Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thinreadline
Precisely so , whilst the argument for smaller weaker bows in a forests is sound , the evolution of longer more powerful bows for game hunting in grassland savannah was essential in an environment where cover is scarce and a greater killing range was needed . This is seen the world over , except perhaps in nomadic horsemen who with the advantage of speed could get so much closer to game without the same need for stealth ... the smaller bow being more convenient when on horseback.
|
Again, not quite. All things considered a bigger bow is desirable, because they tend to be more accurate and to throw bigger arrows. The English longbow and the older woodbows exemplified by the Eastern North American Indian bows are all examples of this, as are some African bows. If you live in the eastern US, which has a plethora of good bow wood (oak, hickory, ash, etc.), this is a really good solution.
There are two other big factors: weather and the availability of poisons. In a rain forest (or on the water) bows tend to either rot or warp (think about wet wood), so in such an environment, you're stuck with some version of a big wood bow, ideally with no knots. Those palm-wood Papuan bows are a good example. In somewhat drier environments, you can start adding backings (sinew, horn, bamboo, etc) to improve the spring, creating many variations on the compound bow. This was done all over the northern hemisphere, from the Arctic (cable backed bows) to Turkey, Korea, China, California, etc. This is an ideal solution if you're living in an area where good bow-woods are scarce but there are big ungulates to provide the other material. It's also not a bad solution if you want to beef up a big wood bow. Backings tend to be glued on, and glues can go bad in wet weather, so there's a trade-off between power and versatility/durability.
Small compound bows are useful for horseback, and are the classic solution adopted by the steppes nomads, all the cultures they contacted, and the Plains Indians. Small and powerful, they are also fussy, need a fair amount of care, and can be inaccurate (due to the small arm length).
As for poisons, they seem to be used where available. For example, some northern California tribes used small sinew-backed bows capable of taking a deer on power alone. They also poisoned their tips with rattlesnake venom. The ancient Greeks reputedly poisoned their arrows, as did the Ainu when they were hunting bears with them. The Kalahari bushmen have a crappy environment for bow woods and few tools to work them, but they have some excellent toxins, so they use light bows with tiny needle-like poisoned arrows, and kill with those. The west African tribes such as the Tiv reportedly use a mix of Calabar bean and whatever snake venom they can get their hands on, and build normal wood bows but use prickly arrowheads to get the poison in. And so forth.
Thing is, bows and arrows aren't simple. Their design takes into account the local environment, materials available, and intended use, and a lot of clever bowyers have independently come up with similar solutions for thousands of years.
Best,
F