Islamic bow for I.D. and comment

[colin henshaw]

Can anyone assist to identify this recent acquisition. Its in pretty worn condition. I'm thinking maybe its Persian or Turkish.

Any relevant information would be helpful, thanks.

[David R]

With those long "arms" I would guess Chinese myself.

[Philip]

It is Chinese, but specifically the Manchu type which virtually supplanted the earlier Chinese and Mongol-styled bows (which resembled those still made in Korea) in China after the 17th cent.

The extensions at the end of the limbs are often referred to as "ears", and although they serve as attachments for the string, they do not flex. There is supposed to be a bridge at the base of each ear that the string makes contact with after the arrow is released, to maintain the alignment of the ears. The ears provide that extra leverage to propel the arrow, along the same principle as the spear-throwers developed by various cultures. They also allowed a very long draw-length. This enabled the bow to shoot large and heavy arrows that maximized projectile energy at the expense of velocity and range. The weight of the ears slowed down the movement of the flexible limbs to a certain extent, and thus Manchu bows were not suitable for propelling lightweight arrows at high velocity for very long distances as their Korean and Turkish counterparts are designed to do.

The Manchus developed a hunting culture requiring mounted shooters to take medium and large sized game (bear, elk, boar, tiger) at short to moderate distances in terrain that was forested or hilly and brush-covered. When they turned their focus to military conquest and the building of a new dynasty, this type of bow which emphasized knockdown power and aerodynamically stable arrows for accuracy at shorter ranges was found to be useful, since these weapons could easily penetrate chainmail and shoot accurately in close-quarter mounted skirmishing.

[Gonzalo G]

Very well exposed by Philip.
Colin, if you like to see movies, get "War of the Arrows" (Choi-jong-byeong-gi hwal, 2011, english subs). There you can find observations from the Manchu warriors, comparing their bows with the Korean ones. And have fun looking these weapons in action. The Manchu bows required different tactics for the mounted archer's units than the used by the nomadic Mongols and Turks, those last more proper for the steppe conditions of terrain (vast open spaces). And although the Manchu arrows were more precise at shorter distances and had more stopping power, I wonder if the velocity of the Mongol and Turkish arrows compensate de mass difference with the Manchu arrows in their piercing capacity over armour.
Regards

[Philip]

Thanks, Gonzalo, for referencing that film. You might be interested in hunting down a copy of THE DIARY OF A MANCHU SOLDIER IN 17TH-CENT. CHINA, which is a translation by Nicola di Cosmo of a handwritten diary by a soldier named Dzengseo of his experience on campaign against Ming rebels in the southwest near the Burma frontier (Routledge: NY, also in UK/Canada, 2006).

The journal provides many references to the role of archery in battles of the era, particularly in conjunction with the deployment of firearms and artillery. It is important to note that the Manchus, though holding up the bow and arrow as cultural icons, made ample use of firearms in their conquest of China, and their successful campaigns against hostile Mongol tribes, in Central Asia, and the Himalayas. (the only non-Chinese foe they faced which had an equally firm grounding in the use of guns were the Vietnamese, and for various reasons they didn't fare well against them).

From the onset, the Manchus had ready access to muskets and cannons thanks to large formations of disaffected Ming Dynasty troops who joined their cause, along with small numbers of Korean and even Cossack war captives who were absorbed into the Banners. It is also worth noting that the Ottomans, though they excelled at archery, utilized firearms from the mid-15th cent. onwards; their use of massive siege artillery at Constantinople in 1453 (provided thanks to the expertise of a mercenary Hungarian), is notable for not only its ultimate success but its early adoption by an Eastern culture.

Dzengseo's combat experience as recorded in the diary amply illustrates the perfect fit of the Manchu bow to the preferred battle tactics, which emphasized shooting individual opponents from the saddle, in keeping with the hunting methods perfected in Northeast Asia. ( In another thread (the one about an Algerian musket) I commented on remarks about cavalry firepower made by a British officer during the Peninsular War, which you may find relevant to this discussion as well. ) Volley fire with Manchu bows was not the norm, although the diary does describe its use in repelling a charge by war elephants.

As regards to your comments about missile velocity and range, I can offer the analogy of my experience with shooting high-powered rifles. A cartridge such as .222 Remington sends small light bullets zinging along at dazzling speeds, the trajectory is flat and accuracy at far distances is wonderful to behold. But deflection by crosswinds, or plant growth in the field, affect light projectiles more, and air friction reduces energy at longer ranges as well. A round like .458 Winchester has a massive slug that travels more like a heavy truck than a race car, but boy does it pack a punch -- just what you need to put down that bull moose. It all boils down to physics, no matter if it involves arrows or bullets.

[estcrh]

This is a great representation of a Chinese soldier.

Portrait of a Chinese Imperial Bodyguard (Zhanyinbao), with archery equipment and wearing a sheathed dao (1760). This full-length depiction of an imperial bodyguard of the first rank is from a set of one hundred portraits of loyal officials and valiant warriors commissioned by the Qianlong emperor (r. 1736–95) that originally hung in the Hall of Imperial Brilliance (Ziguang Ge), the pavilion in the Forbidden City where the emperor received tribute offerings and entertained foreign emissaries.

[Philip]

Thanks for sharing this image!

An interesting aside is the position of the saber in its scabbard, hung so that its hilt faces the rear, to avoid getting tangled with the bow in its case, which faces forward. This is typical Manchu practice.

It actually makes for an efficient draw of the blade, since the soldier would have to rotate the lower part of the scabbard rearward with the left hand, and his right will be grasping the hilt for an EDGE UP draw. With the saber fully out, he can cut in any direction as opposed to an edge-down draw, which requires an additional twist of the wrist to deploy the weapon's edge against an opponent. It is for this very reason that many Eastern swords are worn edge-up in a sash (katana, yataghan), or slung on a belt in such way to permit this kind of draw (the shashka is a prime example). If you have a sheathed kilij or shamshir without is suspension cords, try rigging up your own suspension and you will find that these sabers tend to hang in a peculiar angle with the edge up and slightly outward from the side of the body. Factoring in the deep curve of many of these, it makes for a very ergonomic draw!

[estcrh]

Philip, thanks so much for sharing some of your Chinese archery knowledge. Here is a Chinese bow I recently bought, waiting for it to arrive.

[Gonzalo G]

Thanks, Gonzalo, for referencing that film. You might be interested in hunting down a copy of THE DIARY OF A MANCHU SOLDIER IN 17TH-CENT. CHINA, which is a translation by Nicola di Cosmo of a handwritten diary by a soldier named Dzengseo of his experience on campaign against Ming rebels in the southwest near the Burma frontier (Routledge: NY, also in UK/Canada, 2006).

Actually the campaign was called the War of the Three Feudatories (1673–1682), developed mainly in Yunnan, Guizhou and Guangxi. Very interesting book, thank you for remind it to me.

[Gonzalo G]

As regards to your comments about missile velocity and range, I can offer the analogy of my experience with shooting high-powered rifles. A cartridge such as .222 Remington sends small light bullets zinging along at dazzling speeds, the trajectory is flat and accuracy at far distances is wonderful to behold. But deflection by crosswinds, or plant growth in the field, affect light projectiles more, and air friction reduces energy at longer ranges as well. A round like .458 Winchester has a massive slug that travels more like a heavy truck than a race car, but boy does it pack a punch -- just what you need to put down that bull moose. It all boils down to physics, no matter if it involves arrows or bullets.

I agree on that. That's why I prefer a .45 auto or a .40 S&W over a 9mm pistol. But the penetration power over armour is another thing. I conducted tests with a .260 Remington and a .308 Wichester, among other calibers, over manganese steel sheets. The smaller, but faster .260 had more penetration. On the other hand, the Mongols and Turks did use the tactic of shooting in volleys, so precision was not so important as in close range.
Regards

[Gonzalo G]

This is a great representation of a Chinese soldier.

Portrait of a Chinese Imperial Bodyguard (Zhanyinbao), with archery equipment and wearing a sheathed dao (1760). This full-length depiction of an imperial bodyguard of the first rank is from a set of one hundred portraits of loyal officials and valiant warriors commissioned by the Qianlong emperor (r. 1736–95) that originally hung in the Hall of Imperial Brilliance (Ziguang Ge), the pavilion in the Forbidden City where the emperor received tribute offerings and entertained foreign emissaries.

Estcrh, thank you for sharing this image and the photo of your bow. It is nice to see that kind of weapons. I wonder if your bow can be still used. Though I understand that special care must be given to the limbs if you try to put a string over an old bow. A risky procedure.
Do you have an idea of the age of your bow?
Regards

[estcrh]

Estcrh, thank you for sharing this image and the photo of your bow. It is nice to see that kind of weapons. I wonder if your bow can be still used. Though I understand that special care must be given to the limbs if you try to put a string over an old bow. A risky procedure.
Do you have an idea of the age of your bow?
Regards
Gonzalo, I have wondered about that myself, but I would not take the risk of cracking it. It is a Chinese composite bow, early 19th century, 36 inches long, 16 inches wide.

[Gonzalo G]

Thank you for your response and the measures. Yes, it´s better to stay on the safe side and don't force those old limbs. It is a valuable and beautiful piece.
Regards

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Can anyone assist to identify this recent acquisition. Its in pretty worn condition. I'm thinking maybe its Persian or Turkish.

Any relevant information would be helpful, thanks.


Salaams Colin Henshaw,
You have introduced a great subject... I Quote https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/islamicarchery/islamicarchery.shtml "From medieval times through the nineteenth century, archers of the Islamic crescent, stretching from Turkey eastward to India, were renowned for both their exceptional skills and superior weapons. As a necessary means of advancing the spread of Islam, weapons traditionally held a religious association in Muslim cultures. The bow and arrow, which are extolled in many sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, held a special place above all others. Training in archery was seen as a religious duty and a sign of status, and the craftmanship of archery equipment was highly esteemed. The legacy of Islamic archery is exemplified by the archery traditions and equipment of Ottoman Turkey (1453–1922), of Iran during the Safavid–Qajar periods (1502–1925), and of the Indian subcontinent throughout the Mughal era (1526–1857), which blended Islamic and Hindu cultural elements"Unquote.


Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Below Jarmakee ...The peculiar position for firing at targets directly below...from a fort wall.

The archer in blue on a black horse is Ottoman firing directly behind him.

See https://www.google.com/search?q=turkish+archery&tbm=isch&imgil=yM361TX6vGa6hM%253A%253B9X3eWHTnHeFDIM%253Bh ttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.turkishculture.org%252 52Fmilitary%25252Farms%25252Farchery%25252Fearly-islamic-turkish-1040.htm%25253Ftype%2525253D1&source=iu&pf=m&fir=yM361TX6vGa6hM%253A%252C9X3eWHTnHeFDIM%252C_&usg=__egGqOozBv2OiTwzL442Dy30qbIc%3D&biw=1366&bih=613&ved=0ahUKEwj-0Z-OnvLUAhWSLlAKHd40D3YQyjcIQA&ei=6udcWf60NpLdwALe6bywBw#imgrc=yM361TX6vGa6hM:

The bigger picture shows a mounted Mongolian Archer...

The Indo Persian bow picture and write up can be seen at https://www.pinterest.com/pin/363243526177126131/

[Philip]

Estcrh, thank you for sharing this image and the photo of your bow. It is nice to see that kind of weapons. I wonder if your bow can be still used. Though I understand that special care must be given to the limbs if you try to put a string over an old bow. A risky procedure.
Do you have an idea of the age of your bow?
Regards

Somewhere in my reading I encountered an old Turkish adage stating that the lifetime of a bow is twice that of a man. 'Have been looking through my references for the citation but haven't found it yet, will advise when I do. A lot of my knowledge of these things comes from a colleague, Peter Dekker in Amsterdam, I have forwarded this thread to him and hope that he will contribute something soon.

We both know a fellow in Taiwan who makes Manchu bows in the traditional style, and what's more, is able to restore the performance capabilities of antique bows (that is, assuming that the organic materials have not been consumed by rot, or riddled by insect or worm). It seems that on old bows, what tends to fail with age is the animal or fish glue that holds the laminae together -- exactly the problem that plagues antique string instruments as well. Renew that, with the proper level of skill, and a bow can be brought back to life! Some of these glues can also be rejuvenated in themselves, without having to replace them with modern material (violin restorers do the same thing). Hopefully Mr Dekker will chime in soon on this thread with a more detailed explanation.

I haven't shot any of these old bows myself, but have handled a good number of these in collections. More than a few appear to have been damaged by idiots who have tried to bend them in the WRONG direction. You can tell from looking at what points the laminations have separated.
Haha, on one occasion a collector who showed me his damaged bow told me that's exactly what a "friend" of his tried to do. These weapons were not designed to flex "either way"!

[Philip]

Thank you for your response and the measures. Yes, it´s better to stay on the safe side and don't force those old limbs. It is a valuable and beautiful piece.
Regards

Wise advice, Gonzalo. Stringing a composite bow calls for its own techniques. Do you have Paul E Klopsteg's TURKISH ARCHERY AND THE COMPOSITE BOW (Manchester University, Museum: 1934 repr 1987)? Practically everything you wanted to know about design, manufacture, history, performance, and shooting techniques involving Ottoman bows, with comparative notes in an appendix with mention of Chinese, Korean, and modern (as of the 1930s) longbows. A lot of the material is excerpted from old Turkish manuals and the notes are mostly by archers who traveled and observed.

The info includes detailed instructions on stringing, and the appendix notes also explain how ambient temperature must be taken into account in order to do it safely with "difficult" bows.

[estcrh]

Thanks to Philip, Peter and a few other individuals, in the last few years a lot of information on Chinese archery and Chinese weapons in general has become available to learn from, both as images and text.

Something not often seen is good closeup images of Chinese arrows, here is an example of a Chinese bow with arrows.

Composite Chinese Bow and Arrows

A nice find: A complete 19C. Chinese bow with 10 arrows. The bow is of the composite structure, 43 inches long, 21 inches wide. The edges as well as the edges are covered with ray skin, dyed in green and white, and inlaid with antelope and bird also cut from ray skin. The arrows are long, 35 inches each with steel blades and long feathered tails.

[estcrh]

Chinese "Manchu" arrows, from http://www.manchuarchery.org/arrows

[Gonzalo G]

[QUOTE=Ibrahiim al Balooshi]"From medieval times through the nineteenth century, archers of the Islamic crescent, stretching from Turkey eastward to India, were renowned for both their exceptional skills and superior weapons. As a necessary means of advancing the spread of Islam, weapons traditionally held a religious association in Muslim cultures. The bow and arrow, which are extolled in many sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, held a special place above all others. Training in archery was seen as a religious duty and a sign of status, and the craftmanship of archery equipment was highly esteemed. The legacy of Islamic archery is exemplified by the archery traditions and equipment of Ottoman Turkey (1453–1922), of Iran during the Safavid–Qajar periods (1502–1925), and of the Indian subcontinent throughout the Mughal era (1526–1857), which blended Islamic and Hindu cultural elements"

Just for precison, Ibrahim, though I don't disagree with the cultural and religious importance of archery in the Muslim culture, the role of archery, its cultural importance and even the type of bow from the Persians, Ottomans, Mughal and Mamluke dynasties in India, does not derive from their religion, but from their Central Asian cultural and military heritage. It was there before the islamization of the Persians and Turks and is the same of that of the Mongols, and before them the Partians and Scythians, Hsiung-nu and many others. Remember that the Ottomans and Seljuks were only part of an inmense confederation of the Oghuz Turks, who roamed in the Eurasian steppe and just latter some of them converted to Islam. The same apply to the Mongols and Turks integrated in a Central Asian Empire which is the origin of the Mughals of India. Maybe Islam reinforced this cultural current, or maybe it was the other way around, that this pre-existing culture of archery among those peoples reinforced that of the already had by the Islamic conquerors who spread their religion to Persia and part of Central Asia.

Regards

[Gonzalo G]

Do you have Paul E Klopsteg's TURKISH ARCHERY AND THE COMPOSITE BOW (Manchester University, Museum: 1934 repr 1987)? Practically everything you wanted to know about design, manufacture, history, performance, and shooting techniques involving Ottoman bows, with comparative notes in an appendix with mention of Chinese, Korean, and modern (as of the 1930s) longbows. A lot of the material is excerpted from old Turkish manuals and the notes are mostly by archers who traveled and observed.

The info includes detailed instructions on stringing, and the appendix notes also explain how ambient temperature must be taken into account in order to do it safely with "difficult" bows.


No, Philip. I didn't have it and I have nor read it. Thanks to you, I just get one copy. And I would appreciate more recommendations from you on the matter of historic archery, how to make and use historic bows and related subjects. Thank you. I appreciate very much all the advice and guidance I can get from the people whom I share this kind of inclinations for the historic weapons. Unfortunately, where I live I don't have the oppotunity to access many items and that imposes me several limitations.

My best regards

[Gonzalo G]

A nice find: A complete 19C. Chinese bow with 10 arrows. The bow is of the composite structure, 43 inches long, 21 inches wide. The edges as well as the edges are covered with ray skin, dyed in green and white, and inlaid with antelope and bird also cut from ray skin. The arrows are long, 35 inches each with steel blades and long feathered tails.

Thank you for those pictures and the link, Estcrh. Great bow! seems also Manchu style, and is complete, with the "bridges" to guide the string, The collection of arrows is very interesting.

Pity that Philip is on the other side of the border, for if he would be instead on Texas, I could cross the border to talk with him.

Regards

[estcrh]

I appreciate very much all the advice and guidance I can get from the people whom I share this kind of inclinations for the historic weapons. Unfortunately, where I live I don't have the oppotunity to access many items and that imposes me several limitations.


Pity that Philip is on the other side of the border, for if he would be instead on Texas, I could cross the border to talk with him.
Gonzalo, I agree with you completely on both counts, in fact the reason I started collecting in the first place was that there was so I could hold and see these types of weapons up close since there seemed to be no other way to do this, unfortunately museums are very limited in the way of hands on teaching, thankfully the internet has helped fill in many blank spots as far as knowledge of historical weapons and armor goes.

Philip Tom, Peter Dekker and many other interested people have helped add a whole new level to the amount of easily findable information on Chinese weapons, I can remember when there was virtually no images or information available.

Anyone interested in the subject of Chinese archery should check out these links.

http://www.manchuarchery.org/articles-manchu-archery

http://www.mandarinmansion.com/welcome

http://www.atarn.net/phpBB2/index.php

https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/chinaarchery/chinaarchery.shtml

[estcrh]

Chinese bow case and quiver from http://www.manchuarchery.org/qing-bow-cases-quivers

A set of bow case, quiver and belt in the Charles E. Grayson collection. This type of bow case and quiver would have been worn by the imperial guard of the late 19th century. The bow case is suspended from a fittings that can slide over the belt. Also note the extra straps on the back to counterbalance the quiver. Photo courtesy of Jonathan Stephanoff.


Manchu officer Badai and his quiver. The quiver represents the standard quiver model in use in the mid 18th century, the height of the Qing's military power. Note the three slits in the front and the three pockets on the back that were common for this era. Painting held in the Asian Art Museum of Berlin. Badai was honored for breaking enemy lines single handedly. According to the poem accompanying the scroll, he fell from his horse, hastily dressed his wounds and continued shooting: "Many were felled as he snapped the string of his bow".

[estcrh]

In comparison, Indian kaman bows, quiver and arrows that I have.

[estcrh]

It is interesting how even though most of the world had abandoned archery for guns the Chinese still valued archery.


Archery Drill by Chinese Soldiers in the Streets of Peking, 1894

The bow and arrow is the national arm, every year great reviews are held in Peking, and strict examinations take place in archery. The man who can draw the strongest bow is made a Mandarin, good marksmen also receive notice. It is an ordinary sight to see men practicing in the streets, and there are special schools for training young men how to hold and draw the bow gracefully, and many hours are wasted every day with the arms propped up with sticks in the most uncomfortable position, to enable them to perform this difficult feat. The manner of holding the bow appears strange to western ideas, but it is noteworthy that the merit of the archer is as much judged by his knowledge of "position drill" as by correctness of aim.

[colin henshaw]

Thanks to those who have responded about this bow, most informative. Asian & Islamic archery would make a good new subject for study.

[colin henshaw]

Very well exposed by Philip.
Colin, if you like to see movies, get "War of the Arrows" (Choi-jong-byeong-gi hwal, 2011, english subs). There you can find observations from the Manchu warriors, comparing their bows with the Korean ones. And have fun looking these weapons in action. The Manchu bows required different tactics for the mounted archer's units than the used by the nomadic Mongols and Turks, those last more proper for the steppe conditions of terrain (vast open spaces). And although the Manchu arrows were more precise at shorter distances and had more stopping power, I wonder if the velocity of the Mongol and Turkish arrows compensate de mass difference with the Manchu arrows in their piercing capacity over armour.
Regards

Thanks Gonzalo G, saw a bit of that film on Youtube, it looks like fun...

Regards

[colin henshaw]

Salaams Colin Henshaw,
You have introduced a great subject... I Quote https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/islamicarchery/islamicarchery.shtml "From medieval times through the nineteenth century, archers of the Islamic crescent, stretching from Turkey eastward to India, were renowned for both their exceptional skills and superior weapons. As a necessary means of advancing the spread of Islam, weapons traditionally held a religious association in Muslim cultures. The bow and arrow, which are extolled in many sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, held a special place above all others. Training in archery was seen as a religious duty and a sign of status, and the craftmanship of archery equipment was highly esteemed. The legacy of Islamic archery is exemplified by the archery traditions and equipment of Ottoman Turkey (1453–1922), of Iran during the Safavid–Qajar periods (1502–1925), and of the Indian subcontinent throughout the Mughal era (1526–1857), which blended Islamic and Hindu cultural elements"Unquote.


Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Below Jarmakee ...The peculiar position for firing at targets directly below...from a fort wall.

The archer in blue on a black horse is Ottoman firing directly behind him.

See https://www.google.com/search?q=turkish+archery&tbm=isch&imgil=yM361TX6vGa6hM%253A%253B9X3eWHTnHeFDIM%253Bh ttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.turkishculture.org%252 52Fmilitary%25252Farms%25252Farchery%25252Fearly-islamic-turkish-1040.htm%25253Ftype%2525253D1&source=iu&pf=m&fir=yM361TX6vGa6hM%253A%252C9X3eWHTnHeFDIM%252C_&usg=__egGqOozBv2OiTwzL442Dy30qbIc%3D&biw=1366&bih=613&ved=0ahUKEwj-0Z-OnvLUAhWSLlAKHd40D3YQyjcIQA&ei=6udcWf60NpLdwALe6bywBw#imgrc=yM361TX6vGa6hM:

The bigger picture shows a mounted Mongolian Archer...

The Indo Persian bow picture and write up can be seen at https://www.pinterest.com/pin/363243526177126131/

Hi Ibrahiim

Thanks for your input. Yes, I think I will make a study of Asian & Islamic archery, it seems interesting. Was the bow and arrow ever used in Arabia ?

Regards

[estcrh]

Was the bow and arrow ever used in Arabia ?

Regards
Colin, check out this link. https://www.archerylibrary.com/books/faris-elmer/arab-archery/
Downloadable PDF http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Arab-Archery



Authors : Faris Nabih Amin - Elmer Robert Potter
Title : Arab Archery An Arabic manuscript of about A.D. 1500 “Book on the Excellence of the Bow and Arrow” and the Description thereof.

Introduction. This unique manuscript, discovered in the Garrett Collection of Arabic Manuscripts at Princeton University Library, is the only known treatise available in English on the archery of the medieval Orient. It is considered by Dr. Faris and Dr. Elmer as equal in merit to the nearly contemporary Toxophilus, or the Schole of Shootynge, the chief source of detailed knowledge of early English archery. The manuscript could be used today as a textbook on archery, and is valuable to all students of Arab history and culture and to philologists in a number of fields. One of its most unusual contributions is its resurrection of an ancient system of finger-reckoning—the ancient Arabic system of conveying numerical values by a highly developed sign language involving the use of only a single hand. Though scholars have suspected that such a medium once existed, its details were completely lost. By its delicate and accurately formed manual postures it is sharply differentiated from the crude gestures which indicate "the nine digits" and some of their more simple combinations by holding up an equal number of fingers. Each of these rediscovered combinations, used to represent draws of the bow, is illustrated by a sketch. Another interesting contribution is the solution of the "double nock" problem which has hitherto been one of the most controversial puzzles in archery.






I am not sure how accurate this image is but it appears to be an Arabian archer.

THE VINKHUIJZEN COLLECTION OF MILITARY UNIFORMS
Spain, 1213-1488, Moros Alfaraces... ([Año] 1410).

[estcrh]

Treaty of the military art Mamelouk, containing the schools of platoon, rider, infantryman, archer and crossbowman. A large number of colored and rather well-drawn figures are inserted in the text. Like all Arab works on the same subject, this treatise contains a large number of technical terms and terms of command.

Beginning: الحمد لله ذى العظمة المتعالى بالقدرة عن الصفات و الامثال. This ms. Was executed in 875 of the Hegira (1470 AD), for a great personage of the court of the Sultans Mameluk, whose name was carefully removed from the frontispiece, which is very ornate. However, the last words contained in the central medallion, namely: عزه الله تعالى, which indicates that the last name was that of a sultan. Gold, The ruler of Egypt at that time was Qaitbai. Between the folios currently rated 1 and 2, several sheets are missing.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

[QUOTE=Ibrahiim al Balooshi]"From medieval times through the nineteenth century, archers of the Islamic crescent, stretching from Turkey eastward to India, were renowned for both their exceptional skills and superior weapons. As a necessary means of advancing the spread of Islam, weapons traditionally held a religious association in Muslim cultures. The bow and arrow, which are extolled in many sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, held a special place above all others. Training in archery was seen as a religious duty and a sign of status, and the craftmanship of archery equipment was highly esteemed. The legacy of Islamic archery is exemplified by the archery traditions and equipment of Ottoman Turkey (1453–1922), of Iran during the Safavid–Qajar periods (1502–1925), and of the Indian subcontinent throughout the Mughal era (1526–1857), which blended Islamic and Hindu cultural elements"

Just for precison, Ibrahim, though I don't disagree with the cultural and religious importance of archery in the Muslim culture, the role of archery, its cultural importance and even the type of bow from the Persians, Ottomans, Mughal and Mamluke dynasties in India, does not derive from their religion, but from their Central Asian cultural and military heritage. It was there before the islamization of the Persians and Turks and is the same of that of the Mongols, and before them the Partians and Scythians, Hsiung-nu and many others. Remember that the Ottomans and Seljuks were only part of an inmense confederation of the Oghuz Turks, who roamed in the Eurasian steppe and just latter some of them converted to Islam. The same apply to the Mongols and Turks integrated in a Central Asian Empire which is the origin of the Mughals of India. Maybe Islam reinforced this cultural current, or maybe it was the other way around, that this pre-existing culture of archery among those peoples reinforced that of the already had by the Islamic conquerors who spread their religion to Persia and part of Central Asia.

Regards


Salaams Gonzalo G, Firstly many thanks for posting on this great subject which for too long has gone un-examined by Forum. I had a reasonable go at introducing the subject at the European and it is nice to see this thread gathering pace on Ethnographic. By chance it seems that the Turkish Foot Bow and the Welsh Long never came into deadly combat with each other. The extraordinary greater range of the Turkish Bow would certainly have sent the opposition back to the drawing board I suspect.
Regarding the religious context I think it has been viewed out of context... It was a quote from https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/g...icarchery.shtml which I consider not inaccurate neither does it say the bow was derived from religion ...in fact it goes on to say ~

Quote" The legacy of Islamic archery is exemplified by the archery traditions and equipment of Ottoman Turkey (1453–1922), of Iran during the Safavid–Qajar periods (1502–1925), and of the Indian subcontinent throughout the Mughal era (1526–1857), which blended Islamic and Hindu cultural elements"Unquote. What perhaps it did not underline was where the earlier concept derived from, however, I think it was inferred that people understood the origin..for which the Mongolian Archer is clearly the pointer.

I think emphasis on Blended. Certainly as I read it there was no inference on ownership of style belonging to the religion...but that surely they observed a formidable weapon and adapted and adopted the system and built a military structure around its training in the case of the Turks with their Janissaries and the Mamluke with their recruits taken often as young as 6 years old from the Steppes.

Moreover the subject is a fascinating one and I hope more members can get involved ... Pinterest is bombarding my mail with all things archery and I am certain good photographic evidence will add to the thread in due course.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

:shrug: Turkic warriors guarding the Doors of Tamerlane. Tamerlane, anglicized form of Timur-i-Lang ('Lame Timur' or 'Timur the Lame') (1336-1404), was a Turkic conqueror, born in Kash near Samarkand. He waged several devastating wars, conquering Persia (1392-96) and northern India (1398), and defeating the Ottomans and the Mamlukes (1402)

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Hi Ibrahiim

Thanks for your input. Yes, I think I will make a study of Asian & Islamic archery, it seems interesting. Was the bow and arrow ever used in Arabia ?

Regards

Salaams Colin~ It would seem so. Here are some publications below. There aren't a lot of books on the subject in fact the blue book and the book with the Arab archer are the same with the latter being a reprint.

I put the European archery book in here for interest...

See here for a translation of the blue book https://www.archerylibrary.com/books/faris-elmer/arab-archery/

[Victrix]

Treaty of the military art Mamelouk, containing the schools of platoon, rider, infantryman, archer and crossbowman. A large number of colored and rather well-drawn figures are inserted in the text. Like all Arab works on the same subject, this treatise contains a large number of technical terms and terms of command.

Beginning: الحمد لله ذى العظمة المتعالى بالقدرة عن الصفات و الامثال. This ms. Was executed in 875 of the Hegira (1470 AD), for a great personage of the court of the Sultans Mameluk, whose name was carefully removed from the frontispiece, which is very ornate. However, the last words contained in the central medallion, namely: عزه الله تعالى, which indicates that the last name was that of a sultan. Gold, The ruler of Egypt at that time was Qaitbai. Between the folios currently rated 1 and 2, several sheets are missing.

Some years ago I read a fascinating book called The Knights of Islam, The Wars of the Mamluks (2007) by James Waterson which may be of interest.

[Philip]

Pity that Philip is on the other side of the border, for if he would be instead on Texas, I could cross the border to talk with him.

Regards

California is also right next to the Mexican border. Even if we secede from the Union as some wild-eyed dreamers are talking about, we will still be right next to your country. Just come quick before the wall gets too high :-)

Although if you REALLY want to know all about Manchu archery, it would be wise to make a trip to meet Peter Dekker (and perhaps do some shooting) in Amsterdam. I am overdue for a return visit, myself! But I see that you are familiar with his informative websites on the subject, so that's good.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Some years ago I read a fascinating book called The Knights of Islam, The Wars of the Mamluks (2007) by James Waterson which may be of interest.


APPARENTLY THERE IS A FREE DOWNLOAD...CHECKING.. WRITE UP STATES~

The Mamluks were, at one distinct point in history, the greatest body of fighting men in the world and the quintessence of the mounted warrior. They were slave soldiers, imported as boys into the Islamic Empire from the pagan Steppes, but they became its savior, bringing defeat to the Mongols and forming the machine of jihad that ultimately destroyed the Crusader Kingdoms of Palestine and Syria. They entered the Islamic world as unlettered automatons and through a total application to the craft of the warrior they became more than soldiers. After a bloody seizure of power from their masters, the descendants of Saladin, they developed a martial code and an honor system based on barracks brotherhood, a sophisticated military society that harnessed the state's energies for total war and produced a series of treatises on warfare that more than compare to SunZi's Art of War in their complexity, beauty of language and comprehensive coverage of the bloody business of war. Their story embraces many of the great themes of medieval military endeavor. The Crusaders and the deadly contest between Islam and Christendom, the Mongols and their vision of World Dominion, Tamerlane the Scourge of God and the rise of the Ottoman Empire whose new slave soldiers, the Janissaries, would be the Mamluks' final nemesis.

Another review says~ In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Quote"
Reviewed by
John Dunn
The Knights of Islam: The Wars of the Mamluks. By James Waterson. St.Paul, Minn.: MBI Publishing, 2007. ISBN 978-1-85367-734-2.

"Slave-soldiers?" " Owned Men?" However you translate Mamluk, James Waterson's account of their long history deserves your consideration. He takes you from their beginnings, when Arab leaders purchased Central Asian boys for conversion, both to Islam and as bodyguards, all the way to the end of their story – early 19th Century Egypt. During the 1000 plus years separating these events, Mamluks not only play a critical role in domestic politics, but also figure prominently in thwarting both European Crusaders and several Mongol invasions of the Middle East.
These latter events show the Mamluks at their best, when their tremendous skills as horsemen and warriors allowed for history-altering victories like Ayn Jalut (1260), or the fall of Acre (1291). Waterson shows how Mamluk armies, almost exclusively cavalry, managed to be both good horse archers, and excellent shock troops. He also illustrates their significant skills at siege warfare, and use of "catapults."
Even after their apogee in the 1200s, Mamluks figure prominently in the military affairs of North East Africa and the Near East. The Knights of Islam details this, especially the 1300s-1500s, when Mamluk armies, though in decline, were still capable of defeating the Ottoman Empire when directed by smart leaders like Kayitbay. Waterson continues their story, even after the Ottoman conquest of Egypt in 1516, for Mamluks influenced that nation's history into the 1800s, while they also influenced Ottoman military culture.
Although wars and battles figure prominently, as they should in any account of Mamluks, Waterson does not leave out politics, economic matters, recruitment, or training. This reader liked his explanation of Furusiyya – a set of training lessons that began when Mamluks reached [End Page 227] 13/14, and included horsemanship plus weapons handling. He also makes very clear the most serious flaw within this system – internal rivalries between household forces of rival Mamluk leaders, often so intense that they played into the hands of foreign enemies.
These details and many more, are well covered in The Knights of Islam. Waterson's clear writing is enhanced by a strong command of the secondary literature, and good use of translated primary sources. His text is nicely organized, supported by a glossary, maps, a time-line, plus a first-rate collection of color photos, and a useful bibliography.
Specialists may argue on a few issues, pointing out that Egypt's Muhammad Ali can not be shortened to "Ali," or asking the photo editor to reconsider plate 37, which is dated to the "1880s," even though the British soldiers clearly have Wolseley pattern sun helmets. Most readers, however, should find the Knights of Islam interesting. It could benefit parties focused on Medieval, Islamic, Egyptian, or military history." Unquote.

[Timo Nieminen]

A bibliography of Asian archery (books only).

Primary sources:

Faris & Elmer, "Arab Archery", noted and linked upthread

Latham, J. D., W. F. Paterson, and Ṭaybughā, "Saracen Archery: An English Version and Exposition of a Mameluke Work on Archery (Ca. A.D. 1368)", London: Holland P., 1970.
http://pgmagirlscouts.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/saracen_archery.pdf

Jie Tian & Justin Ma, "The Way of Archery"
https://www.amazon.com/Way-Archery-Chinese-Military-Training/dp/0764347918/

Stephen Selby, "Chinese Archery"
Not a single primary source, but a collection of a variety of sources. Gives the original and a translation in English, plus discussion.
https://www.amazon.com/Chinese-Archery-Stephen-Selby/dp/9622095011/

Joseph Needham & Robin D. S. Yates, "Science and Civilisation in China: Volume 5, Chemistry and Chemical Technology; Part 6, Military Technology: Missiles and Sieges"
Not a single primary source, but a collection of a variety of sources.
https://www.amazon.com/Science-Civilisation-China-Chemistry-Technology/dp/052132727X/
https://archive.org/stream/ScienceAndCivilisationInChina/Needham_Joseph_Science_and_Civilisation_in_China_V ol_5-6_Chemistry_and_Chemical_Technology_Military_Techn ology_Missiles_and_Sieges

Modern sources:

Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani, "Persian Archery and Swordsmanship"
http://www.freelanceacademypress.com/persianarcheryswordsmanship.aspx

Paul Klopsteg, "Turkish Archery". Recently reprinted, and cheap!
https://www.amazon.com/Turkish-Archery-Composite-Bow-Interpretation/dp/1684220092/

Adam Karpowicz, "Ottoman Turkish bows"
https://www.amazon.com/Ottoman-Turkish-bows-manufacture-design-ebook/dp/B013MCOYMW/

G.N. Pant, "Indian Archery"
https://www.amazon.com/Indian-Archery-G-N-Pant/dp/8173200149/

Charles E. Grayson, "Traditional Archery from Six Continents"
https://www.amazon.com/Traditional-Archery-Six-Continents-Collection/dp/0826217516/

Stephen Selby, "Archery Traditions of Asia"
http://www.atarn.org/commercial/traditions.htm

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

PLEASE SEE ~
AND SIMPLY COPY THIS STRING INTO YOUR WEB SEARCH WINDOW file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf FOR AN EXCELLENT FULL AND FREE VERSION OF THE TRANSLATED ARAB ARCHERY BOOK

This entire book is out of copyright and free for anyone to download. :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[estcrh]

The Mamluks were, at one distinct point in history, the greatest body of fighting men in the world and the quintessence of the mounted warrior............... the Ottoman Empire whose new slave soldiers, the Janissaries, would be the Mamluks' final nemesis.

Actually I believe it was not the Janissaries that finally defeated the Mamluks, it was Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Ottoman Albanian general who defeated the Egyptian Mamluks in the early 1800s. After the withdrawal of the French occupiers of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Pasha devised a plan to murder the whole remaining lot of them by luring Mamluk leaders to a celebration and ambushing them, the rest were eventually hunted down and killed, supposedly very few got away. Muhammad Ali Pasha declared himself the "khedive" of Egypt and interesting enough it was Europeans who controlled Egypt until the early 1900s.

[Timo Nieminen]

Turkic warriors guarding the Doors of Tamerlane.

Anachronistic art. They carry the Manchu/Qing bow, which spread west along the steppe after the Manchu conquest of Mongolia (which was post-Timurid). Bows derived from the Manchu bow were used as far west as the Crimea, from where they influence European and Turkish bows. AFAIK, the Turkish and European versions (often about 4' long) weren't as big as the Crimean ones, which were often smaller than the Manchu/Chinese ones (like 5' vs 5.5' to 6').

[Gonzalo G]

I think emphasis on Blended. Certainly as I read it there was no inference on ownership of style belonging to the religion...but that surely they observed a formidable weapon and adapted and adopted the system and built a military structure around its training in the case of the Turks with their Janissaries and the Mamluke with their recruits taken often as young as 6 years old from the Steppes.

Salam aleikum, Ibrahim, peace be upon you. I am sorry if I misuderstood the quote, I just tried to extend the scope of Ottoman and Indian Mogol-Mamluke archery to the whole nomadic peoples of Central Asia. I know arab archery is ancient and has its own traditions. And that they were an open and sophisticated people who also incorporated every scientific, cultural and technological valuable asset they found among other peoples.
Regards

P.D. Thank you for the string to the Arab archery book, but I introduced it to my web search window...and noting happened, I mean, it did not open a page with the book. Maybe I did something wrong, please advise me.

[Gonzalo G]

California is also right next to the Mexican border. Even if we secede from the Union as some wild-eyed dreamers are talking about, we will still be right next to your country. Just come quick before the wall gets too high :-)

Although if you REALLY want to know all about Manchu archery, it would be wise to make a trip to meet Peter Dekker (and perhaps do some shooting) in Amsterdam. I am overdue for a return visit, myself! But I see that you are familiar with his informative websites on the subject, so that's good.

Yes, but I am at the opposite side, bordering east Texas. Very far. As for the Great Wall, don´t worry. We are already organizing teams for the national contest to see who goes up-under-around the Great Wall faster. The China lesson....

Sadly, I can't go even to the next town, less Amsterdam. Snif... :(

[estcrh]

PLEASE SEE ~
AND SIMPLY COPY THIS STRING INTO YOUR WEB SEARCH WINDOW file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf FOR AN EXCELLENT FULL AND FREE VERSION OF THE TRANSLATED ARAB ARCHERY BOOK

This entire book is out of copyright and free for anyone to download. :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.Ibrahimm, link not working...if it is for this book here is a link. Arab Archery An Arabic manuscript of about A.D. 1500 “Book on the Excellence of the Bow and Arrow” and the Description thereof.

http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Arab-Archery

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Ibrahimm, link not working...if it is for this book here is a link. Arab Archery An Arabic manuscript of about A.D. 1500 “Book on the Excellence of the Bow and Arrow” and the Description thereof.

http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Arab-Archery

It works for me... Just copy the string straight into your web search window... It should work... :) Shoot again !

There are quite a few ways into the document and heres another https://www.archerylibrary.com/books/faris-elmer/arab-archery/ where you simply go down the list and press on a link ... It also has other good archery links...

[estcrh]

It works for me... Just copy the string straight into your web search window... It should work... :) Shoot again !Try it, I think something is missing, your linkis for the same book I posted a link to.
file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Put this into search as a complete string

file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdf



My string works but yours does not.... :shrug:

[estcrh]

Put this into search as a complete string

file:///C:/Users/Peeter/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DI00.156/Arab%20Archery.pdfBeen there, done that, it does not work, check and see if you copied it correctly.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Yes that works. It will give the entire book... I used the string you have and both that and my string are working...

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salam aleikum, Ibrahim, peace be upon you. I am sorry if I misuderstood the quote, I just tried to extend the scope of Ottoman and Indian Mogol-Mamluke archery to the whole nomadic peoples of Central Asia. I know arab archery is ancient and has its own traditions. And that they were an open and sophisticated people who also incorporated every scientific, cultural and technological valuable asset they found among other peoples.
Regards

P.D. Thank you for the string to the Arab archery book, but I introduced it to my web search window...and noting happened, I mean, it did not open a page with the book. Maybe I did something wrong, please advise me.

Ensure you copy the string and put into web search...It works for me....

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Actually I believe it was not the Janissaries that finally defeated the Mamluks, it was Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Ottoman Albanian general who defeated the Egyptian Mamluks in the early 1800s. After the withdrawal of the French occupiers of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Pasha devised a plan to murder the whole remaining lot of them by luring Mamluk leaders to a celebration and ambushing them, the rest were eventually hunted down and killed, supposedly very few got away. Muhammad Ali Pasha declared himself the "khedive" of Egypt and interesting enough it was Europeans who controlled Egypt until the early 1900s.

Yes correct but he used his Janissaries to do the deed ...The Mamluks were surrounded and shot to pieces. Only one got away and of the few others that were not at that wipe out... They were mostly hunted down and killed.

[estcrh]

Yes correct but he used his Janissaries to do the deed ...The Mamluks were surrounded and shot to pieces. Only one got away and of the few others that were not at that wipe out... They were mostly hunted down and killed.According to everything that I have read he used his Albanian troops, he then basically took control over Egypt and the Ottoman government could do nothing to stop him.

Wikipedia.
"The French withdrawal left a power vacuum in Egypt. Mamluk power had been weakened, but not destroyed, and Ottoman forces clashed with the Mamluks for power. During this period of turmoil Muhammad Ali used his loyal Albanian troops to work with both sides, gaining power and prestige for himself......The Mamluks still posed the greatest threat to Muhammad Ali. They controlled Egypt for more than 600 years, and over that time they extended their rule systematically south along the Nile River to Upper Egypt. Muhammad Ali’s approach was to eliminate the Mamluk leadership, then move against the rank and file. Muhammad Ali invited the Mamluk leaders to a celebration at the Cairo Citadel in honor of his son, Tusun Pasha, who was to lead a military expedition into Arabia. The event was held on March 1, 1811. When the Mamluks had gathered at the Citadel, and were surrounded by Muhammad Ali's troops, he had his troops kill them. After the leaders were killed, Muhammad Ali dispatched his army throughout Egypt to rout the remainder of the Mamluk forces."

[Gonzalo G]

Actually I believe it was not the Janissaries that finally defeated the Mamluks, it was Muhammad Ali Pasha, an Ottoman Albanian general who defeated the Egyptian Mamluks in the early 1800s. After the withdrawal of the French occupiers of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Pasha devised a plan to murder the whole remaining lot of them by luring Mamluk leaders to a celebration and ambushing them, the rest were eventually hunted down and killed, supposedly very few got away. Muhammad Ali Pasha declared himself the "khedive" of Egypt and interesting enough it was Europeans who controlled Egypt until the early 1900s.

I am sorry, estcrh, but the Mamluk Sultanate was defeated and destroyed as such by Selim I in 1516, beign the Mamluks no match for the Ottoman artillery and janissaries. Since then, the Mamluks were the already defeated and decadent subjects of the Ottoman Empire which, in the time of the French invassion, also was in decadence (as all empires will be, and vanish, sic transit gloria mundi). They were defeated on the battlefield by the Ottomans, and not by treason. Muhammad Ali Pasha only recovered Egypt. And since the Mamluks were already unruly and useless, he killed their leaders in an ambush. As many christian kings and princes did in their time in Europe. From then he was only nominal subordinate of the Ottomans, given the fact that the aforementioned empire was in total decadence, as said.

Regards

P.D. Already downloaded the book from the estcrh's link. It is the same. Thank you very much to both of you.

[Gonzalo G]

Anachronistic art. They carry the Manchu/Qing bow, which spread west along the steppe after the Manchu conquest of Mongolia (which was post-Timurid). Bows derived from the Manchu bow were used as far west as the Crimea, from where they influence European and Turkish bows. AFAIK, the Turkish and European versions (often about 4' long) weren't as big as the Crimean ones, which were often smaller than the Manchu/Chinese ones (like 5' vs 5.5' to 6').

I agree on the anachronism, but specifically in which way Manchu bows influenced the Turk bows? By Turks you meant the Ottomans? Because there are many Turkic peoples, from nort-west China to south-west Russia, not to mention the Ottomans. Do you mean all of them?

Regards

[estcrh]

They were defeated on the battlefield by the Ottomans, and not by treason. Gonzalo, I did not say that the Egyptian Mamluks were defeated by treason, I said that the Mamluks were not defeated in Egypt by the Janassaries, the treason was Ali taking control over Egypt and proclaiming himself as the "Khedive".

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

It woz Ali Pasha wot done it !!!

[estcrh]

The bow was found in Japan, an unusual place to find an Indo-Persian bow. It is covered with illustrations, cows or bulls and military men, I am thinking that this is a Persian portrait, any thoughts would be helpful.

[Gonzalo G]

Ganzalo, I did not say that the Egyptian Mamluks were defeated by treason, I said that the Mamluks were not defeated in Egypt by the Janassaries, the treason was Ali taking control over Egypt and proclaiming himself as the "Khedive".


Ok, sorry for that, estcrh. But at that time the Mamluks were only the problematic and unruly subjects of the Ottomans, already defeated but kept by the Ottomans to manage Egypt for them. Not anymore the great Mamluks who defeated the Mongol armies. They were defeated by fireweapons and more modern tactics, since although they have some fireweapons, they didn´t learn how to use and produce them properly. That, and all the complexities involved in the decadence of their own sultanate in the 16th Century. The same happened to the so called "Tatars", Uzbeks, Kazaks, etc. with the Russian Empire, or to the Mongols with the Chinese-Manchu Empire. A mix of social, economic, historical and technological and military factors. Which, among other things, conducted to the decadence of archery.

Regards

[Gonzalo G]

The bow was found in Japan, an unusual place to find an Indo-Persian bow. It is covered with illustrations, cows or bulls and military men, I am thinking that this is a Persian portrait, any thoughts would be helpful.

I am not an expert on this field (or any other), but the portrait seems to be Naser al-Din Shah Qajar, though I can be mistaken. He conducted intense diplomatic activities. Maybe a diplomatic gift to Japan rulers? After all, he searched for allies on the whole world against the Russians, and the Japanese could be taken as natural allies at that moment.

Thank you for all your photographs, estcrh.

Regards

[Timo Nieminen]

I agree on the anachronism, but specifically in which way Manchu bows influenced the Turk bows? By Turks you meant the Ottomans? Because there are many Turkic peoples, from nort-west China to south-west Russia, not to mention the Ottomans. Do you mean all of them?

By "Turkish" here, I mean the Turkish subjects of the Ottomans. The European bows I refer to are AFAIK European subjects of the Ottomans. (For Turkic peoples outside Turkey, I'll usually use "Turkic" rather than "Turkish".)

AFAIK, the Mongol adoption of the Manchu bow was driven by the Manchu conquest of Mongolia. After the Mongolian Mongols adopted it, then it spread to Moghulistan, and next to Mawarannahr/Transoxiana (under Uzbek rule by then), and then to the Crimean Khanate. By the time the Manchu bow reaches Crimea, it's shrunk a bit (but is still a big bow) - smaller ears, smaller string bridge, and also less reflexed.

The Crimean Khanate being an Ottoman protectorate, the Ottomans are exposed to this bow. At which point, bows appear in the Ottoman Empire which are intermediate in size between the traditional Ottoman bow and the Crimean/Manchu bow. The new bows are about 50"/125cm long, as compared with the traditional 40"/100cm bows, and the 60"/160cm Crimean/Manchu bow (and the 66"-72"/170-180cm Manchu/Qing bow).

[Gonzalo G]

Thank you for your reply, Timo. The Ottoman bows I have seen does not have the siyah-ears big and so rigid (so it seems) like the Manchu. But I have only seen some Ottoman and Manchu bows in pictures, never seen one personally, and they look different. The Manchu bow seem more "Hunnish", but symmetrical. I have only elemental knowledge of the historic composite bow from the Orient, that's why I asked for the specific influences, like beign more robust, bigger than the originals, siyah bigger or more rigid, different profiles-curvatures-proportions, etc.
I also wonder if those Timurid warriors should carry their swords edge up.

Regards

[Victrix]

Ganzalo, I did not say that the Egyptian Mamluks were defeated by treason, I said that the Mamluks were not defeated in Egypt by the Janassaries, the treason was Ali taking control over Egypt and proclaiming himself as the "Khedive".

Estcrh, you would enjoy reading James Waterson's book. It's a fascinating read and well worth the modest money. It has pride of place in my library. During their heyday the Mamluks were like the Samurai of the Islamic world, and second to none in their fighting skills to which their entire lives were devoted. As Gonzalo G mentioned, their weaknesses were a lack of willingness to adapt to new scientific advances and corruption as a result of power grabs.

[estcrh]

Composite bows at ed-Dur (Umm al-Qaiwain, U.A.E.)

http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/archaeology/Publications/The%20Near%20East/Composite%20bows%20at%20ed-Dur.pdf

Bows in Arabia and at ed-Dur

According to pre-Islamic Arabic poetry, the bow was a frequently used weapon in Arabia (29). Originally, the Arabs used the simple, asymmetrical bow (upper and lower limbs being of different length). Later, the ‘Arab composite bow’ was intro- duced: a large, segment-shaped bow with long ears bent forwards, a descendant of the above-mentioned ‘composite segment bow’ with bone coverings. When ed-Dur was occupied (late first century BC- first half of the second century AD), this type was widely used by the Arabs (30). Surprisingly, how- ever, ed-Dur is the only site in the Arabian Peninsula where bone nock-plates have been excavated. More- over, no illustrations of the Arab composite bow have been found, perhaps because of the ‘iconoclas- tic tendencies common to Islam and to the pre- Moslem religions of the country’ (31).

[estcrh]

the portrait seems to be Naser al-Din Shah Qajar, though I can be mistaken.

Good guess Gonzalo, so this bow was made in the mid to late 1800s at the earliest, the comparison between the portrait on the bow and his photograph is very similar.

It is not in good condition, maybe someone has an idea of how to preserve it. Persian bows are rather rare.

Naser al-Din Shah Qajar (16 July 1831 – 1 May 1896) (Persian: ناصرالدین شاه قاجار‎‎), also Nassereddin Shah Qajar, was the King of Persia from 5 September 1848 to 1 May 1896 when he was assassinated.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Composite bows at ed-Dur (Umm al-Qaiwain, U.A.E.)

http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/archaeology/Publications/The%20Near%20East/Composite%20bows%20at%20ed-Dur.pdf

Bows in Arabia and at ed-Dur

According to pre-Islamic Arabic poetry, the bow was a frequently used weapon in Arabia (29). Originally, the Arabs used the simple, asymmetrical bow (upper and lower limbs being of different length). Later, the ‘Arab composite bow’ was intro- duced: a large, segment-shaped bow with long ears bent forwards, a descendant of the above-mentioned ‘composite segment bow’ with bone coverings. When ed-Dur was occupied (late first century BC- first half of the second century AD), this type was widely used by the Arabs (30). Surprisingly, how- ever, ed-Dur is the only site in the Arabian Peninsula where bone nock-plates have been excavated. More- over, no illustrations of the Arab composite bow have been found, perhaps because of the ‘iconoclas- tic tendencies common to Islam and to the pre- Moslem religions of the country’ (31).


The research paper is quite excellent however, I dont know what context you mean iconoclatic tic... "a contradiction in established beliefs"... I can say however, that I have found a lot of arrow heads around here in the desert...which proves to me someone must have been loosing some arrows off>>> a long time ago. :)

[estcrh]

The research paper is quite excellent however, I dont know what context you mean iconoclatic tic... "a contradiction in established beliefs"... I can say however, that I have found a lot of arrow heads around here in the desert...which proves to me someone must have been loosing some arrows off>>> a long time ago. :)

Ibrahiim, sorry for the confusion, that is a quote from the research paper, I did not write it and I am not exactly sure what the writer of the quote meant. By the way, do you have any images of the arrow heads you have found? Here is an image of what looks like an ancient composite bow in use.


An archer engaged in combat using a thumb draw on what appears to be a type of Indo-Persian bow. It dates back to the 8th-9th Century AD and was taken from the ancient city of Panjikent located partially in Tajikistan's northwest but mainly in Uzbekistan's southeast according to the locals. For years it was kept in the Hermitage of St. Petersburg, Russia but now resides back in Tajik lands where it rightfully belongs.

[Gonzalo G]

The research paper is quite excellent however, I dont know what context you mean iconoclatic tic... "a contradiction in established beliefs"... I can say however, that I have found a lot of arrow heads around here in the desert...which proves to me someone must have been loosing some arrows off>>> a long time ago. :)

It is very clear. The iconoclasts was a famous Bizantine religious current among the chrstian church. They were opposed to the representation of human beigns (oikonos=image in Greek). Their foes were those who supported the use of images of saints, etc., as a media to propagate the faith and teach the christian church's beliefs. Those last won, after a true civil war. The Jews, Muslims and Christisn Iconoclasts are against the use of human images. So, no illustrations of arab bows are usually found, because of this (no images of archers), acording with the quote from that article. Protestantism in Europe raised again this iconoclastic belief, and they refused to use images in their churches, as opposed to the catholics. In their churches you only find symbols, as the cross.

Regards

[estcrh]

It is very clear. The iconoclasts was a famous Bizantine religious current among the chrstian church. They were opposed to the representation of human beigns (oikonos=image in Greek). Their foes were those who supported the use of images of saints, etc., as a media to propagate the faith and teach the christian church's beliefs. Those last won, after a true civil war. The Jews, Muslims and Christisn Iconoclasts are against the use of human images. So, no illustrations of arab bows are usually found, because of this (no images of archers), acording with the quote from that article. Protestantism in Europe raised again this iconoclastic belief, and they refused to use images in their churches, as opposed to the catholics. In their churches you only find symbols, as the cross.

RegardsGood explanation, thanks.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Ibrahiim, sorry for the confusion, that is a quote from the research paper, I did not write it and I am not exactly sure what the writer of the quote meant. By the way, do you have any images of the arrow heads you have found? Here is an image of what looks like an ancient composite bow in use.


An archer engaged in combat using a thumb draw on what appears to be a type of Indo-Persian bow. It dates back to the 8th-9th Century AD and was taken from the ancient city of Panjikent located partially in Tajikistan's northwest but mainly in Uzbekistan's southeast according to the locals. For years it was kept in the Hermitage of St. Petersburg, Russia but now resides back in Tajik lands where it rightfully belongs.


I think I have a few left ... will check the store ...and take a picture.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I think I have a few left ... will check the store ...and take a picture.


I still need to take some pictures... however, looking at a report on the UAEi ~ Quote"Broadheads were used for war and are still used for hunting. Information on regional Arabic arrowheads found from the period 100BC-150AD in the United Arab Emirates show the use of three-bladed broadheads, or trilobate arrowhead. "A trilobate arrowhead can be defined as an arrowhead that has three wings or blades that are usually placed at equal angles (i.e. c. 120°) around the imaginary longitudinal axis extending from the centre of the socket or tang. Since this type of arrowhead is rare in southeastern Arabia, we must investigate its origin and the reasons behind its presence at ed-Dur. UAE" ''Unquote.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

RESEARCHERS FIND ANCIENT OFFERINGS TO A DEITY OF WAR
Archaeologists led by Guilluame Gernez of Pantheon-Sorbonne University in Paris discovered two groups of 'remarkable' objects during excavations at Mudhmar East.
The site in the Arabian Peninsula, near Adam, Oman.
Researchers found two small quivers made entirely of bronze, each including six arrows.
At just 35 cm, these quivers are small-scale replicas of real objects and are non-functional – and they're the first of this kind ever to be discovered in the Arabian Peninsula.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3504651/Ancient-mini-weapons-Gods-Tiny-2-900-year-old-bows-arrows-daggers-Oman-shed-light-mysterious-religious-practices.html#ixzz4nJL0lRhl

[estcrh]

RESEARCHERS FIND ANCIENT OFFERINGS TO A DEITY OF WAR
Archaeologists led by Guilluame Gernez of Pantheon-Sorbonne University in Paris discovered two groups of 'remarkable' objects during excavations at Mudhmar East.
The site in the Arabian Peninsula, near Adam, Oman.
Researchers found two small quivers made entirely of bronze, each including six arrows.
At just 35 cm, these quivers are small-scale replicas of real objects and are non-functional – and they're the first of this kind ever to be discovered in the Arabian Peninsula.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3504651/Ancient-mini-weapons-Gods-Tiny-2-900-year-old-bows-arrows-daggers-Oman-shed-light-mysterious-religious-practices.html#ixzz4nJL0lRhl

Good find!!!!

http://www2.cnrs.fr/en/2725.htm

Paris, 10 March 2016
First non-utilitarian weapons found in the Arabian Peninsula

An exceptional collection of bronze weapons dating from the Iron Age II (900-600 BC) has been uncovered near Adam, in the Sultanate of Oman. The remains were discovered scattered on the ground in a building belonging to what is thought to be a religious complex, during excavations carried out by the French archaeological mission in central Oman. In particular, they include two complete quivers and weapons made of metal, including two bows, objects that are for the most part non-functional and hitherto unknown in the Arabian Peninsula. Additional archaeological research, which began in 2011 in the region, will be needed to elucidate the political system, social practices and rituals existing in the Arabian Peninsula at the time.

[Timo Nieminen]

Thank you for your reply, Timo. The Ottoman bows I have seen does not have the siyah-ears big and so rigid (so it seems) like the Manchu. But I have only seen some Ottoman and Manchu bows in pictures, never seen one personally, and they look different. The Manchu bow seem more "Hunnish", but symmetrical. I have only elemental knowledge of the historic composite bow from the Orient, that's why I asked for the specific influences, like beign more robust, bigger than the originals, siyah bigger or more rigid, different profiles-curvatures-proportions, etc.

A couple of examples:

First, some Manchu bows:
http://mandarinmansion.com/antique-manchu-composite-bow
http://www.hermann-historica.de/en/kompositbogen_im_mandschu-stil_china_19_jhdt/l/138178
https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/chinaarchery/1998-0162bow.shtml
These are big bows (170cm to 180cm long), very reflexed, long ears, prominent string bridges. The Mongolian version is similar: often a bit smaller, but still a big bows, often with shorter (but still long) ears, usually less reflexed. A couple of examples:
http://www.hermann-historica.de/en/kompositbogen_mongolei_20_jhdt/l/138189
http://www.hermann-historica.de/en/kompositbogen_mit_sehne_mongolei_20_jhdt/l/138192
http://mandarinmansion.com/tigers-tail-patterned-composite-bow

The typical Ottoman bow is very different. Much, much smaller (about 1m long), short ears, no string bridges:
https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/islamicarchery/1994-0657turkbow.shtml
https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/islamicarchery/1994-0977turkbow.shtml

Now the in-between bow, the "Crimean" bow. AFAIK, these are Turkish Ottoman, rather than Crimean as such - the actual Crimean bow was close to the Mongolian/Manchu bow (more prominent string bridges).
150cm long, so very large: https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/islamicarchery/1994-0656tartarbow.shtml
125cm long, so about halfway between the above example and a typical Ottoman bow: https://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayson/islamicarchery/1994-0982tartarbow.shtml

I also wonder if those Timurid warriors should carry their swords edge up.

All of the scabbards I've seen have mounts such that the sword would be hung from the belt, edge down. Most examples I've seen in art are worn that way (I can remember seeing a sketch of a miniature with the sword worn through a waist belt, but still edge down).

[Timo Nieminen]

Another online publication of interest:

Bernard A. Boit, "The Fruits of Adversity: Technical Refinements of the
Turkish Composite Bow During the Crusading Era", MA thesis, The Ohio State University, 1991.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a243362.pdf

[kronckew]

Another online publication of interest:

Bernard A. Boit, "The Fruits of Adversity: Technical Refinements of the
Turkish Composite Bow During the Crusading Era", MA thesis, The Ohio State University, 1991.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a243362.pdf

it ignores the use of metal lammelar armour and mail used by byzantine cataphracti and the sassanids, and turks, all of which used recurved horsebows, only mentioning the light leather lamella used by some other muslim light cavalry. they also armoured their horses.

[Gonzalo G]

These are big bows (170cm to 180cm long), very reflexed, long ears, prominent string bridges. The Mongolian version is similar: often a bit smaller, but still a big bows, often with shorter (but still long) ears, usually less reflexed.

From the representation of Mongol and Manchu mounted warriors, I believed these bows were smaller to facilitate shooting from horseback. 1.70-1.80 mt is about the size of a English longbow, isn't it? I can´t imagine carrying those long bows from a quiver suspended from the waist.


All of the scabbards I've seen have mounts such that the sword would be hung from the belt, edge down. Most examples I've seen in art are worn that way (I can remember seeing a sketch of a miniature with the sword worn through a waist belt, but still edge down).

Do you mean, among the Timurids?

Thank you for the link, I´m downloading.

Regards

[Timo Nieminen]

From the representation of Mongol and Manchu mounted warriors, I believed these bows were smaller to facilitate shooting from horseback. 1.70-1.80 mt is about the size of a English longbow, isn't it? I can´t imagine carrying those long bows from a quiver suspended from the waist.

Some photos of large bows being worn on horseback at http://www.manchuarchery.org/photographs-mongolian-archers (and when you combine it with the long heavy arrows you want for these bow, a musket, a sword, and a lance, you have a lot of stuff to carry).

Smaller is easier on horseback, but note that the bow survived for so long in the Qing army as a cavalry weapon. After pike and musket became the dominant infantry weapons, the bow remained in use by the cavalry for another 200 years. If they'd adopted the pistol as a standard cavalry weapon, the bow might have been abandoned.

The Japanese managed with an even longer bow! (Modern yumi usually vary from 2.2m to 2.5m.)

Do you mean, among the Timurids?

Timurids, and also others nearby in space and time. I double-checked Timurids specifically, but it reflects much broader usage. The Central Asian standard sword suspension was edge down, hung from the belt, two hangers on the spine-side of the scabbard.

[Gonzalo G]

Thank you, Timo.

At what moment and where began those sabers be carried edge-up? In the Golden Horde they were carried edge-up, as I understand. The Russians adopted this sytsem, as also the oriental style of sabers. The Japanese carried the nihonto edge-up in the sash, but edge-down with armour.

Regards

[Timo Nieminen]

The oldest Central Asian scabbards for curved sabres I've seen that look designed for wear through a waist sash (and therefore at least potentially edge-up) are 18th century. However, scabbards don't survive as well as swords, and the practice might be older. I've seen older Tibetan scabbards (for straight swords) that look like they're made for wear through a waist sash, edge up (maybe 17th century?).

The oldest scabbards I've seen for wear edge-up hung-from-belt are 19th century (shashka scabbards, all of them).

AFAIK, uchigatana mounts (Japanese sword mounts for edge-up waist-sash wear) appear in the 15th century, and become common in the 16th century. This was driven by the growth of infantry as armies got larger. The uchigatana/katana is an infantry sword, and the tachi is a cavalry sword.

Can you point to any art showing Golden Horde swords being worn edge-up?

[Gonzalo G]

Hi Timo,

It seems that I´m wrong. I have been checking Tatar sabres with scabbards, and all them seem to be carried edge-down.

I thought the tachi was not used anymore in the 16th Century, except for few exceptions.

Regards

[Timo Nieminen]

The tachi was still in use as a cavalry sword. For example, in this picture of the Siege of Osaka Castle, 1615:
http://files.lib.byu.edu/exhibits/guns-scrolls-swords/2D.jpg
the cavalry wear tachi, while most infantry wear a katana (some armoured infantry wear tachi, too, like the musketeer near the gate at the bottom left, and the archer at the bottom extreme right).

As late as the Satsuma Rebellion, art still shows traditionally-equipped armoured cavalry wearing tachi (and modernised cavalry with Western sabres, modernised infantry with katana worn in baldrics, unarmoured samurai women fighting on horseback with katana - lots of variety).

[Gonzalo G]

Thank you, Timo. Very instructive.

Regards

[estcrh]

The tachi was still in use as a cavalry sword. For example, in this picture of the Siege of Osaka Castle, 1615:

As late as the Satsuma Rebellion, art still shows traditionally-equipped armoured cavalry wearing tachi .
Just because a sword was worn in the manner of a tachi does not necessarily make the sword a true "tachi".

There were true tachi, which are swords made during a certain period of time and with certain identifiable traits.

There were swords that were not true tachi which were mounted in a tachi koshirae.

There were swords that were not true tachi and were not mounted in a tachi koshirae but were still worn in the manner of a tachi.

There were swords made at a later date than true tachi which were made to look like true tachi.

[Timo Nieminen]

it ignores the use of metal lammelar armour and mail used by byzantine cataphracti and the sassanids, and turks, all of which used recurved horsebows, only mentioning the light leather lamella used by some other muslim light cavalry. they also armoured their horses.

Light leather lamellar is a myth, anyway. The lamella need to be thick enough to be effective - about 3mm rawhide or more. All of it is overlapped to give you at least double thickness everywhere (side-by-side overlap), so rows are 6mm thick. If you again double the thickness by vertical overlap of the rows, you have 12mm, for about the same weight as 2mm iron/steel plate (without even considering the weight of the lacing).

Take that 3mm rawhide lamellar, and wear it on top of a mail shirt (as was common), and it isn't light armour at all.