The Archers of Islam

Author(s): W. F. Paterson
Source: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 9, No. 1/2 (Nov.,
1966), pp. 69-87
Published by: BRILL
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3596173 .
Accessed: 23/05/2011 05:45

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Economic and
Social History of the Orient.

http://www.jstor.org
 THE ARCHERSOF ISLAM
BY

W. F. PATERSON

'...archery is dependent on five articles: the bow,

the string, the arrow, the thumb guard and the archer'.
Taybughi al-Ashrafi1)
i. Introduction
Though the bow is one of the most importantearlyweapons devised
by man and its impact on history has been considerable,it has rarely
been given the detailed attention that it deserves. It merits study as it
has a degree of complexity which can only be appreciatedby actual
use and an understandingof its basic mechanics.One may add to this
an understandingof the vocabularyand technical terms, as and when
they may appear,and a fuller appreciationof the actions of archersin
miniature paintings.
Success with the bow results from hard work and regularpractice,
for only by these means can a degree of masterybe achieved, enabling
the archerto draw to the limit of his strength and yet shoot under full
control. If one watchesan experiencedarcher,his actions appearsmooth
and effortless, which is as it should be, but to the onlooker this can give
a false impression, as the considerableeffort needed to draw a bow is
hidden by skill and training.
While the history of the old English longbow representsthe finest
tactical use of this weapon in a defensive role, the composite bow in
the Middle East was of no lesser merit in the hands of the mounted
archerswhen used as a weapon of offence.

2. The CompositeBow
The composite bow, as used by the Islamic horse-archers,represents
one of the most efficient forms of this weapon ever devised and its

I) British Museum MS Additional 23489, fo. I9b.

70 W. F. PATERSON

constructionis worthyof detailedconsideration.The most important

sourceof informationis MustafaKani,Telchis
Resailer-Rumat,Istanbul,
A.D. I847, with JoachimHein's dissertationon this work in Der
Islam, xiv (1925), pp. 289-360, on which P. E. Klopsteg based his
translationand commentaryin TurkishArcheryandtheComposite Bow,
whichappearedas a privateeditionin 1934 with a revisionand reprint
in 1947. This work is mainlyconcernedwith the flight bow of the
OttomanTurks,whichis a specialisedformof this weapondevisedfor
sportingpurposes.Flightshootingwas a favoritepastimeamongmost
archersin the Middle East, and its sole object is to achieve maximum
distancewithoutregardto accuracy.The techniquesinvolvedrequire
special skill, and exponentsof this art among the Turks, where it
reachedits highestperfection,could sendtheirlight and delicatelittle
arrowsover 6oo yards. However, neitherthe bows nor the arrows
used with themweresuitablefor war,thoughthis methodof shooting
has an obviousapplicationin the long-rangebarrageagainsta massed
targetup to a limitingrangeof about400 yards.
Valuablecontributionshave also been made by Henry Balfour)
and CommanderH. S. Hamlin,Jr. 2). Their publishedworks give a
very complete picture of the internal structure of the Eastern bows.
During recent years painstakingand careful dissection of a number of
Oriental composite bows have been made by Edward McEwen to
determine the exact details of their construction, followed by the
making of replicas,using the original materials,to prove the accuracy
of his observations. Discussions with him have added considerably
to our knowledge of the finer points in the art of the craftsmenwho
made these weapons.
With reference to fig. I the construction of a typical bow was as
follows. The craftsmanstartedwith a wood core, the main requirement
of whichwasthatit shouldabsorbgluewell.Varietiesof maple,cornus,

x) Journalof the Anthropological

Institute,XIX, 1890, pp. 22zz9-244and JRAI, LI,
1921, pp. 289-306.
2)"A Study of Composite Bows", Archery(magazine), April, May, June, July,
and September, 1948. Palm Desert, Calif.
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 71

SIYAK NoCK
wvH TEM•'oRARY SIYAH

Ha'RN•/
t? •:,-
;s,\,

1'A 1T

/ SINEW
?•,• i

CORD
It
,,,, p1=

IB7FAN3AQ

PERSIAN

Sii

Fig1
Fig. x
72 W. F. PATERSON

mulberryand similartypes areamong the betterwoods for this purpose,

and dissected bows often show differentwoods were used for different
sections of the core. This is usually in five sections, two siyahs,two
dustdrsand the grip. The siyahsprovide the relatively thick and un-
bending ends to the bow, whose purpose will be discussed below,
while the dustdrsare thin and flexible, as all the bending when the bow
is drawn takes place in this section.
The parts were then glued together with fishtail splices about 34
inches in length. In this way the actual handle, or grip, of the bow is
about 5 inches long, but about I2 inches with its splices at either end.
The form of the wood core determinesthe final shape of the bow and
the curve of the siyahin relation to the dustdr.In the case of Persian
and Turkish bows-using this latter adjective in its wider sense-the
siyahis smoothly curved over its length through about 600, while the
Indo-Persianones have a more sharply curved knee near the base of
the siyahwhere it joins the dustdrgiving a curve in the siyahthrough
about 900 or, in the case of the so-called 'crab' bow from India of as
much as 1200 (see Plate III). To achieve this amount of curve the
siyahis made in two parts splicedtogether as otherwiseweaknesswould
result due to there being no continuous run in the grain of the wood.
Craftsmenappear to have preferred splicing to increasing the curve
of the wood by heat or of going to the trouble to find a naturalgrowth
of approximatelythe right shape.
The s~yahat this stage was made longer than the finalform, as shown
in the top left-hand drawing, to allow a temporarynock to be cut on
the 'wrong' side and, as will be explained,this was used to control the
shape of the bow during manufacture.The siyah,though carvedfrom a
single piece of wood, is in two sections. There is the end which is
usually oval or triangularin section and is 2 to 3 inches in length and
then the ridged part which in section is like a trianglewith two concave
sides that extend to the point of the splice (see fig. 2).
In designing any good bow there are two important features that
must be avoided. One is that there must be no bend in the grip when
the bow is drawn. If there is, the bow kicks in the hand when it is shot,
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 73

TIP $JEA SYAH rUSTXRL GRI'P

a) ?+

b ) 95~ ?r

c) -?

fl~ WOD S/CW 9

Fig.
2 )Prin
?: b uoPrin c uks

it is unpleasant to use and it is almost certain to be inaccurate.The

second is related to the pull on the string, which the archer calls the
weightof the bow. This, naturally, increases as the string is drawn
further and further back, but if the weight increases rapidly towards
the end of the draw it will again result in inaccurate shooting as a
fractional variation in draw length will have a more marked effect on
the range attainedby the arrow than if the weight increases slowly at
the end. In this way a rapidbuild-upin the weight at the end of the draw
magnifiesany error made by the archer,while a slow build-up tends to
eliminate it (see fig. 3).
With the Orientalcomposite bow the design of the handle eliminates
bending in the centre when the bow is drawn and the rigid siyahs,
acting as levers during the latter half of the draw, effectivelyreduce the
rate of increase of the weight at this stage. These factors will be con-
sidered in further detail below.
The next stage in the construction of the bow was to attach two
74 W. F. PATERSON

strips of horn to the belly, which is the side facing the archer as he
shoots. That of long-horned cattle was most commonly used and the
strips taper from the grip to the end of the splice where the sjyahis
fitted to the dustdr.At the centre of the limb they vary in thickness
from about I/8th to 1/4 inch. Both the inside of the horn and the wood
core of the dustdr,which is not usually flat, but slightly curved from
side to side, were scored along their length to increasethe surfacearea
exposed to the glue and thus give better adhesion. The horn was
lightly bound to the core to avoid exuding too much of the glue and
then left for, perhaps, two months to allow the glue to set. At this
stage the bow was a flat 'U' in shape and it was held in this form by a
cord tied between the tips of the two siyahs.The curve of the bow was
reflex, that is to say the opposite way to which it would be bent for
stringing, and the cord that controlled the amount of bend was firmly
seatedin the temporarynocks cut in the 'wrong' side of the tips.
With existing Persian bows the horn on each limb is not a single
piece but a number of strips glued together and held in position with a
binding of fine sinew 1). This practice seems to have been peculiarto
the Persiansand arose from the design of the limbs which were usually
much wider than those of any of the other Middle Eastern bows.
Becauseof this featurea single piece of horn could not be obtainedthat
was flat enough and wide enough to fit the belly. It is of interestto note
that a similarwidth is favoured in modern bow design as this helps to
avoid any lateraltwisting in the limb as the bow is drawn.
This glueing process took place in the winter, when the cooler and
more humid conditions slowed the setting .rateof the glue 2). A slow
setting rate gives superioradhesion.
When the glue had set, the next stage was to apply sinew to the back
of the bow, which is the side away from the archeras he shoots. Leg
tendon of cattle or deer answers well. Payne-Gallwey 3) and F. E.

I) This may be seen in a damaged bow, Ingo Simon collection, Manchester

Museum, No. o.7649.
2) Cf. C. Cahen, Bulletind'Itudes Orientales,XII, p. IZ9.
3) A Treatiseon Turkishand OtherOrientalBows, London 1907, p. 4.
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 7J

Brown 1) both speak of neck sinew being used, but from practical
trials this has proved useless. First, it will not beat out into fine fibres
and secondly it is too elastic to provide the desired tension when the
bow is drawn. It is sometimes found, cut into thin strips, as additional
packing in the region of the siyah,but this would appearto be its only
real use in the construction of the bow. After the leg sinew has been
cleaned and dried it can be beaten out into fine fibres, and it is in this
form that it is impregnated with glue and fastened to the back of the
bow.
Glue-soaked sinew cannot be effectively applied in cold weather as
it is then difficultto handle and the result will be a poor bow. It is by
far the most important component in the composite bow, and even if
inferior wood and horn are used such defects in materialscan, to a
large extent, be eliminated by the correct application of sinew. This
process was normally carried out on a warm spring day 2) and the sinew
could be laid on in one, two or even three layers.Two layers were used
in making the flight bows of the Ottoman Turks 3) and in this case the
reflex in the bow was slightly increased when the first layer was applied.
It is not known if the same practice was followed by craftsmenfrom
other regions.
When the final layer was applied the bow was reflexedinto a com-
plete oval and a cord was led around the temporarynocks cut into the
extended siyahsand down to the grip to hold it in this position until the
glue had set (see fig. i, bottom left-handdrawing). The object of this
method of constructionwas to get the maximumtension into the sinew
when the bow was later strung and drawn, as high efficiencycan only
be achievedif the various components are adequatelystressedwhen the
bow is shot.
However carefullythe two horn strips are butted against each other
when appliedto the wood core, a gap almost invariablyappearsbetween
Vol. 9,
I) "A Recently Discovered Compound Bow", SeminariumKondakovianum,
'937, pp. I-1o.
2) Add. 23489, fo. zzb.
3) J. Hein, "Bogenhandwerkund Bogensport bei den Osmanen",Der Islam, 1925,
PP. 347-350.
76 W. F. PATERSON

them when the bow is fully reflexed. If this gap is not plugged unfair
shearingstrainswill be thrown on to the bond between the wood core
and the horn when the bow is shot, the slight reflexin the handle and
the rigidity of the grip will be lost. This is the reason for the ibranjaq
(Turkish: chelik)found at the centre of the grip and fitted between the
two horn strips. All existing bows that have been examinedhave this
fitting made from bone or ivory, though in earlier days a suitable
hardwood seems to have been employed1). Elmer suggested that it
was a form of shock absorber 2), but he lacked practical experience in
their construction.
When the glue had set after about another two months or so, the
bow had to be adjusted so that both limbs curved equally and correctly
when it was drawn. The excess was cut off the siyahsand the nocks for
the bowstring cut into the back. With Turkish and Persianbows a saw
cut was made 2 to 3 inches in length and a slim wedge of horn inserted
to reinforceand strengthenthe tips of the bow. This feature is absent
in bows from India and no mention of it has been found in any of
the Arabic manuscriptsthat have been examined,though this does not
preclude the fitting as none of the works go into the finer details of
construction. On the side of each nock toward the grip, after the tips
of the siyahshad been fully shaped, a sinew binding was applied to
avoid any risk of the wood splitting under the impact of the bowstring
when the bow was shot. Where the horn insert was used it also held
this firmly in place.
To string a fully reflexed bow is not an easy task. After removing
any surplus or exuded glue as well as any obvious irregularitieswith a
file, the bow would have been thoroughly warmed to make it more
supple. The craftsman,probably with an assistant, would then have
carefullyflexed both limbs together until a string could be slipped into
the nocks. The shape of the two limbs could then be studied and, after
removing the string, any section of the limb not curving enough would
be filed away until the right shape was achieved. This process, known
I) N. A. Faris and R. P. Elmer, Arab Archery,Princeton, 5.
1945, P. x
z) N. A. Faris and R. P. Elmer, op. cit., p. I62.
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 77

as tillering, calls for much care and patience if a first class weapon is
to be produced. Having achieved the right shape when the bow was
strung, the bow then needed to be partly drawn and studied again to
see that the two limbs were still correctly balanced and, if they were not,
the file once more had to be applied. This process continued until the
bow could be brought to full draw with both limbs achieving as
perfect a curve as lay within the skill of the maker to produce. If the
two limbs do not recoil exactlytogether when a bow is shot, inaccuracy
is the only result and good shooting characteristicscan only be achieved
by the slow and careful process described.
Finally, the sinew was covered with thin diagonal strips of bark or
thin leather and varnished to make it waterproof. The reason for the
diagonal strips of bark is that this materialhas virtually no stretch. If
they were placed along the length of the limb they would breakas soon
as the bow was drawn. The horn might also be covered as is invariably
the case with existing Persian and Indian bows. Mamluk, Ottoman
flight, Mongolian and Sino-Tatar bows, among others, left the horn
exposed. The covering was then decorated and many of the designs
that can still be seen show a high standardof skill and artistry.
Sir John Chardin,writing of his third visit to Persia, from which he
returned in 1677, says: "The Persian Bows are the most valued of all the
East: The Matterwhereof they are made is Wood and Horn laid over
one another, and covered with Sinews, and over that the skin of a tree
very sleek and smooth; they paintthem afterwards,and Varnishthem so
admirably well, that one may see one's self in those Bows, and the
colour of them is as bright as possible" 1).

3. TheMechanics
of TheBow
It is clearthat making a bow in this mannerwas a slow and expensive
process,whichcan,perhaps,be justifiedby a studyof the advantages
that it offered.
A bow is a simplemachinefor storingenergyby the actionof the

I) Sir John Chardin's Travelsin Persia, The Argonaut Press, London I927, p. 270.
78 W. F. PATERSON

archerin drawingthe string. When he looses the string it is transferred

in the form of kinetic energy to the arrow. No bow can be ioo%
efficient as work must be done by the bow in carryingits own limbs
forwardwith the string. This amount is lost as it cannot be transferred
to the arrow. It follows that a bow with heavy limbs and, in particular,
heavy tips wastes more energy than a bow with light limbs and tips.
When the string is loosed not only has the bow to push the arrow
forward but it must also carry itself forward and the concept of
apparentlypropelling a weight greaterthan that of the arrow has been
dealt with by P. E. Klopsteg in his Theory of Virtual Mass 1). For
convenience, this problem may be consideredin two parts. First, how
much energy can a bow store and secondly, how much of the stored
energy does it transferto the arrow.
The stored energy depends on a number of factors. There is the
physical strength of the archerand thus the weight of bow that he can
handle, there is the length of his draw which is determinedmainly by
the length of his arms and the width of his chest and lastly the cha-
racteristicsof the bow which determineshow the weight builds up as
the bow is drawn.
These characteristicsof bows may be compared by plotting them
on a force-drawcurve (fig. 3). This is obtained by measuringthe force
needed to draw back the string at intervals from rest to full draw and
the area under the curve is a measureof the energy put into the bow.
The curves are those of an English longbow and a Mongolian com-
posite.
Even a cursory examination shows how much more energy the
composite bow stores than the more simple wooden bow. With the
composite the weight builds up quickly during the first half of the
draw and, if it was not for the rigid siyahs,it would continue to build
up at much the same rate and thus prove too strong for the archerto
handle. During the second half of the draw the lever action of the
siyabscomes into play with the result that the increase in weight is
I) AmericanJournal of Physics,Vol. ii, No. 4, August 1943, pp. I80-I. Also
Smithsonian4565, Washington 1963, pp. 588-590.
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 79

5~0

Uf)
A-
30
0:3

~ 20
p.

I..

•DRAW LENGTH IN INCHES

Fig. 3

relatively small. When shooting this bow it feels, as the shoulder and
back muscles come into exerting their power, that the pull on the
bowstring reduces,though this is not, in fact, the case.
Sir John Chardinrecords: "The Goodness of a Bow, as the Persians
say, consists in this, viz. That a Bow be hard to bend till the Arrow be
laid half over it, and then that it be soft and easy, .. ."
.1).

Compared with this the longbow builds up more slowly at the

beginning of the draw and more quickly towards the end. In conse-
quence the archer feels that considerably more effort is needed to
draw such a bow than in the case of the composite. The superior
characteristicsof the latter can thus be seen as, for a given maximum
effortput into drawingthe bow, the composite stores more energy.
i) Sir John Chardin, op. cit., p. 270.
80 W. F. PATERSON

The next question is how much of this energy the bow transfers
to the arrow. Here, practical performance and efficiency are two
very different quantities. From purely mechanical considerations
the highest efficiency is achieved with a very heavy arrow that will
fully absorb all the thrust from the string. Such an arrow would not
travel very far, though its impact at short range would be considerable
and enable it to penetrateany armouror mail, if the arrowheadwas of
the correct type. Against this a light arrow is inefficientand, though it
will be dischargedat a higher velocity, it cannot fully absorb the thrust
of the string. There is an exception to this in the case of the flight
arrows, but they are in a special category.
An analogy may be taken by considering three balls, about the
size of a tennis ball, one made of lead, one made of rubber and one
made of cotton wool. If thrownby handit could be well that the heavy
ball and the light one would go about the same distance, while the
rubber one would go very much further. As regards the force with
which they might hit an object the lead one, if within range, would
obviously give the hardest impact, while that of cotton wool would
have least effect. In this way a compromise must be achieved to give
the best performanceto the arrow when shot from a given bow and its
weight must be related within certainpracticallimits to the weight or
power of the bow 1).
If a short stick is taken, one end held and the other bent and allowed
to fly back, the speed of recovery when the end is released will be
higher than in the case of a longer stick. In the same way a short bow
can impart a higher velocity to an arrow than can a longer bow,
assumingthat their constructionis similar.Thus, for velocity one needs
a short bow with a lighter arrow, but for hitting power one needs a
longer bow with a heavierarrow. It should also be noted that the short
bow tends to be inaccurateas it is more difficultto get the two limbs to
move forward perfectly together due to its higher rate of recovery.

i) W. F. Paterson,Bowman'sHandbook,Portsmouth I1955,pp. 15-17.

See also J. D. Lathamand W. F. Paterson, "An Analysis of Arrow-Weightsin an
Islamic Military Manual",Journalof SemiticStudies,vol. X, No. 2, I965.
JESHO IX PLATE I

Top: The Mongolian bow used to produce the curve in fig. 3.

Lower: A Sino-Tatarbow, similarto that commented upon by Ingo Simon. Just
in front of the grip, though difficultto see in this reproductionfrom the
original in colour, are three thumb rings, two of jade and one of ser-
pentine.
JESHO IX PLATEII

Left to right:
i. A Sind bow. Note the characteristicdouble angle in the siyabsand the
marked reflex in the grip.
ii. A Turkish bow of unknown origin. Its length suggests it is a target or
hunting bow. The back Is covered with bark strips and the horn of the
belly Is left exposed. The grip lacks the hump on the back and is covered
with leather.
iii. An Indo-Persian bow. The design of the siyahsshows influence of the
Sind bow.
iv-vi. Ottoman Turk flight bows.
JESHO IX PLATE III

Top and centre: Typical Indo-Persian bows. They are good examples of the type
of bow carried by the mounted archers.
Bottom: A 'crab' bow from Central India. Note the amount of recurve
in the siyahs.
JESHO IX PLATEIV

A fine example of the Ottoman Turk flight bow. The inscriptions on the siyahs
show that it was made by Ibratumin 1 69 A.H. The delicate little flight arrows
are tipped with ivory.
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 81

Length in a bow tends to give greater accuracy and steadiness in

shooting. It also gives a better thrust to a heavier arrow and for these
reasonsthe longer bow is more suitablefor warfare.
The Mongolian bow, already mentioned, though accurate,is not a
good bow by composite standards,as it is too long. From nock to
nock, measured along the side of the bow, it is 63 inches compared
with about o50inches recommended by Taybughi al-Ashrafi 1). Ottoman
flight bows, on the other hand, vary between about 40 to 42 inches.
One result of the greater length is that the horn and sinew are in-
sufficientlystressed when the bow is drawn and the speed of recovery
of the limbs is relativelyslow when the string is loosed.
The accuracyof these bows is fully supportedby the late Ingo Simon,
a noted archer and one of the greatest authorities on Oriental bows.
He wrote: "In these latter years I have taken to using mainly one big
Chinese Tatar bow. I find that at short range it is unsurpassed.The
arrows are too heavy for anything save short range work, but they
rarely get broken and are easy to find [afterwards in the ground] on
account of their size. Recently I hit a matchbox at zo yards with four
successive shots" 2) (see also Plate I).
From these considerations the equipment used by an archer is
usually a compromise, depending on the purpose for which it is
intended. For warfarehe should have a bow that is not too short, so
that it will be reasonablyaccurateand reliable.He needs to use a heavy
arrow if he expects to penetrate armour or mail. However, for use on
horseback a shorter bow is easier to handle, but this would require a
lighter arrow. With such conflicting requirementsit is easy to under-
stand how designs have differed,depending on what a given tribe or
race considered were the most important factors, coupled with the
skill of their craftsmenand the materialsthat they had available.
This last factor can be of the greatest importance. The question is
sometimesasked,why was the compositebow not used in the West,
if it was such an efficientweapon?The simpleanswerto this is that
I) Add. 23489, ff.22b-23a.
2) The British Archer, (magazine) Vol. 8, No. 6, I9r7, p. 231.
JESHO, IX 6
82 W. F. PATERSON

there were no long-horned cattle or goats in Europe from which

suitable horn could be obtained. The composite bow was used by the
Venetians in their wars with the Ottoman Empire, though even if
their own craftsmenmade the bows I feel sure that the horn must have
been obtainedfrom the Middle East 1).
The most efficient bows ever devised were the flight bows of the
Ottoman Turks. They were so delicately made and the materials
stressed so near breaking point at full draw that they needed to be
warmed,or even heated, before being strung to increase their supple-
ness. Such a bow would be useless in war as an archercannot stop and
warm his bow, if it happens to be unstrung, before going into battle.
Also, a highly stressedbow can easily be broken and the archer,in war,
needed a sturdy and reliableweapon.
Such then are the main technicalaspects to be taken into account in
determining the design of bows. Climatic considerations also enter
into the problem as modifications are needed, particularly under
extreme conditions, regarding the optimum proportions of sinew,
wood and horn in the bow.
Fig. 2 shows three typical examples. Bows with a thin wood core,
such as those found in India are more liable to distortion than those
which have a thicker core. Such defects are usually easy to correct by
heat treatment, but it is obviously better to have a bow that is less
likely to be found unfit for use when it is needed. The Turkishdesign is
superior to the other two.

4. Accuracyand Penetration
The best equipment is of little use unless the archerhas achieved a
high standardof ability, neither can the archernormally do more than
what he has trained to do. For this reason the various exercises need
to be studied to assess what the archersmight have been expected to
achieve in battle.
The basic handling of the bow must be mastered on foot before

I) Cf. G. Giorgetti, L'Arco, la Balestrae le Macchine

Belliche,Milan, 1964, pp. 20-23.
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 83

attempting to use it on horseback. Target ranges appear to have

reached up to about 280 yards on the long field (al-middn
al-tawil),
whose range was between 140 and 130 outstretched armspans 1). This
compares with the range of 12 score paces, or 240 yards, used by the
old English longbowmen and this is near the limit of the war bow
employing a full length arrow with a steel head.
It must be emphasised that doubling the weight of a bow does not
double the range to which it will shoot an arrow.If, for instance,a bow
with a weight of 45 lbs. at full draw will shoot a given arrow 240 yards,
a 65 lbs. bow will only shoot the same arrow about 280 yards. The real
advantage of the heavier bow is that it enables a heavier arrow to be
used that will hit harder and achieve a higher penetration.
At such ranges accuracyis relativelylow and a good shot under calm
weather conditions might be expected to hit a target the size of a man
on horsebackabout once in every four shots. However, the application
of such long range shooting by a group of archers against a formed
body of the enemy needs no amplification.
An arrow will loose much of its velocity in travelling such a distance
and should be effectively stopped by good quality armour or mail.
During the Crusaders' coast march from Acre in 191, which cul-
minated in the Battle of Arsiif, Beha ed-Din records that the Saracen
archerscould do little againstthe armourof the Franks:
"their infantry drawn up in front of the horsemen stood firm as a
wall, and every foot-soldier wore a thick gambeson and a hawberk, so
dense and strong, that our arrowstook no effect... I saw soldiers with
from one to ten arrows sticking in them, still marchingon" 2).
Such evidence, no doubt, led R. C. Smallto say in CrusadingWarfare,
p. 81: 'The bow and arrow appear to have been light weapons. The
arrows penetrated Frankish armour, but often without wounding the
body of the wearer'.
What is more likely is that the Crusaders'archersforced the Moslem
cavalry to keep its distance at this stage of the engagement and shoot
I) Add. 23489, fo. I27a.
2) S. Lane-Poole, Saladin,London, 1898, p. 30o.
84 W. F. PATERSON

from long range. Coupled with this it may have been that the arrows
were too light for such a purpose or that too much use was being made
of the light dartsshot with the aid of the arrow-guide(majrd).
Later, when the Saracens began to press home their attacks the
Itinerariumrecords:
"That day our own losses and the sufferingsof our horses, who were
pierced through and through with arrows and darts...". And again:
"With deadliest effect they kept launching forth their darts and
arrows" 1). Such statements suggest that with the reduced range the
arrows became effective due to the higher velocity on impact and
supports the idea that the arrows were too light ratherthan the bows
being too weak.
In assessing the ability of an archer to shoot with adequate and
consistant accuracy,Taybughi requiredhim to shoot at a target set up
at a range of 6o bows *). This would have referred to the strung bow
and that specifiedby him would have measured45 inches, thus giving
a range of 75 yards.At this range he was expectedto keep all his arrows
within a circle 3 feet in diameter,which is a good and practicalstandard
of accuracy, which an average man can achieve after a few years of
regularpractice.From this evidence one may presume that the trained
archer,on foot, should hit a man every time at about 60 yards.
When mounted and at full gallop the problem is very different and
the ranges at which accurateshooting is possible is very much shorter.
In qiqajthe target was basicallya mound of earth,or something similar,
on the ground at which the archershot as he went by at full gallop and
one might guess that the range was about io yards 3). The other form
of shooting was qabaqwhere a gourd was hoisted to the top of a mastand
served as a target at which the archer shot as he rode beneath it 4). This
was one of the recognisedfurusijyaexercises and obviously demanded
a very high standard of horsemanship as well as skill in archery 5).
i) S. Lane-Poole, op. cit., p. 315 and p. 320. 2) Add. 23489, fo. iooa.
3) Add. 23489, ff.61b-74a. 4) Ibid.
5) D. Ayalon, "Notes on the Exercises...,"
Furdsiyya IX,
ScriptaHierosolymitana,
Jerusalem 196I, pp. 55-56. Also, M. Reinaud,JournalAsiatique, Septembre 1848,
pp. 220-221.
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 85J

Here, it should be mentioned that it is unlikely that an archer could

shoot as strong a bow on horseback as he could on foot. Though the
main power comes from the shoulders and the back muscles, with the
arms playing a relatively minor part, when shooting a powerful bow an
archernormally needs a firm footing and, if the ground is slippery, he
may have difficultyin controlling his bow. Some loss of such support
would naturallyresult from shooting in the saddle so that the mounted
archer would probably have used a slightly lighter bow on horseback
than he could have used on foot.
There is no doubt that the adepts at these exercises achieved a
remarkable degree of skill through hard and regular practice and there
are some interesting accounts in the pages of Hansard1). That author,
however, was not very good at giving references to his sources of
information so it has not yet proved possible to check all his stories.
Such tales usually concentrate on the rare feats, which may have been
somewhat enhanced by the original writers and the legends that
surround a great archer, be he Odysseus or Bahrim Giir, Rustem or
Robin Hood, do not enable one to judge what might have been within
the ability of the average man.
Accurate knowledge on the power, or weight, of Islamic bows is
lacking though one might draw certain conjectural conclusions from
Arab Archery (pp. 14-II5), where Thhir al-Balkhi is credited with
relating the weight of arrows needed with bows of various weights.
The heaviest bow that he mentions is one hundredratls and it could be
assumed that this was the most that an averagearchercould have been
expected to handle.
Tihir was one of the so-called Great Masters, but though he is
mentioned in most works relating to archery,no biographicaldetails
have come to our notice in spite of a careful search. He may have
taught under the Samanidsor the Ghaznavids and from such scanty
information Dr. W. Hinz of Gottingen has kindly suggested that the
Baghdad ratl of 406.25 grams might have been the unit that he used.

I) G. A. Hansard, The Book of Archery, London 1840, pp. 34-36, I20-125, 137-142.
86 W. F. PATERSON

This would give his bow of one hundred ratls a weight of 88 lbs.
which a man slightly above averagestrengthcould masterwith practice.
With this as a basis and from practicalexperiencein shooting with the
stronger bows it can be suggested that the majority would have used
bows from 65-70 lbs weight. Such a bow should drive a war arrow
through any armouror mail up to a range of about Ioo yards given, in
the case of armour,a reasonablysquarehit on the surfaceof the plate.
The surprisinglyhigh penetrationof arrows has been shown on many
occasions 1).
There remainsthe problem of the actual forms of the bows used by
the Islamic archers. The majority of miniature paintings show two
basic types. There are those with the relativelystraight tips and, from
a side view, such a shape is given by a Persian bow as shown in fig. I.
The other type has a strong recurve in the tip which suggests the
Turkish design such as that shown in Plate II, ii 2).
The length of such bows seems to have varied quite widely. In the
Ingo Simon Collectionthere is a Bashkiribow from the Siege of Vienna
(Manchester Museum No. 0.7633) and this measures inches from
58
nock to nock along the side. This would appear to be about the longest
of the Islamic war bows. Those from Persia are about 54 inches,
Taybugha specifies one of about inches, while Indo-Persian bows
5o
vary between 44 to 48 inches. These are the shortest if the Ottoman
flight bows--40 to 42 inches-are excluded on the grounds that they
were not weapons of war.
Detailed knowledge of many bows is lacking. What of the bows
from the Kirghiz, Turkmen and Uzbek areas? Do any of the Mamliik
bows still exist? Can the few remaining craftsmen believed to exist in
the Mongolian areabe contactedbefore the finer details of their art is
lost? Lettershave remainedunanswered,so may a humble archermake
a final plea to those who may have the fortune to come across such

I) See C. J. Longman, Archery(Badmington Series), London 1894; pp. 425-435;

Saxton Pope, HuntingwiththeBowandArrow, New York 1923, pp. 46-49.
2) See also, W. F. Paterson, "Persian Archery",Journalof the Societyof Archer-
Antiquaries, vol. 1962, pp. 23-24, and vol. 6, 1963, pp. 20zo-z22
5,
 THE ARCHERS OF ISLAM 87

items? Any details would be most gratefully received and preserved

in the archives of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries.

I must gratefully acknowledge the work of Dr. J. D. Latham of

ManchesterUniversity on an edited and annotated translation of the
Kitabghunyatal-tulldbfi ma'rifatal-ramnybi 'l-nushshibby Taybughi'l-
Baklamishial-Yiin~ni, to be published by the Holland Press, London,
and for his kind agreementto use the few brief extractsthat appearhere.
Referenceshould also be made to the section on archeryfrom an older
generaltreatiseon armsto be publishedshortlyby Mr. Antoine Boudot-
Lamotte (University of Bordeaux).