The Famous Longbow

[Martok]

A new member wished to contribute the following:

The most reliable and effective arrowheads are those which are either triangular or square (i.e. in cross-section). These are for use in battle and for piercing iron and all kinds of armour. There are various types of arrowheads, of which the most useful are those just mentioned. The haydari head (a broadhead for hunting?)' is not as good as either of these two kinds. Target heads (nusul al-ahdaf) should be rounded. There is also a kind of head resembling an olive, which, some masters have told me, is the most useful of all arrowheads for battle and for piercing shields and which in Turkish territory is used by archers more than any other type. They also have an arrowhead resembling a chisel. Like the maydani it is cylindrical, but its tip is not pointed. On the contrary, it looks as if it has been cut obliquely from its lineal midpoint and tapered to a blade on two opposite sides so as to present the appearance of a scalpel. The edge of the blade is as wide as the diameter of the body. I have tested this head and found that it will pierce the laminae of a brigandine (qarqal) as well as it is possible to do so.

http://www.caama.ca/

[Orda Khan]

Nobody can state in any certainty which composite bow is the best, it really depends on the bowyer. That the Hun bow was a vast improvement over the Scythian is without doubt but for any other variation of this design the performance is more or less similar. There is no marked difference that suggests the Turkish bow (btw this design usually refers to the type used by the Ottomans rather than the 'Turkic' steppe nomads) is any better than the bows introduced by the Huns, ie composite bows with siyahs (rigid limb tips). In fact, the asymmetrical design of the Hun bow could well qualify as the best performer of the Asiatic reflex bows if we consider the negative effect of 'handshock'. Many historians have put forward their theories as to why the lower limb was shorter and conclude it was for ease of use from horseback. I don't agree. The Hun is markedly asymmetrical while the others are not and there were many others. Handshock is hardly noticeable with the Hun compared with others such as the Mongol or Turk and accuracy is not affected at all by the asymmetrical limbs. Accident or design?

Longbows were prevalent throughout various European countries though the bows remembered are those of English armies. Yew was the stave of choice due to the heartwood/sapwood combination which works in a similar way to the horn/sinew constructon of the composite. However the tensile strength of sinew is supposedly four times greater than the best sapwood. The other drawback of self bows is 'memory', the bow will eventually begin to lose its performance as the stave begins following its draw path and is the reason why such bows are not left strung for long periods.

The Japanese Yumi is a very long bow and is another example of asymmetry. Japanese archery, mounted or not is quite different and is more of a Zen approach, as in the 'perfect release'. To the best of my knowledge, they were not renowned for huge draw weights

........Orda