Arrows v's silk shirts and other myths
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 июн 2024
- There are so many myths about the longbow.....and I look at 3 popular ones in this vid. Are arrows easier to remove when you wear a silk shirt? Can arrows shoot through 3"/75mm oak doors? Do arrows spin so fast they drill into targets?
Well that is mostly what the film is about, but it is also partly about the importance of truth....
If you would like to help support this channel, visiting my websites is a great help
Highly accurate budget historical weapons todcutler.com
Museum quality custom weapons todsworkshop.com
Our T shirts are available here, including our new "Knight Vision" teespring.com/stores/todswork...
To really understand why I am using this crossbow as a testing platform and why it is useful to do so, watch this first video in the series • CRAZY idea... War bow ...
Edited like all my LDLB films, by Greg Bright
The origins of the silk shirt myth? A comment taken from my FB page "Jonathan Alvekrans Regarding the latest video, the silk shirt myth seems to originate from James Chambers' book The Devil's Horsemen, published in the 70s. He gives no source for his stement and all other mention of this appears to go back to that book. books.google.se/books?id=tbTNDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PT62..."
You put a lot of thought into this 👍
I can't add any sources but i do remember my mother saying that the mongols valued the silk shirt because it got entangled in the arrow head and made it EASIER to extract it without causing more damage.
Great Video as always, Thanks.
So a couple of comments, you are correct that a person who survived the arrow or a bullet hit, is better off with a Silk Shirt vs. Linen as the debris from the garment will not collect in the wounds as readily as other material. Very important in the days before antibiotics.
Secondly, rotation vs penetration is not likely a "Thing" in low velocity projectiles, like arrows. "Modern Arrows" like the APFSDS fired out of tanks, it is a factor. That is why the British 105mm Rifled Gun, was replaced with the German 120mm Smooth-bore Gun. When launching a 6 pound Tungsten or Depleted Uranium Finned Dart at 6,000 Feet per second,.The Smooth-bore gun performs better as no energy is wasted on rotation to stabilize the projectile. Of course it is theoretically less accurate than a rifled gun at 2 kilometres distance, however the target is rather large, usually another tank, so no big deal.
Finally Teflon coated bullets were used in armor piercing pistol ammunition in the 1970's, notably by the KKW corporation. These were brass bullets coated in Teflon. The reason for the coating was two fold, one to reduce wear on the pistol's barrel, but primarily to help seal the bullet against the rifling, preventing blow-by and aiding engagement with the rifling. Copper jacketed and lead bullets, slightly deform when fired and engage the rifling, whereas hard brass does not.
I thought the silk shirt thingie was about getting the barbed arrows out in a less unsettling than normal fashion.
Hey Tod for the arrow through the door, another thing to consider is how many times the door has been shot, as perhaps the first or second wont however maybe the 5th or the 10th will have sufficiently weakened the frame to allow for some arrows to penetrate completely
"I am now gonna pop up from time to time and just give a slightly more balanced, slightly less ranty explanation in certain places".
Respect. Being able to criticize your own work and its limitations from a different angle is something that not only encourages me to trust your work more, but you yourself as a person.
underrated comment.
Thank you. I just try to be balanced ands needed to get myself a back a bit more central
True maturity and professionalism. Thanks for the comment and the videos. Love from Brazil.
@@tods_workshop I've watched and been impressed by many of your videos, but this, and the level of professionalism, attention to detail, and the pursuit of truth and honesty shown in it are something else. Very much appreciate you correcting or amending your statements, and striving for a more nuanced and less definitive, or black and white answer. This is the type of quality content I love to subscribe to and support; thank you for your hard work and dedication to accuracy.
@@tods_workshop by 'central' i hope you just mean, you'll note more often that these fantastic tests are all very specific to these excellent heavy arrows from a very powerful bow representation. Within these specific test variables/scenarios, by all means you can be pretty confident with a conclusion :)
It's Geral de Barri, known as Giraldus Cambrensis, or Geral the Welsh-man. It's an account from 1188 when he wrote about his experience in Wales, named Itinerarium Kambriae.
It's during the Siege of Abergavenny Castle in 1182. "Two soldiers ran over a bridge to take refuge in one of the Castel towers. Welsh archers, shooting from behind them, drove their arrows into the oak door of the tower with such force that the arrowheads penetrated the wood of the door which was nearly a hand thick; and the arrows were present in that door as a memento."
Giraldus saw them six years after they had been so effectively shot. A hand is about 4 inches or 100 mm. The correct phrasing is "palmalis fere spissitudinis transpenetrarunt" - "they penetrated nearly the space of a palm. So maybe 3 1/2 inches or 89 mm. My palm is 103 mm across.
Thank you!
The kind of knowledgeable people I find in Tod’s comment section never ceases to amaze me
Yeah I knew that guy he was always exaggerating. Should have heard him talk about his weiner
"transpenetrarunt" but that means the arrows stick in, not that they went through, right?
so the myth is a bad translation?
but does "hand thick" refer to width, length, or depth of a hand ? why choose width ? perhaps in translation/interpretation, it was meant "as thick as a hand", which would only be a few inches as your hand really is only 1-2 inches thick, and is a far more believable statement, given Tod's results.
This pausing reminds me of the emperors new groove when Cusco pauses to remind the audience that he’s the main character and not pacha
Hahaha! Oh man, totally agree. Except that Todd criticizes and tries to tone himself down instead of inflate his ego. Really good comparison, thanks alot!
@@retroicdescent and that is why i respect his judgement. Yeah, i am more likely to trust him.
Great minds...
@@flyndutchmn At first I wondered why didn’t he just redo the dialogue so we would not know he had “disagreed” with himself. Then it occurred to me he was also demonstrating the danger of having to be absolutely correct. Acknowledging an error is difficult in real life (and almost impossible online apparently) so I respect his options even more if that’s possible.
I know the constant pausing might be annoying to some people but to me it just shows you that you won't give us a fake reaction and you will show your honest reactions to your experiments. Keep up the great work
That is probably one of the COOLEST ways of editing opinions, historical reference, and experimental trials that I’ve seen. If only I could do that in real life to dial back my soap box moments.. cheers on your ingenuity.
Thank you - very kind
@@tods_workshop Todd, have you heard of the Samurai-era use of silk standards that would billow behind the rider when he was on horseback? It essentially billows out like a parachute, and is pretty effective as slowing down incoming projectiles much like an airbag slows someones forward momentum. Perhaps the myth had root in some similar such usage? I could definitely see such a silk cape/standard slow incoming arrows to a stop, or enough so that they barely penetrate, in which case pulling them out by the silk gains some credence. I'd love to hear your opinion. Videos of the samurai-era standards being tested against arrows on horseback can be found on youtube. Best regards!
@@tods_workshop after some googling, the Japanese cape was called a Horo. It essentially inflated behind the rider at speed, and was pretty effective at stopping or at the very least slowing arrows down. The video that went into it in depth has been taken down unfortunately, but if you google "horo stops arrows" or something similar, there's lots of interesting content to look into. Maybe you can test this at some point?
It's a Tod's version of a footnote. A Todnote? =)
@@Sophocles13 I have seen this video. It seems to stop arrows quite well in the situations its used. Mongols used similar tactics, you charge in fire and then turn riding away. The Horo worked for stopping arrows as the rider rode away. It wouldn't work if the horse was stopped or when the rider is charging it.
21 minutes of company time very well spent. Thanks for a bright spot in my day.
My social responsibility and from the perspective of a company owner says I should disapprove - but I don't! Love it and really made me laugh
Watching this is 2020. For a brief moment, I thought "lockdown Long bow" was what Tod called his Long bow during a lockdown.
It wasn't until this comment I realized that's not what it meant 😂 😂 😂
ya, that is what I thought it meant too lol. I thought it was an experiment he was doing during lockdown.
Well the video was posted in October 2020
Lockdown does refer to the lockdown, you bleeding idiots
@@stupidhandles so much hostility. 😂 😂 😂 Clearly someone is having a bad lockdown
I mean... it's what he calls his crossbow because he can't bring a longbow archer to his house during lockdown? It is still called the because it was lockdown.
I have a feeling that the Mongol "silk shirts" were more of a gambeson type thing, and they also wore something like scale mail or lamellar armor on top, which would definitely slow the arrows down somewhat. Also this was a defense against barbed arrows, not bodkins.
I remember stories of roman/chinese trade. The romans would unweave the much thicker woven silk and make it into more like the silks we use today. Chances are, despite talking about the Mongols instead of the Chinese, you were correct about it being a thicker garment. Not just by layers, but likely by weave as well
also short capes were a thing.. with the bottom of the cape tied to the sadle or the riders waist. it would billow out behind the rider. arrows hitting it would have momentum blunted by that as well..
@@mcewenhandcraft You mean an arrow curtain?
@@zeekeno823 the Mongolians didn’t have much production, most of their “high end” stuff like fancy fabrics came from other peoples... and given that the mongols everyone in the west were facing had already been through china i’m gonna say it’s Chinese silk fabrics they took
So your general statement is correct and I totally agree with you
The thing with being hit with an arrow while wearing silk did save lives, mail and proper armor did more but for being protected to having something a fabric that wraps around and a weapoin yeah it did work and it was very damn wonderful. it did work and it did change the battlefields they were part of. but we can look at his ideas of the same stuff, but well... he loves to show off stuff... but its not accurate cause there are so many different things going on.
I'm so happy to see that you are able to call yourself out and correct yourself. It's a lost art, especially here on youtube.
You mean we aren't all infallible?! Triggered! /s
Dedication to the scientific method.
Excellent explanation of your observations.
I appreciate how you didn't just cut the mistakes out, but addressed them. Makes you human.
Silk myth: I remember reading that the silk undershirts were worn very loosely in a crumpled fashion. the silk setup you had was a very tight wearing of the silk, which was much more conducive to shock impact penetration.
This is one of the best clips i've watched on YT. Love love love the interventions and the smoothing of the waters. The world needs more of this across the board. Bravo.
i thought on the Mongolian war garments it was armor over a multi layered silk kaftan.
It is and both the layers and armor help slow the arrows.
Also most of the legends about Silk are about when its wet.
What wasnt dificult since the mongols where traveling hours untill Battle, so their own swet would do the job.
This has been tested by another chanel and it was evident that the silk undershirt worn beneath a layer of armor does provide a great benefit
Am still confused why the mongols shot themselves....
Todd refers to Mongolian arrows when talking about the silk myth.
@@DreadX10 Because they were a bunch of tribes that constantly waged war on themselfs as well as with anyone around them. Its not like they were a united entity.
Sir, your videos have taught me so much more than I thought I already knew. Please keep up the great work
One of the most interesting medieval warfare/craft channels on entire RUclips. Thank you, Tod, a lot. Really love your videos.
As someone that's part Welsh, I greatly appreciate someone recognizing the proper origin of the longbow.
Yeah it was welsh in origin but the English was the ones who really utilised it the best by using it in mass formation and making everyone train with it
Over the course of the millennium since the long bow was invented I would argue that most people in England are "part Welsh".
Additionally the long bow inventors owe much to the inventors of the common bow.
@@TurinTuramber how did you come to that conclusion?
@@lionheart3916 "Very simply, if you postulate that 1000 years was 30 generations ago then your theoretical number of ancestors is two to the 30th, or just over a billion: 1,073,741,824"
If you go back far enough, everyone is related. A millennium ago there were far far far far less people around. The boundary of what is English and what is Welsh would blur into one.
@@TurinTuramber so your saying because the population was far less than today that most of England was welsh? So what about the Germanic migration from the saxons or the Scandinavian influence due to the Dane law and the norman conquest I wouldn't say any of those were welsh
I thought the silk shirt myth was about wearing a silk shirt your under armor. So if only the tip of the arrow passes through it will be wrapped in silk prevent it from infecting the wound
Is an arrowhead likely to be "dirtier" (from a microbiological perspective) than a shirt against your skin? Maybe if your enemies are jerks and wiping their arrowheads with feces. Or if the archer stuck the arrow in the ground before firing?
I've personally heard 2 versions of the silk shirt myth, only 1 having to do with the wounds. The idea that I heard was that the silk shirt was less likely to leave fibers in the wound, which is a common cause if infection. I also have heard if it wrapping the arrows as well, but never really believed that part. The other silk vs arrow myth I heard was of early samurai wearing silk capes to disrupt to arrow flight before it would actually strike flesh or armor.
@@patrickdix772 the samurai "myth" was shown to work here on RUclips. Memory wants me to say it was this channel but I might be mixing that part up.
@@Soridan I haven't watched all the videos on the channel (mostly not all the old shoots an x), so if it's not in the title of the video I don't seen one about arrows vs a cape here. I did a quick scan through of the video titles to check, and honestly haven't done any real research on it, just remembered hearing it somewhere.
@@patrickdix772 Yeah, funny that, I can't find it now. Definitely saw the video though, the guy riding around had multiple arrows shot at him and each arrow's flight path was sufficiently disturbed by the horo (the silk cape inflated by air) that their effectiveness was vastly reduced and mostly they smacked sideways into him.
On the drilling myth: Imagine that you are screwing a screw into a piece of wood, you have to apply a certain amount of force to push and rotate it in. Then think about how low a rotational force the arrow has, it is light weight and the rotational speed will never be very high. You also have to keep the rotational force and forwards force constant for a while. The rotational force of the arrow is so much lower the the force forwards. It just makes sense that the arrow won't "drill" in but that it might rotate a bit on impact. My guess is that the rotational force will be dissipated almost as soon as it hits the target. The most penetration will still come from the force forwards.
You can basically clarify this with 5 minutes of simple math.
The rotational force an arrow can produce is hardly existent.
But its so much more fun to show it in practice ^^
Not historic, but really interesting to note is the rotation created when using single bevel broadheads. Look up penetration research by Dr. Ed Ashby. Very efficient transfer of forward momentum into rotational force. I have been able to easily and consistently split 1" boards with a 50 lb recurve and 650 grain arrows to simulate bone in a hunting scenario.
Most people including some archers do not have an idea about the spin frequency of an arrow. I recall values around 1 rotation per second. Even if it did not loose any rotation on impact, the angle of rotation during penetration would be neglectable. I do not think the the rotation contributes too much to stabilizing the arrow either. The drag of the fletchings may take the brunt of this job.
@@maxlutz3674 The problem with this entire topic is that people often go for how plausible something "sounds".
Joe achieved around 55m/s with his longbow.
For an arrow to make any significant rotation in a target under these circumstances it would be required to rotate with more than 60 rotations per second.
An arrow like this would sound like a flying humming top.
Let alone the loss of energy of the arrow that would be transformed into rotational energy. Such a design would be inefficient as hell.
Have I mentioned that you would need the arrowhead to have a rotational geometry to really benefit from such a rotation in the first place?
Of course its obvious that a straight blade in a drilling machine is bullocks.
As soon as you think it through.
As long as you only think "something turning into the target making more damage sounds reasonable" it seems to make sense.
@@AliothAncalagon The real problem with this topic is that it does not even have to sound plausible if it is stated by a self-proclaimed expert. Many people are gullible and lack the knowledge to judge so they believe.
1.19 minutes. Bravo Bravo. Love your honesty and love your attitude. Its why i come back time and time again. Great integrity.
Hey Tod, very enjoyable video. Thanks for taking the time not only to make it but to add the extra commentary. Your good intentions definitely come across and confirm what we already thought: that you're a likeable guy. Cheers.
Even if they spin like crazy, arrows don't have enough inertia for the spin to have any "drilling" effect. Simple physics, man.
absolutely
Plus flathead arrows or those cross shaped cross section modern hunting arrows would not work if the arrow was spinning anything close to bullet fast.
even without the camera you can tell by the hole it makes. if it did drill the hole would be round and you dont see many round holes from a broad head or a bodkin etc, so how people got to this i dont know.
you forget this is the internet. Where all basement trolls are experts on subjects while all of them forgetting about nature's laws that proove then wrong everytime
@@yareyare_dechi
It's not quite similar, but I have seen several light novels/manga/comics/fanfics/etc that seem to think that any attack, particularly projectile attacks, would get stronger if the attack also spun around like a drill. The general idea seems to be that a spin would somehow put more 'force' into the attack.
I'm not 100% where this idea came from or how it got popular, but from what I can tell(with minimal research mind you), the basic idea seems to come from bullets.
Basically, someone heard about guns having rifling for gyroscopic stabilization, but didn't really get the idea of gyroscopic stabilization, so came away with the very basic idea of 'projectile+spin=better'. People thought it made enough sense I guess, because it didn't take long for 'make it spin' became kind of a go-to method for upgrading an attack after the first spinny attacks started coming out.
It used to be rather common a few years back, but seems to have lost popularity for the most part.
.
As a side note, even if we ignored the lack of inertia and 'definitely not drilled' holes, there's also the fact that most arrowheads are very clearly not designed with drilling into anything in mind. How anyone would see a broadhead and go 'yep, that looks like it's supposed to drill into things', I've no idea.
Commentary was well done. Obvious you take pride in your vids. Thanks for everything you do!
Thanks
I appreciate the stepping back and recognizing one’s possible mistakes
Im really enjoying your videos Tod. I just discovered your channel yesterday and Ive been binge watching them. Got my sub fo sho. Keep up the good work mate!
Lets face it. The mongol arrows worked quite well against the Chinese even when they wore silk. On the other hand I can imagine that there was some kind of Asian gambeson made of silk that worked like a gambeson an got translated as silk "shirt" Just as the medieval Norse called their gambeson as vápntreyja or weapon shirt.
Pretty much it was layered silk under amor it helped just like a western gambeson but both got shot through regularly
The Deel, there's one at Royal armouries in Leeds, 4 layers of something closer to habotai, cut on different weave angles and the edges bound, I'd love to see an arrow Vs that.
the silk never stopped the arrow, but rather helped dull the edge to help minimize the damage, it likely was layered, however.
I am a bit disappointed he missed this. But he also missed the fact the Normans Brought the longbow to the English when William The Conquerer
Invaded England and took the throne in 1066 after the famous battle of Hastings.
Entertaining channel and I appreciate what he tries to do, however....
It's also worth considering just how loose/much extra fabric in said slik shirt. pulling the fabric nearly taught the arrow will punch right through. perhaps having it looser like on a more flowing silk shirt would be a contributing factor. I think it's a matter of is the shirt strong enough to slow the arrow down and pull more material in with it. - A completely uneducated/scientific thought
@@Blackhawck50 i think these arrows are too heavy and bow too powerful for silk. It's more possible silk would help against weaker bows, lighter arrows. So the Mary rose had all these powerful bows in it, and this sunk around 1550, when militaries were getting their most professional and armour was at its peak. I suspect (a guess ofcourse) if we went back 100 years earlier, the typical military soldier was shooting only 120lb. Point is, Todd is really testing the pinnacle of warbow power, and i'm not entirely sure such power is representative of the majority of medieval warfare.
Turnbull, Stephen. (2003). Mongol Warrior 1200 - 1500. Osprey Publishing, Oxford. Mentions this, couldn't find much before that but given how widespread the idea is, I doubt it's just Osprey (Silk Roads author Dr Frankopan mentions it). I think it comes from a misunderstanding of the qualities of silk - of course it gets pierced, but the hole is clean without having shredded wool wires inside your body afterwards, and the arrow penetrates more cleanly since it just goes straight through the silk.
Perhaps it's more about not dragging a bunch of material into the wound that would cause infection?
Thanks
We also have to take into account that the Mongolian would ideally be wearing armour of some description, typical for a Mongolian ether iron or rawhide lamellar and a padded garment underneath rather than just a silk shirt. That being said linen is also rather strong and I do not think we have any account from elsewhere of being able to pull out an arrow from a linen shirt.
Ultimately there are probable too many variables to work with, arrow head, arrow weight, velocity, type or armour worn etc. to conclude in a single video.
Lighter arrows, armour and loose silk shirt might still be plausible, I’ve also heard somewhere that silk is supposed to have much higher tensile strength when wet, so, how much did mongols sweat? ;)
@@konzetsu6068 well, on horseback in a battle, I'd guess rather copiously is the answer
I love how you dealt with your editing. Great approach!
Great show! Love your candid honesty
and great care for historical accuracy!
Hi Todd I would be interested to do testing with my asian warbows, where do you recommend getting reasonable price armour that is still historical?
ebay
maybe go to a medieval club and ask them
I would suggest asking around in collector forums, reenactors with a more historical flair, etc. for "broken" stuff so you can test. Make the purpose clear. Say for example you get some mail that tore in half. Sure, ain't no good to be worn anymore, but that mail "fabric" is still plenty good to be shot at and get the same results you'd if it was in a whole shirt. And the owner might be much more willing to part ways with it for a lower price than something new or in good shape. Don't get your hopes up, but if you point out you're doing tests, you might even get a couple of freebies now and then.
@@louisvictor3473 why not make ur own
@@xiaotian5863 He said historically accurately, not "Joe on the street thinks any two pieces of metal that just looks the part are all the same thing" levels of accuracy. Unless you've specialize on this, you can't just put a bunch of off the shelf metal together and call it historical accurate armor, and you won't become a specialized armorer overnight, in a month, or in a year.
So much respect for you interrupting yourself in this, so many people wouldn't have bothered and just sent it out as is
I love your honesty, Tod! Your videos are amazing! Please keep up the good work!
Props to you on coming back thu and clarifying your meaning and points certainly helps to understand
If I shad to guess about the oak door story I would’ve bet anything they meant exactly what we saw here. Some guys in a castle with a thick oak door started seeing longbow arrows start poking through the door a few inches and probably thought huh ok shit. That arrow actually poked its way through the door. Not sailed through
I actually think there was some truth in that myth, and it all comes down to how tight the plank was framed on the side. Like we saw in the first few tests with unframed planks, the arrows easily split the planks apart. So in case the plank wasn't held tight on the side, like with some cheap carts or doors that had some gaps between the planks, an arrow could very well split a plank and went right through it.
@@Secret_Moon A normal hut door could / would break down by arrow fire, but a reinforced castle door? I thins they are a) way to thick and b) are reinforced good enough for this not to happen.
@@Seelenschmiede Yes, I did say only with cheap doors and carts with gaps between the planks that this thing might have happened.
Also, I think the deciding factor is not how thick the planks were but how big the gaps between the planks were. We saw in the test that oak planks are very easy to be split if nothing holds them together. If there is a gap the size of the arrow diameter between the planks, the arrow can easily crack and push the two half of the plank apart to fly through.
@@Secret_Moon why should there be gaps? Medievil craftsman were very good in their jobs. So when you can interlocking planks today, they could make them too. Is this the modern viewpoint of "everything in the medievil time was shoddy and badly crafted"?
Maybe an old cart, after decades of use got rattly loose planks with gabs in between, but who would use it and why would a longbow archer attack this person?
Yes, wood works when it ages, but there is a thing called maintenance. Especially for high risk structures like castle doors.
@@Seelenschmiede wood shrinks as it ages. After twenty years of good care even the best crafted wood items start to get a bit wobbly.
I really appreciate the honesty Tod, you could have uploaded the unrevised video but you took the effort to fix it. Thanks for that, you have my utmost respect.
We all have our off days (especially in recent times!) I'm new to your content but have to say it is brilliant and this video goes to show why, you watched and pulled yourself up on something. Self awareness is a great attribute to have in life and someone of us struggle with it.
Keep up the great content (must be tough with our lockdowns) can't wait for you to get back with a bit of a team doing tests, that's no criticism of you but that wealth of knowledge in a youtube video was striking 👍
Love how you approached the final edit on this video. A massive amount of integrity and honesty shown.
Thanks
Can i just say, the whole "hey guys, just so you know, i was being a bit dumb about things- I'ma come in and call myself out a few times, sorry." is- kind of amazing. The fact that you're willing to call yourself out- when- to be honest, not a lot of people do- nice going man.
Calling oneself out on occasions should be a thing
Hey Tom, I really appreciate your commitment to accuracy and fairly representing your findings. It is very tempting to be sensational and overestimate your confidence on this platform, and indeed it is heavily incentivized. It takes a lot of courage to step back decide you've been a little too confident in your claims, and I greatly respect the scholarly environment you do so well to cultivate on this channel. Thanks, and keep up the good work!
Yet another cracking video with a bunch of fascinating data. Cheers!
Mad respect for someone that can call himself to task publicly like that. It's that sort of maturity that lends credence to the rest of your work; if you haven't called yourself out for it, we can be more confident that your research and conclusions are sound.
Nice work Todd and Interjecting Todd!
Undressed silk is a lot thicker and stiffer then fine slik and was worn in several. Similar in concept to a Gambeson.
However, it's likely (if the shot has enough power to penetrate the flesh), that it will slice between the fiber rather than "pushing" the silk to create a wound. I guess it needs another experiment, but if the silk fibers are tight and strong enough (or if the arrow is not too sharpened), it would certainly only bruise the wearer.
@@marz6770 the idea was it would let you pull the arrow out of a wound. I think the issue here is the bow and arrows used (as Tod mentions) and the type and thickness of silk as he and others here have alluded to- but also I expect there was armor involved as well (leather at the very least). In a situation where the arrows were only able to penetrate a short distance (say an inch) I can imagine thick silk might get bound up enough to then be pulled out by tugging on the surrounding silk.
At any rate, recurve bows were massively less powerful than the beast Tod is shooting here.
Tod, total respect for your 'self peer reviewing'. The adamant sweeping statement is a trap it must be easy to fall into if you do your type of video and subject matter but you pulled it back from the edge of the slippery slope.
Correcting yourself and avoiding the broad generalized statements is one of the reasons why I love this channel.
wonder what Tod's wife thinks about him shooting the Sunday roast...
.. it's dead, Todd ...
He was ordered to tenderize it.
'Kebabs it is then . . .'
Probably better than shooting the neighbour's cat.
It's cheaper than a 3D replacement insert.
The thing about DRILLING is that it's a very LOW forward velocity, and a very high rpm, in order to minimize chip thickness. Certainly there are drills and material combinations that allow much faster forward movement for the same rpm, but as a general rule; the rpm required for drilling is a VASTLY larger number than the forward velocity.
So are ANY arrows, modern or medieval, drilling into targets? Definitively, no. And as a machinist I don't feel any doubt what so ever in that answer.
Is an arrow TWISTING inside a target? In some cases like armor strikes (where armor is usually quite thin >20mm), not enough to matter. In cases of going through a body or especially game, yes it's absolutely twisting as it goes through.
But TWISTING is not the same as DRILLING. The act of the the arrow twisting doesn't actually increase it's ability to penetrate.
In fact, an argument could tenuously be made that because a twisting arrow has to travel through more linear material through the body of say a deer, it's actually reducing the amount of penetration.
So then, COULD an arrow be made to DRILL through a target? Well, not really, no.
The thing about drilling is it invariably takes time to do. So at the very extreme end of design, you'd need an arrow spinning at thousands of rpm, with a spring resisted weight system inside the shaft so the arrow could actually maintain a pressure against a target while it was drilling into it. But here's the catch that makes it impossible: you also need to stabilize that force 100% absolutely directly perpendicular, or the arrow destabilizes in drilling and just flings off in a random direction.
If anyone has any doubt that an arrow ISN'T drilling into a target, then imagine this scenario: A drill chuck with a drill is spinning 2000rpm in a drill press. That chuck falls out of the quill onto a workpiece, and for sake of exaggeration lets say the table isn't in place and the workpiece is on the floor. How far into the workpiece is that drill going to make it before it falls to the side?
It's going to make a dent, and that's about it.
A great analysis - thank you
clearly we need rocket propelled arrows that spin into the target.
...this is totally still classified as an arrow.
Great comment. My question now is does the arrow twist enough in the target to create appreciably more tissue damage?
@@mjfleming319 Logically only if your close enough for friction to have not reduced the spin before it hits the target. But still the rotation would have to be much higher than was apparent to me
hmmm, quite interesting
do you think it would be possible to have a fletching style that would increase the rpm of an arrow?
I was also curious if some form of 'propeller-bladed arrowhead' could increase rotation?
You are one of my favorite you tubers. I appreciate the added cuts to this of you explaining. I would have felt weird at the end if you didn’t add in all of those notes!
I think possibly using silk that is more loose could give more material for the arrow to grab and enough for it to ‘pull’ some in with it!
Great video again! Received my ordered dagger today, really love it!
Huge respect for being able to correct yourself in the video :D
Thank you
I think you should have only done one shot. You're putting a lot more pressure on the silk when you pulling on 3 arrows. I'm not sure if it would have made a difference, but it's worth considering. Most people aren't going to get shot 3 times in the same location before finally deciding to find cover :D
your approach to your enthusiastic statements and own fallibility does you credit, thanks for sharing your own nuanced thinking.
My favorite channel on these types of topics!
Wouldn’t they have worn the silk underneath their armour as well? Just as a sort of last line? Rather than just the silk? Could be worth trying.
Great video!
They and meny other eastern nation's wore meny, meny layes of silk as armour, it worked against swords but I'm not sure about the arrows. The first bulletproof vest make by Jan Szczepanik, was of silk.
Plus He did show one huge advantage of those silk cloths: The fibers didn't get pulled into the wound.
Which should be an improvement over wool or linen fibers getting into the wound.
Not to mention that arrow stops work by having a cloth hanging lose from a wire.
If you wear loads of lose flowering silk clothes, the arrow will be decelerated before it reaches the body.
Just like with a modern arrow stop barrier.
If you place that in front of a target, even target pointed arrows will just punch through it as well.
I heard a silk shirt was worn under chainmail for the effect Tod described.
Can't beat silk knickers, just sayin'
@@wadekirby8575 that would make sense to me. If only the tip of the arrow is getting through, then the silk would probably prove useful in getting the arrow out.
The silk shirt thing seems almost self-explanatory. Even if we imagine for a moment that Mongolian silk was so absurdly durable that the arrow would not in fact tear through it but rather push the fabric into the body, the shirt would have to be so loose (or exceedingly elastic, which we know it wouldn't have been) that you can push the garment several inches into the body without tightening it enough that the arrowhead will puncture it. They'd have to have been wearing XXXXXL shirts.
If you wrap some cloth around a leg of lamb at roughly the same "tightness" as a shirt typically sits on a human body, and push your finger into it, you don't get very far before you begin to meet resistance. The arrowhead would tear right through the fabric as soon as any kind of resistance is met.
Todd that silk test reminds me of a bit of kit some samurai wore which was a cape that would inflate like a balloon at speed due to drag which was proposed to stop arrows. On the history channel they showed that as effective but as we all know that can be a quite unreliable source at times and I think it would be interesting to test up to what poundage that armor was effective for. Just an idea for that silk armor video coming down the pipe.
Tod, I'm *really* impressed with you going out of your way to balance this video. This balancing shows integrity and commitment which is very welcome and impressive!
Also, whenever I heard you say "leg of lamb", part of my heard "Legolas"!
Dear Tod, I seem to remember something about silk shirts and vikings from my country Denmark, where this myth is also said. I am fairly convinced that the silk shirt, is more like a silk hauberk, or rather a gambeson. I hope you'll consider doing the test with several layers of silk like in a gambeson, with every layer having alternating grains. I think this will make a big difference.
Is there any difference between that and a normal gamberson
Also knight surcoats often was made of silk that was layered to some extent. Its wasn't gambeson thick but it was a few layers. That and middle eastern cultures and byzantines used silk on the battlefield it just wasn't used by its self.
The way you handle being dissatisfied with your own content is top-notch, Tod. There are many creators that would just push out the content because it’s, “good enough”. You strive to be as accurate and knowledgeable as possible to put out the best content possible. You’re honest with yourself and us, your audience, which is why so many of us respect and trust you. Great stuff as usual, my man!
Well done for putting in the extra effort!
It doesn't take a physics degree to know that an arrow or bolt doesn't drill itself into the target. The function of the fletching causing the arrow to spin is simply to stabilize the flight of the arrow. I knew the answer before you did the test, but I also understand that some people don't have the experience or have not yet aquired a knowledge of ballistics. This was a great educational video for those who didn't previously have that knowledge. We all had to learn this at some point and were without that knowledge prior to the time we learned.
I really enjoyed your test to see if an arrow could shoot through a plank door. All your videos are great and I appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge. I am looking forward to building my own hunting crossbow. Your build video was fantastic! Thank you, Sir.
"Drilling into the target"
"Spinning causes more damage than the impact"
"Spinning bullets penetrate deeper"
"Hollow point bullets are buzz-saws inside the body"
"If the bullet doesn't spin, it can't penetrate the target."
...
Every one of these 'truths' about spinning bullets/arrows/spears have been refuted the same way: slow-motion films.
Yes, a bullet spins in flight, around one rotation per 18" of flight on average for rifles, one in 9" for pistols.
If your soft target is two feet thick, that 'Devil Bullet' is going to spin about twice as it passes through.
Hardly a buzz-saw or a drill, those two rotations...
Man, if we started talking about guns, we'd never run out of myths. :D
The fuddlore gave me 'nam flashbacks
Only contention I have with this analysis is that we don't know whether the rotational momentum decreases at the same proportional rate as the linear momentum. In fact I should imagine it doesn't as the only thing stopping the bullet rotating is friction along the surface rather than impact with a target for the linear momentum (although admittedly the friction would be very high given it scales linearly with the normal force, or the force acting to arrest the bullet). So, as the bullet slows down linearly, we might expect it to still be rotating relatively quickly and the number of rotations per cm to increase, possibly quite significantly.
Take into account that a silk shirt (or armor? gambison-esque?) would've been used in conjuction with actual armor, be it chain, lamellar, etc.
Those would be the primary detract of the arrow's power. So the question would be if the arrow went only slightly in - would the silk shirt do what the myth says?
Or perhaps, would a silk gambison behave differently (in general) than a, for example, linen one? Now that's an interesting notion to test.
I simply don't know the basis of the myth, but I would imagine that silk gambesons would work very well
@@tods_workshop I suppose a more suitable test would be a bodkin against a medium carbon steel plate backed by layered silk/paper.
I would like to add that silk is also flame resistant. So there's a benefit to that in accordance with the sort of weaponry that the mongols might've faced?
@@tods_workshop From what I can remember, the Mongols got a lot of silk when they raided China in 1211. Since they shared spoils equally, every soldier would have been given silk, so that if one could make a shirt of it, they all could. I don't know if they had enough to make gambesons. As I understand it, the idea was not to pull out the arrow WITH(by) the silk, but pull it out with(together with) the silk. The silk supposedly prevented barbs from eating into the flesh, and so made them easier to pull out without further injury. Even so, a silk undershirt must be comfortable to wear, and would prevent chafing when riding on horseback for days and weeks.
Very possibly once you start layering and orienting material that’s where you can start to some strange results for a material science standpoint.
I appreciate a creator who can critique his own video like this. Well done.
i'm so glad he "fixed" the door test. while watching i was like... that piece of wood is too small it just gets split, a door wouldn't ... just then: in come the frame. Thanks Tod, that's the quality of testing i've gotten used to expect from your videos!
Even bullets don't drill into targets, they don't weigh enough to overcome the friction when they hit the target.
the selling point of silk is that it doesn't rip apart and gets inside of the wound like other fabrics
If that’s why your buying silk may i interest you in Kevlar or other aramids
This was my understanding too - its not about stopping the arrow or easing its removal , its to prevent infection after by not having fragments of leather/sackcloth left in the body.
@@pmk198908 I think using silk is not necessarily a bad idea. You could say that silk is a 'natural Kevlar' . At least chemically both are liquid crystals with similar properties.
@@xTh3be5tx one of them is regularly used in bullet-resistance applications, the other isn’t. This was a stupid myth that at best got misinterpreted over the centuries and at was worst was pseudoscience bullshit. I’m glad we’re finally putting it to bed
@@pmk198908 just making sure that you do understand bulletproof vests were made of layered silk before invention of aramids. and were prohibitively expensive.
I really like this video where you came back and described a more moderate viewpoint. It's so the way that these things go where are you producing video and then in the editing room you think about what you said. In my opinion do this all the time
I find the wood penetration test interesting. I'm more of a firearms guy and I remember a test for Acceptable Military Calibers. It was a penetration test using a 3/4" (18mm) pine board.
Turned out even the lowly 22 caliber could pass that benchmark.
Super fun to see your arrows splitting kindling.
I’d love to see politicians fact-check their own speeches this way!
If nothing else you've come up with a fun way to make kindling.
Thanks very much, Tod. I love your work.
Great work, Tod !
Hi Tod,
I actually know where the door story comes from. There was a chronicle on the English's wars in Wales, and an account of a skirmish between the English and Welsh: 'Two soldiers ran over a bridge to take refuge in one of the Casde towers. Welsh
archers, shooting from behind them, drove their arrows into the oak door of the
tower with such force that the arrowheads penetrated the wood of the door which
was nearly a hand thick; and the arrows were preserved in that door as a memento.'
You can find more info and a specific source in the book "Longbow: a social and military history" (pg36)
If they're just "penetrating", which I interpret as the points sticking out the backside, and multiple archers are firing, then I could believe that. The wood would give more and more with each arrow.
I would consider the "silk shirt" test with leather/lamellar armor over the silk, and an accurate weight/style bow and arrow. Otherwise, the test itself is discounted. Silk was the last line of defense (in theory), not the first.
I appreciate you acknowledging the nuance in the views that you state!
I like the segway into explanation on the side videos. Thank you.
Lockdown longbow is the actual best thing to come out of the lockdown change my mind
we won't!
America just launched its own astronauts to the moon again via SpaceX recently. Or the Starlink satellites that will allow us to watch Tod's Workshop in the middle of the ocean is pretty good. Or the new Jeorg magazine for his repeating crossbow? In all honesty the Lockdown Longbow series has been great though I haven't missed one :)
I dunno, getting a free $4000 from the government was lit. I got an AR15 and a glock from it.
iirc the "silk armor" is analogous to a gambeson, not a silk shirt.
Even then, the point of a gambeson isn't for the fabric to be pulled into the wound and facilitate extracting the arrow, it's to prevent penetration in the first place.
@@maximsavage well, maybe the Mongols had regular armour to slow down the arrow head mostly, and had a loose fitting silk shirt under everything else.
So that the full speed arrow head can not be stopped, but slowed down arrow head after it penetrated all the other armour layer, can be wrapped around with final silk layer as it penetrade the skin.
@@davidjacobs8558 That sounds... plausible, perhaps. It would make for a worthwhile test, at the very least. We know for a fact that the mongols had armor, a kind of leather lamellar, for instance, and that some also wore mail. However, if this hypothesis has any chance of being true, I think we'll need a weaker bow to test it. As far as I know, and I might be wrong, 160 lbs of draw weight wasn't very common in the eurasian steppe. I've seen 120 lbs longbows shoot clean through a shirt of properly riveted mail, it was like the armor didn't exist as far as that arrow was concerned. But, we know that mail could stop arrows, which suggests those bows were weaker.
@@maximsavage No. The Mongolian compound bow alledgedly had a draw weight of 150lbs as standard. The silk khalat was multi-layered and used for the exact reasons described. It wasn't a one layer silk shirt from marks and spencer or something.
@@BADALEX1 Then we need a new test with a historically accurate khalat, with and without armor over it.
A better indication that arrows don't drill into targets is that the arrows don't have drill bits as their heads.
These videos are brilliant, the way you analyse everything and give the footage along with the conclusions are brilliant.
Thank you
Tod, I love your honesty!
Hat's off to you, mate.
This was a perfectly fine video even without the clarifying edits. No rants here. I have not studied physics in 30 years, but can't you pretty much rule out the possibility of spinning? Yes the arrow is going to spin in flight, but it only has its own weight to give it angular momentum, and the angular momentum imparted by the fletchings doesn't seem significant when the arrow is turning inside solid wood, mail, or flesh. Unless that 160 lb bow imparts considerable spin at the start of the shot I don't see how air resistance on feathers is going to create that much force.
It would also be pretty horrible design if that much energy went into the spin rather than the actual shot. A bit of rotation is nice for stability in flight but the absolute majority of energy should be used to propel the arrow and give it range. If anyone wanted the arrow to really spin then both the fletchings and the arrowhead would have some type of screw shape.
The same really goes for the silk shirt. Expecting the arrow to cut behind the silk but not through it feels like expecting a sheathed sword to cut something without damaging the sheath.
This is not to disparage the video or the tests, it just sometimes astounds me how much common myths/assumptions seem to go against intuition.
Regarding English vs. Mongol war bows and arrows: Mongol composite bows were roughly the same poundage, but because of their design, were slightly more efficient at transferring their energy to the arrow. As regards a lighter arrow, I'd expect a thinner, faster arrow to also penetrate further through cloth, so that shouldn't affect the results too much.
As for the silk, I'd imagine they would be worn underneath other armour or even just heavy clothing, since the steppes do get rather chilly. Maybe in other circumstances, as you mentioned- long distance hits, weak bows, weak shots- the silk might be enough to make the difference between a flesh wound and a bleeding gut. Perhaps that would make for a fun series of tests!
On the subject of rotation, another RUclips channel, Taofledermaus does a lot of work with high speed projectiles, and rotation is one of the things they examine. I wonder how similar the techniques are between wood and lead.
And finally, on shooting legs of lamb! Another of the channels I watch, Paul Harrell, does his shooting on the patented Meat Target: a chop / steak for the pectoral, a slab of ribs on the front, a bag of oranges to simulate lung tissue, and then another slab of ribs on the back. That would be a great test to see with medieval weapons! Not just bow and arrow, but sword, mace, and so on.
Cheers for another great video. Love the channel and your work.
I would be careful about the claim with same poundage, there are very few found horse bows with higher draw weight than 100lbs (even that is nice feat, considering it was used from a horseback), most of sources found online are more like opinions, even say fanboy claims (average draw weight being of 160 pounds, IMMENSELY better transfer of power and so on), than something based on a fact - sometimes bordering the famous jokes of katanas cutting space and time (but this is of course found even on side of long bows, turkish/ottoman bows and so on)
But they were also significantly shorter so the same poundage transfers less energy to the arrow (because it imparts the force for less distance/time/same thing).
@@Robert399 You have a point, but Mongol bows were recurve bows whose _draw length_ (which is the meaningful variable for energy) is greater than that of an equally long straight bow. On the other hand, the force in recurve bows is non-linear so the comparison is even more difficult.
Why oranges and not buying some sheep lung from the butcher?
@@dempa3 Specifically for the Paul Harrel example, I think it's a mix of a) not wanting to leave bits of bloodied, pulverised lung tissue everywhere (at least with oranges things just get a bit sticky) and b) especially with the pandemic he (Paul) has said he's had problems even acquiring his usual cuts of meat and has had to alter the materials now and then. Much like Tod though he is very upfront about the limits of the conclusions that can be drawn from his work.
Edit: from a medical professional and history nerd: i have studied medieval and older medical books and writing, the reality is that the silk Mongol myth is not that it will pull the arrow easily, but that the wound will be cleaner. Meaning no fabric in the wound that will lead to infection. The other myth is the capes the horse archers used, which will deviate the arrow and reduce the spinning action and there for causing smaller wound. Maybe have a fan blowing at a big peace of cape and shoot at it? On the silk again the silk was worn under armour, maybe it made then the removal easier or just kept the wound cleaner.
Thank you! I was the one who requested silk cape or shirts! Thank you so much for testing it.
The billowing capes were tested that way and they seemed to work. Some arrows had their heads entangled in the silk but didn't hit the body.
@@DreadX10 got a video of that?
I really appreciate all the edits!
That does prove that a reasonable thickness of Oak is an effective armor against arrows.
Armor is only reasonable if it’s a reasonable weight
At the very least a shield. But it's still gonna be super heavy
@@Specter_1125 reasonable weight would depend on context. body armour or warwagon/ship/siege tower armour?
@@Yorick257 Yep. Shields were laminated for that very reason - to make them sturdier than equal weight of plain wood.
Guy inside a log yelling at archers: what are you going to do without your pointy twang sticks now huh!
It was most assuredly a great video Tod. It shows two things (apart from the subject matter of course :D)
1. We should always remember not to jump into generalized conclusions based on a simple single experiment and turn that into a universal truth (a lot of us do that from time to time, in most cases subconsciously. After all, we want to be right and feel vindicated by our findings).
2. It showed once again why I love your channel - not only are your skills and products featured in your vids simply, well... incredible. But there is a true passion and honesty to actually learn things and understand the past as best as possible. No grandstanding, sweeping proclamations etc. and that is not that common these days especially on this platform filled with clickbait titles and half-truths.
Thanks for these cool little films with "lockdown longbow"
Thanks Rob, very kind. Yes absolutely, we are all guilty of over a egging the pudding from time to time and ultimately it just muddies the waters
These physical demonstrations, however limited, are worth so much more than any amount of knowledgeable speculation.
Well done!
It has been a year, good sir. The fact you recognized potential biases and worked to clarify.
Still a very good video.
One thing I've heard said about silk vs. arrows is that Mongols would wear a silk *cape* that would billow out behind them, and that the billowing cape would entangle any arrows falling down towards them (ie. shot in an arc at long range), robbing them of momentum and pulling them to strike at a different angle so that the arrow would only cause minor wounds at worst.
Is there any truth in that? I have no idea...
This has been tested and yes it worked. With loose fabric, the arrowhead takes the silk with it (but not always) and now has to accelerate all that cloth (oriented perpendicular to the arrows flightpath) so it looses a lot of momentum in those last feet to the target.
Ever seen a mongol with a cape in a depiction? Traditional mongol clithes are made out of felt, not silk.
@@shrekas2966 I absolutely have seen depictions of Mongols with capes in secondary sources, but I have no idea if those are based on depictions or descriptions from primary sources, or just based on the imagination of the artists. Which is part of why I said I have no idea if there's any truth to it.
@@randalthor741 thing is, who do you call a mongol?
The most accurate depiction of early mongol expansion ive seen depicts then wearing similar lamellar armors like chinese made out of steel or leather, sometimes both. They are worn on a somple kaftan, which was mostly wool back then. no capes on top.
The depiction was made by one of the middle eastern dynasties.
@@randalthor741 brewminate.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/111319-36-History-Medieval-Middle-Ages-Mongol-China.jpg
Open up youtube and see an upload from Tod from 1 min ago? Gonna be a good day!
I actually enjoyed...both of you. Thank you!
Tod popping in from time to time to criticise himself was both instructive and hilarious at the same time. Nice way of doing it.
I am waiting for Todd to get bored of the "Quarantine Longbow" and move on to the "Quarantine Trebuchet" and his better half coming out to find him only for Todd to pop out of small castle he built surrounded by a moat and curtain wall from which he will found his new kingdom.
I read "Quarantine" as "Tarantino" for some a absurd reason and was very confused.
Sounds like shad haha
@@edwardteach3000 Sounds like a good time either way!
Notification Squad - already know its going to be a good one!
The second you started shooting at the planks I said to myself well its not nailed down or held by bracing in a frame, so its not a great test. But as you always do Tod, you realised the same thing and adjusted the test accordingly. This is why I love this channel so much, it may not be rocket science, but you definitely come up with the most definitive tests that Ive seen. Loved this one even if you felt it needed the popups. Cheers mate!
It shows you take enough pride in your work, your channel, and your equipment that you'll go back and correct errors or pull yourself up for being too sure, and that is a rare quality these days for sure :)
Tod, your videos are awesome (and so are your products!). Honestly I think you're being too hard on yourself in this video, but I admire your introspection. Keep doing the cool things you do!
The spinning myth reminds me of the 7.63x39 rounds tumbling myth.
I remember being told that the benefit of a silk shirt was that you'd be less likely to leave fibres behind to fester inside the wound after taking out whatever pointy thing was stuck into them. Always seemed kind of plausible given the difference between a linen and silk threads.
The drilling arrow is possibly down to how the term drill has evolved over the centuries as much as it is just being used as a descriptive term for arrow sticking into something rather than an explicit description of what has physically happened. Medieval writers weren't as pedantic as some about the words they used as they were communicating with those without a vast knowledge of how stuff works.
I have heard that at one point surgeons used sutures made of silk because of the fibers not getting into the wound
Tod, I think most medieval boards were riven, not sawn. A riven board is split on the quarter and denser than a modern flat sawn board like you used in your test. Also, the longer the board the more difficult it will be for the arrow to split. Love your your work and the way you explore historic problems!
Very well done. My favorite of the lockdown longbows so far.