Same with sword fighting. I cannot even BEGIN to imagine what the top 1 in a million swordsman in medieval times could do with a single sword. Please keep this up.
dudeinthesea I imagine they can deflect an arrow with a sword maybe, given its a lighter sword like katana. Heavier swords might be able to break other swords.
+Azure sais are dagger ment to catch and break katana. lmao. katana have a soft back core that can be chopped up and if so will effectively ruin the sword. european swords are not necessarily better but are better only if they arent equal. katana at its purest a curcible "damascus" blade. while in actuality its not damascus it hold many similar properties. even the most honed purest more professional katana will not stand up to its foreign counter part. they simply are not designed to they never fought a celtic short sword or a gladius. a katana ultimately has 2 useful faces as a euro has 4 or more. plus the steel is of better quality. (this is beinging the periods of the 1400s together with the most ultimate form of each. for the sake of comparisons)
***** I didn't realize you replied but since Keith revived this thread, might as well I reply. I based my assumption katana could be used to deflect arrow based on video a katana swordsman hitting bb pelet with his sword. What do you have to support your words that the same can be done with a spoon? If you don't have any, I take it was based on your fanboyism. Weeaboo is the word for it right? Plus I proved sword can be broken. You admit it.
I don't like that people are trying to make Anderson a fraud by claiming his techniques are worse than modern archers. Sure, perhaps they have less piercing power than modern archery techniques, but what modern archers do you know can: -split an oncoming arrow in half with their own arrow -catch an arrow in midair and refire it And half the other things he does here?
Those are pretty impressive techniques but a more effective technique in combat would be to just dodge the arrow coming at you rather than splitting it in half.
What a lot of these people miss is that this is about proving that certain tricks and levels of archery are actually not impossible as previously noted by modern archers and scholars, which is a pretty powerful word of finality to use. Of course it's more prudent to just outright dodge an arrow. Of course rapid firing techniques like this would probably have less piercing power than full drawback shots but I don't think that's really the point. The point is to display not only the flexibility and versatility of the bow to perhaps a whole new degree that could have previously been forgotten, but also from a historical view to shed light on some of history's claims. To me what makes this interesting is its historical context, to give greater understanding on just how good bowmen of old were and just why armies that were renowned for their bowmen were so universally respected and feared worldwide. Plus it's just interesting to get any even glimpse to the extents of human dexterity and training. I feel like people trying to turn it into a competition are just missing the point.
lightsoul007 this is not about logic or common sense- this is about technique, why run a marathon when you can run for the same distance on a treadmill in a gym, why do boxing if you can burn the same amount of calories by a cycling for a longer period of time? what if-just what if: *that's not the point?!*
Lol, DON'T try this at home: I got pretty good at catching arrows. Worked up from toy fiberglass bows to a 35# recurve, all shot at about 100'. Things went great until I got overconfident and tried a broadhead. Permanent scar across my thumb from the LAST arrow I attempted. BTW this was approx. 1978. WAY before social media. As I recall, my inspiration was a TV episode of "Kung-Fu" . Ahhhh, good times. Not claiming any other skill to match Anderson, but in my youth for a while, this I could do!
Why use those examples? Those are merely tricks. The important thing is mobility and speed. The modern technique is okay for archer snipers. It's not for when you are within range of a charging swordsman.
Also this version of archery just isn't as cool looking. More effective? Certainly. But seeing them reach up to the quiver, pull out an arrow, and fire it is cooler. I mean, technically Legolas is fast because he's doing more movements and firing at a comparable rate ... But he's also a fantasy character. This shit is real and awesome
Long Lee He can work as stunt double or consultant, training on location. Heck he can be in the movies as one of the many archers, especially if he's hooded.
thesynergy2 To you, pulling one arrow at a time may look cool, but to me it seems slow and ineffective. Especially when Legolas is pulling single arrows at ranges of 12 feet to the enemy. In real life the enemy doesn't neatly come one at a time. It would be really cool to see a MIX of both styles, where Legolas uses one by one draw for ranged accuracy, and then a swarm of three orcs come in at once, he grabs three arrows from his quiver and dispatches the orcs in, like the video, 1.5 seconds.
I am a Kyudo practitioner, and we hold arrows in our hand....I have to giggle at all the people who feel the need to downplay, insult or critique Lars' technique. We see this type of "I'm better than him" elitist attitudes in martial arts as well...mainly when others are full of themselves or threatened by a new approach, or are a self proclaimed master with a huge ego. Get a life, haters, and post your own video your own technique.
i get all the heat from some of the untrue narration in the lars video, but people... put up or shut up. dang haters. respect the skill and take what you can from it. that video inspired me and i became a far faster and agile archer than ever before. Thank you MR Andersen
Somehow I doubt you are a Kyudo practitioner. If you are a true Kyudo practitioner, you should know better than anyone that anything this guy says 'forgotten' was never actually forgotten, and that he did not 'reinvent' anything, and most importantly, that archery is not about how fast you can shoot. You learnt it all wrong lady.
I love these sorts of stories. Someone gets creative and rediscovers something old using nothing but an ancient manuscript and suddenly all these 'professionals' are full of criticism. This is how Troy was discovered too - go look it up. Fantastic story. Thank you Lars for retruning knowledge and skill to the world that we had lost. You are a great pioneer.
This doesn’t really have to do with anything but the guy who discovered Troy (Heinrich Schliemann) also destroyed the majority of it and is kind of a textbook example for how to not do archeology.
His style is pulled mainly from existing trick shooting or sport archery. Old manuscripts arnt an incredibly reliable source, but even then he cherrypicks the daylights out of them. The other evidence we do have contradicts his conclusions, like warbows being much heavier draw than modern bows, wheras Lars uses a bow that's quite light.
@@TheCompleteMental Some of this is true. Yet he does things others cannot. Extraordinary things in fact. That makes him a pioneer and a great archer. He also revives lost or ignored techniques, that makes him a successful revivalist. Also not every bow ever shot was in the hands of an english longbowman. 120 pounds or more is great for battles against armoured men but is not the only form of traditional archery. I'd say the skills that Lars has developed (to a astoundingly high degree) are better matched to real hunting or combat in a traditional setting than those of the average olympic archer.
@@nznick9033 what does he do that othere cannot? He's very skilled but not in a fundamental way. Even if he was, how would those things be relevant to archery in combat, and do we have any reliable evidence of them being used? Which techniques did he revive, for instance? I'm not just referring to english longbowmen, either. Several asiatic civilizations used 100+ pound draw weight bows, like mongols, koreans, ottomans, manchurians, so on. I cant see how these would be practical for hunting, which again doesnt typically overlap with trickshooting. The comparison to olympic archery is a red herring.
Dear Lars Andersen, Your technique seems quite impressive, would you be so kind and upload a tutorial where you explain to us, youtube-watching archers how we can learn this technique and keep the old traditions alive?
@@jareth7456 He's asking him to "Teach me instinctive", but I doubt he realizes how funny that sounds. Hopefully some discoveries were made over the last 6 years
@@hellgeist_ instinctive shooting is about the way you aim, and it doesn't mean that you have to figure it out ourselff. Moreover there is still technique to the way you draw, nock, pull, anchor and so on. You need to build a consistent muscle memory in order to become accurate, so I don't know what seems so funny or ironic to you.
A Man with vision... Great. i am 61 Year´s young and saw a video fom Lars Andersen. I thought, that´s it and buy a bow and trained alone for my self. Reading book´s that Lars Andersen show in his video´s. Ok, hard to get this old books. But...it work´s. Thank you Mr. Andersen.
atleast Bruce Lee cane up with a cool name for his style as opposed to Lars's name wich is old master technique. like da fuq. could've been so much cooler and original
This is what I call real archery not those lame fancy compund bows with thousands of pulleys, scopes and shit, the traditional bows are way more badass
Lars... you have single handedly revived in my awareness... the gravity to pursue this ancient art of sustenance, self mastery and exploration. Thank you Sir.
@@mohammadrahman1722 Yeah but what i mean to say is this old human man shoots faster than legolas so a fit 20year old could shoot far faster. At least when you compare to the movie one.
Absolutely inspiring!!!! I am so glad i found this.My father told me all about this type of archery and many of what is said in this video was told to me first hand. Altho in a personal setting mt father was able to go into much more detail. He did this only because when I wanted to shoot a bow, i did not want to shoot as everyone does nowadays, i was only interested in historical useful shooting techniques. He was a great lakes region archaeologist and also studied much more history than that, so it was easy for him to tell me all these things without me having to read a hundred books to get to the heart of it quickly. I am truly grateful you are doing this and will be showing this to my son who is now interested in archery. This actually has respawned my interest for myself. I think I may start some practice shooting again. Altho not with all those tricks.
Why is everyone comparing him to legolas? LEGOLAS ISN'T REAL. Never has been. Nothing about him is real. And to be honest this guy is BETTER than legolas.
they compare him to legolas because legolas is supposed to be a fantastical warrior with abilities beyond what is really possible. Yes he is better than legolas, something that is supposed to be impossible. They state this in the video.
If technology renders a skill obsolete, that skill will cease to be practiced. I don't know if it's totally accurate to say we "lost knowledge" though, because apparently there were surviving texts that taught this guy what he needed to know, even though perhaps no one was practicing the skills necessary...
There are certain metallurgy and crafting skills that have been lost to time. Some can be reverse-engineered, but others are still frustratingly unsolved yet.
War, invading armies, cultural shifts, book-burnings, degradation of recorded materials, gaps in apprenticeship due to illness or death, etc. There are so many ways the chain of knowledge can be broken.
History is full of examples of us losing knowledge sadly. Take a lot of the works of the ancient greek philosophers, probably only ten percent of what they knew survived and what we do know about them is pretty amasing, they were able to perform surgery that wouldn't be redisocvered for nearly 2000 years. It was only in the past century of so that we discovered that they had calculus, if the mathematicians of the 1600s had had that knowledge it would have been quite significant.
Awesome. I used to hunt with a bow as a kid before I discovered I REALLY enjoyed a rifle. But here I am at 37 wanting to bow hunt again.... There are A LOT of great reasons for doing so. I love my firearms, always will. But I aim (LOL) to hunt with a bow again. My dad's gone, now, so I must teach myself, and I may as well go beyond just hunting and I enjoy a recurve much more than I ever did a compound. Glad I found this video! Thanks for posting it!
Note that he holds all the arrows in his ARROW hand! Also, he does not draw all the way to his face like most of us were trained to do, but only to about halfway like the Plains Indians of North America, or like we would shoot a slingshot.
Imagine how skillful warriors were on the battlefield back in the day, If they were at this level (and higher) it'd have been chaos but highly skilled - moreso than we give it credit for nowadays. I wonder how many feats of skill that "modern scholars" have disregarded were true?
Something I was considering earlier was what if the Native Americans had this level of bow skill when the Europeans came over? Would America exist as it is today? What else would be different in the world?
Christopher Arendt The First Nations were not defeated by armies, they were defeated by smallpox. Don't quote me on this, but something like 90% of the Native population along the eastern seaboard died from European diseases. But my point is that they may very well have had such traditions, but no one knows about it today because it was written out of history.
Id say back in the day worriers were A LOT more skillful. Why? men were trained basically since the age they could walk....Thank God we live in a different time...
Christopher Arendt Hardend steel armor (Spain conquistadors) vs. obsidian arrowheads and obsidion blades (azteeks) the winner is quied obvios. Also where most indian tribes no wariors but even those defeated the europeans and their muskets at first. But after the gun had become mor advanced than they had litterally no chance.
The warriors wherend more skillfull they just had different skills. You needed alot of skill to use your weapons properly back then but you should not underastimade accurate shooting it is alot easyer than fighting with a mce or axe. also is timing today more importand than hand to hand combat becaus fighting at meele range happens rarely.
My god is it ironic that people keep bringing up medieval Europe when not once did Lars cite these techniques were used in medieval Europe. All of his citations are from antiquity+medieval asia; where plate armour didn't exist; period. Chainmail was basic, and similar to kind he was shooting at. All bows were of the similar type he was using (or weaker greek short bows), though the more advanced ones (like the Syrian Composite bow) may be a little bit more on the draw weight, regardless no one used long bows in antiquity aside from maybe the northern celts, and those sucked anyway compared to Syrian composite bows. It's also important to note that during antiquity, archers had much shorter ranges than they did during the medieval ages, and long range warfare for them only occurred during the opening skirmishing period of a battle, afterwards they would run behind ally lines and stay close to those lines so those soldiers could protect them if they were flanked. This meant they were usually only shooting from a distance of 10-20 meters. Heavy cavalry was practically non-existent except in the far east of asia minor, and it'd hardly be considered heavy by medieval standards. Bronze coverings over the heart and neck is hardly heavy and any bow could penetrate it. When cavalry flank you, it's a good idea to fire a shit ton of arrows at their horses, rendering them useless. You don't need to be that accurate in that case when you have a unit of cavalry bearing down on you, it's not hard to miss.
The issue lies in the draw strength, yes they didn't have plate armour but plate armour was NEVER designed to counter bows/arrows. It was designed to deflect bladed weapons. Yes you can fire arrows in rapid succession, but the faster you do it the weaker the draw strength is. Range is important sure but if the arrow doesn't have enough force behind it to pierce through leather armour then it's relatively useless. You reference Asia as if their armour was any weaker than the western equivalents when they still used layered protection. Hitting someone through 2 or 3 layers of protection is heck lot harder than a single piece. He is a trickshooter and nothing more. Good at his job but any claims he makes are purely speculative.
I'm sorry but you don't know what you're talking about. To be fair there are a great many common misconceptions about armor and weapons and the efficacy of both. Plate armor was well designed to stop bows and arrows... as well as pretty much everything else, getting through quality plate armor was very difficult, but then again it was also very expensive and only a minority of folks on the battlefield has such elite armor. For much of history and geography the majority of soldiers on the battlefield have little to no armor, a helmet if they're lucky, and for many of other parts of history armor can be quite light. Now Lars is a fellow of slight build who started shooting around the age of 40. Start someone young or just someone stronger and they'd be able to use much heavier bows at near that speed. And here's the thing, it's the technique for the reload that matters, regardless of exactly how fast one can be in combat the point is these techniques allow a shooter to be MORE fast and MORE effective than someone shooting with a slower form. Also the book he mentions above "Arab Archery 1500" does indeed have this and several other combat speed shooting techniques listed in them. He simply applied them better than anyone before him.
Gehrig RFC Heavier build and Age certainly, but you still have to take the time to actually draw the bow string. A half-draw wouldn't cut it for me, sorry. In western culture yes, it was rare for anyone besides a noble to have a 'full set' of metal armour. However, Leather was much cheaper to come by and was fairly common in both cultures. Armour in east was far more uniformed. (ashigaru for example) He claims it is a 'lost' art but it was never actually lost and has been practised (like many archery techniques) for centuries, even today. It's simply because we as a 'western' audience we aren't exposed to this kind of variation on archery techniques. He bases his knowledge of artistic images from people who rarely if ever at all witnessed the actual events of battles. If the source material is flawed then how can this be the 'correct' technique? The book he mentions and quotes is a conversation between two mythological figures.... If I believed everything mythological figures said the world would be flat and we'd be at the centre of the Universe.
red244 1. Sometimes his draw is more or less full than others, either way the difference is near negligible. Drawing to eye or ear and releasing as one movement can be just as fast. There is no need to hold a bow at draw, indeed, this is more tiring and far less useful vs moving targets or while moving yourself, either on foot or on a horse. 2. Both cultures? The world has been composed of hundreds if not thousands of cultures. And armor has varied widely among them. But is usually fairly uncommon in most among the bulk of most armies. 3. The ability to shoot 3 arrows at 1.5 seconds was a lost art. And indeed, before Lars video I saw very few folks practicing the arrow in the hands technique. Some elements of it survived but others... not so much.Certainly in the west. 4. The knowledge is based on several things. Experimentation, art, written word, and existing traditions from several cultures around the world and at different times. Is all the art perfect? No. But through it we can see some common threads. Accounts all throughout history tell of such impressive rate of fire feats. Some existing traditions (or recently existing ones) can show related skillsets. Then we have written instructions on accomplishing several of these techniques, from the period in which they were practiced. Then through experimentation and practice they can all be applied and brought together. 5. Ah the book quoting between mythological figures thing... I see you saw the skeptical reaction video... but apparently not Lars' response to it. Pity. Sorry man but again you don't know what you're talking about... and neither did she. I own a copy that book man, and have taught a class based off of that section, and it is regarded as an excellent treatise on archery written in period. Yes, the part where the writer tells the mythological ORIGIN STORY of the technique involves a convo between mythical figures, because people in period rarely know where things come from when they are centuries or millennia old. But if you go back a single page from there you will find several techniques described in detail for how you do these techniques. And again, the Arab Archery 1500 book is regarded as an optimum primary period source on archery, both for technique and for historical insight, yes it's peppered with fables, religious references, and legendary origins, but that's most period documents... the techniques and info on archery is as solid as anything you will find. Sorry man, you're just on the wrong side on this one.
Omg, it is because you have not seen his other videos! It is how they did when not using the english long bow. that was made for range not speed. He use the bow of a riding bow man and they can shoot hella fast as you see!
WOW!! I am speechless! I have in my life seen or even herd of anyone shooting a long bow as fast as this!!! I mean three shots three arrows in one second, while he was jumping down from a ten feet off of a platform!!! Truly amazing! If didn’t see this on video I would never have believed it even possible!!
This might sound weird, but I think we're starting to see this with Math already. Math teachers can process complex algebra and calculus just in their heads, but most younger students, myself included, use calculators for almost everything. There may come a time when math is a sport, and no one in the future will be able to believe how fast mental math was done in the past without computer assistance.
It is unlikely that it will be come a sport, because there's no action. The reason why you'd think so because most westerner don't calculate things in their minds while most Asians has been doing so already since they were young.
some ancient slavic books says that in the past people could even regenerate lost limb but nobody today would belive it, people basically lost most of their abilities due to technology replacing them, just as like the history of archery is complete bullshit whole history is a lie
Finally all of us mabi fans can rejoice at the return of the arrow revolver technique. (If you know what I'm talking about just upvote me, don't even have to comment)
The Old texts are wrong all the old paintings are wrong too, everything is a big hoax set up by the Ancient Archers, Painters and Eye witnesses because modern archers can't do it. Makes perfect sense.
Arguing the bow has less power is the same argument used to say an old .30-06 rifle is more effective than an AR15. Voted down by those jealous as fk they can’t do it! Good work by Lars!
You guys don't realise that bows and guns aren't same thing. Handgun, shotgun, machine gun etc, these weapons are used in different situation. Bows are mostly same, the only difference is power. You can't kill a well armed soldier with a 20 lbs bow. Medieval archers all around the world (West and east) used over 100 lbs bow for reasons. Even in modern day, to hunt a deer, you need at least 40 lbs draw weight in your hunting bow. Lars doesn't even shoot 40 lbs. I am not saying speed shooting is useless or it was never done. But it’s not the only way archers shot. Spcially horseback archers did shoot fast, in various technique.
In the same way Lars intuits a style from the manuscript, shouldnt we - even more - intuit a style from 100+ pound draw weight bows that we *know* existed in several independant cultures from thousands upon thousands of, not just historical accounts, but actual surviving examples (like the Mary Rose)?
The best way to stimulate the natural instinctive reaction, stripped bow, spot on shooting, and it helps in other life situations of accuracy, I love it.
@thedementation666: He holds 10 arrows in hand, allowing him to reload and fire his next arrow MUCH faster than if he were to take the time to draw each individual arrow from his quiver and fire it. When he runs out, he grabs another 10 without even looking, which he can then fire in quick succession. Sounds like a more efficient form of shooting to me!
As “self-thought” archers from the age of 5-6, my friends and I had lots of fun playing indians in the forest for several summers. We were shooting at targets (and sometimes eachother) moving around pretty much like Lars does at the clip. Later we discovered, but never understood, that modern archers hold the arrow on the left side of the bow while shooting on a target. Decades later it actually gives a lot of satisfaction discovering that “our” method has been the common way among moving archers… Og: Rå skyting da Lars!
As a young person with a love of history this is fascinating to me. Makes me view archery in a totally different light. It is always portrayed as a very slow and methodical, but in reality it is insanely fast, close range and accurate
Let's all chant this together: A broad-tip arrow sinking just one inch into your neck is worse than listening to the eternal "can't hit hard if you shoot fast" crowd. Getting your shot on target faster than the other guy gives you time to make your follow-up shot count. Combat arrow points were either flying blades or piercing tips. Either way they will cause injuries. Even if you push them in by hand! And how long did a soldier with a septic wound last back then?
Daenon Janis considering the battlefields they used to fight on, he'd probably be right at home actually. His other video shows him firing a few shots at range, one at an angle, followed by one practically straight on. The second hit before the first and both were dead on regardless.
Kinshota Kanaes link me to the video. I may have seen it but I can't recall. Anyone can have 2 good shots with enough takes (which if you check snopes Lars most certainly had many many takes) I'm still standing by my comment. I doubt he would hit a man in the neck from even 10 yards consistently. He doesn't even actually do proper Syrian or Mongolian horseman Archery, and you would be stupid to be that close on a battlefield with a bow and no means of quick movement.
I saw a 'demo' of this technique in the 1970's! The archer kept on referring to it as 'trick shooting' and reminded the crowd the "serious archers never use this technique!" He hit every target that he called out, with astounding speed. When we asked him why archers don't use this technique, the archer replied "too long too learn, too much practice to get good." He just called all other archers lazy...
99 ranged, meanwhile people who pay to stand outside and line up a shot for 20 minutes be like "that's not real archery" "real archery is shit like us" like get over it even if you are elitist, you just have to straight up understand; this man is better than you are, your entire guild, or will ever hope to become at archery. yes his bow is light, it's a shortbow. this guy is 3rd age range tier. the only reason any archers are mad here, is because what lars does, fundamentally devalues your existence and craft so much, that he makes you all look like you've *been doing it wrong for thousands of years*
holy shit this guys awesome. I've been working on his techniques but without actually instructions on how I'm just watching and trying to mimic him. If nothing else this guy could make a nice living being a consultant for movies and tv showing people how to shoot more realistically. Looking at you avenger and arrow.
Redditor here and fellow expert bowmaster. The Redditor in the vid is good, but this isn't impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats with my Kontra bow back home, they're not much bigger than two meters. I'll PM you next time you swing round /r/Archery or /r/Atheism fine sir, we could do with archerier like yourself as we are currently recruiting for our Archery Guild clan. Some more practice and you will be good enough to be a fellow guild member and who knows, with time, maybe even a Reddit Gold member, *tip of the hat* to you good sir and keep practicing, you WILL get there eventually xD
I heard a story of a king who was a great archerer was once caught by another army and was forced to be blind folded and ordered to shoot some apples But as he heard the king of the other state he shot at him just by hearing the voice straight through the eye
If I had to guess judging by the grammar, the video's maker isn't an English speaker (or at least not a native speaker) and probably used the text-to-voice in order to avoid making what was being said unclear to English speakers with a heavy accent.
Lars Andersen is from Denmark...so I'm guessing he either a) can't speak English or b) can't speak it well, so he used a text-to-speech device to communicate with the English speaking world.
Great video amazing skills , all sceptics should relax and just realise there is so much ancient knowledge we have lost that is amazing and just need to to look at things like the ancient pyramids that we realise before the I pad came along man was still building things and reaching the stars without electric and machines 👍👌
In D&D, with a round lasting 6 seconds, a 20th-level Fighter could conceivably get off 12 shots in 12 seconds (3 extra attacks for a total of 4 attacks per round with Action Surge on the first round doubling that number). However, Lars here can fire arrows at rates faster than 1/second, and while the Fighter only gets 1 Action Surge per day, Lars can, well, do this all day.
Imagine if some random dude in a gang started using bow and arrow today, like a driveby but theres just a dude hanging out the window of the car with a bow lmaoo
I'm a Lord of the rings fan and i also like the legolas character but what amazes me more than what this guys is able to do is how some people just can't cope with a REAL person outdoing what a FAKE movie character did in a movie, and so they turn their brain to fantard and start trying using logic to make their lovely character look better. Oh look the Uruk Hai were moving! Oh look Legolas is using a quiver! Oh look Legolas is using a much bigger bow! Oh look legolas is... WHO CARES legolas is a fake character and even a fake character looks bad compared to a real person in this case, we should be giving kudus to the guy not defending a F******** story book character, priorities people.
Ancient bow techniques have always been here, and i think it's good that someone has taken the time to learn and study something long forgotten. it's a past of "our" history despite what nation we are from. if people could take the time and have the same kind of passion about things, i wonder what would happen?. Mastering the essence of archery is a lot more than to be able to shoot targets with high speed or accuracy.
Lars Andersen has pulled the pants down on many armchair historians and sideshow artists by doing what noone bother to do for several hundred years. PUT IN THE HOURS and prove what can be done with a bit of training even at a ripe old age (Sorry Lars) Imagine then what a professional archer in a mediaval army could have done - training hours every day from the age of 7? I suspect that all those selfproclaimed experts who put down Lars' efforts only really have one aim. To lower the bar so they can look good again. ....and about the "weak bow" - try shooting an arrow with a sharp steel broadhead from a 30pd bow at someone from 100ft of distance. If its so harmless you should not worry about spending the next 20 years in prison ;-)
Weak 30 pound bows can kill unarmored people, but they are not warbows because any form of armor will stop them. Actual warbows have 100lb draws and over. Historically inaccurate butted mail is so weak that a butter knife can probably stab through it. Historically accurate riveted mail is quite decent against penetration and would laugh off arrows from a 30lb bow. A 30lb bow likely can't even go through padding/gambeson worn underneath mail. Skallagrim and ThegnThrand both have decent tests against historically accurate riveted mail on youtube, and it is quite difficult to penetrate. ThegnThrand has a recent video of a 105lb warbow, and that can actually penetrate riveted mail and padding underneath.
@@James-dg6xe Besides written historical records, we do have a decent idea of ancient armor based on archaeological evidence of actual armor that have survived throughout the ages. For example, metal bands for the lorica segmentata/laminar have been found buried in the ground that allows historians to gauge the thickness and type of iron used in its construction. Riveted chainmail have been found all over (mostly as clumps of rusted masses). Bronze armor survived much better than iron or organic armor, so many bronze armors and helmets from ancient times have survived. In East Asia, stone representations of armor have been found that allows people to understand its construction methods. Actual metal lamellar plates have been found in East Asia (eg. Tang Dynasty tombs and archaeological sites) that allows people to gauge their thickness and materials.
@Abu Troll al cockroachistan Steel plating armor can vary greatly in thickness, and not all armor is steel plating. Even if we're only talking about late middle ages European plate armor, the thickness of armor around the center of the chest/vital areas can be 3x-4x thicker than armor around the peripheries/limbs/etc. The Tang Dynasty had lamellar plates up to 2.8mm thick. Other lamellar plates have been as thin as 0.8mm. A high powered bow or crossbow might not penetrate the thickest parts, but may penetrate the thinner armors. And non-plate type armor such as riveted chainmail made of iron or steel materials can be penetrated by a sufficiently powerful bow as shown by many youtube tests. And armor has been composed of many different materials that vary in strength - rawhide, bronze, iron, linen, cotton, mulberry, steels with different levels of carbon, cheap munitions grade steel, etc. The most common form of armor during much of the European middle ages [especially earlier periods] wasn't steel plates, but rather organic armors made of fabric/plant fibers such as gambeson/aketon. The most common form of armor used by Alexander of Macedon's army was actually linothorax made out of linen fabric.
I remember when this strange video was on top of TH-cam’s recommendation. It was such a well made video, aside from the archaic narration, which I didn’t notice was an AI until stumbling upon this video for the second time, years later. This is like when Walt went to using an alternative, old school meth cook that was more cost effective. He found something that worked for the same result without as much fuss as the alternative cook. I like thinking that this guy has been able to revive this lost technique. It’s amazing what gets left behind and how effective or efficient they are, great for bringing back to the present day for those that still enjoy the hobby, but are looking for a different, more straightforward way of participating in it in a way that is simple yet does so much more for you that current technique, sort of like Bel Canto singing too I suppose.
Jesus people this is a speed shooting technique not trying g to say it's the only or most effective in fact at the beginning of the freaking video it says there are many different ways to shoot for different reasons this is the fastest no question
Yeah he's dead on the video is real time, this isn't Ken block pretending it didn't take 16 tries, he's a boss. Even if he slowed down enough for a full draw on a 55-60 he'd still be faster and apsolutly lethal.... eBayed a north American flat bow the same day I saw this video no joke dream season can take a seat I have to try this
His claims backed by his ability speaks volumes. He has recaptured a lost art and makes modern archery look clumsy. He has validated legendary skills by renowned warriors in the past that were dismissed as exaggeration. An army of Mongols on horse back with these skills must have stricken fear into everyone they confronted and were virtually invincible. The Samurai archer was equally proficient I am sure along with any European archer worth his salt before the invention of the gun.
Whatever we can say or comment .....anyone ready to compete with him.? It is soooo easy to blah blah and critique but go ahead and just do the apple shot like he did ....?
How many takes do I get? I also noticed none if his targets were firing back or barreling down on him, and his trick shots were largely conducted in a gym providing sure footing. The most perplexing part of the video though was the narration. Why not get a human being to do it?
Neal Orr They probably didn't have a competent enough English speaker. And yes, funny how demonstrations don't actually involve people being involved in some Ren Faire battle or whatever weird criteria you need.
I feel like the video should have mentioned that training like this was the exception, even among masters. Bows through history were, first and foremost, a distance weapon. To be precise, they were either the longest range weapon or the second longest range weapon, depending on the specific bow (though they do drop a bit if you count artillery). Naturally, whenever someone received training for such a long range weapon, it focused on long range. Not to say that training for short-mid range combat with the bow didn't exist, but that it tended to take a back seat to a technique which made the most of the fact that the bow permitted you to hit someone on the opposite side of the battlefield.
Yeah, but as you mentioned, this is all about close-range archery. A good long-range archer can be fairly deadly (as shown here). Edit: Actually, it depends on which era and location we're talking about. In some places, body armor was a rarity for soldiers, especially since many might have had to pay for it (a common thing for back then). So if this technique was being done in an area 'back then' where full-body armor was used, then it would mostly be useless. But otherwise, this man is a nightmare.
***** Depends on the arrow, the arrowhead, the bow, the archer, the thickness of the wood, and the type of the wood. Non combat bows? Sure. Hunting bows from settled societies or the overly weak bows sometimes used to teach kids would reasonably be stopped by a bit of good wood/plywood. Combat bows? If its not designed to punch through armour, maybe you could get away with it being a bit over an inch thick over a thick gambeson. But I wouldn't trust that, particularly because every time it gets hit it becomes structurally weaker. That's not to say it wouldn't technically stop it. The arrow would certainly stop moving. But there's a decent chance it would go deep enough to still wound, especially if its in a bad spot or, like I mentioned earlier, the armour has been hit repeatedly.
No you are wrong bows were not a distance weapon. That's all bullshit. I know I am a history major, This is most likely the way a bow was used. All the "pros" out there and bullshit people say is just coming from dumb people.
Kyle Blank That has no bearing on the ability to penetrate traditional armour. A bulletproof vest is made of various fabrics that cause the bullet to deform in advance and spread out so even if it reaches the skin it will have lost a massive amount of energy and not be in a position to create a cavity. An arrow, on the other hand, does not deform. The vest only provides resistance equivalent to the thickness and density of the fabric. A Gambeson is superior protection to a bulletproof vest which isn't specialized to also protect against non-deformable impact, simply because its thicker.
A lot of people who complain it is not useable seem to forget that the main weakness of the bow is close in. Even midling accuracy at such a high rate of fire would take down many men, with even the slightest gaps in their armour at close range. This is the style of horse archery as well, the whole point is to ride close and but 30 arrows into someone in a few seconds. This is a very effective technique, only limited in battle by how many arrows you can carry. A lot of people forget, a 45 pound bow is enough to put an arrow clean through someone...
If he draws the bow halfway through then the arrow only has about 25% of the full kinetic energy. You cannot compensate for that by just a slight push against the bow. It's simple physics... If you could do that, there would be no point of using a bow because you would be able to throw the arrow by hand just as fast.
Most of the soldiers in the pre-gunpowder age were just light to no armor... They were lucky to have a chest plate. So volleys of arrows would devastate 90% of the army very easy... Nobles had armour (commanders, knights, possibly mercenaries, and leaders), but that was like a minority.
The chainmail result is inaccurate, for a couple of reasons: A. Chainmail has padding underneath it when worn and isn't stretched taut. Thus the minor penetrations here wouldn't be an issue. B. The best modern chainmail is equivalent to cheap munitions-quality mail from old, so if a modern arrow can penetrate modern mail, the jury is still out. Not an accurate result. C. Finally, we know arrows couldn't penetrate chainmail, because if they could, nobody would wear it. We also have plenty of instances in historical accounts in which cataphracts or Muscovites were pelted with arrows (in the latter case, from Mongols with 100 pound bows) and were only mildly troubled. Other than that, a great video.
Then why were the Muscovites, the Poles, the Hungarians, the Khwaresmians and the Jin Cataphracts all fell before the Mongols? Clearly it wasn't just due to the Mongols' hand to hand combat prowess.
El Bandito The problem is, the people dying in those defeats you speak of were the unarmored peasantry and men at arms. The wealthy nobles wearing chainmail were largely the ones escaping unscathed... as their men routed under a hailstorm of arrows that penetrated lesser armor. There are accounts of said men accounting themselves well against Mongol forces until panic and wavering fear led the entire army to rout. The Mongols might have been known for their incredible horse archery, but even they used melee tactics - such is almost a neccessity, if only to fend off the enemy's melee cavalry. Even they couldn't always keep an enemy at distance, especially when they are trying to attack and press a siege.
< 3 This is why Mod Historians shouldn't be so quick to discount the Primary sources as they sometimes are. (Unless we're talking the Assyrian Annals, you gotta inter linea that shiz to the max.)
Funny how Lars is better than Legolas and Hawkeye, since they are the symbols of "impossible" archery. I guess if they tried to portray actually impossible archery, the audience wouldn't believe it, or maybe even be able to SEE it. I can barely see Lars' hands move as it is. And he's real.
It bothers me when people say lars didn't rediscover this art that people knew about it. I say experience is ultimately the only real knowledge and I say it was rediscovered by lars because he is the only one in modern times to learn how to actually do it and by in large still is the only one.
Most impressive! because of the speed and flexibility. I am not yet convinced it would go through decent armor in realistic conditions though. what is the speed and weight of the arrows and the poundage of the bow?
For people giving Lars grief over the arrows not being stuck into the targets... You know that it can help a little if you can get the arrows back in the heat of battle, right? Not that it's recommended, but just like how sword-fighting isn't all about deep thrusting and actually involves a lot of small cuts overtime, a poking arrow can sometimes prove more helpful in some situations. Like, I don't know, having it bounce on someone's cheek before digging out enough of another's eye to make him blind and potentially destabilize a group.
Also, it was quite common for soldiers not to have armor, since most of the time, you needed to pay for it yourself. Thus, only high-ranking guys had armor. Some places had soldiers in full-body armor though, but in other places, this close-range archery was most likely very deadly.
432neptune Don't tell the others that though, I got done told that these techniques are more or less useless, even with what you said. I swear people are stupid.
Joshua Madoc I like how people are trying to say that this guy is incorrect in how he does things by using the logic of modern archery. I think this picture here sums up my feelings pretty well: global3.memecdn.com/new-meme-for-those-extra-stupid-people_o_2349461.jpg
Sword fighting is not about accumulating small cuts. Its about killing the other person in any way possible, with a sword, dirt, fists, whatever. It was not fencing, or like a movie. Think bar fight with MMA fighters. Then substitute those fighters with assholes with swords. And multiply that by several thousands.
thethingamajiggy Very true. More often than not knights did not wield a sword/slashing weapon against an armoured opponent. they used blunt weapons, or combination weapons like the crows beak. Mainly to knock your opponent down or out, flip his visor up, and stab them in the face/armpits or other weak points with a dagger. Hollywood really does no justice to true history.
So the trick is about holding the entire quiver in your hand while shooting, and being able to quickly exchange the arrows one after one. Well...that takes a lot of skill, but still it's just a technique. Can't see how he can be compared to Legolas if they use two entirely different techniques.
Lars Andersen should be a playable character in an action RPG.
Lol'd.
Gonna make a Lars Andersen build
He would be too op
I wouldn't care about other characters then.
the character would be too op. and shut down the game.... lol gj lars
jake b same
no full auto in the building bro
Air soft🤣
"That's not full auto"
@@WunnSEN "This is *Proceed to firing 30 arrows in minigun's rpm*"
Wunn Sen this is *shoots plasma beam*
DAAYuum bro okay!!
Lars is this good only after a few years. Imagine those ancients who have trained since birth.
Look again his skill now
@@saturnpeax And how good would he be now if he trained since birth? That was the point of Arxces ;)
The Lakota...Comanhe 👍
@@aleksejjovanovic986no is trained since birth and he has better materials and techniques
like who ?
Same with sword fighting. I cannot even BEGIN to imagine what the top 1 in a million swordsman in medieval times could do with a single sword.
Please keep this up.
dudeinthesea I imagine they can deflect an arrow with a sword maybe, given its a lighter sword like katana. Heavier swords might be able to break other swords.
Azure weeaboo detected
***** Umm.. What? lol. What's your point with katana again? And I believe rapiers can be broken, they do have a special knife for it I believe.
+Azure sais are dagger ment to catch and break katana. lmao. katana have a soft back core that can be chopped up and if so will effectively ruin the sword. european swords are not necessarily better but are better only if they arent equal. katana at its purest a curcible "damascus" blade. while in actuality its not damascus it hold many similar properties. even the most honed purest more professional katana will not stand up to its foreign counter part. they simply are not designed to they never fought a celtic short sword or a gladius. a katana ultimately has 2 useful faces as a euro has 4 or more. plus the steel is of better quality.
(this is beinging the periods of the 1400s together with the most ultimate form of each. for the sake of comparisons)
***** I didn't realize you replied but since Keith revived this thread, might as well I reply.
I based my assumption katana could be used to deflect arrow based on video a katana swordsman hitting bb pelet with his sword.
What do you have to support your words that the same can be done with a spoon?
If you don't have any, I take it was based on your fanboyism. Weeaboo is the word for it right?
Plus I proved sword can be broken. You admit it.
I don't like that people are trying to make Anderson a fraud by claiming his techniques are worse than modern archers. Sure, perhaps they have less piercing power than modern archery techniques, but what modern archers do you know can:
-split an oncoming arrow in half with their own arrow
-catch an arrow in midair and refire it
And half the other things he does here?
Those are pretty impressive techniques but a more effective technique in combat would be to just dodge the arrow coming at you rather than splitting it in half.
What a lot of these people miss is that this is about proving that certain tricks and levels of archery are actually not impossible as previously noted by modern archers and scholars, which is a pretty powerful word of finality to use. Of course it's more prudent to just outright dodge an arrow. Of course rapid firing techniques like this would probably have less piercing power than full drawback shots but I don't think that's really the point. The point is to display not only the flexibility and versatility of the bow to perhaps a whole new degree that could have previously been forgotten, but also from a historical view to shed light on some of history's claims.
To me what makes this interesting is its historical context, to give greater understanding on just how good bowmen of old were and just why armies that were renowned for their bowmen were so universally respected and feared worldwide. Plus it's just interesting to get any even glimpse to the extents of human dexterity and training.
I feel like people trying to turn it into a competition are just missing the point.
lightsoul007 this is not about logic or common sense- this is about technique, why run a marathon when you can run for the same distance on a treadmill in a gym, why do boxing if you can burn the same amount of calories by a cycling for a longer period of time? what if-just what if: *that's not the point?!*
Lol, DON'T try this at home: I got pretty good at catching arrows. Worked up from toy fiberglass bows to a 35# recurve, all shot at about 100'. Things went great until I got overconfident and tried a broadhead. Permanent scar across my thumb from the LAST arrow I attempted. BTW this was approx. 1978. WAY before social media. As I recall, my inspiration was a TV episode of "Kung-Fu" . Ahhhh, good times. Not claiming any other skill to match Anderson, but in my youth for a while, this I could do!
Why use those examples? Those are merely tricks. The important thing is mobility and speed. The modern technique is okay for archer snipers. It's not for when you are within range of a charging swordsman.
Why has this man not been approached for a film yet?! I'd love to see this guy in some awesome medieval movie in HD.
well. who need other real skills rather than acting to be actor or actress ?
Also this version of archery just isn't as cool looking.
More effective? Certainly.
But seeing them reach up to the quiver, pull out an arrow, and fire it is cooler. I mean, technically Legolas is fast because he's doing more movements and firing at a comparable rate ... But he's also a fantasy character.
This shit is real and awesome
Long Lee He can work as stunt double or consultant, training on location. Heck he can be in the movies as one of the many archers, especially if he's hooded.
thesynergy2 To you, pulling one arrow at a time may look cool, but to me it seems slow and ineffective. Especially when Legolas is pulling single arrows at ranges of 12 feet to the enemy. In real life the enemy doesn't neatly come one at a time. It would be really cool to see a MIX of both styles, where Legolas uses one by one draw for ranged accuracy, and then a swarm of three orcs come in at once, he grabs three arrows from his quiver and dispatches the orcs in, like the video, 1.5 seconds.
He appeared in 174 episodes of House M.D.
I am a Kyudo practitioner, and we hold arrows in our hand....I have to giggle at all the people who feel the need to downplay, insult or critique Lars' technique. We see this type of "I'm better than him" elitist attitudes in martial arts as well...mainly when others are full of themselves or threatened by a new approach, or are a self proclaimed master with a huge ego. Get a life, haters, and post your own video your own technique.
True Sensei!
indeed
i get all the heat from some of the untrue narration in the lars video, but people... put up or shut up. dang haters. respect the skill and take what you can from it. that video inspired me and i became a far faster and agile archer than ever before. Thank you MR Andersen
done :)
Somehow I doubt you are a Kyudo practitioner. If you are a true Kyudo practitioner, you should know better than anyone that anything this guy says 'forgotten' was never actually forgotten, and that he did not 'reinvent' anything, and most importantly, that archery is not about how fast you can shoot. You learnt it all wrong lady.
Wow, I never knew an one archer arrow rain was possible in real life. Archers doing arrow rain in videogames seems a lot more believable now.
Yeah. That's pretty shocking that a trained archer can put 11 in the air before one goes down.
I only practiced archery for 4 days. There must be a day that I will be skilled.
th-cam.com/video/cZ4C_g54afE/w-d-xo.html
I want to know how much materials it takes to make all those arrows lol
I love these sorts of stories. Someone gets creative and rediscovers something old using nothing but an ancient manuscript and suddenly all these 'professionals' are full of criticism. This is how Troy was discovered too - go look it up. Fantastic story.
Thank you Lars for retruning knowledge and skill to the world that we had lost. You are a great pioneer.
I only practiced archery for 4 days. There must be a day that I will be skilled.
th-cam.com/video/cZ4C_g54afE/w-d-xo.html
This doesn’t really have to do with anything but the guy who discovered Troy (Heinrich Schliemann) also destroyed the majority of it and is kind of a textbook example for how to not do archeology.
His style is pulled mainly from existing trick shooting or sport archery. Old manuscripts arnt an incredibly reliable source, but even then he cherrypicks the daylights out of them.
The other evidence we do have contradicts his conclusions, like warbows being much heavier draw than modern bows, wheras Lars uses a bow that's quite light.
@@TheCompleteMental Some of this is true. Yet he does things others cannot. Extraordinary things in fact. That makes him a pioneer and a great archer. He also revives lost or ignored techniques, that makes him a successful revivalist.
Also not every bow ever shot was in the hands of an english longbowman. 120 pounds or more is great for battles against armoured men but is not the only form of traditional archery. I'd say the skills that Lars has developed (to a astoundingly high degree) are better matched to real hunting or combat in a traditional setting than those of the average olympic archer.
@@nznick9033 what does he do that othere cannot? He's very skilled but not in a fundamental way. Even if he was, how would those things be relevant to archery in combat, and do we have any reliable evidence of them being used?
Which techniques did he revive, for instance?
I'm not just referring to english longbowmen, either. Several asiatic civilizations used 100+ pound draw weight bows, like mongols, koreans, ottomans, manchurians, so on.
I cant see how these would be practical for hunting, which again doesnt typically overlap with trickshooting. The comparison to olympic archery is a red herring.
Thanks archery robot that was very informative.
Dear Lars Andersen,
Your technique seems quite impressive, would you be so kind and upload a tutorial where you explain to us, youtube-watching archers how we can learn this technique and keep the old traditions alive?
Ikr
Trust me when I say you don't want to rob yourself of the discovery process.
@@jareth7456 He's asking him to "Teach me instinctive", but I doubt he realizes how funny that sounds. Hopefully some discoveries were made over the last 6 years
Comanches.
@@hellgeist_ instinctive shooting is about the way you aim, and it doesn't mean that you have to figure it out ourselff. Moreover there is still technique to the way you draw, nock, pull, anchor and so on. You need to build a consistent muscle memory in order to become accurate, so I don't know what seems so funny or ironic to you.
Someone is surviving the zombie apocalypse.
4 years ago and still funny
APBT Zoey Amen to that.
5 years ago still funny.
5 years ago, still funny
5 years ago, STILL funny
Amazing display of archery skills. The video makes you wonder what other great skills we may have lost as technology advances
I love this guy.
Also a great way to say: Practising pays off
A Man with vision... Great. i am 61 Year´s young and saw a video fom Lars Andersen. I thought, that´s it and buy a bow and trained alone for my self. Reading book´s that Lars Andersen show in his video´s. Ok, hard to get this old books. But...it work´s. Thank you Mr. Andersen.
he is the Bruce Lee of arrows. give this guy props.
atleast Bruce Lee cane up with a cool name for his style as opposed to Lars's name wich is old master technique. like da fuq. could've been so much cooler and original
+Zachary Barker old masters technique,..... becuz compounds bow are new, therefore old masters its pretty cool
One Love maybe he is a reincarnation of a master archer THAT WOULD BE AWESOME!!!!!!!
He already has all the props he could need! Bows and arrows! 🤪🤪🤪
I only practiced archery for 4 days. There must be a day that I will be skilled.
th-cam.com/video/cZ4C_g54afE/w-d-xo.html
This is what I call real archery not those lame fancy compund bows with thousands of pulleys, scopes and shit, the traditional bows are way more badass
Tibori Andrei same bruh!
Totally agree
Yeah modern archery is a joke
Lol someone's only watched movies
Agree
Lars... you have single handedly revived in my awareness... the gravity to pursue this ancient art of sustenance, self mastery and exploration. Thank you Sir.
Face it, Lars is talented and works hard to perfect these techniques. As a traditional archer I completely respect what he does.
All of a sudden, Legolas looks like a blithering amateur.
Fun to see that in medieval standards Legolas would be considered mediocre at best.
@@Jebu911 seeing as he took down a whole oliphaunt by himself, at least in the movies, I doubt that
@@mohammadrahman1722 Yeah but what i mean to say is this old human man shoots faster than legolas so a fit 20year old could shoot far faster. At least when you compare to the movie one.
at speed maybe, but accuracy + distance hes still top notch
Absolutely inspiring!!!! I am so glad i found this.My father told me all about this type of archery and many of what is said in this video was told to me first hand. Altho in a personal setting mt father was able to go into much more detail. He did this only because when I wanted to shoot a bow, i did not want to shoot as everyone does nowadays, i was only interested in historical useful shooting techniques. He was a great lakes region archaeologist and also studied much more history than that, so it was easy for him to tell me all these things without me having to read a hundred books to get to the heart of it quickly. I am truly grateful you are doing this and will be showing this to my son who is now interested in archery. This actually has respawned my interest for myself. I think I may start some practice shooting again. Altho not with all those tricks.
Why is everyone comparing him to legolas? LEGOLAS ISN'T REAL. Never has been. Nothing about him is real. And to be honest this guy is BETTER than legolas.
Everyone is comparing him to Legolas, because he compares himself to Legolas.
***** What do you mean?
they compare him to legolas because legolas is supposed to be a fantastical warrior with abilities beyond what is really possible. Yes he is better than legolas, something that is supposed to be impossible. They state this in the video.
doubt he can kill a giant elephant
***** how the hell does that even make sense?
fictional characters are not more real than real life people.
I honestly have a hard time wrapping my head around how we lost knowledge as a species
Guns son guns
If technology renders a skill obsolete, that skill will cease to be practiced. I don't know if it's totally accurate to say we "lost knowledge" though, because apparently there were surviving texts that taught this guy what he needed to know, even though perhaps no one was practicing the skills necessary...
There are certain metallurgy and crafting skills that have been lost to time. Some can be reverse-engineered, but others are still frustratingly unsolved yet.
War, invading armies, cultural shifts, book-burnings, degradation of recorded materials, gaps in apprenticeship due to illness or death, etc. There are so many ways the chain of knowledge can be broken.
History is full of examples of us losing knowledge sadly. Take a lot of the works of the ancient greek philosophers, probably only ten percent of what they knew survived and what we do know about them is pretty amasing, they were able to perform surgery that wouldn't be redisocvered for nearly 2000 years. It was only in the past century of so that we discovered that they had calculus, if the mathematicians of the 1600s had had that knowledge it would have been quite significant.
Awesome. I used to hunt with a bow as a kid before I discovered I REALLY enjoyed a rifle. But here I am at 37 wanting to bow hunt again.... There are A LOT of great reasons for doing so. I love my firearms, always will. But I aim (LOL) to hunt with a bow again. My dad's gone, now, so I must teach myself, and I may as well go beyond just hunting and I enjoy a recurve much more than I ever did a compound. Glad I found this video! Thanks for posting it!
Note that he holds all the arrows in his ARROW hand! Also, he does not draw all the way to his face like most of us were trained to do, but only to about halfway like the Plains Indians of North America, or like we would shoot a slingshot.
Imagine how skillful warriors were on the battlefield back in the day, If they were at this level (and higher) it'd have been chaos but highly skilled - moreso than we give it credit for nowadays. I wonder how many feats of skill that "modern scholars" have disregarded were true?
Something I was considering earlier was what if the Native Americans had this level of bow skill when the Europeans came over? Would America exist as it is today? What else would be different in the world?
Christopher Arendt The First Nations were not defeated by armies, they were defeated by smallpox. Don't quote me on this, but something like 90% of the Native population along the eastern seaboard died from European diseases. But my point is that they may very well have had such traditions, but no one knows about it today because it was written out of history.
Id say back in the day worriers were A LOT more skillful. Why? men were trained basically since the age they could walk....Thank God we live in a different time...
Christopher Arendt
Hardend steel armor (Spain conquistadors) vs. obsidian arrowheads and obsidion blades (azteeks) the winner is quied obvios.
Also where most indian tribes no wariors but even those defeated the europeans and their muskets at first. But after the gun had become mor advanced than they had litterally no chance.
The warriors wherend more skillfull they just had different skills. You needed alot of skill to use your weapons properly back then but you should not underastimade accurate shooting it is alot easyer than fighting with a mce or axe.
also is timing today more importand than hand to hand combat becaus fighting at meele range happens rarely.
I would love to learn this from the master, Lars. I've been shooting since I was 12, now I'm over 60. This looks like so much fun.
My god is it ironic that people keep bringing up medieval Europe when not once did Lars cite these techniques were used in medieval Europe.
All of his citations are from antiquity+medieval asia; where plate armour didn't exist; period. Chainmail was basic, and similar to kind he was shooting at. All bows were of the similar type he was using (or weaker greek short bows), though the more advanced ones (like the Syrian Composite bow) may be a little bit more on the draw weight, regardless no one used long bows in antiquity aside from maybe the northern celts, and those sucked anyway compared to Syrian composite bows.
It's also important to note that during antiquity, archers had much shorter ranges than they did during the medieval ages, and long range warfare for them only occurred during the opening skirmishing period of a battle, afterwards they would run behind ally lines and stay close to those lines so those soldiers could protect them if they were flanked. This meant they were usually only shooting from a distance of 10-20 meters. Heavy cavalry was practically non-existent except in the far east of asia minor, and it'd hardly be considered heavy by medieval standards. Bronze coverings over the heart and neck is hardly heavy and any bow could penetrate it. When cavalry flank you, it's a good idea to fire a shit ton of arrows at their horses, rendering them useless. You don't need to be that accurate in that case when you have a unit of cavalry bearing down on you, it's not hard to miss.
The issue lies in the draw strength, yes they didn't have plate armour but plate armour was NEVER designed to counter bows/arrows. It was designed to deflect bladed weapons. Yes you can fire arrows in rapid succession, but the faster you do it the weaker the draw strength is.
Range is important sure but if the arrow doesn't have enough force behind it to pierce through leather armour then it's relatively useless. You reference Asia as if their armour was any weaker than the western equivalents when they still used layered protection. Hitting someone through 2 or 3 layers of protection is heck lot harder than a single piece.
He is a trickshooter and nothing more. Good at his job but any claims he makes are purely speculative.
I'm sorry but you don't know what you're talking about. To be fair there are a great many common misconceptions about armor and weapons and the efficacy of both. Plate armor was well designed to stop bows and arrows... as well as pretty much everything else, getting through quality plate armor was very difficult, but then again it was also very expensive and only a minority of folks on the battlefield has such elite armor.
For much of history and geography the majority of soldiers on the battlefield have little to no armor, a helmet if they're lucky, and for many of other parts of history armor can be quite light.
Now Lars is a fellow of slight build who started shooting around the age of 40. Start someone young or just someone stronger and they'd be able to use much heavier bows at near that speed. And here's the thing, it's the technique for the reload that matters, regardless of exactly how fast one can be in combat the point is these techniques allow a shooter to be MORE fast and MORE effective than someone shooting with a slower form.
Also the book he mentions above "Arab Archery 1500" does indeed have this and several other combat speed shooting techniques listed in them. He simply applied them better than anyone before him.
Gehrig RFC
Heavier build and Age certainly, but you still have to take the time to actually draw the bow string. A half-draw wouldn't cut it for me, sorry.
In western culture yes, it was rare for anyone besides a noble to have a 'full set' of metal armour. However, Leather was much cheaper to come by and was fairly common in both cultures.
Armour in east was far more uniformed. (ashigaru for example)
He claims it is a 'lost' art but it was never actually lost and has been practised (like many archery techniques) for centuries, even today. It's simply because we as a 'western' audience we aren't exposed to this kind of variation on archery techniques.
He bases his knowledge of artistic images from people who rarely if ever at all witnessed the actual events of battles. If the source material is flawed then how can this be the 'correct' technique?
The book he mentions and quotes is a conversation between two mythological figures.... If I believed everything mythological figures said the world would be flat and we'd be at the centre of the Universe.
red244 1. Sometimes his draw is more or less full than others, either way the difference is near negligible. Drawing to eye or ear and releasing as one movement can be just as fast. There is no need to hold a bow at draw, indeed, this is more tiring and far less useful vs moving targets or while moving yourself, either on foot or on a horse.
2. Both cultures? The world has been composed of hundreds if not thousands of cultures. And armor has varied widely among them. But is usually fairly uncommon in most among the bulk of most armies.
3. The ability to shoot 3 arrows at 1.5 seconds was a lost art. And indeed, before Lars video I saw very few folks practicing the arrow in the hands technique. Some elements of it survived but others... not so much.Certainly in the west.
4. The knowledge is based on several things. Experimentation, art, written word, and existing traditions from several cultures around the world and at different times. Is all the art perfect? No. But through it we can see some common threads. Accounts all throughout history tell of such impressive rate of fire feats. Some existing traditions (or recently existing ones) can show related skillsets. Then we have written instructions on accomplishing several of these techniques, from the period in which they were practiced. Then through experimentation and practice they can all be applied and brought together.
5. Ah the book quoting between mythological figures thing... I see you saw the skeptical reaction video... but apparently not Lars' response to it. Pity. Sorry man but again you don't know what you're talking about... and neither did she. I own a copy that book man, and have taught a class based off of that section, and it is regarded as an excellent treatise on archery written in period. Yes, the part where the writer tells the mythological ORIGIN STORY of the technique involves a convo between mythical figures, because people in period rarely know where things come from when they are centuries or millennia old. But if you go back a single page from there you will find several techniques described in detail for how you do these techniques. And again, the Arab Archery 1500 book is regarded as an optimum primary period source on archery, both for technique and for historical insight, yes it's peppered with fables, religious references, and legendary origins, but that's most period documents... the techniques and info on archery is as solid as anything you will find.
Sorry man, you're just on the wrong side on this one.
Omg, it is because you have not seen his other videos! It is how they did when not using the english long bow. that was made for range not speed. He use the bow of a riding bow man and they can shoot hella fast as you see!
DC Comics: keep an eye on this guy if you ever want to make a Green Arrow movie
That would be incredible.
@Dorian Grey k
@Dorian Grey your point is archery is useless, but you are talking about making a movie.
WOW!! I am speechless! I have in my life seen or even herd of anyone shooting a long bow as fast as this!!! I mean three shots three arrows in one second, while he was jumping down from a ten feet off of a platform!!!
Truly amazing! If didn’t see this on video I would never have believed it even possible!!
This might sound weird, but I think we're starting to see this with Math already. Math teachers can process complex algebra and calculus just in their heads, but most younger students, myself included, use calculators for almost everything. There may come a time when math is a sport, and no one in the future will be able to believe how fast mental math was done in the past without computer assistance.
It is unlikely that it will be come a sport, because there's no action. The reason why you'd think so because most westerner don't calculate things in their minds while most Asians has been doing so already since they were young.
lmao
Math is for weebs and plebs nigga buy a cellphone
some ancient slavic books says that in the past people could even regenerate lost limb but nobody today would belive it, people basically lost most of their abilities due to technology replacing them, just as like the history of archery is complete bullshit whole history is a lie
livefromhollywood194 I’ve never thought about that but I think you’ll be proven right in time.
Finally all of us mabi fans can rejoice at the return of the arrow revolver technique. (If you know what I'm talking about just upvote me, don't even have to comment)
Great effort by Andersen, good that he is shedding light on a lost martial arts techniques.
People say it can't be done because they can't do it.
Ariel Reyes True
so true
the real archery. coz archery is not just a sport with boring style.
Jealousy
The Old texts are wrong all the old paintings are wrong too, everything is a big hoax set up by the Ancient Archers, Painters and Eye witnesses because modern archers can't do it.
Makes perfect sense.
Arguing the bow has less power is the same argument used to say an old .30-06 rifle is more effective than an AR15.
Voted down by those jealous as fk they can’t do it!
Good work by Lars!
Good point
You guys don't realise that bows and guns aren't same thing. Handgun, shotgun, machine gun etc, these weapons are used in different situation. Bows are mostly same, the only difference is power. You can't kill a well armed soldier with a 20 lbs bow. Medieval archers all around the world (West and east) used over 100 lbs bow for reasons. Even in modern day, to hunt a deer, you need at least 40 lbs draw weight in your hunting bow. Lars doesn't even shoot 40 lbs.
I am not saying speed shooting is useless or it was never done. But it’s not the only way archers shot. Spcially horseback archers did shoot fast, in various technique.
In the same way Lars intuits a style from the manuscript, shouldnt we - even more - intuit a style from 100+ pound draw weight bows that we *know* existed in several independant cultures from thousands upon thousands of, not just historical accounts, but actual surviving examples (like the Mary Rose)?
The best way to stimulate the natural instinctive reaction, stripped bow, spot on shooting, and it helps in other life situations of accuracy, I love it.
Props to this guy man, he may not be shooting a high poundage bow but he has got this skill down!!!
He pierced the chain-mail just fine, anything beyond that is extra weight and could be your death in war.
@thedementation666: He holds 10 arrows in hand, allowing him to reload and fire his next arrow MUCH faster than if he were to take the time to draw each individual arrow from his quiver and fire it. When he runs out, he grabs another 10 without even looking, which he can then fire in quick succession. Sounds like a more efficient form of shooting to me!
I'm going to guess that this guy is just trolling, seeing as how he disabled replies to his comment.
This is amazing! I've watched this over and over!
As “self-thought” archers from the age of 5-6, my friends and I had lots of fun playing indians in the forest for several summers. We were shooting at targets (and sometimes eachother) moving around pretty much like Lars does at the clip. Later we discovered, but never understood, that modern archers hold the arrow on the left side of the bow while shooting on a target. Decades later it actually gives a lot of satisfaction discovering that “our” method has been the common way among moving archers… Og: Rå skyting da Lars!
I am speachless... Congratulation from Poland on mastering archery!!!!
As a young person with a love of history this is fascinating to me. Makes me view archery in a totally different light. It is always portrayed as a very slow and methodical, but in reality it is insanely fast, close range and accurate
Let's all chant this together: A broad-tip arrow sinking just one inch into your neck is worse than listening to the eternal "can't hit hard if you shoot fast" crowd.
Getting your shot on target faster than the other guy gives you time to make your follow-up shot count.
Combat arrow points were either flying blades or piercing tips.
Either way they will cause injuries. Even if you push them in by hand!
And how long did a soldier with a septic wound last back then?
Lars would be extremely lucky to hit a man in the neck, let alone hit him at all if he were farther than 20 yards.
Daenon Janis considering the battlefields they used to fight on, he'd probably be right at home actually. His other video shows him firing a few shots at range, one at an angle, followed by one practically straight on. The second hit before the first and both were dead on regardless.
Kinshota Kanaes link me to the video. I may have seen it but I can't recall. Anyone can have 2 good shots with enough takes (which if you check snopes Lars most certainly had many many takes) I'm still standing by my comment. I doubt he would hit a man in the neck from even 10 yards consistently. He doesn't even actually do proper Syrian or Mongolian horseman Archery, and you would be stupid to be that close on a battlefield with a bow and no means of quick movement.
I saw a 'demo' of this technique in the 1970's!
The archer kept on referring to it as 'trick shooting' and reminded the crowd the "serious archers never use this technique!"
He hit every target that he called out, with astounding speed.
When we asked him why archers don't use this technique, the archer replied "too long too learn, too much practice to get good."
He just called all other archers lazy...
Daenon Janis Did you not just see him sink three in a second into a man-sized-block at 70 yards?
99 ranged, meanwhile people who pay to stand outside and line up a shot for 20 minutes be like "that's not real archery" "real archery is shit like us" like get over it even if you are elitist, you just have to straight up understand; this man is better than you are, your entire guild, or will ever hope to become at archery. yes his bow is light, it's a shortbow. this guy is 3rd age range tier. the only reason any archers are mad here, is because what lars does, fundamentally devalues your existence and craft so much, that he makes you all look like you've *been doing it wrong for thousands of years*
holy shit this guys awesome. I've been working on his techniques but without actually instructions on how I'm just watching and trying to mimic him. If nothing else this guy could make a nice living being a consultant for movies and tv showing people how to shoot more realistically. Looking at you avenger and arrow.
lindybeige is likely more qualified
everyone is making long paragraphs when I'm just like "I LIKE BOWS AND ARROWS!"
Redditor here and fellow expert bowmaster. The Redditor in the vid is good, but this isn't impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats with my Kontra bow back home, they're not much bigger than two meters. I'll PM you next time you swing round /r/Archery or /r/Atheism fine sir, we could do with archerier like yourself as we are currently recruiting for our Archery Guild clan. Some more practice and you will be good enough to be a fellow guild member and who knows, with time, maybe even a Reddit Gold member, *tip of the hat* to you good sir and keep practicing, you WILL get there eventually xD
+Want to see my machine gun?
-But.. that's a bow..
+I'm aware
I really want to see this in Discovery Time Warp. It would be awesome.
I heard a story of a king who was a great archerer was once caught by another army and was forced to be blind folded and ordered to shoot some apples
But as he heard the king of the other state he shot at him just by hearing the voice straight through the eye
How can the shot go through the eye if you are aiming for the voice. It must be a shot through throat!
Sure are a lot of haters out there for a technique that clearly works. I would not mind learning this myself. Well done Lars!!!!!
Why does the narrator sound like a broken robot?? Impressive archer though.
i was wondering the same thing
If I had to guess judging by the grammar, the video's maker isn't an English speaker (or at least not a native speaker) and probably used the text-to-voice in order to avoid making what was being said unclear to English speakers with a heavy accent.
Lars Andersen is from Denmark...so I'm guessing he either a) can't speak English or b) can't speak it well, so he used a text-to-speech device to communicate with the English speaking world.
It's Microsoft Sam, however there are better voices Like those from Loquendo, but only pirates would have access to all these extra voices.
This video is mainly about archery, not perfectly spoken English.
3:11 Tardis blue. Just saying.
Great video amazing skills , all sceptics should relax and just realise there is so much ancient knowledge we have lost that is amazing and just need to to look at things like the ancient pyramids that we realise before the I pad came along man was still building things and reaching the stars without electric and machines 👍👌
So elves do exist....
When you max out your archery class in a medieval rpg, but realize your not even close to Lars Anderson level
Because the games are based on Hollywood Archery.
In D&D, with a round lasting 6 seconds, a 20th-level Fighter could conceivably get off 12 shots in 12 seconds (3 extra attacks for a total of 4 attacks per round with Action Surge on the first round doubling that number). However, Lars here can fire arrows at rates faster than 1/second, and while the Fighter only gets 1 Action Surge per day, Lars can, well, do this all day.
amazing, and he's really enjoying it
must have been crazy having to fight with a sword when there were archers like this back then
Imagine if some random dude in a gang started using bow and arrow today, like a driveby but theres just a dude hanging out the window of the car with a bow lmaoo
It would be a lot quieter I guess so kinda practical if ur really good
Deadly AF. Some broadheads do more damage than a bullet.
I'm a Lord of the rings fan and i also like the legolas character but what amazes me more than what this guys is able to do is how some people just can't cope with a REAL person outdoing what a FAKE movie character did in a movie, and so they turn their brain to fantard and start trying using logic to make their lovely character look better. Oh look the Uruk Hai were moving! Oh look Legolas is using a quiver! Oh look Legolas is using a much bigger bow! Oh look legolas is... WHO CARES legolas is a fake character and even a fake character looks bad compared to a real person in this case, we should be giving kudus to the guy not defending a F******** story book character, priorities people.
Well he's not even in the Books lol he's only in the movies.
Thank you!
Ancient bow techniques have always been here, and i think it's good that someone has taken the time to learn and study something long forgotten. it's a past of "our" history despite what nation we are from. if people could take the time and have the same kind of passion about things, i wonder what would happen?. Mastering the essence of archery is a lot more than to be able to shoot targets with high speed or accuracy.
Who narrated this? Microsoft Sam?
Damon Day Almost, it was actually Clippy.
Lmfao young ppl don't get that
Lars Andersen has pulled the pants down on many armchair historians and sideshow artists by doing what noone bother to do for several hundred years. PUT IN THE HOURS and prove what can be done with a bit of training even at a ripe old age (Sorry Lars) Imagine then what a professional archer in a mediaval army could have done - training hours every day from the age of 7?
I suspect that all those selfproclaimed experts who put down Lars' efforts only really have one aim. To lower the bar so they can look good again.
....and about the "weak bow" - try shooting an arrow with a sharp steel broadhead from a 30pd bow at someone from 100ft of distance. If its so harmless you should not worry about spending the next 20 years in prison ;-)
cfolman From the age of 7? More like from birth lol
Weak 30 pound bows can kill unarmored people, but they are not warbows because any form of armor will stop them. Actual warbows have 100lb draws and over. Historically inaccurate butted mail is so weak that a butter knife can probably stab through it. Historically accurate riveted mail is quite decent against penetration and would laugh off arrows from a 30lb bow. A 30lb bow likely can't even go through padding/gambeson worn underneath mail. Skallagrim and ThegnThrand both have decent tests against historically accurate riveted mail on youtube, and it is quite difficult to penetrate. ThegnThrand has a recent video of a 105lb warbow, and that can actually penetrate riveted mail and padding underneath.
@@Intranetusa Historically accurate armor cannnot be recreated, because we do not know the material properties of the metal used.
@@James-dg6xe Besides written historical records, we do have a decent idea of ancient armor based on archaeological evidence of actual armor that have survived throughout the ages. For example, metal bands for the lorica segmentata/laminar have been found buried in the ground that allows historians to gauge the thickness and type of iron used in its construction. Riveted chainmail have been found all over (mostly as clumps of rusted masses). Bronze armor survived much better than iron or organic armor, so many bronze armors and helmets from ancient times have survived. In East Asia, stone representations of armor have been found that allows people to understand its construction methods. Actual metal lamellar plates have been found in East Asia (eg. Tang Dynasty tombs and archaeological sites) that allows people to gauge their thickness and materials.
@Abu Troll al cockroachistan Steel plating armor can vary greatly in thickness, and not all armor is steel plating. Even if we're only talking about late middle ages European plate armor, the thickness of armor around the center of the chest/vital areas can be 3x-4x thicker than armor around the peripheries/limbs/etc. The Tang Dynasty had lamellar plates up to 2.8mm thick. Other lamellar plates have been as thin as 0.8mm. A high powered bow or crossbow might not penetrate the thickest parts, but may penetrate the thinner armors. And non-plate type armor such as riveted chainmail made of iron or steel materials can be penetrated by a sufficiently powerful bow as shown by many youtube tests.
And armor has been composed of many different materials that vary in strength - rawhide, bronze, iron, linen, cotton, mulberry, steels with different levels of carbon, cheap munitions grade steel, etc. The most common form of armor during much of the European middle ages [especially earlier periods] wasn't steel plates, but rather organic armors made of fabric/plant fibers such as gambeson/aketon. The most common form of armor used by Alexander of Macedon's army was actually linothorax made out of linen fabric.
This is wonderful , these master Archers of old knocked it out the ball like him ,
when Joe Rogan mentioned Lars,I was like "fuck yeah I watched Lars too"
should compare to the new legolas, seen in the Hobbit. Think they took legolas's swag and multiplied it by 30x
I remember when this strange video was on top of TH-cam’s recommendation.
It was such a well made video, aside from the archaic narration, which I didn’t notice was an AI until stumbling upon this video for the second time, years later.
This is like when Walt went to using an alternative, old school meth cook that was more cost effective. He found something that worked for the same result without as much fuss as the alternative cook.
I like thinking that this guy has been able to revive this lost technique. It’s amazing what gets left behind and how effective or efficient they are, great for bringing back to the present day for those that still enjoy the hobby, but are looking for a different, more straightforward way of participating in it in a way that is simple yet does so much more for you that current technique, sort of like Bel Canto singing too I suppose.
Jesus people this is a speed shooting technique not trying g to say it's the only or most effective in fact at the beginning of the freaking video it says there are many different ways to shoot for different reasons this is the fastest no question
Not only that, I don't think much other speed shooters can keep up with his accuracy...
Yeah he's dead on the video is real time, this isn't Ken block pretending it didn't take 16 tries, he's a boss. Even if he slowed down enough for a full draw on a 55-60 he'd still be faster and apsolutly lethal.... eBayed a north American flat bow the same day I saw this video no joke dream season can take a seat I have to try this
His claims backed by his ability speaks volumes. He has recaptured a lost art and makes modern archery look clumsy. He has validated legendary skills by renowned warriors in the past that were dismissed as exaggeration. An army of Mongols on horse back with these skills must have stricken fear into everyone they confronted and were virtually invincible. The Samurai archer was equally proficient I am sure along with any European archer worth his salt before the invention of the gun.
Ammo should be quick access like holding many in one hand or the quiver is on the bow holding forearm.
Whatever we can say or comment .....anyone ready to compete with him.? It is soooo easy to blah blah and critique but go ahead and just do the apple shot like he did ....?
How many takes do I get?
I also noticed none if his targets were firing back or barreling down on him, and his trick shots were largely conducted in a gym providing sure footing.
The most perplexing part of the video though was the narration. Why not get a human being to do it?
Neal Orr They probably didn't have a competent enough English speaker.
And yes, funny how demonstrations don't actually involve people being involved in some Ren Faire battle or whatever weird criteria you need.
Neal Orr Yeah I also noticed that it is 2015 and he is a writer, not a warrior.
Ben W
About 90% of Danes are fluent in English.
Neal Orr
Those internet statistics.. but sure, Danes are, as in general, capable of speaking English.
Why couldn't you just get a guy to read the script. This sounds so awkward.
tibschris he have very thick accent
Not that it’s bad, just very hard to understand if you are not used to
@@326inminecraft he said get someone to read it
Wow, you're half draws are faster than other people's full draws? That's amazing!
I feel like the video should have mentioned that training like this was the exception, even among masters. Bows through history were, first and foremost, a distance weapon. To be precise, they were either the longest range weapon or the second longest range weapon, depending on the specific bow (though they do drop a bit if you count artillery). Naturally, whenever someone received training for such a long range weapon, it focused on long range. Not to say that training for short-mid range combat with the bow didn't exist, but that it tended to take a back seat to a technique which made the most of the fact that the bow permitted you to hit someone on the opposite side of the battlefield.
Yeah, but as you mentioned, this is all about close-range archery. A good long-range archer can be fairly deadly (as shown here).
Edit: Actually, it depends on which era and location we're talking about. In some places, body armor was a rarity for soldiers, especially since many might have had to pay for it (a common thing for back then). So if this technique was being done in an area 'back then' where full-body armor was used, then it would mostly be useless. But otherwise, this man is a nightmare.
***** But what about when he shot through chainmail with modern arrows (which aren't even made for combat)?
***** Depends on the arrow, the arrowhead, the bow, the archer, the thickness of the wood, and the type of the wood.
Non combat bows? Sure. Hunting bows from settled societies or the overly weak bows sometimes used to teach kids would reasonably be stopped by a bit of good wood/plywood.
Combat bows? If its not designed to punch through armour, maybe you could get away with it being a bit over an inch thick over a thick gambeson. But I wouldn't trust that, particularly because every time it gets hit it becomes structurally weaker.
That's not to say it wouldn't technically stop it. The arrow would certainly stop moving. But there's a decent chance it would go deep enough to still wound, especially if its in a bad spot or, like I mentioned earlier, the armour has been hit repeatedly.
No you are wrong bows were not a distance weapon. That's all bullshit. I know I am a history major, This is most likely the way a bow was used. All the "pros" out there and bullshit people say is just coming from dumb people.
Kyle Blank
That has no bearing on the ability to penetrate traditional armour. A bulletproof vest is made of various fabrics that cause the bullet to deform in advance and spread out so even if it reaches the skin it will have lost a massive amount of energy and not be in a position to create a cavity.
An arrow, on the other hand, does not deform. The vest only provides resistance equivalent to the thickness and density of the fabric. A Gambeson is superior protection to a bulletproof vest which isn't specialized to also protect against non-deformable impact, simply because its thicker.
I call him to be on my zombie apocalypse team!
Finders keepers :)
You changed your comment, nvm
You're*
Your*
You’d never survive with him.
A lot of people who complain it is not useable seem to forget that the main weakness of the bow is close in. Even midling accuracy at such a high rate of fire would take down many men, with even the slightest gaps in their armour at close range.
This is the style of horse archery as well, the whole point is to ride close and but 30 arrows into someone in a few seconds.
This is a very effective technique, only limited in battle by how many arrows you can carry.
A lot of people forget, a 45 pound bow is enough to put an arrow clean through someone...
2:17
noice
loved it. :P
just a tip, the mechanical voice automatically makes it sound like a conspiracy, or as a sales pitch.
Yes & the artisan knew how to make a really good bow, did excellent. Nice tecnic. He's a very moving archer, good handling.
that moment when your narrator is a computer
he does not draw it fully because the hand holding the bow pushes the moment he releases the arrow. that can compensate for the force not fully drawn
If he draws the bow halfway through then the arrow only has about 25% of the full kinetic energy. You cannot compensate for that by just a slight push against the bow. It's simple physics... If you could do that, there would be no point of using a bow because you would be able to throw the arrow by hand just as fast.
wojtekimbier it is not half drawn apparently
@just away but he doesn't...
Lars, you never cease to amaze
What pound bow is being used?
a 35lbs short bow
Most of the soldiers in the pre-gunpowder age were just light to no armor... They were lucky to have a chest plate. So volleys of arrows would devastate 90% of the army very easy... Nobles had armour (commanders, knights, possibly mercenaries, and leaders), but that was like a minority.
Shields... there's a reason shields were so widespread
Talmid
They had gambison and leather, which was cheap and could stop arrows from up to I think 140 pound drawstrength bows
Thank you for showing us Master Archery gonna start to learn archery from videos.
The chainmail result is inaccurate, for a couple of reasons:
A. Chainmail has padding underneath it when worn and isn't stretched taut. Thus the minor penetrations here wouldn't be an issue.
B. The best modern chainmail is equivalent to cheap munitions-quality mail from old, so if a modern arrow can penetrate modern mail, the jury is still out. Not an accurate result.
C. Finally, we know arrows couldn't penetrate chainmail, because if they could, nobody would wear it. We also have plenty of instances in historical accounts in which cataphracts or Muscovites were pelted with arrows (in the latter case, from Mongols with 100 pound bows) and were only mildly troubled.
Other than that, a great video.
Then why were the Muscovites, the Poles, the Hungarians, the Khwaresmians and the Jin Cataphracts all fell before the Mongols? Clearly it wasn't just due to the Mongols' hand to hand combat prowess.
El Bandito The problem is, the people dying in those defeats you speak of were the unarmored peasantry and men at arms. The wealthy nobles wearing chainmail were largely the ones escaping unscathed... as their men routed under a hailstorm of arrows that penetrated lesser armor. There are accounts of said men accounting themselves well against Mongol forces until panic and wavering fear led the entire army to rout.
The Mongols might have been known for their incredible horse archery, but even they used melee tactics - such is almost a neccessity, if only to fend off the enemy's melee cavalry. Even they couldn't always keep an enemy at distance, especially when they are trying to attack and press a siege.
Jetman123 OH YEAH JETMAN...you sound like you read up on your history.
< 3
This is why Mod Historians shouldn't be so quick to discount the Primary sources as they sometimes are. (Unless we're talking the Assyrian Annals, you gotta inter linea that shiz to the max.)
Excellent use of research and skepticism! I approve!
So many Dungeons & Dragons players commenting.
The amount of butthurt "traditional" archers is amusing
I know, they're on both of his popular videos now that he's trending. It's hilarious.
Unless they used cgi I doubt what I can see with my own eyes in this video can be a lie. And cgi doesn't seem likely.
***** Lars' video is actually one of the hardest to fix up in the editing room. Because he shoots multiple shots in most scenes.
I think you mean 'eurocentric traditional' archer sir... :P
Lyedel
Exactly lol
Funny how Lars is better than Legolas and Hawkeye, since they are the symbols of "impossible" archery. I guess if they tried to portray actually impossible archery, the audience wouldn't believe it, or maybe even be able to SEE it. I can barely see Lars' hands move as it is. And he's real.
They didn't know what legendary archers were, they only knew the noble past time of target archery. A crying shame for a lot of reasons.
Nice trick shots
chainmail was never meant to stop arrows
It bothers me when people say lars didn't rediscover this art that people knew about it. I say experience is ultimately the only real knowledge and I say it was rediscovered by lars because he is the only one in modern times to learn how to actually do it and by in large still is the only one.
Most impressive! because of the speed and flexibility. I am not yet convinced it would go through decent armor in realistic conditions though. what is the speed and weight of the arrows and the poundage of the bow?
Hawkeye is that you?
Does anyone know the LBS of his bow? I saw people claiming it was lightweight.
For people giving Lars grief over the arrows not being stuck into the targets... You know that it can help a little if you can get the arrows back in the heat of battle, right? Not that it's recommended, but just like how sword-fighting isn't all about deep thrusting and actually involves a lot of small cuts overtime, a poking arrow can sometimes prove more helpful in some situations. Like, I don't know, having it bounce on someone's cheek before digging out enough of another's eye to make him blind and potentially destabilize a group.
Also, it was quite common for soldiers not to have armor, since most of the time, you needed to pay for it yourself. Thus, only high-ranking guys had armor. Some places had soldiers in full-body armor though, but in other places, this close-range archery was most likely very deadly.
432neptune Don't tell the others that though, I got done told that these techniques are more or less useless, even with what you said.
I swear people are stupid.
Joshua Madoc I like how people are trying to say that this guy is incorrect in how he does things by using the logic of modern archery.
I think this picture here sums up my feelings pretty well:
global3.memecdn.com/new-meme-for-those-extra-stupid-people_o_2349461.jpg
Sword fighting is not about accumulating small cuts. Its about killing the other person in any way possible, with a sword, dirt, fists, whatever. It was not fencing, or like a movie. Think bar fight with MMA fighters. Then substitute those fighters with assholes with swords. And multiply that by several thousands.
thethingamajiggy Very true. More often than not knights did not wield a sword/slashing weapon against an armoured opponent. they used blunt weapons, or combination weapons like the crows beak. Mainly to knock your opponent down or out, flip his visor up, and stab them in the face/armpits or other weak points with a dagger. Hollywood really does no justice to true history.
NOW THATS QUICKSCOPING
So the trick is about holding the entire quiver in your hand while shooting, and being able to quickly exchange the arrows one after one.
Well...that takes a lot of skill, but still it's just a technique. Can't see how he can be compared to Legolas if they use two entirely different techniques.