Bow-cases for strung and unstrung bows
Hi all.
I have been wondering about bow-cases. It seems to me that after the disappearance of the Orlat style gorytos, mounted warriors stopped using the bow-case for a strung bow for quite a few centuries. Curved bow-bags however were still used and are seen on Soghdian artwork.
Firstly, would anyone know why this is?
And secondly, does anyone know of strung bow-cases (as separate bow cases) in the time between the Orlat gorytos and the introduction of stirrups?
Thanks
I have been wondering about bow-cases. It seems to me that after the disappearance of the Orlat style gorytos, mounted warriors stopped using the bow-case for a strung bow for quite a few centuries. Curved bow-bags however were still used and are seen on Soghdian artwork.
Firstly, would anyone know why this is?
And secondly, does anyone know of strung bow-cases (as separate bow cases) in the time between the Orlat gorytos and the introduction of stirrups?
Thanks
Unstrung bow cases were used well into the Five Dynasties period in China, long after the introduction of stirrups. Bow cases for strung bows as part of the late gorytos disappeared in Iran during the Sasanian Dynasty at about the same time unstrung-bow cases started appearing in Sogdian art. They became much more common after the fall of the Sasanians. It appears from the Varqa va Gulshah manuscript (thirteenth century) and the Kashan lustre plates (eleventh century), that strung-bow cases may have entered Iran with Turkish tribesmen and mercenaries from the East.
There are no written sources that are unambiguous about bow cases. The Strategikon mentions them, but it is unclear whether Maurice was writing about the kind of bow case we would recognise.
There are no written sources that are unambiguous about bow cases. The Strategikon mentions them, but it is unclear whether Maurice was writing about the kind of bow case we would recognise.
Sorry for the late reply to this. Thanks for your input.
This then raises the question - what did the the lancer/mounted archer do with his bow when he went in to fight melee? What if he wanted to shoot again after a melee?
It seems odd to suggest that it was strung/unstrung every time they wanted to switch weapons.
This then raises the question - what did the the lancer/mounted archer do with his bow when he went in to fight melee? What if he wanted to shoot again after a melee?
It seems odd to suggest that it was strung/unstrung every time they wanted to switch weapons.
Taybugha advises that the bow should be flung onto the forearm string out at the end of a qabak course rather than being put back into the case. I think this is because in most times for practice, a bow case and quiver were not used. Instead, based on some miniatures, I think that arrows were held in the belt and drawn as needed. Large numbers were not shot in one round in this type of competition so there was no need for a quiver, except when practising drawing from a quiver at full gallop.
I think this technique would be normal if a horseman was suddenly confronted by a nearby opponent. Mardi at-Tarsusi has several scenarios like this described in his treatise. If time permitted, the bow would be put back in its case which would be the best place for it.
I think this technique would be normal if a horseman was suddenly confronted by a nearby opponent. Mardi at-Tarsusi has several scenarios like this described in his treatise. If time permitted, the bow would be put back in its case which would be the best place for it.
Thanks again for the reply. Yes, I recall reading in one of the Osprey books a similar technique employed by some of the early Islamic cavalry.Bede wrote:
Taybugha advises that the bow should be flung onto the forearm string out at the end of a qabak course rather than being put back into the case. I think this is because in most times for practice, a bow case and quiver were not used. Instead, based on some miniatures, I think that arrows were held in the belt and drawn as needed. Large numbers were not shot in one round in this type of competition so there was no need for a quiver, except when practising drawing from a quiver at full gallop.
I think this technique would be normal if a horseman was suddenly confronted by a nearby opponent. Mardi at-Tarsusi has several scenarios like this described in his treatise. If time permitted, the bow would be put back in its case which would be the best place for it.
It does seem odd though, to me, the unstrung bow bag is a backwards development from the Orlat gorytos's bowcase. Also, wouldn't fighting with a bow on your forearm hinder your use of the shield?
Without many intermediate forms, it is difficult to make firm conclusions about the development of closed and open bow cases. What is almost certain is that many features of technology developed in relative isolation and then were exposed to the rest of the world as a result of population movement or military action. There wasn't an internet to share ideas and few cultures had any kind of military research organisations (with exceptions like early Syracuse in Sicily) so to expect a logical development of weapons and equipment is perhaps overly ambitious. Historians in general in the past and military historians in particular have sometimes used hindsight to a greater degree than justified to explain the evolution of weapons and their tactical use. I think that the more archaeological discoveries are made will eventually make the development of archery equipment look more complicated, episodic and localised than we now think. Unfortunately, simple theories are usually the early product of small amounts of information. When more information becomes available, theories become more complex and more precise.
Shooting on horseback mostly was done with the shield worn on the back when it was being carried. Shooting with the shield is usually associated with foot archery and the siege of cities and fortresses. An exception is a scene in a miniature painting of the siege of Smyrna by Timur where horsemen holding shields shoot at people on the city wall. Under these conditions it is unlikely that the archer would be in the situation of having to throw his bow down onto his arm while holding a shield. If he had his shield on his arm, he was already preparing for hand to hand combat in open warfare so I think the situation would be rare and in most cases the archer would attempt to put his bow in its case. In real life-threatening situations saving your life would be more important than saving your bow.
To summarise, most horse archers in open warfare would not have their shields on their arms so a sudden attack would not allow them time to both put their bows away and access their shields.
Shooting on horseback mostly was done with the shield worn on the back when it was being carried. Shooting with the shield is usually associated with foot archery and the siege of cities and fortresses. An exception is a scene in a miniature painting of the siege of Smyrna by Timur where horsemen holding shields shoot at people on the city wall. Under these conditions it is unlikely that the archer would be in the situation of having to throw his bow down onto his arm while holding a shield. If he had his shield on his arm, he was already preparing for hand to hand combat in open warfare so I think the situation would be rare and in most cases the archer would attempt to put his bow in its case. In real life-threatening situations saving your life would be more important than saving your bow.
To summarise, most horse archers in open warfare would not have their shields on their arms so a sudden attack would not allow them time to both put their bows away and access their shields.