Well, it depends. We see villains doing this in TV series, such as The Arrow and The Avengers movies. Obviously, attempting to catch an arrow in real combat wouldn’t be feasible. It is exceedingly risky and unlikely to succeed in the chaos of battle. If you are fast enough to catch it, why not just get out of the way and avoid the risk of injury? Let’s not forget that the tip of the arrow is carrying a deadly point.

Still, lots of trick artists catch arrows, but they are doing so under controlled circumstances with light weight bows that do not cast the arrow at normal hunting speeds. They often use flu flu fletchings that are designed to create drag on the arrow and thus slow it down. They are also expecting the shot, which is seldom aimed directly at them. It’s cool to watch, but doesn’t seem to serve a practical purpose in combat.

The Japanese have developed a system known as Yadome no jutsu, which is the skill of cutting or blocking an incoming arrow with a sword. Japanese texts claim that it is possible, and several online videos show warriors deflecting arrows with swords. To me, this seems more feasible and useful than catching an arrow. People debate whether arrows can be cut or deflected when shot by full strength bows, but under the right circumstances, it appears to be possible.

Dodging an arrow would be potentially less difficult than either catching or deflecting one, though this would depend on the speed of the arrow, the distance of the shooter from the target, the quality of light (so the arrow can be seen), and the speed and agility of the target. Though this skill is often “poo-pooed” by modern archers, some historical groups practiced this skill. Historical records provide documentation that people could and did dodge arrows in combat. Here is just one example from Cabeza de Vaca’s account from the 1530s that describes Native Americans dodging arrows, crossbow bolts, and harquebus fire.

“They fight in a crouch, and while shooting at each other they talk and dart from side to side to dodge their foe’s arrows. Because of this, our crossbows and harquebuses will do them little damage. On the contrary, the Indians laugh at those weapons, because they present no danger to them on the plains over which they roam. They are only good in narrow areas and in swamps.” [Source: Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, Chronicle of the Narváez Expedition (Penguin Classics, 2012), 68.]

A modern historian notes a similar practice among eastern Native Americans. “Pre-European contact warfare was often characterized by hand-to-hand encounters between large forces, which resulted in relatively few casualties. Indians were able to dodge arrows and sometimes wore wooden or leather armour which provided a measure of protection.” [Source: Armstrong Starkey, “European-Native American Warfare, 1513-1815,” in War in the Early Modern World, 1450-1815, ed. Jeremy Black (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1999), 246.]

We should remember that arrows do not travel faster than the speed of sound, which means that at close ranges the intended victim can hear the sound of the string being loosed prior to impact. Many hunters have had the experience of game “jumping the string” for just that reason. Most selfbows also can’t achieve speeds over 180 feet per second, which isn’t slow and is certainly lethal. However, it isn’t anywhere near the speed of modern compounds that can reach speeds around 400 feet per second.

If the intended victim faced the archer, expected the shot, stood far enough away to have time to react, and saw the arrow, there’s no reason that a physically fit person could not dodge an arrow. Moving in an erratic pattern as the natives did in Cabeza de Vaca’s account would also make it possible to avoid arrows. So, catching or deflecting an arrow in combat was probably possible, but very risky and extremely dangerous. Dodging an arrow was more likely, and we have historical evidence demonstrating that it was, in fact, done.