Main Discussion Area > Flintknapping

horse culture native bows

(1/3) > >>

Papa Matt:
OK, brothers. I appreciate everybody weighing in on the "superior weapon D bow vs. Recurve" thread. Now I have two new questions. Any native brothers who know or have heard the stories please comment  :)

The buffalo hunters of the plains who were often on horseback, used generally short and powerful bows.

Question #1:  Were these same shortbows effective in the long range or would these brothers have carried a different, longer weapon for shooting an elk or white man at 50 yards?

Question #2:  Shorter the bow length NTN, the lower the brace height, correct? But did not the plains indians shoot short arrows with exceptionally long fletching? So, with a low brace height, and long fletch, were they dragging the feathers backwards against the naturally lay of the blades of the feather, across their hand/arrow shelf each time in order to shoot?

Fire away!

thanks,

~~Papa Matt

JackCrafty:
Good questions...I'm very interested in the answers you'll get for this one. ;D

As far as I know, Plains Indians used their "horse" bows for hunting and warfare.  From the few accounts I've read about Indians fighting Europeans, the arrows were shot at close range.  However, some plains tribes, like the Comanche, used bows that were in the 50"-56" length range.....which means that they might have been capable of long-range shooting.

The long feather issue is interesting.  IMO, yes, the feathers dragged against the hand and bow....but the noise didn't matter when hunting buffalo from horseback (or during combat).  Also, I think that the arrows were made to be expendable and were probably lost easily or damaged during the hunt....so messed up fletchings weren't a concern.

Papa Matt:
Yeah, I've thought the same things. Just want to see if anyone has read or been told anything different.

Pat B:
I've seen pics of NA fletching with a slot cut out of one feather to accommodate the side of the bow.
   Not until the Spaniards came to the new world did the NA have horses. Before that the dog was their beast of burden. I imagine they carried longer bows during pre-Columbian times and they may have carried over to the horse times also.
 In warfare, many warriors counted coup instead of actually killing and that was extremely close range. ;D    Pat

hawkbow:
I wonder if the longer feathers were simply a practical solution to shooting such short arrows from short powerful bows.The longer feathers would stabilize the shorter shafts allowing for greater accuracy and better penetration on buffalo and elk as well as on human enemys. Hawk a/ho

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page