Islamic Crossbow?

Jens Nordlunde · 20th July 2005, 04:40 PM

Hi Brian,

I think I have seen a crossbow on an Indian painting - I will have to have a look.

Jens

B.I · 20th July 2005, 05:05 PM

thanks jens, any help would be greatly appreciated. sculpture or text especially, or persian islamic painting. unfortunately indian painting only flourished after the moghuls, with the very occasional early example being crude and normally not of use.
however, even if it is moghul or post moghul, at least it shows the idea was adapted.
ideally, i am after pre 16thC islam, whether indian, persian, turkish etc. a written accout would be excellent.

Rivkin · 20th July 2005, 05:12 PM

Ofcoarse:
"The Mamluks in Egyptian politics and society" edited by Thomas Philipp and Ulrich Haarmann
"Studies on the Mamluks of Egypt" David Ayalon

As far as I remember in the first book there is an article on mamluk theology. As I remember Mamluks used "arab" bows (standard bows), "turkish" bows (long, heavy arrows) and "persian" bows (crossbows, or "foot-activated bows"). The latter ones were extremely popular, however there was a theologic problem - nowadays forgotten sunna about Mohammed supervising his troops and saying "why are you using persian swords and bows ? You should use only arab weapons !". The solution was found in stating that he meant that one should not use the weapon of kafir, for persians at the time were kafir.

Since turks and persians converted you can use their weapons, but you can't use firearms for they are "christian sunna" (Ayalon quotes the last speach of Tuman-Bey in which he accuses ottoman in violating this law by using "christian sunna" - guns).

B.I · 20th July 2005, 05:20 PM

thank you krill, thats wonderful.
do you have these books and can you quote the phrase. if this isnt possible, do remember which book mentioned the crossbow and i will find it and source the quote myself.
much appreciated.

B.I · 20th July 2005, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivkin

Since turks and persians converted you can use their weapons, but you can't use firearms for they are "christian sunna" (Ayalon quotes the last speach of Tuman-Bey in which he accuses ottoman in violating this law by using "christian sunna" - guns).

very interesting. i am not familiar with 'christian sunna' and its meaning.
the firearms theology i am aware of.
its a strange concept, that if you cut off someones head, the body still remains 'whole' as in, it still exists in the material world, even if in two pieces.
but, firearms cause the body to be partially destroyed when meeting their maker, and so you are undoing what your deity has created.
very strange.

fernando · 20th July 2005, 09:51 PM

Sorry if this is nonsense ...
What about the muslim crossbow being of portuguese ( or partly ) influence ?
By the time Afonso de Albuquerque defeated and practically controlled all the sea and coast, from the straight of Ormuz, all India west coast, down to Malaca,( around 1505 ), he personnaly took it as a modernity that all the archers from his fleet used the crossbow, while João de Barros and others from the period, quoted that, muslims and turks were armed with normal bows, some of them very powerfull and sofisticated.
At least several crossbows were left back or captured during the inumerous battles ... this could be a start, like other known cases of invader/defender influence on altering or adopting eachother's weapons.
If this is a plausible possibility, i can translate a few historical quotations, added by pictures.

Rivkin · 20th July 2005, 10:54 PM

1. "Christian sunna" (also known as "hadith of kafirs") is when someone does not follow the islamic tradition - for example erects statues (like spanish umayads) or in opinion of some uses paper money (rather than bimetallic islamic currency system). Handguns were considered "christian sunna" in an extremely orthodox (and in the same time extremely unislamic) mamluk society, i.e. they were considered a chirstian novelty that is prohibited for proper muslims (source - Ayalon quotation of Tuman bey's speach).

2. I'll find this article, but it will probably take some time - I'll have to check out the books from the library, and right now I'm on a little bit tight schedule.

3. As far as I remember the decision of qadis that permitted the use of crossbow was made during the rulership or Calawun, (14th century) or somewhere in this range of time, centuries before the establishment of a portuguese base in Oman. The problem is that crossbow is nearly always referred in islamic sources as a "bow", the paper makes the point in emphasizing that it's (as far as I remember) sometimes is called a "persian bow" or "the bow where string is drawn with the foot". The size of these bows is reported to be completely enormous - elite, extremely strong mamluks were rumored (according to the paper, that I'll dig up

) to use bolts that weighted up to a few dozen pounds and more.

Rivkin · 20th July 2005, 11:27 PM

Ok, here are two books that should mention islamic crossbows:
Boas, Adrian J. (1999). Crusader Archeology. New York: Routledge.
Burke, Edmund. (1957). The History of Archery. New York: William Morrow and Company.

20th July 2005, 04:40 PM	#1
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Brian, I think I have seen a crossbow on an Indian painting - I will have to have a look. Jens

20th July 2005, 05:05 PM	#2
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	thanks jens, any help would be greatly appreciated. sculpture or text especially, or persian islamic painting. unfortunately indian painting only flourished after the moghuls, with the very occasional early example being crude and normally not of use. however, even if it is moghul or post moghul, at least it shows the idea was adapted. ideally, i am after pre 16thC islam, whether indian, persian, turkish etc. a written accout would be excellent.

20th July 2005, 05:12 PM	#3
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Ofcoarse: "The Mamluks in Egyptian politics and society" edited by Thomas Philipp and Ulrich Haarmann "Studies on the Mamluks of Egypt" David Ayalon As far as I remember in the first book there is an article on mamluk theology. As I remember Mamluks used "arab" bows (standard bows), "turkish" bows (long, heavy arrows) and "persian" bows (crossbows, or "foot-activated bows"). The latter ones were extremely popular, however there was a theologic problem - nowadays forgotten sunna about Mohammed supervising his troops and saying "why are you using persian swords and bows ? You should use only arab weapons !". The solution was found in stating that he meant that one should not use the weapon of kafir, for persians at the time were kafir. Since turks and persians converted you can use their weapons, but you can't use firearms for they are "christian sunna" (Ayalon quotes the last speach of Tuman-Bey in which he accuses ottoman in violating this law by using "christian sunna" - guns).

20th July 2005, 05:20 PM	#4
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	thank you krill, thats wonderful. do you have these books and can you quote the phrase. if this isnt possible, do remember which book mentioned the crossbow and i will find it and source the quote myself. much appreciated.

20th July 2005, 09:51 PM	#6
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Sorry if this is nonsense ... What about the muslim crossbow being of portuguese ( or partly ) influence ? By the time Afonso de Albuquerque defeated and practically controlled all the sea and coast, from the straight of Ormuz, all India west coast, down to Malaca,( around 1505 ), he personnaly took it as a modernity that all the archers from his fleet used the crossbow, while João de Barros and others from the period, quoted that, muslims and turks were armed with normal bows, some of them very powerfull and sofisticated. At least several crossbows were left back or captured during the inumerous battles ... this could be a start, like other known cases of invader/defender influence on altering or adopting eachother's weapons. If this is a plausible possibility, i can translate a few historical quotations, added by pictures.

20th July 2005, 10:54 PM	#7
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	1. "Christian sunna" (also known as "hadith of kafirs") is when someone does not follow the islamic tradition - for example erects statues (like spanish umayads) or in opinion of some uses paper money (rather than bimetallic islamic currency system). Handguns were considered "christian sunna" in an extremely orthodox (and in the same time extremely unislamic) mamluk society, i.e. they were considered a chirstian novelty that is prohibited for proper muslims (source - Ayalon quotation of Tuman bey's speach). 2. I'll find this article, but it will probably take some time - I'll have to check out the books from the library, and right now I'm on a little bit tight schedule. 3. As far as I remember the decision of qadis that permitted the use of crossbow was made during the rulership or Calawun, (14th century) or somewhere in this range of time, centuries before the establishment of a portuguese base in Oman. The problem is that crossbow is nearly always referred in islamic sources as a "bow", the paper makes the point in emphasizing that it's (as far as I remember) sometimes is called a "persian bow" or "the bow where string is drawn with the foot". The size of these bows is reported to be completely enormous - elite, extremely strong mamluks were rumored (according to the paper, that I'll dig up ) to use bolts that weighted up to a few dozen pounds and more.

20th July 2005, 11:27 PM	#8
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Ok, here are two books that should mention islamic crossbows: Boas, Adrian J. (1999). Crusader Archeology. New York: Routledge. Burke, Edmund. (1957). The History of Archery. New York: William Morrow and Company.