Questions Concerning the Designs of Bows...
The Ottoman Empire was not as intent on enforcing uniformity as some others since it contained many nationalities and religious and cultural groups. The Crimean Tatars provided valuable cavalry and were in a position to cause problems for Polish and Russian states who where a major threat to the northern borders of their empire.
The Crimean Tatars also represented a vigorous and independent archery tradition so it would be unlikely that they would conform to an Ottoman standard. At the same time, the Ottomans were replacing archery with firearms. There were recruiting horse archers because they were not able to supply enough of their own.
I would imagine that the Turkish bows had a greater extreme range, but after the invention of effective firearms, that job would be taken over by guns and the medium to short range would be the most used for bows.
The Iranian Persian bows were made of water buffalo horn strips correct? As opposed to a whole piece like the Turks used right?
If so, did that make the Persian Bow's durability any less or better?
This style of construction is stable and, though it takes longer initially, it seems just as robust as the Turkish style. Adam commented in his book that you might expect less string follow with the thinner limbs. I know of reproduction Persian bows that were still shootable after forty years.
mongolianarcher wrote:
Yes I am buying a Crimean Hybrid Bow from Lukas Novotny and they are AMAZING to shoot. Since I have a longer drawlength as you mentioned, it is much more comfortable to shoot the Crimean bow as opposed to a Turkish/Ottoman bow.
Bede wrote:
People who use them tell me that for most shooting circumstances they are more comfortable to use which brings greater accuracy. They are a war bow rather than a flight bow and that is what they should be compared to. Turkish war bows were very efficient but their shorter draw limited the size and weight of their arrows. Tatar bows could shoot a heavy arrows as effectively as a Turkish bow up to medium range which where most horse archery was done. The smoother draw would have ensured archer comfort and probably greater accuracy as I mentioned before.
I would imagine that the Turkish bows had a greater extreme range, but after the invention of effective firearms, that job would be taken over by guns and the medium to short range would be the most used for bows.
Personally, from the translations I am editing, I can say there are some very thoughtful old works on archery from the Iranian cultural orbit. They have direct relevance to the understanding of the better known Arabic and Turkish works.