Telhis-i Resail??r-r?mat translated and on market

Good! Gokmen will kindly translate in English the whole book for us, ha-ha! Just kidding :D

Is it illustrated? That would make it worthwhile for foreigners.

I don't remember well, but I think the English translation was available online some time ago.

Jos?Dom wrote:

I don't remember well, but I think the English translation was available online some time ago.

If you remember where, I will grateful...

Gokmen,
This is a great step forward, but, as one who is working through Hein at the moment, I must point out that the problem in Kani's work is not in the Turkish vocabulary. The large number of Arabic and Persian words that are no longer used in Modern Turkish are the real problem because you cannot just look them up in a dictionary to find out what they mean. You have to have some idea how they were used at the time and whether Kani was quoting an earlier author who used them differently.

Because Hein was not an archer, he misunderstood some of the text through lack of practical experience. Klopsteg did understand archery and physics, but was misled by some of Hein's confusion. I have found Turkish authors are now much more aware of these problems and are very careful about how they explain old books. However, Hein was very aware of the way the Osmanlis wrote and had a good insight into the literary background of the work.

I hope the book is on Amazon or some other easy to access bookseller internationally. I will certainly get a copy. Thanks for letting us know.

For people interested in the sometimes obscure Persian words used in archery and other martial arts, I recommend Lexicon of Arms and Armor from Iran: A Study of Symbols and Terminology by Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani. Aside from New Persian spellings that could be directly related to Ottoman texts, there is a lot of earlier references in Old Persian and Middle Persian.

Here it is on Amazon:http://www.amazon.com/Lexicon-Arms-Armo ... 3932942310

If someone could just translate the chapter on bow making to english that would be interesting.

Are there any further developments in terms of printing an English version of Mustafa Kani's "Telhis-i Resailu r-rumat". Just wondering if anyone has any information? Thanks! :?:

"If someone could just translate the chapter on bow making to english"

and one about arrows, and schooting and.... :D

I have Hein's translation into German and I am working through it. However, it is sometimes hard to untangle his comments from those of Mustafa Kani. At the moment I am concentrating on the sections on shooting.

Adam Karpowicz has written a much more accessible book on Ottoman bow making and I think that is a better way to go unless you are familiar with dealing with texts that sometimes quote without any indication so you might end with a sentence with information from two countries and several centuries apart.

Arrow making is more problematic since some of our Turkish colleagues have proved by examining damaged arrows that the construction method of the nocks is somewhat different than some of the English language texts suggest. I have been replicating some of the techniques, but I am not ready to publish yet. It is also important to note that sixteenth through nineteenth century nocks are not only of one type. There are two major shapes of nock slot used in the Turkish empire; the metropolitan made in Istanbul and probably most cities of the empire and the Crimean Tatar. One is a nock with converging cusps and the other has parallel cusps. This is only discussing the shapes of the slot. There are also constructional methods and outside profiles of the nock to consider. Then there are the profiles of arrows, balance, footing, methods of reinforcing the foot, point structure and fletching.

"Turkish colleagues have proved by examining damaged arrows that the construction method of the nocks is somewhat different than some of the English language texts suggest"


Would you shed some light over it? pictures, drawings anything

I think there are pictures on the site somewhere of this. Basically, instead of fixing two cusps of brazil wood to the sides of the site of the nock, the two pieces touch and form the base of the slot of the nock when it is cut out. There are also two slits in the sides of the arrow shaft where the tips of the cusps are lodged. I think that this was to aid in manufacture to fix the pieces in position. All of this was covered by the sinew binding.

In the nock diagram in Payne-Gallwey, the arrow shaft ends in a truncated wedge. This has be replicated in most later discussions. The real construction method explains a problem I had examining old arrows. I could not see a strip of pale wood from the arrow shaft at the base of the nock slot. Once I understood that the brazil wood pieces were glued together as well as to the wooden shaft, it all made sense.

Adam Karpowicz's book is a tremendous contribution to the understanding of the making and design of Turkish bows. However, I believe that it would also be very informative to have a translation in English of Mustafa Kani's work considering it is a cornerstone of Turkish archery literature.

I wonder if there any archery experts out there who have the linquistic skills to interpret his work? One of the reasons that I ask is that I have a late 18th century Turkish archery treatise. However, it contains no illustrations, and I don't really know what aspects of archery are dealt with or even if the work is truly on archery.

Obviously, I'm curious to find out more about the details of this work. If anyone knows of someone who could help me interpret Ottoman Turkish written in Arabic script [Osmanli Turkish] -- at least the first few pages, I would appreciate hearing from you. :D

Yes, it would be useful to have the book translated, but as Bede said, it may not bring much and confuse people. Such translation would rather be an interpretation (as it is the case with Hein's) and would depend on the skill and experience of the person who does the translation.

Cem translated for me all passages relevant to the construction of the bows and I tried to make the best of it in my book. Bear in mind, Mustafa Kani was not a bowyer and one can not take all information he presented literally, since, I suspect, he probably did not quite understand all details which the bowyer(s) showed him.

Adam

Adam is right. Kani was commissioned by the Sultan to write the treatise. Though he was a good archer by our standards, we was only a courtier to the Turks. He compiled a great deal of information from earlier books and in the fashion of the time did not always distinguish what was his own writing and what was from earlier sources. Even in Hein, I have sometimes had trouble separating the translator from the author from the authorities.

It is a big job if done properly and not worthwhile doing if done poorly.

Bede and Adam are certainly on point with their observation that the translation needs to be done carefully and in such a way as to avoid propagating misunderstandings and misinformation. Having said that, I am sure that for many of us, an English translation would be welcomed as well as found valuable.

Mustafa Kani's book is a seminal work on Turkish Archery, not to mention archery in general. After all, his book has been translated in part by a number of individuals including Klopsteg [who obviously concentrated on the more technical aspects of bowmaking, etc.], Hein, the author of "Sacred Archery", Hammer-Purstall as well as others. Even Klopsteg found that between the time of the publication of his first edition of "Turkish Archery" in 1934 and the second edition in 1947 he learned valuable insights that improved his knowledge of the subject and was able to add new information.

Now that the book has been translated into the modern Turkish language, perhaps it may better lend itself to an English translation.

While an English translation might not be perfect -- if it is properly done by an informed individual(s), it could still be extremely informative.

With the availability of Adam's own in-depth book "Ottoman Turkish Bows - Manufacture & Design", along with Faris & Elmer's "Arab Archery", Paterson's "Saracen Archery" and other such material, a knowledgable translator has a lot more technical material and resources available to help produce and develop an accurate translation.

I guess I am just "wishing" but considering the interest in all aspects of Turkish archery along with the technical aspects of bow making, arrow making and shooting there is bound to be a ready audience for such a book. You may recall in 1934 that when the first edition of Klopsteg's book was published, it was actually sold out before it was actually printed -- such was the interest in the subject.

Just some thoughts! :)

Hi David,

I found an interesting book which was approximately written at the same time as Kani's. "Grammar of the Turkish Language" by Arthur Lumley Davids 1832. You can see all pages online here: http://www.archive.org/stream/grammarof ... 5/mode/2up

Even though it explains a lot, you should not hope to learn Ottoman Turkish through this book. Nevertheless it is very interesting and reflects a bit the sentiment and atmosphere of the 19th century especially in the introduction text.

Learning Ottoman is indeed a huge problem, even for us Turks, as the grammar and words used are different, mixed with Persian and Arabic.
Another problem is also that the language changes so much during the centuries. Also who writes the text makes a big difference, normal people's Turkish is easier to understand, court texts are very hard to understand. Interestingly sometimes I might decipher Mamluk kipchak texts easier than Ottoman texts.

I have the mentioned book. It is divided into 3 sections.
1. The original pages in Arabic script in Ottoman Turkish.
2. Ottoman Turkish but in Latin alphabet
3. Today's Turkish in Latin alphabet

I think the best approach is to look at the 3 sections of the book to understand a topic. That's how I do it.
Many topics are explained in much more detail than in Hein or Klopstegs book. And some sections "make sense again" after reading the original.

And you are right, I also believe that this book translated into English would be a milestone in the archery literature. But it is a huge project..

thanks

Gokmen

Hi Gokmen,

Thank you for sharing the information on Arthur Lumley Davids' book. I don't, however, think that I have nearly your ability to actually translate Kani's work. Having said that, it is good to be able to access the pages of Davids' book on-line. It may be helpful to me and others at some point.

Your first post noted that Kani's work had been published in today's Turkish. If it is an accurate translation, why couldn't this book be the basis of a translation into English? What is your thought on this possibility?

:D

David,
Speaking as someone having some experience with making sense of these types of manuscripts, it is not a simple proposition to translate one. There are so many variables including specialised vocabulary, archaic grammar, scribal errors, misquotations by the original authors, obscure and incomplete description and numerous other issues that it is not a trivial exercise to attempt a modern translation.

It takes time and sometimes experiment to work out what a passage might be describing. I have also found that modern meanings of words have often changed and it takes work to track down when a word stopped meaning one thing and started meaning another.

Even transliterating and translating the Telhis into modern Turkish does not mean it is cut and dried. Our Turkish friends will be working hard to make sense of some of this if my own experiences are anything to go on. Luckily, they have a lot more experience of bows than the previous translators.

Hi Bede, Your points are certainly all valid -- it isn't an easy task. I am just hopeful that the job may be somewhat easier now that a translation into modern Turkish has been made along with the fact that the knowledge base concerning the making of Turkish bows has increased as a result of ATARN as well as the fact that there are more works/sources, such as, Adam Karpowicz's book for scholars to consult to see if they are on the right track.

Bede - I'm just hopeful that someday we will have an English translation considering the importance and influence of this seminal work. :D

David,
I agree that a good direct English translation would be a valuable contribution to our knowledge of Turkish archery. It is important to realise there are other valuable Turkish treatises on archery, some referenced by Kani himself. I look forward to seeing these published and translated too.

If you wish you can even say that Mustafa Kani's book is an attempt to revive Turkish archery. So we are not even the first ones :)

There is another book which came into the market recently, it was written by Kemankesh Mustafa Efendi in 1735.
It is in Turkish again unfortunately.
http://www.kitapturk.com/diger/kavsname-75635k.html

The topics are similar to Kani's book.

G?kmen

Who can fournish exacts indications for the new Turkish transaltion (translator, puplisher, ISBN etc.) ?

G?kmen,
I have ordered a copy of the Telhis and hope to see it soon. Do you have any other details of the other book?