Do heavier arrows and bows really kill in ancient warfare?

[Blue Scallop]

Yesterday I tried archery inside a mall for the first time. Our arrows were lightweight. We were discussing with my companions how arrows can kill people in the ancient warfare or battle when they look so light and can't penetrate further from the skin or flesh. Do they use heavier bow and arrows in real war and can those really kill people? Are these also being sold in sporting shop?

 

[phinds]

Yesterday I tried archery inside a mall for the first time. Our arrows were lightweight. We were discussing with my companions how arrows can kill people in the ancient warfare or battle when they look so light and can't penetrate further from the skin or flesh. Do they use heavier bow and arrows in real war and can those really kill people? Are these also being sold in sporting shop?

Your use of the term "lightweight" is totally vague. Are you experienced with regular arrows? What was the pull force on the bows you were using? Your whole question is too vague to be answered unless we happen to have a member who is familiar with those arrows and regular arrows AND knows what kind of bow you are talking about.

 

[berkeman]

Yesterday I tried archery inside a mall for the first time. Our arrows were lightweight. We were discussing with my companions how arrows can kill people in the ancient warfare or battle when they look so light and can't penetrate further from the skin or flesh. Do they use heavier bow and arrows in real war and can those really kill people? Are these also being sold in sporting shop?

Lethal? Not so much...

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6745/1943/1600/DSCN3167.0.jpg

Lethal, yes...

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/2e/ed/49/2eed49095a29655e27523ca52fdd408f.jpg

 

[Vanadium 50]

AND knows what kind of bow you are talking about.

And the arrow. The ones with a rubber cup on the business end are not as deadly as the ones all sharp and pointy.

 

[Mark44]

Yesterday I tried archery inside a mall for the first time. Our arrows were lightweight. We were discussing with my companions how arrows can kill people in the ancient warfare or battle when they look so light and can't penetrate further from the skin or flesh. Do they use heavier bow and arrows in real war and can those really kill people? Are these also being sold in sporting shop?

At the Battle of Agincourt (25 Oct, 1415), the English under Henry V won the battle over the numerically superior French forces, primarily due to the efforts of the English longbowmen. The arrows fired by the English archers had enough force to penetrate armor.

It is said (but not backed up by historical evidence) that the "V" sign for victory, with two fingers raised, originated at that battle. As the story goes, English and Welsh archers captured by the French had their index and middle fingers cut off, making it impossible for them to use their longbows. The uncaptured and victorious English raised their hands, showing those fingers, as a sign of defiance.

There's a very long history of people using bows and arrows, both for hunting and in war, going back at least two thousand years. The Plains Indians of the US were master bowmen, and were able to ride their horses at full gallop firing arrows at buffalo or at other tribes they were at war with, or at homesteaders or US Cavalry troops.

 

[Fervent Freyja]

The arrow weight isn't as important as drawing weight of the bow. Lighter arrows can travel faster, but heavier arrows penetrate more deeply. Combining a lighter arrow/bolt with a bow that requires more strength to draw is going to be more deadly than a heavy arrow with a bow that doesn't require as much strength to cock, especially if you add a head that's designed for maximum damage once inside your target.

You didn't shoot a real effective bow, if you are questioning if they can really kill people! I have a crossbow, but cannot draw it myself (I think 400, so requires 200 pound pull with a cocker), and still wince when I hit a target. My bolts are aluminum and pretty light. You don't want to be in front of one. These things would not only penetrate you, but are powerful enough to pick up up off the ground and throw you backwards! My husband can kill anything with a crossbow, easily. I usually miss. I prefer using his AR-15 when I go hunting with him, but bow season usually opens before rifle season. Bullets deliver more damage than arrows. Back a long time ago when they used bows in war you had a higher chance of surviving than vs struck by a bullet. Lethalness probably depends how accurate the shooter is and how much strength they can put behind it than weight of the arrow.

Yes, you can buy them in any sporting shop.

 

[Blue Scallop]

These are what you can find in typical archery centers inside malls (they are ones I tried and it's my first time). How deadly are these? In our estimation, this can hardly reach 1 inch beyond the flesh (of say cows). In warfare arrows.. how far they can reach inside the flesh?

 

[russ_watters]

These are what you can find in typical archery centers inside malls (they are ones I tried and it's my first time). How deadly are these? In our estimation, this can hardly reach 1 inch beyond the flesh (of say cows). In warfare arrows.. how far they can reach inside the flesh?

Suffice to say, for safety reasons and because they don't expect random people at a mall to be very strong, the "draw weight" (Google that...) of those bows will be a small fraction of what a hunting or war bow draws...and the arrows are lighter, with duller points.

An arrow/bow that can pierce a steel plate would go all the way through an unarmored person.

 

[Bandersnatch]

These are what you can find in typical archery centers inside malls (they are ones I tried and it's my first time). How deadly are these? In our estimation, this can hardly reach 1 inch beyond the flesh (of say cows). In warfare arrows.. how far they can reach inside the flesh?

Look at the numbers by these bows - that's the draw weight. It's the weight equivalent that your arm has to support at full draw (between 28 and 32 inches, depending on construction of the bow).
I can only barely make out the first two, which are in the 20s-30s pound range. Such poundages are given to archery first-timers, so that they can start learning the technique.
It's likely the ones further on the left are heavier. You wouldn't see much of a difference visually. It's just a matter of slightly thicker or broader limbs.

As you go up with draw weight, you need more and more muscle to use it, and also increasingly heavier arrows (for one, they're stiffer, so won't get damaged upon release).

IIRC, the legal requirement for bow hunting (deer) in USA is 45 pounds. Anything less is considered not powerful enough to cause incapacitating wounds. As a rule of thumb, if it can kill a deer, it can kill a human. For wartime use you'd likely want no less than 60.

English longbows recovered from the Mary Rose wreckage are estimated to have been between 100 and 180 pounds draw weight, but that's a bit on the extreme end of the scale.

Ask around what's the heaviest bow they've got, and give it a try to get a feel for the difference a few extra pounds can make.

 

[Blue Scallop]

Look at the numbers by these bows - that's the draw weight. It's the weight equivalent that your arm has to support at full draw (between 28 and 32 inches, depending on construction of the bow).
I can only barely make out the first two, which are in the 20s-30s pound range. Such poundages are given to archery first-timers, so that they can start learning the technique.
It's likely the ones further on the left are heavier. You wouldn't see much of a difference visually. It's just a matter of slightly thicker or broader limbs.

The one on the left most is written 22:

What is the legal maximum draw weight of bows sold in sporting good shops? Maybe for tactical bow&arrow used by say the Delta Force, it needs license? Because bows&arrows can be considered lethal or deadly weapon so there should be licenses for more draw weight, no?

By the way, what is the draw weight of the bow & arrow used by Katniss Everdeen? It's so deadly accurate.

As you go up with draw weight, you need more and more muscle to use it, and also increasingly heavier arrows (for one, they're stiffer, so won't get damaged upon release).

IIRC, the legal requirement for bow hunting (deer) in USA is 45 pounds. Anything less is considered not powerful enough to cause incapacitating wounds. As a rule of thumb, if it can kill a deer, it can kill a human. For wartime use you'd likely want no less than 60.

English longbows recovered from the Mary Rose wreckage are estimated to have been between 100 and 180 pounds draw weight, but that's a bit on the extreme end of the scale.

Ask around what's the heaviest bow they've got, and give it a try to get a feel for the difference a few extra pounds can make.

 

[Bandersnatch]

What is the legal maximum draw weight of bows sold in sporting good shops?

There isn't a maximum, nor do you need a license (at least not in the USA, UK or Poland, I've no idea about the rest of the world). You may need years of what amounts to regular weight training, though.

 

[phinds]

By the way, what is the draw weight of the bow & arrow used by Katniss Everdeen? It's so deadly accurate.

It's so accurate because it's a movie. Draw weight has nothing to do with it.

 

[Blue Scallop]

There isn't a maximum, nor do you need a license (at least not in the USA, UK or Poland, I've no idea about the rest of the world). You may need years of what amounts to regular weight training, though.

You mean a guy can carry a 50 draw weight bow and arrow walking in the street in the heart of New York. Can't he be considered armed and dangerous?

 

[Bandersnatch]

As far as I'm aware, you only need a license if you're hunting. In most countries bows are considered sports equipment (in contrast, crossbows are usually deemed weapons).
Always check with your local regulations, though.

 

[Blue Scallop]

As far as I'm aware, you only need a license if you're hunting. In most countries bows are considered sports equipment (in contrast, crossbows are usually deemed weapons).
Always check with your local regulations, though.

Many countries don't have permit to carry firearms.. so let's say you are in the middle of the jungle. Bow & arrow will be a good defensive weapon.
What draw weight minimum do you need to stop a tiger or lion by one shot that can reach it's brain?

And if your target is 3 meters away versus 10 meters away. Does classical physics says that force of the arrow would be greater at shorter or longer distance? logic says longer distance between the arrows need to build momentum while it travels in airs, yes? Or closer is more deadly?

 

[phinds]

logic says longer distance between the arrows need to build momentum while it travels in airs, yes? Or closer is more deadly?

So you think that the arrow gains speed after it completely leaves the bow? What force is it that causes that?

 

[Blue Scallop]

So you think that the arrow gains speed after it completely leaves the bow? What force is it that causes that?

not gain speed.. but gain force.. because the traveling arrows increase the momentum and hence the force of impact, right?

 

[phinds]

not gain speed.. but gain force.. because the traveling arrows increase the momentum and hence the force of impact, right?

HOW does it gain momentum? What is the definition of momentum? Do you understand that the instant it leaves contact with the bowstring, there is no force acting on it (other than gravity, of course, and a small amount of air resistance)? How can the momentum increase if there is no force acting on it?

 

[Blue Scallop]

HOW does it gain momentum? What is the definition of momentum? Do you understand that the instant it leaves contact with the bowstring, there is no force acting on it (other than gravity, of course, and a small amount of air resistance)? How can the momentum increase if there is no force acting on it?

You have a point if the arrow is shot horizontal.. but if it's shot from above to below.. there is increase of momentum due to acceleration due to gravity.

 

[phinds]

You have a point if the arrow is shot horizontal.. but if it's shot from above to below.. there is increase of momentum due to acceleration due to gravity.

A trivial amount if the arrow has any force from the bow.

 

[russ_watters]

Look at the numbers by these bows - that's the draw weight. It's the weight equivalent that your arm has to support at full draw (between 28 and 32 inches, depending on construction of the bow).
I can only barely make out the first two, which are in the 20s-30s pound range.

Great post, except that I suspect those numbers are the hook/bow number, not the draw weight...

 

[russ_watters]

Maybe for tactical bow&arrow used by say the Delta Force, it needs license? ...

By the way, what is the draw weight of the bow & arrow used by Katniss Everdeen? It's so deadly accurate.

Delta Force? Fictional action movie star girl? Can't tell if serious, but sure hope not...

 

[Blue Scallop]

https://www.goprimalnow.com/shop/archery-hunting-bows/longbow-compact-folding-survival-bows/compact-folding-breakdown-bow-50-lb/

the above only selling for $149. 40 lbs bow weight. if used for hunting.. how deep can it penetrate the flesh of the hunted animal? 2 inches? 3 inches? what do you think?

 

[Vanadium 50]

Maybe for tactical bow&arrow used by say the Delta Force

The military has moved past bows and arrows. They now have something called "firearms". I think this will catch on.

You mean a guy can carry a 50 draw weight bow and arrow walking in the street in the heart of New York.

Article 265 of the New York State penal law does not list bows as dangerous weapons.

 

[russ_watters]

https://www.goprimalnow.com/shop/archery-hunting-bows/longbow-compact-folding-survival-bows/compact-folding-breakdown-bow-50-lb/

the above only selling for $149. 40 lbs bow weight. if used for hunting.. how deep can it penetrate the flesh of the hunted animal? 2 inches? 3 inches? what do you think?

Closer to three and a half.

 

[russ_watters]

The military has moved past bows and arrows. They now have something called "firearms". I think this will catch on.

Er, well, evidently, some army special forces used them up until at least the early '80s.

I suppose usage later than that would still be classified...

 

[Aufbauwerk 2045]

The old-timers would tell you how effective the American Indian bows were. One of my British ancestors in America was a scout for the patriot army during the war of independence, and he later served in Indian territory. One day he and a companion were paddling their canoe, when the companion was killed by an arrow shot from an Indian bow.

On a fictional (or semi-fictional?) note, in the movie The Wild Geese staring Richard Burton, the South African mercenary officer uses a modern crossbow to take out some sentries without waking up the rest of the enemy force. He explains that the crossbow is silent, and the quarrels are tipped with cyanide to ensure the quick demise of the target.

I haven't watched these myself, but I believe there are Youtube videos showing poor Bambi's cousins being slaughtered by hunters who use the bow and arrow for "sport." Personally I think it would be more sporting if they were attacking a pack of rabid pit bulls, but that's just my opinion.

 

[zoobyshoe]

The old-timers would tell you how effective the American Indian bows were. One of my British ancestors in America was a scout for the patriot army during the war of independence, and he later served in Indian territory. One day he and a companion were paddling their canoe, when the companion was killed by an arrow shot from an Indian bow.

I recall reading a contemporary account of some explorers who encountered a party of friendly Indians who did not have guns. They camped together for a while, and the Indians tried to teach the whites archery. None among the whites was strong enough to draw the Indian bows more than a little bit.

 

[Ketch22]

Yesterday I tried archery inside a mall for the first time. Our arrows were lightweight. We were discussing with my companions how arrows can kill people in the ancient warfare or battle when they look so light and can't penetrate further from the skin or flesh. Do they use heavier bow and arrows in real war and can those really kill people? Are these also being sold in sporting shop?

You ask some very interesting questions, The arrows are generally very light. This must be taken with a grain of salt. The resistance and penetration capabilities of the broad head have a significant effect on the damage done. In addition to this one must balance momentum with velocity. A 800 grain arrow when acted upon by a 50lb force for 0.25 seconds will achieve a greater velocity than a 1000 grain arrow acted upon by the same force. But will that additional velocity actually have more momentum? Another significant impact is how the bow delivers the force to the arrow. In the old days there were Longbows which had a fairly consistent delivery of force this assisted in not knocking the arrow out of balance. Modern bows are often compound and have dampeners and aids to keep things stable.
There is something to be said for high weight and velocity but it must also be in a balance that can be controlled by a human hand. Near my place there are lots of Archery hunters for Deer. Typical is a compound bow of around 80lbs draw with a 25lb hold. a 900 grain arrow with a large broadhead will pass entirely through a full size Deer. This while passing through whatever including bone is in it's path. The old school types use a longbow of around 70lb pull with a 950 to 1075 grain weight with the same result.
I could not read from the pics the draw weight but my guess is that it was well below that. I have "joined" my friends a few times and a high draw weight bow is not something that would do well with a regular mall patron. The answer lies somewhere in the balance of what can be handled by the archer and what delivers the greater force.

 

[Andy SV]

A bow will deliver a set amount of energy independent of the weight of the arrows however a heavy arrow will absorb more energy that would otherwise be lost as friction in the bow itself
and is not as easy for wind to deflect

 

[RogueOne]

How deeply the arrow penetrates through an animal depends on the arrow's momentum as well as the tip/blade that is chosen. Heavier arrows have more momentum. I have bow hunted and have shot arrows straight through fully grown whitetail deer from 30 meters away. That was using a 40lb draw weight and a draw length of 29 inches. I was also using a broad-head on the end of my arrow.

I do not think that a bow would be an effective defensive weapon against predators. Even after shooting that whitetail straight through heart and lungs, the deer ran for 50 meters before incapacitation. Following up with an accurate second shot is virtually not an option with a bow and arrow in a defensive situation.

If you are legitimately at risk of being attacked by a large predator in your area, it would be more effective to use a rifle chambered for a large caliber.

 

[RogueOne]

I recall reading a contemporary account of some explorers who encountered a party of friendly Indians who did not have guns. They camped together for a while, and the Indians tried to teach the whites archery. None among the whites was strong enough to draw the Indian bows more than a little bit.

I believe it. Those explorers were not archers. The draw weight on my bow as of today is so high that most non-archers cannot draw it fully. I am white, one of my good friends from high school is native American. He is unable to draw my bow, which gave us a good laugh when we discovered it. He's not an archer and has not developed those muscles.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I believe it. Those explorers were not archers. The draw weight on my bow as of today is so high that most non-archers cannot draw it fully. I am white, one of my good friends from high school is native American. He is unable to draw my bow, which gave us a good laugh when we discovered it. He's not an archer and has not developed those muscles.

Yes. But the main reason I mentioned that story was to point out that even "primitive" people were capable of making very stout bows, which, of course, were completely deadly in the hands of a decent archer. In other words, modern bows engineered by engineers aren't more powerful or more effective than what even very "primitive" people were capable of making. In the days when they lived by their bows, their bows were powerful and deadly. They killed buffalo with them; they could easily kill people.

 

[Bandersnatch]

In other words, modern bows engineered by engineers aren't more powerful or more effective than what even very "primitive" people were capable of making.

While there's no arguing that bows that were used in war or hunting were effective weapons - otherwise they wouldn't be used - on the above point I disagree.
A large part of good bow design is in making the energy transfer to the arrow efficient. Anyone can make a 'bow' that is hard to draw - just put a string on a thick stick. So a primitive bow that is hard to draw is not an evidence of high quality or effectiveness. The trick is to make the draw weight translate into arrow momentum in an efficient fashion.
That's why you have those really complex constructions in e.g. composite recurve bows of the steppe nomads, and that's why you have the complex arrangement of pulleys on a modern compound bow.

Regarding the story about Indians, the inability of outsiders to draw the bows might not come as much from great draw weight as compared to bows from other places or periods, but rather from the type of draw used by Indians. They were using 'pinch' draw, which makes it nigh impossible to fully draw any decent-poundage bow unless you have really, really strong fingers. By contrast, when using a Mediterranean draw pretty much the only limitation is in your back muscles.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Anyone can make a 'bow' that is hard to draw - just put a string on a thick stick. So a primitive bow that is hard to draw is not an evidence of high quality or effectiveness.

The Native American bow, at least in North American Plains tribes, was a complex composite bow that could be made from many different materials. It was actually highly engineered. Plains Indians traded all the way to the pacific coast for "whale bone" which was the basis for their bows.

Baleen is a filter-feeder system inside the mouths of baleen whales. The baleen system works by whale opening its mouth underwater and taking in water. The whale then pushes the water out, and animals such askrill are filtered by the baleen and remain as food source for the whale. Baleen is similar to bristles and is made of keratin, the same substance found in human fingernails and hair. Baleen is a skin derivative. Some whales, such as the bowhead whale, have longer baleen than others. Other whales, such as the gray whale, only use one side of their baleen. These baleen bristles are arranged in plates across the upper jaw of the whale. Baleen is often called whalebone, but that name also can refer to the normal bones of whales, which have often been used as a material, especially as a cheaper substitute for ivory in carving.

George Catlin reports the plains natives told him a good bow took over a year to make. They didn't use sticks, except for "bird bows," which were light bows for duck and turkey hunting, and training bows for children. Even a bird bow was a composite bow, however, made from different pieces of wood with the proper curves, bound together with sinew.

The average Native bow was not a "stick," but a cable-backed bow:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable-backed_bow

I have seen South American Native long bows for hunting that were monocoque pieces of wood, or "sticks," so to speak, although they're highly and deliberately shaped to function as bows. They can't be drawn too far without breaking the bow. I think they made do with them because both hunting and combat are at closer quarters in the jungle than on the plains. The English longbow, on the other hand, which was a monocoque piece of wood, was made from the Yew tree, which is unique in its elasticity:

Wood from the yew is classified as a closed-pore softwood, similar to cedar and pine. Easy to work, yew is among the hardest of the softwoods; yet it possesses a remarkable elasticity, making it ideal for products that require springiness, such as bows.[37]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxus_baccata
There was no similarly elastic tree in the Americas that I'm aware of. Regardless, I have an inkling the composite, cable-backed bow is something the natives probably brought with them when they first came to the Americas. The one-piece wood bow, in the absence of yew wood, is just not a very strong bow. All ancient cultures the world over seem to have improved on it with composite bow construction.