beats me..

but yeah, during the sengouku jidai period, the muskets proved superior over bows..and I do agree

It took years to train to a good bowman, but some one can be taught to shoot and handle a weapon in a day. this is the difference and this was the demise of the bow.

Originally Posted by LeEnfield 2

It took years to train to a good bowman, but some one can be taught to shoot and handle a weapon in a day. this is the difference and this was the demise of the bow.

Exactly!! and thats why the japanese then prefered the musket..

Some bows that used to be in use like the Turkish bows actually outperformed muskets. The major reason the bow decline was the rate of fire is low and it is easier and less expensive to train gun weilders. Also ammuniton for guns can be massed produced quickly and efficiantly unlike wooden arrows.

Still guns are more practical on the field than bows and arrows.

Originally Posted by LeEnfield 2

Of course when you go to make your arrows you will have a vast amount of trees around were you are to make the arrows, then you have to catch the birds to pull their feathers out to make the flights, then all you need is is the steel for the arrow tips, then you will need to melt and cast the arrow heads while your enemy sits quietly by why you do all this work.

you dont actually have to flioght or tip arrows, and i have found that with a simple square piece of wood and a staple, if you cut the staple off to make a nail-like pice of metal then you have a very effective tip. i have seen it go through 400mm polycarbonate.


sorry, i forgot to add that you can easily buy dowelling for your arrows previous to the beggining of the siege

Here is the most interesting article on how bows and arrows, and many other things, were made in early America. It is about Ishi, the last person of the Yahi tribe in California. It is a fascinating read.

http://www.mohicanpress.com/mo08019.html

http://www.gilanet.com/amerabo/ishipage.htm

I think you might need to ask the native indian tribes of the USA that question.

I watched a program on the History Channel where one man was using a flintlock and the other was using a bow. The number of arrows fired accurately was around 10, I don't remember the exact number, to one shot with the musket. They also demonstrated the effect if firing arrows in dense forest which muffled the bow string snap. I think the bow was probably the first "stealth" weapon. So, more powerful didnt matter as much as the circumstances of the conflict.

While some ancient bows were very impressive, they are most certainly not capable of doing what guns can do. The English Longbow and the Mongolian Recurve Bow and many others were terrifyingly deadly, but nothing to compare to a high powered rifle or a fully automatic weapon.