Latest Lars Andersen Video

fusizoli · Post by **fusizoli** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 8:14 am

Just for fun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcPEfR9jUBo

:D

geoarcher · Post by **geoarcher** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 3:15 pm

Bede wrote:Regarding the narrow Turkish nocks, the Ottomans were not as famous for rapid shooting as the Seljuks and others like the early Mamluks. The slight chamfer on the lips of the nock and the feathers being right down to the notch make it easy to accurately nock the arrow without looking. They would have been able to shoot fast, but the demonstrations of extremely rapid shooting may have gone out of fashion by their time.

Do you have a good example of this arrow picture wise?

This also makes me wonder in relation to speed/shower shooting the length of the arrows. It seems a shorter length would be preferred for this say 28 inches. Easier to manage essentially I'd wager to say.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Mon Mar 09, 2015 2:27 am

I have some pictures or can take some new ones.

As to the question of using a short draw, I have mixed feelings. In trick shooting where you are trying to put on a good show, short drawing is a possibility. However, in warfare the chances of an overdrawing accident are greater because of the situation and the consequences could be fatal. Saracen Archery mentions that the war arrow was 1 qirat shorter than the target arrow. The logical reason is that a soldier wearing a helmet is restricted in how far he can draw an arrow in the standard manner. It might also be a scribal error replaced shorter with longer. After all, Manchu soldiers wearing helmets could draw very long arrows. With a slightly longer arrows, the chances of an accident would be reduced.

But taking the description as it has come down to us, would you spend your time practising with a full draw and then go into battle using a short draw that destroyed your aiming and reduced the effect of the arrow? My feeling is that the slightly shorter draw in SA could be managed with a helmet with metal ear-flaps while still aiming and also extending the shoulders for a strong draw.

There are short war arrows (about 66 cm) in various collections and while they could have been for short archers, I feel there is another explanation. In 1500 a device called a navak-e qabza was described. It was a siper with a metal trough that was tied to the bow grip. It could even be safely used to draw small width broad heads. I made one several years ago. The book it was mentioned in was in Persian and probably represented a widespread technology.

geoarcher · Post by **geoarcher** » Mon Mar 09, 2015 12:42 pm

Bede wrote:I have some pictures or can take some new ones.

Whatever you have. Definitely still interested.

Bede wrote: There are short war arrows (about 66 cm) in various collections and while they could have been for short archers, I feel there is another explanation. In 1500 a device called a navak-e qabza was described. It was a siper with a metal trough that was tied to the bow grip. It could even be safely used to draw small width broad heads. I made one several years ago. The book it was mentioned in was in Persian and probably represented a widespread technology.

I made one of the arrow guides recently out of bamboo. Its more like what you see the Koreans use but this one sounds different. Got a picture of it?

Mule · Post by **Mule** » Mon Mar 09, 2015 2:18 pm

A siper is different from a tong-ah/majra

The one Bede is talking about is different in that it's attached to the bow, not the hand

geoarcher · Post by **geoarcher** » Mon Mar 09, 2015 2:32 pm

I know that. That's why I'm asking him for a picture of what he made.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Tue Mar 10, 2015 2:37 am

This is a picture of the nock and fletching of a pishrev arrow in the Grayson Collection. You can clearly see how the sides of the nock have been chamfered to capture the string easily. This is s a flight arrow so it was not meant to be nocked rapidly, but most Turkish nocks follow this pattern with some variation in the degree of filing the nock opening. You can see by the different colours of the nock lips where they poke out beyond the sinew wrapping that they are bakam (i.e. brazil wood pieces glued on).

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:13 am

I have some pictures of the navak-e qabze somewhere. I will look for them. If I can find them, I still have the device and with put it on a bow and photograph it.

geoarcher · Post by **geoarcher** » Wed Mar 11, 2015 12:49 pm

Thanks Bede that's a really good picture for reference of the arrow. If you still have your siper I'd be curious to see.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:54 am

I did post it on the forum many years ago, but I can't find it there so I will have to make new pictures.

jchocz · Post by **jchocz** » Sun Mar 15, 2015 6:30 pm

Draw weights bow (100 and more pounds) is not suitable for fast archery. Lars Andersen and fast archery - an interesting topic. My humble opinion - it was not just the ability to pierce the armor of a soldier. Sometimes it is more psychological effect - soldiers on fast horses, fast rain of arrows shot ...

geoarcher · Post by **geoarcher** » Mon Mar 16, 2015 5:30 pm

It doesn't seem though as we analyze things more deeply, per this discussion, that what Lars shows was really all that applicable to warfare. Matter of fact it seems more applicable to exhibition shooting as Bede discusses here in the second to last post:

http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t ... light=lars

Heavier bows would have been pretty much essential to warfare. Ergo this fast with light bow firing techniques demonstrated in these videos is not really the way warfare was conducted using a bow as the video narrator proclaims.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Wed Mar 18, 2015 4:19 am

It is my opinion that what Lars demonstrates is essentially the kind of demonstration put on before rulers and army chiefs to show your skill. Could these skills been useful for training for warfare? Whereas I think it unlikely that in a battle with thousands of arrows flying through the air at once that it would be possible or practical to catch one and shoot it back, on the other hand the coordination developed in the practice might be useful.

While I do not think it likely that shooting at the rate that Lars has achieved could be done with a 90 lb + bow (except by exceptionally strong individuals), the dexterity would have permitted shooting war bows at a higher rate than the average strong archer.

The choice of a light and supple bow for some of the shots is probably not only for the comfort of the archer, but also to contain the arrows within a reasonable area so that random arrows do not fall on the spectators. I am also guessing that you did not shoot your best arrow shafts at a blade to be split down the middle.

Reading the old manuals and historical accounts of archers, it is clear that there always were some exceptional ones who were often chosen to make difficult shots. In one Persian manuscript written in India there are accounts of members of the leader's bodyguard being called out to shoot particular enemies such as the opposing general. If it worked, it could change the course of a battle. If it failed it was only a wasted arrow.