ADVANTAGES OF DRAWING BEYOND EAR, OVER DRAWING TO MOUTH.

ravenbows · Post by **ravenbows** » Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:02 am

I am just getting started in the use of the thumb ring and have been instructed, and have gotten proficient in a certain style which has it origins I do not know.

But, what is the advantage of drawing the bow to or beyond the ear like the chinese tradition, or drawing the bow to the mouth as in the Turkish Traditions?

Initially I guessed that the power stroke of the bow would be the reasoning, but 50lbs of force is 50lbs of force. (force acting on the arrow after release)

Does anybody did any research or may have a better understanding?

Thank you

Joseph

Stephen Selby · Post by **Stephen Selby** » Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:29 pm

Drawing to the ear, the eye or the mouth all work fine once you get used to them.

The advantage of the long Chinese draw, with the draw-arm elbow, shoulder, bow-arm shoulder, elbow and wrist all in a straight line, ("five points level") is that the bone structure takes the strain of holding the draw with a heavy bow instead of the muscles. But that method is only suitable for ground, target archery and no use on horseback.

S

daryush · Post by **daryush** » Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:41 pm

Stephen: How come it's not useful when mounted?
(assuming it's possible to use heavy bows in the saddle, which I'm sure it is given enough training...)

jbl · Post by **jbl** » Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:50 pm

Joe-the longer the draw the more the weight of the draw increases i.e. a bow 50lb@28" will be let's say 56lb@30". I talked to a friend who shoots English War Bows (100lb+ draw weight) he says that drawing past the ear as it seems most Ancient cultures did allows him to get MUCH more caste. That would be the advantage to any bow whether it is an Asian bow, English longbow or a modern glass recurve.

mongolianarcher · Post by **mongolianarcher** » Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:03 pm

Crab bows are drawn to the ear, manchu and korean and japanese are beyond the ear. Scythian, and standard turkish bows are drawn to the lip.

ravenbows · Post by **ravenbows** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:13 am

Stephen, that is actually the reasoning that I am looking for. Not that Im looking for an answer, just that for practical killing reasons.....be it human in war or for the harvesting of food............I had a hard time determining why one would extend so far back at moving game or during war.

It seems to me that a shorter draw would facilitate a quicker release of the arrow thus requiring less time to get the arrow to its mark. Which in a hunting situation often times is mere seconds........and I would imagine that would also be the case during war time.

JBL........you make a good point.......but would a 56lb bow perform as well drawn to 28 inches as a bow that was 56lb drawn to 32 inches?

Im just wondering if the extended time the arrow is on the string, given that both bows have the same brace height, would be an advantage?

mongolianarcher · Post by **mongolianarcher** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:22 am

Usually the bows with the longest draw are the higher energy transferrers, if that makes any sense, like the manchurian, and thus they have more energy to penetrate.

Boghadair · Post by **Boghadair** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:02 am

Lucas,
they may have more energy for penetration but the downside is the heavy siyhas have more mass,move slower, cause more handshock and the heavier arrows won't go as far. But one wants to get as close to the game as is practical.At point blank range, yes the heavier arrows should do better.Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:05 am

The Manchus, Crimean Tatars, and Japanese all used heavy arrows and maximised the energy in them with a long draw.

The Turks according to Kani did draw to the ear normally, but there were several reasons in warfare to draw shorter.

The most obvious one is the cheek pieces of the helmet. An archer needed to have consistent arrow placement: drawlength and height. While wearing a helmet, you either draw to the length of the arrow and hold the drawing hand away from the face or draw to the edge of the cheek piece.

The standard arrow lengths specified in Saracen Archery have the war arrow shorter than the target arrow. Another issue is the arrows issued to the army. There is no practical way of delivering new arrows by individual length to soldiers during a battle. They were probably standardised. Tall men would be forced to use arrows that compelled them to draw short. Short men would either have to draw past their comfort zone or draw the arrow short.

A modern example that might refer to the latter problem is the current practice among the Mongols of using arrows of Manchu military length and putting marks or tape on them so that they can only draw to the ear.

Ingo Simon wrote in a letter that using a Manchu bow and long arrows gave him greater accuracy. He was regularly hitting a match box on a string at 25 yards. He also commented that it was much easier to find the large arrows.

What Stephen and the longbow shooter said agrees with my experience. With a bow designed for the draw, you are able to line up your joints and get a strong and efficient draw and deliver a hard hitting arrow. The shorter draw is useful for many shots and can be made efficient by good bow and arrow design. The long draw is useful when shooting fewer, more powerful arrows.

mongolianarcher · Post by **mongolianarcher** » Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:23 pm

Exactly, I cant believe I forgot about the Krimeans set up as well, I am glad you explained it completely Bede. Boghadair, this is true, the Manchus did have to ride closer to their targets.
Lets say the Koreans and Manchus went to battle.
The koreans would be well protected with strong small bows that go up to 500m, but have small penetration because of the distance, and arrow's small penetration energy. Also you can imagine how much wind can change the course of these arrows.
So it could be led to believe it takes more than one arrow to kill a manchurian.
The manchu with their big robust bows would be headed down to the middle of the battle field getting within 180 yards, shoot their arrows accurately, and each arrow that hits, kills.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:37 am

Judging by a lecture I heard by Colonel Kim Ki-Hoon, the Koreans recognised the problem and I have seen war bows that were built bigger and heavier to achieve a similar effect to the Manchu bows. Later in their history, they tended to get closer to their enemies before shooting.

It is interesting to speculate why of the great Eurasian civilisations, only the Turks and the peoples of the Indian sub-continent kept using medium draw length bows with light weight arrows. The Qajar Persian bows had also gone towards the longer draw length. The Turks used Crimean Tatar cavalry in the final Vienna campaign at the same time as using their own shorter bows as shown by the captured weapons in Karlsruhe.

ravenbows · Post by **ravenbows** » Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:10 am

I wonder though, regardless if you are shooting a big heavy arrow or not, is it not necessary to get the arrow off in an expedient a fashion as possible?

And would not this shorter draw provide that extra time?

Bede,
I see in your picture that you are drawing a shorter draw, are you consciously anchoring in one place?

Thanks

Joseph

mongolianarcher · Post by **mongolianarcher** » Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:55 am

Yes Bede, I have also noticed the small amounts of short draw users. I guess because the Persians and Turks were known for their quick shooting, they kept the draws and bows, short. That is all I can come up with.

jbl · Post by **jbl** » Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:16 pm

Even in modern archery a longer arrow is considered more "stable" and "accurate".

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:25 am

IF you are talking about the picture used with my name, I am not at full draw there. I was using a snatched release where I drew until the point of the arrow entered the siper and then snatched back the drawing hand and released when my thumb touched the lobe of my ear. I had previously worked out that this brought the point of the arrow to the centre of the siper's groove.

It is certainly true that you can shoot faster with a shorter draw. I think that most of the users of the longer draw were more deliberate in their shooting. However, speed of shooting was used to test you proficiency in nocking and drawing. In battle, it would probably have limited uses though it was still being used by the Mongols. Shooting rapidly in battle requires a rapid turnaround of archers so that they could replenish their quivers. This disrupted the battle line if it was moving, but was successful if it was static. Even at twelve arrows a minute, you shoot 24 arrows in two minutes.

The increase of the use of long heavy arrows increased with the development of firearms. The Manchu cavalry in the eighteenth century had muskets for long range fighting, bows for medium range and swords and lances for close range fighting. Until the invention of repeating firearms, bows could still compete on horseback in cavalry to cavalry encounters.