How to hold arows in bow hand?
-
Lord Ruthven
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:09 pm
- Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
- Contact:
-
Stephen Selby
- Posts: 1452
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 1:10 pm
- Location: Hong Kong
- Contact:
Some people - whether Byzantines or others - have four fletches. I can't see how that would affect the consistency or accuracy of their shooting. Also I can't see what benefit in loading speed would be gained from having the points upward (I agree that they are shown that way in some paintings.)jbl wrote:I believe that is why the Byzantines had four fletch and the feathers were cut to 1/4". They also carried their arrows bodkin up in their quivers for "speed loading".
Bodkins are sharp. They were also covered in shit or poison to give them added toxicity if they created a wound. On the whole, they would be better pointing away from the hand of a speed shooter.
-
jbl
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 6:05 pm
- Location: Indiana
This information is from "Byzantine Cavalryman C.900-1204" by Timothy Dawson published by Osprey. I have also read the same information in others sources about the Byzantines. Emperor Ioannes (II) Kommenos died from septicaemia as a result of piercing his own hand. Again when we think of ancient archery we have to think these warriors trained with these weapons since early childhood and accidents like this were probably few and far between.
As far as four low profile fletching I think this was used because you never had to worry about how you knocked the arrow. The Byzantines also were known to use a thumb draw.
As far as four low profile fletching I think this was used because you never had to worry about how you knocked the arrow. The Byzantines also were known to use a thumb draw.
-
Bede
- Posts: 2360
- Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:57 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
The Byzantines did use the closed quiver some of the time and this did have the points upward. However, these quivers were built in such a way to prevent the hand from coming directly down on the points. The foot of the arrow was grasped from the side. This is not apparent in many modern illustrations, including some in Osprey publications , which have misinterpreted quiver size orientation and use. Tim's book, as I remember it, did not make this mistake.
Closed quivers are not designed for fast shooting. Instead they are designed to protect the arrows from the elements. Arrows used in the closed quiver did not have barbs (from archaeological sources and paintings) nor do I think they were poisoned or contaminated. Rust would have been the result and sharpening arrowheads would have been risky. This does not mean all arrowheads were at the same level of cleanliness and it was not intentional.
The accidental death of a soldier from an arrow wound is neither unlikely nor surprising. An arrow shot into the ground and retrieved would potentially be contaminated by tetanus (horses were a source) and other dangerous bacteria. The fact that the soldier could be the emperor shows that hygiene was not what we would like to see. Others like Henry V of England survived serious arrow wounds.
Closed quivers are not designed for fast shooting. Instead they are designed to protect the arrows from the elements. Arrows used in the closed quiver did not have barbs (from archaeological sources and paintings) nor do I think they were poisoned or contaminated. Rust would have been the result and sharpening arrowheads would have been risky. This does not mean all arrowheads were at the same level of cleanliness and it was not intentional.
The accidental death of a soldier from an arrow wound is neither unlikely nor surprising. An arrow shot into the ground and retrieved would potentially be contaminated by tetanus (horses were a source) and other dangerous bacteria. The fact that the soldier could be the emperor shows that hygiene was not what we would like to see. Others like Henry V of England survived serious arrow wounds.
Bede