Chin dynasty crossbow found

4

4V50 Gary

Staff
Xian is know for its terracotta army. Most of the weapons were looted centuries ago but recently archaeologists have uncovered an intact crossbow. Per historical texts, it has a range of 2,600 feet which per the article outranges most modern assault rifles (OK, we know ARs have been used in 1,000 yard matches). I don't see the PLA rearming itself with crossbows so as to have a standoff advantage.

26CEA90300000578-0-image-a-1_1426854127992.jpg


Here's a link to the article.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/peoplesdaily/article-3004149/2-200-year-old-crossbow-powerful-modern-day-assault-rifle-discovered-Terracotta-Warriors.html

I wish the Chinese would reproduce them for export to the US. Ditto with their hopper fed crossbow.
 
Am I the only one who's not seeing an "intact" crossbow here? All I see is a vaguely crossbow-shaped print in the ground.
Guess i don't know how archaeology works.
 
Just like the Roman Ballista !
Click to expand...
Yes, actually very similar. The two weapons are close in size, and in age.

Romans inherited the technology from the Greeks some time in the 2nd century BC. There wouldn't be meaningful communication (much less trade) between Rome and China for another 300 years. Even then, it was limited to things like fabric and glass. I doubt Chinese emissaries would have been aware of the Ballista, and I doubt even more they'd have had the means to transport one back home.

So, did the Chinese develop this independently but at the same time? Heck of a coincidence.
 
Romans inherited the technology from the Greeks some time in the 2nd century BC. There wouldn't be meaningful communication (much less trade) between Rome and China for another 300 years. Even then, it was limited to things like fabric and glass. I doubt Chinese emissaries would have been aware of the Ballista, and I doubt even more they'd have had the means to transport one back home.

So, did the Chinese develop this independently but at the same time? Heck of a coincidence.
Click to expand...

If emissaries saw one, then it could certainly be copied. Keep in mind that such people did not usually travel alone, but with their own sort of security detail, sometimes with scholars and such. Even if one wasn't brought back, if witnessed, it could have been duplicated from memory, drawings, or written descriptions.

The bow itself was developed independently in several parts of the world and so it would be no surprise if some sort of crossbow wasn't also developed independently as well.

With that said, this isn't the earliest version in China. Crossbows in China precede this by another 300-500 years.

It just means they found the entire item in one piece rather than random scattered parts
Click to expand...

Right, all the parts are there, in situ.
 
I am wondering and the source for the 2600 feet range. Especially since the one pictured isn't going to be fired.
And comparing it to the "modern assualt" rifle fails by about a mile or more. You just don't get much effective aiming with the rifle past several hundred yards. I suspect that the "sights" on the crossbow, if any, are not precise enough to hit anything much past 200 yards or so.

Ballista also more properly belongs to the torsion powered weapons, not bent wood or metal bow staves.
 
Per historical texts, it has a range of 2,600 feet
Click to expand...

Any chance the historical text give the size of the "foot"?

I would rather doubt it is the same as the 12" English standard we use today.

For many centuries a "foot" and a "yard" were what ever the ruling king said they were. Also, there is always a question of translation accuracy...

And they also talked their own version of smack in the old days, too...

on the other hand, the range of a rifle is several thousand yards. The effective range is a few hundred, for most...I seem to recall Drill Sgts teaching me 460 meters as the effective range of the M16A1. And I think the Marines said 600 for the same rifle & ammo. ;)
 
Any chance the historical text give the size of the "foot"?

From Wiki, the Chinese standard was the Li or "Chinese mile" that was about 1/3 of our mile, and it was subdivided into units that would be more or less comparable to our feet. I would guess that the number of 2600 was based on whatever was stated in the texts and then converted to modern feet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_(unit)

These also varied through time, but can be assessed through documents and such just like English feet.
Click to expand...
 
Per historical texts, it has a range of 2,600 feet which per the article outranges most modern assault rifles
Click to expand...
Are we talking "practical range" or "absolute range" here?
A heavy crossbow at a 45 degree angle will probably go that far.
 
Quote:
Per historical texts, it has a range of 2,600 feet which per the article outranges most modern assault rifles
Are we talking "practical range" or "absolute range" here?
A heavy crossbow at a 45 degree angle will probably go that far.


Which under that condition, which I think is not terribly far fetched, the equivalent comparison with "assault rifle" is closer to miles than a few hundred yards.
Ditto for the couple hundred guys shooting at a mass of guys [and not expecting aimed hits]
 
I join in the suspicion that the Chin dynasty measure for "foot" is different from our American or the English foot. I wonder if it literally meant a foot too which would shrink the range from 2,600 to 1,300. Also mentioned if that was effective range and I would think not for accuracy (unless it was volley fired). There is an example of a bushwhacking where a smaller army was chased by a larger army. After several days of retreating (with smaller campfires every night to lead the pursuer to believe that there was no shortage of desertions), the pursuing army's commander was drawn to a banner. He ordered a torch lit so he could read the banner. It said, "(Your name here) dies here." Suddenly, he became a human porcupine as he was pierced by a volley of arrows fired from crossbows.

Last, I have a bamboo Chinese ruler with no numerical markings. It was probably made sometime after the fall of the Ching Dynasty (1911) and is about 14 3/4" long with each of the ten major units being 1 15/16" long. Like the decimal system, each ten units is divided into ten sub units (about 3/16" each). I've no idea what they call their measurement system or its subdivisions. I've also another ruler from "The China Specie Bank of Hong Kong, Shanghai & Canton with the same measurements on one side and the American inch system on the other.
 
There is an example of a bushwhacking where a smaller army was chased by a larger army. After several days of retreating (with smaller campfires every night to lead the pursuer to believe that there was no shortage of desertions), the pursuing army's commander was drawn to a banner. He ordered a torch lit so he could read the banner. It said, "(Your name here) dies here." Suddenly, he became a human porcupine as he was pierced by a volley of arrows fired from crossbows.
Click to expand...
Bit off topic, what was the name of this battle? I'm very interested in reading about it.
 
With what little information given in the story about the crossbow I do not find their range claim overly believable for a one man crossbow. Historical evidence shows that the chinese did have a great many different types of crossbows, single shot as well as repeating, one man short range up to siege crossbows with up to 3 bows ganged together for power. Some of the larger bows were also mounted on carts and used a a form of mobil artillery. There are written records from period authors as well as weapons having been reproduced from period drawing that have shown the siege crossbows were able to shoot a bolt in the 1,100 american yard range but these were crew served wall mounted monsters not 5 foot long man portable crossbows.
I may well be wrong about what that bow was capable of and willingly admit it, I am not a student of chinese culture and military history beyond the reading of reports that I read from archeological publications that came into our office and a probably faulty memory due to the length of time I have been retired. My field of interest was in fact limited to the American Southwest and peoples that despited the quality of the tools they produced and used never left a primarily stone age tool kit.
 
Are we talking "practical range" or "absolute range" here?
Click to expand...
There's little difference in those terms for a sharp broadhead on a heavy arrow

100 arrows raining down on you at any distance in not a good thing
 
Mosin-Nagant - I read part of that account in Samuel Griffith's version of Sun Tzu's, The Art of War. I don't recall from which book I read the rest of it that discussed the continual retreat.
 
http://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_farthest_arrow_ever_shot
In 1988 Harry Drake shot an Arrow 2,047 yards 2 inches with a Foot bow.
Not a crossbow!! that is 1,16 mile's

Google also led to a link saying this was done by a crossbow, but the majority indicate Drake laid on his back holding the bow with his feet.

I've read of competitions between English longbows and French crossbows during lulls in the 100 years war and iirc the crossbows won distance contests unless the longbow men did as Drake did.


I can't say how powerful the pictured crossbow is but 250# wouldn't be out of the question. Given a soldier trained to use the weapon over a few years they could probably cock such a bow without mechanical help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top