressive and showy, I am willing to bet that this is, at least in the context of Western medieval archery, largely rubbish. The bow he is using is manifestly not of any worthwhile draw weight, and his insistence that battlefield archers were somehow apt to "machine-gun" their arrows is based on very evidence, from what I see.

Still, a very talented man!

Indeed, give him a proper war bow with a big draw weight and then lets see what happens. Of course the video is still quite entertaining.

[shandy]

Very interesting video and impressive skills. I was also thinking about how this would relate to longbows… It looks plausible for horse archers or skirmishers etc. But I guess for massed volleys other techniques would be needed, although speed might have played a role.
Anyway, I wsh I could do that 

[FramFramson]

Yes, I think this is applicable, but more to ancients, light bows, hunters, horse archers and so forth.

The arms race of the later medieval period eventually sacrificed all other factors in favour of penetration power. I expect that modern western ideals of standing archers with longbows and fixed competition targets come from that era and aren't just some oddball modern invention.

[shandy]

The arms race of the later medieval period eventually sacrificed all other factors in favour of penetration power.

Never thought about it this way - the longbow is not the pinnacle of archery, but an extreme onesidedness… I like that.

[rumacara]

Nice video

When i grow up i would like to be like him.
As an archer i would never considered doing those things but the experiment with 2 or 3 arrows in the hand does work although we loose some accuracy.

[axabrax]

Did you see where he penetrates chainmail? That seems like a worthwhile penetration power to me.

Though his skills are impressive and showy, I am willing to bet that this is, at least in the context of Western medieval archery, largely rubbish. The bow he is using is manifestly not of any worthwhile draw weight, and his insistence that battlefield archers were somehow apt to "machine-gun" their arrows is based on very evidence, from what I see.

Still, a very talented man!
[/quot

[epmoretto]

Sure, though it is most certainly cheap "butted" mail, rather than a serious set of riveted mail, which is both MUCH stronger and historically accurate.

Having had the pleasure of playing around with a friend's set of riveted mail, it generally stops just about everything short of close range fire from high poundage warbows. Indeed, there are accounts from the crusader-era which suggest that archers who did manage to penetrate a knight's armor struggled to actually cause any worthwhile damage, since the difficulty of getting through riveted mail robbed the arrow of its force, meaning that it could not penetrate the padded clothing underneath.

Though, I suppose the most egregious error this gentleman makes is in assuming archers were somehow tasked with fighting "up close and personal" with their bows. We have plenty of historical evidence which suggests that archers- with a few exceptions, such as at Agincourt- were used only as skirmishers or ranked missile troops, and fell back when confronted by a foe. This seriously challenges his notion that archers were unloading at point blank range with an array of showy skills.

I guess the final point I would bother to make is that even Eastern warbows were not of a piddly draw weight- I have heard they still reach well past the eighty pound point with regularity, which seems to be a great deal heavier than this guys' bow.

[Agent Brown]

Exactly. While most impressive, I fail to see how the skills he displays could be translated to the battlefield. Ninjas might be interested though.

[Arlequín]

With the mindset honed with the hindsight of centuries of tradition with massed battle, linear warfare et al, we probably can't see the value of this. For less rigid warfare, i.e. Plains Indians, African Tribal Warriors and possibly early Ancient Era combatants, amongst others, who's to say that such techniques weren't used or had value?

I did note that the guy did remark that he wondered what could be achieved by someone fitter and stronger, using a bow with a heavier draw weight.