Civil War Bow and Arrows?

[Zbone]

Recently recorded PBS special on Abraham Lincoln and Mary and in the final 3 part series, and they showed a photograph of two Civil War solders holding rifles and at the same time what looked like to me, to be longbows. The photo was a little blurred and cropped for TV, but if they were bows, they looked about head high length and of a semi-curve design. Their uniforms looked dark from the Union side.


I knew the Thompson brothers came out of the Civil War and shot bows out of necessity because of the availability of firearm ammunition, but I didn't not realize bow and arrows were used during the Civil War. I found this interesting and was wondering if anyone could confirm.

[Jake Diebolt]

I'm not sure about the civil war, but read the wikipedia article on Jack Churchill, who fought in WWII with a longbow and a sword...

[buckeye_hunter]

It would make some sense since they wore little if any armor. There would definitely have been a few situations where it would have created a possible advantage.

However....

The guns simply had better range and were easier for training purposes. While training with a pistol or rifle does take some time, I believe it is likely easier to learn with a rifle.

It takes more time to get decent, especially at long range, with a bow. Also, if the bow is going to shoot a long distance, it would take some time for the archers to build up to shooting the required weight.

I think they used guns for the same reason the indians switched to them. Quicker and better range. Possibly not in the beginning, but certainly in the end....

[joekeith]

Yeah guns are good. But for takin' out sentries at night without makin' noise to alert others a bow would be hard to beat.  I'm sure there were guys that already knew how to shoot bows too.  

[buckeye_hunter]

Like I said....certain situations the bow is better!      

[Doc Nock]

Just talked to a Civil War re-enactor I work with.

Interesting points:
* He knows of no record of bows being used

* However, he quickly adds that in the early war, most units were Militia volunteers, so they brought what they had, so highly possible

* Uniforms varied for same reason above, one central pa Militia had all "GREY" uniforms fighting on the Union side (that had to get complicated)   :eek:  And a few Rebel units wore dark coats!

* Outfit from the Philadelphia area wore musket ball proof chest armour...weighed 70# or so... was left road-side in short order on long marches.

Amazing piece of history and perhaps there is much we don't know or lost?

[Rusty in Fla.]

Southerners were known to take captured Union if needed, sometimes trying to change the color sometimes not.

  When I was in grade school I remember checking a book out of the school library that showed an American solider shooting a bow around a pile of rubble. The caption said he was shooting into windows while another solider backed him up with a rifle. The picture would have been from the late 50's to early 60's. The idea was for the archer to flush out snipers.

[Cromm]

The thing is with a gun a kid or a very weak old person can still shoot it. But a bow takes a bit of work to pull back and shoot.

[Yeoman Bowman]

Tough to find information about this online, but I stumbled across this page which talks about the history of the longbow:

"...the Longbow was not quite obsolete: during the American Civil War efforts were made to use archers on the battle field."

It gives no details, just this one sentence.

It also mentions Jack Churchill, a WWII British captain, not only carried his longbow, but used it to kill a German soldier during the British retreat at Dunkirk.

 http://www.ketteringarchers.co.uk/History%20of%20the%20Longbow.html

[ethan]

I read in an old issue of TBM that Benjamin Franlin purposed equipping the continental (sp?) army with longbows due to supply issues but it never really took off.  Imaging that!!

[jrbows]

Not civil war or ww2 but even more recently,there is a picture in a time life Viet-Nam book of a sailor shooting a flaming arrow out of a Bear bow off of a boat ,as I remember the caption read that he was trying to set the grass roofed huts on fire,I have a copy of the picture only some one on here I'm sure has this series of books,as we are blessed with quite a few veteran members.

[fireman_3311]

I would sure imagine the use of archery was quite rare during the CW.  Guns were like shoes, if they had them, they used them!!  Like said above though, early war, muskets were scarce, so those early volunteers carried what they had.... From dads shotgun to moms pitchfork!!!

Muskets could sure be picked up quite easily though, long as ya didnt mind a little blood!!!

[Jake Diebolt]

In the napoleonic wars the Brits considered fielding regiments of longbowmen against French legions...because no one wore any armour, the main reason for the longbow being obsolete was gone. The longbows rate of fire was still faster than most muskets, and you could arc it over hills or walls if need be (in theory, anyway)

In any event the plan never went ahead, as there were not enough men who remembered how to shoot the war bows, and almost no bows to be used.

[Yeoman Bowman]

On the French side, Napoleon also wanted to use archers. Their rate of fire, accuracy and killing power was still better than the firearms of the day. Though I don't know that anything came of this idea. I suppose the French had not practiced with the enthusiasm of the British, so they didn't have the reserve of archers.

[Liquid Amber]

"Silent, Flashless Weapons" is the title of an article on the bow in modern warfare published in the Dec/Jan TBM.  When all is considered, the bow's value in modern warfare is mostly nuisance.  A secret project commissioned with Northwestern University during WWII produced two crossbow weapons that never were put into service.  It was de-classified in 1958.

Churchill's killing of a German in WWII was a stunt, as the bow wasn't needed for the operation and he was in no danger with two armed troops by his side to clean up the situation after he shot.

Its an interesting subject that still shows possibility for more discovery.