[rickystl]

Originally Posted by Philip

So true. Consider the use of the Indo-Portuguese snap matchlock in China and Japan as one example. Introduced in the first half of the 16th cent, still being made as late as the 1870s. A colleague who is an expert on historical archery (both research and shooting) pointed out that those Oriental cultures with highly developed composite-recurved bows in their shooting culture were understandably slow in making a total commitment to firearms because their bows could outshoot just about any smoothbore musket in terms of:
1. rate of fire
2. effective range (a strong Turkish bow can cast an arrow in excess of 800 yd)
3. projectile speed (arrows shot from Korean flight bows have been clocked at around 1000 fps)
4. projectile energy (an arrow weighing about 800 g shot from a Manchu bow of about 100# pull weight (medium for one of these) or more could penetrate most chain mail.
5. field accuracy -- LtGen Wm Warre, observing Portuguese and French cavalry skirmishing during the Peninsular War, wrote: "...Our people and theirs were constantly within 30 yd of one another firing with no effect, ...neither party had any idea of fear." The weapons of course were flintlock carbines and pistols. Officer candidates in the Chinese military exams were expected to hit targets at a gallop within that range with their bows. Up to 20-25 yards, it apparently made little difference in accuracy if you were using a smoothbore, or a strong bow if you're shooting from a moving horse.

The big strikes against archery were
1. Bows of this performance level, and arrows of sufficient quality, were expensive to produce and not amenable to mechanized production.
2. An inordinate amount of training was needed for proficiency -- in these cultures, archers learned in childhood and practiced through their teens in order to be ready for military service in the mounted units. Recruits in basic training can be taught to use a smoothbore flintlock to the limits of its performance capability in a week or so.

As breechloading rifles and revolvers spread via trade and colonization in the 19th cent., and new national armies built of conscription became more important than a hereditary military caste (or slave-soldiers as in the case of the Mamluks and Janissaries), only then did the armies of the East fall into line with Western equipment and training standards.

Hi Philip.

Now that's an interesting bit of history. Thanks for posting. I'll save that.

Rick