Native american bow poundage?

[DngrsDan]

Have always wondered what type of poundage the early American indian's bow were. What types of wood did they use? Has there ever been any documentation of that?

[DBerrard]

3Rivers has three books all about Native bows and arrows.

The Sioux used a cute lil bow...bout 32" long and around 30# draw weight. With enough arrows it did the job though  

Comanche horse bows only drew maybe 20" but with a draw weight around 40# at that DL..

Average Ojibwe bow was around 48", not sure of draw eights, but sometimes they used the neck of a snapping turtle as a string.. cut its head off and skinned it in a coil..twist it up into a cord. Most of their bows were throwaways from any ole tree...but if needed for big game or war ash or hickory was preferred.

[Swamp Pygmy]

There are lots of different types and styles based on the region you are from. shorter bows were typical of brushy areas or horse back hunters. Longer bows work better in humid conditions. Generally made of white woods and between 40-50lbs. Most were simple D bend through the handle flat bows. They used whatever woods they had locally that worked. They used as quality woods as osage to low quality such as willow. But despite all the talk of osage and yew most bows were simply a white wood, hickory being VERY common all over the country.

I have other info available if you want. Just PM me I wouldn't want to break TOU. This may already but I don't think.

About Indian archery, "the simple D bow" by Micky Lotz. I'm pretty sure he's a member here. It was a good article and covered the bases. About as comprehensive as a magazine article can be.
     http://www.primitivearcher.com/articles/simpledbow.html

[DngrsDan]

Thanks Dave. I always thought that their bows were probably low poundage. Goes to show you don't need 100# bows to bring in the goods. I have a friend who has shoulder problems who has had to give up archery with his 55# recurve. Maybe I can get him to go for a 40#.

[DngrsDan]

Thanks to you also Swamp. You musta posted as I was writing up my response to Dave.

Thanks for the info.

[DBerrard]

40# will definately get it done.
I'd recommend taking a look at RER.
I only say this because I had a guy shooting a 40#@29" RER Recurve next to me last summer...
I was shooting a 45@25 with my 26" DL and his arrows smacked the target with more authority than mine. Mustve left an impression I guess  :D

Regards,
  Dave

[DngrsDan]

Dave
I'm bow-less at the moment *sob!* and I'm not sure yet what # I'm going to be getting. Used to shoot a 65# compound long long ago, but I know I don't want to be trying to hold that much with a longbow. Will have a chance this weekend to shoot a few different bows thanks to some fine folks in here so I will have a better idea of what I want. The two archery shops I've found in my area only carry compounds! I'm thinking maybe a 50# would be comfortable for me.
Now that I've got the archery itch again it's agony not having a means of scratching it!

Dan

[Arwin]

From what I have heard most of their bows were in the 30'3 and 40's. I'm going to do some digging and find out what kind of bows they used around me. I know the Yankee Springs area was a main hunting ground for most of the natives around here. Curious to see what woods were prefered.

[Pat B]

The Cherokee, and probably other Natives, made war bows that were close to 100# and over 6' long.
   There were as many different bow designs, bow weights and wood and tools used as there were different people. A Native American bow isn't just one style.
   Jim Hamm and Steve Alaley(sp) put out 2 encyclopedias(Vols I II) about Native American bows and arrows.
   The Smithsonian's Museum of American Indians, in Washington DC, has a few varieties on exhibit. Check out their website.    Pat

[agd68]

The woodland tribes used longer bows than the horse tribes; bows around the 60"-62" mark . According to one book I read on Native bows they tended to preferr the lower poudeges for hunting. Pass throughs were not desireable. The arrow head would continue to cut things up when the animal ran.Of course they were probably much better trackers than most of use and did'nt need a blood trail like a neon sign.

[Steertalker]

DngrsDan,

Don't want to hijack your original question but in addition it would be nice to know if there has been in research done or if there is any historical data that would shed light on the effectiveness of their bows.  Of course the Native American indians thrived but I would be curious about whether they had to use multiple arrows to kill, did they get one shot kills, what kind of penetration did they get on deer and elk sized game, etc etc.

Brett

[Pat B]

From Al Herrin, "Eastern Woodland Bows", TBBII, pg.75...("Today, the longer bow is preferred for long range sport of cornstalk shooting, and the shorter bow is preferred for hunting since it is easier to use in brush. The longer bows are often heavier draw weight, 60 to 80 pounds or even more, while the shorter bows usually draw about 45 to 50 pounds.
   I believe these two types of bows reflect aboriginal types which have been handed down from the pre-Columbians to present day.")
  We know very little about the Eastern style bows because very few have survived over the years.  The Sudbury bow(now housed at the Peabody Museum at Harvard), is one of the few remaining Easter Woodland bows and is 66" long.  Pat

[Swamp Pygmy]

@ steer stalker.

Well we have folks right on the board here that that use wooden selfbows in that range and stone points right here on TG. Not much different than what the indians used except for the string.  They work pretty well I assure you.

But along those lines you might be interested in this: "Yahi Archery" saxton pope. In the section entitled "hunting methods" Pope elaborates a little about a penetration test. Apparently at 30 yds his 40 some odd D bow could crack the spine but not pass through.

   http://www.archerylibrary.com/articles/pope/yahi-archery/  

@Bradd. Hey I'd take it easy with the attitude. I wouldn't speak with such certainty about a topic as vague as native american archery. We know much less on the subject due to the perishable nature than we do many other things.

Pat is right, I've heard about the cornstalk shooting sport. They judge not only be accuracy but by the amount of penetration you get. They use long crazy tapered points for it too. With bows of higher weights. It's been speculated that the holdover as a sport helped preserve native archery much better than most tribes.

PS- the forests were not as dense across the whole country that is a very blanket statement. So is that the natives had no use long range weapons. What do you think they were growing corn in the forests? They had farm land and meadows then as now. With the dawn of agriculture comes the need to defend the sedentary lifestyle. A weapon that can extend your range and keep your attackers further away is a great advantage and is probably what the famous Cherokee warriors practiced cornstalk shooting for. Also in the high humidity south long bows keep string follow to a minimum. Most of the pictures from artists of the time show bows at least as tall as the archers themselves in my area. The whole subject is far too obscure and lost to history to speak with the certainty you do.

[Lucas K]

During the De Soto expedition there are reports of horses being shot through Both shoulders, no possible way a 40 or 50 pound bow or will do that. While I agree that their hunting bows may have been lighter, their bows for warfare were fairly heavy

Lucas

[Swamp Pygmy]

I'll just stay out of this one.

[SCATTERSHOT]

Great book by Reginald and Gladys Laubin touches on this subject. I think it's called American Indian Archery or something pretty close.

I'll see if I can locate my copy and see what they have to say.

[DBerrard]

This is about all tribes I believe. Dan is a nice fella so let's not make this political (if that's where his is headed) and take over his thread. Back to poundage..  

[ishiwannabe]

Bradd, with all due respect, you are only referring to the Iroquois, and there were many, many more societies than that in the times of the Native Americans. What you know as fact for them, may not be the same for others.
Again, no disrespect intended.

[ishiwannabe]

No harm no foul Bradd...
I have studied the native people with great respect and interest.
I wasnt intending to instigate either, just opening the topic a bit more.

[Pat B]

Bradd, Al Herrin is a member of the Cherokee Nation and grew up in OK with the Cherokee there.
   I'm not looking for an argument either but all I can go by is what I have read. Every time I am near a museum that has Native American artifacts I look at and study each bow they exhibit. Unfortunately, very few bows have been exhibited to the public in the museums I have visited.
   I build wood bows. I'm not a true primitive bowyer or am I Native American. I appreciate the Native American cultures and try to accomplish some of what they and other indigenous people had, to the best of my ability.
   Today, we have to worry about being PC and especially in a sport that is misunderstood by the majority of the folks out there. I sure that native people were in tuned with nature enough to be able to survive with whatever method, tool, weapon or food source they had available at the time. After all, they were in survival mode most of the time if not always.
   I'm interested in facts about primitive archery; whether modern or ancient. And I appreciate any info you have and are willing to share. I specifically appreciate the Eastern Woodland styles of bows or what the Non-Natives call Eastern Woodland styles.     Pat