Persian Arrows
Hi all,
New to the forum but some of you will have heard of me.
Trying to find out as much information as i can about Persian arrows, as far as i can tell the standard war arrow was made from the phragmites reed as it was less robust than arunda which were used for target arrows that could be reused.
The average weight that i have worked out for such an arrow would be very light at around 15 to 25 grams. which would have given good range but poor impact power.
Any comments greatly appreciated.
Jason hoffman
New to the forum but some of you will have heard of me.
Trying to find out as much information as i can about Persian arrows, as far as i can tell the standard war arrow was made from the phragmites reed as it was less robust than arunda which were used for target arrows that could be reused.
The average weight that i have worked out for such an arrow would be very light at around 15 to 25 grams. which would have given good range but poor impact power.
Any comments greatly appreciated.
Jason hoffman
Jason,
It depends what you mean by "Persian" and what era you are talking about.
Iran during the period from the Sassanians through the Arab conquest up to the Qajar Dynasty varied in its borders. Sometimes it included what is sometimes referred to as Greater Iran, which takes in Iraq, modern Iran, part of Afghanistan and other bits and pieces of modern neighboring states.
The types of arrows used over this area were varied. Both wooden and reed arrows are mentioned in the Adab al-Harb as used in Iran proper. I have seen Phragmites australis arrows and poplar arrows, but not any Arundo donax arrows.
Western Iran was called Iraq al-Ajam by the Arabs: Foreign Iraq. What we call Iraq, they referred to as Iraq al-Arab or Arab Iraq. Because of the influx of Turks starting before the Seljuks and intensified after the Mongol conquest, large parts of Eastern Iran or Khurasan were influenced by Central Asian practices. The Turks moved west and occupied Azarbaijan and moved out of Iran to Anatolia to set up states in what was to become Turkey.
From this you can see there were many different influences on Persian archery. The Persians in the west were close to Iraq and reed arrow technology was highly developed there. The Mongols preferred wooden arrows as did the Khurasanis. Since swords had been imported from India for centuries, it is likely that high quality reed arrows might have been too.
Not all reed arrows are light. I have amaji arrows from India that were designed for qighaj shooting and other rough targets from close range and they are very heavy. The secret was in using very long tangs on the arrow heads. The broad headed arrows I have measured are spined for bows between 60 and 80 pounds on modern scales so they were probably used with heavier bows with the thumb release.
One reason that weapons collectors use the term Indo-Persian is that is hard to tell except by decoration were some of these things came from. By the Qajar Dynasty, the Persians were using longer draws than they had in the past and these arrows are over thirty-two inches. However, they were never as big as Chinese arrows of the Qing.
It depends what you mean by "Persian" and what era you are talking about.
Iran during the period from the Sassanians through the Arab conquest up to the Qajar Dynasty varied in its borders. Sometimes it included what is sometimes referred to as Greater Iran, which takes in Iraq, modern Iran, part of Afghanistan and other bits and pieces of modern neighboring states.
The types of arrows used over this area were varied. Both wooden and reed arrows are mentioned in the Adab al-Harb as used in Iran proper. I have seen Phragmites australis arrows and poplar arrows, but not any Arundo donax arrows.
Western Iran was called Iraq al-Ajam by the Arabs: Foreign Iraq. What we call Iraq, they referred to as Iraq al-Arab or Arab Iraq. Because of the influx of Turks starting before the Seljuks and intensified after the Mongol conquest, large parts of Eastern Iran or Khurasan were influenced by Central Asian practices. The Turks moved west and occupied Azarbaijan and moved out of Iran to Anatolia to set up states in what was to become Turkey.
From this you can see there were many different influences on Persian archery. The Persians in the west were close to Iraq and reed arrow technology was highly developed there. The Mongols preferred wooden arrows as did the Khurasanis. Since swords had been imported from India for centuries, it is likely that high quality reed arrows might have been too.
Not all reed arrows are light. I have amaji arrows from India that were designed for qighaj shooting and other rough targets from close range and they are very heavy. The secret was in using very long tangs on the arrow heads. The broad headed arrows I have measured are spined for bows between 60 and 80 pounds on modern scales so they were probably used with heavier bows with the thumb release.
One reason that weapons collectors use the term Indo-Persian is that is hard to tell except by decoration were some of these things came from. By the Qajar Dynasty, the Persians were using longer draws than they had in the past and these arrows are over thirty-two inches. However, they were never as big as Chinese arrows of the Qing.
Jason,
As Bede mentioned before please find attache one of these Indo-Persian arrows. Source maybe India, but the region is unknown.
Reto
As Bede mentioned before please find attache one of these Indo-Persian arrows. Source maybe India, but the region is unknown.
Reto
Reto,
They are very attractive arrows and have all the characteristics of good Indo-Persian arrows.
This type has usually a nock carved from a tapered hardwood cone glued into the reed or bamboo. Sinew binding reinforces the join and paint covers the whole area. Sometimes there is a layer of fine bark covering the sinew binding.
The steel point is inserted either into the shaft directly or into a wooden foreshaft. It the tang goes into the shaft, a filling of tree resin is used to keep it in place. This acts like a modern epoxy resin filler and can be softened with heat to realign the head. This type of mounting is also bound with sinew, sometimes covered with bark and painted. Another techniques is to insert a wooden foreshaft and bore a hole in it for the tang. Often this type has the end of the footing next to the arrow head enclosed by metal ferrules. Sometimes these ferrules are arranged decoratively.
None of these descriptions are 100%. Some arrows from some areas use several techniques together. No one ever compiled a catalogue of the different arrows produced in the different areas of India and Iran. It is too late now to produce a definitive description of each type from each area. This is especially true because arrows probably were traded all over the area.
They are very attractive arrows and have all the characteristics of good Indo-Persian arrows.
This type has usually a nock carved from a tapered hardwood cone glued into the reed or bamboo. Sinew binding reinforces the join and paint covers the whole area. Sometimes there is a layer of fine bark covering the sinew binding.
The steel point is inserted either into the shaft directly or into a wooden foreshaft. It the tang goes into the shaft, a filling of tree resin is used to keep it in place. This acts like a modern epoxy resin filler and can be softened with heat to realign the head. This type of mounting is also bound with sinew, sometimes covered with bark and painted. Another techniques is to insert a wooden foreshaft and bore a hole in it for the tang. Often this type has the end of the footing next to the arrow head enclosed by metal ferrules. Sometimes these ferrules are arranged decoratively.
None of these descriptions are 100%. Some arrows from some areas use several techniques together. No one ever compiled a catalogue of the different arrows produced in the different areas of India and Iran. It is too late now to produce a definitive description of each type from each area. This is especially true because arrows probably were traded all over the area.
Jason; The term "Standard war arrow" is a term coined by Hugh Soar of merry old England to describe a typical English war arrow which is used today in a war arrow flight-shooting contest. Without looking it up, I will say that the weight is 265 grains.
As Bede states, there is certainly no median weight of an Indo-persian war arrow. These arrows vary from delicate to solid metal shafts. Indeed, some indo-persian quivers were tool boxes of arrows for different purposes, distances.
Indo-Persian is the last of the Persian empires, diamantled by the Brits in the 1850s. The last of their equipment in collections today represents possibly the highest quality of archery gear ever made, as would be expected. I would consider most, if not all of their existing arrows to be made from true bamboos rather than phragmites.
The previous States of the Persian empires are numerous, indeed. There is little room for doubt that Phragmites was an important arrow-making material for the Persians of antiquity. Phragmites is the ubiquitous arrow-making material.
I have made this statement before but would once again like to challenge others to find the splice in an Indo-persian arrow and explain its function. Reto's fine example shows the splice in a typical disguise. -j-
As Bede states, there is certainly no median weight of an Indo-persian war arrow. These arrows vary from delicate to solid metal shafts. Indeed, some indo-persian quivers were tool boxes of arrows for different purposes, distances.
Indo-Persian is the last of the Persian empires, diamantled by the Brits in the 1850s. The last of their equipment in collections today represents possibly the highest quality of archery gear ever made, as would be expected. I would consider most, if not all of their existing arrows to be made from true bamboos rather than phragmites.
The previous States of the Persian empires are numerous, indeed. There is little room for doubt that Phragmites was an important arrow-making material for the Persians of antiquity. Phragmites is the ubiquitous arrow-making material.
I have made this statement before but would once again like to challenge others to find the splice in an Indo-persian arrow and explain its function. Reto's fine example shows the splice in a typical disguise. -j-
Hello Bede,
Why the nock is so "wide" in this arrows? There is a special reason for that shape?
TIA, Best regards
Gianrico
PS I hope all is OK for you and your family, let us know.
Why the nock is so "wide" in this arrows? There is a special reason for that shape?
TIA, Best regards
Gianrico
PS I hope all is OK for you and your family, let us know.
Gianrico,
The nocks are so wide because the string was often of gut which was twisted and covered with silk floss. There was a belief, quoted in "Saracen Archery", that a thick string made a more accurate arrow. If there is a technical reason for this, it might be that the heavier string was more consistent and smooth in its motion.
Jack,
"Indo-Persian" refers to an art style not to an empire. The state you are referring to is the Mogul Empire, which was founded by Babur, who was a Chagatay Turkish-speaking descendent of Tamerlane (Timur) on his father's side and Chinggis Khan on his mother's side. For the first few generations, the royal family spoke Chagatay among themselves, but the court spoke Persian. Eventually, after the Indian Mutiny, the British extinguished the dynasty and send the last emperor into exile. During the first part of the empire's existence, many Persians settled in India. Some were Sunni Muslims fleeing the powerful Shia Safavid dynasty in Iran. Others were just seeking a better life in an empire where skilled artists, poets, soldiers and administrators were welcome.
What do you mean about the "splice"? All the nocks I have seen in Indo-Persian arrows have been more like a mortise and tenon construction. In wooden nocks, the nock piece was tapered down to a tenon and inserted into the shaft. In ivory ones a small wooden tenon was glued into the shaft and a hole was bored in a piece of ivory and that piece was glued onto the tenon and carved into a nock. I have several arrows where the wrapping has come undone and you can see the parts clearly. There were tribal arrows in India constructed differently as described in one of Doug Elmy's articles. Have I misunderstood something?
Have you ever worked out how they could shave the skin off the shaft (about .5 mm) so evenly and consistently?
P.S.
Jack, I hope everything is fine with you. We keep seeing pictures of those storms on television and it looks scary.
The nocks are so wide because the string was often of gut which was twisted and covered with silk floss. There was a belief, quoted in "Saracen Archery", that a thick string made a more accurate arrow. If there is a technical reason for this, it might be that the heavier string was more consistent and smooth in its motion.
Jack,
"Indo-Persian" refers to an art style not to an empire. The state you are referring to is the Mogul Empire, which was founded by Babur, who was a Chagatay Turkish-speaking descendent of Tamerlane (Timur) on his father's side and Chinggis Khan on his mother's side. For the first few generations, the royal family spoke Chagatay among themselves, but the court spoke Persian. Eventually, after the Indian Mutiny, the British extinguished the dynasty and send the last emperor into exile. During the first part of the empire's existence, many Persians settled in India. Some were Sunni Muslims fleeing the powerful Shia Safavid dynasty in Iran. Others were just seeking a better life in an empire where skilled artists, poets, soldiers and administrators were welcome.
What do you mean about the "splice"? All the nocks I have seen in Indo-Persian arrows have been more like a mortise and tenon construction. In wooden nocks, the nock piece was tapered down to a tenon and inserted into the shaft. In ivory ones a small wooden tenon was glued into the shaft and a hole was bored in a piece of ivory and that piece was glued onto the tenon and carved into a nock. I have several arrows where the wrapping has come undone and you can see the parts clearly. There were tribal arrows in India constructed differently as described in one of Doug Elmy's articles. Have I misunderstood something?
Have you ever worked out how they could shave the skin off the shaft (about .5 mm) so evenly and consistently?
P.S.
Jack, I hope everything is fine with you. We keep seeing pictures of those storms on television and it looks scary.
Bede and others who have contacted me, thankyou for your concern. About 2.7 million people are estimated to have evacuated the Houston area in advance of an ominous hurricane, which just missed the city proper but devestated some outlying areas. The confusion is huge. I took my Persian, Chinese and Am. Indian bows with me and they are now safe back at home.
I think we can agree that Indo-Persian, Mogol, Mugal and Mughal are synonyms.
There is another splice on many Mugal arrows. This is a tusk tennon splice in the bamboo shaft, sinew lashed, below the fletches. On Reto's pic it can be seen above the word parameters, at about 3cm. There is a slight swelling where the sinew lash occurs and is decorated with paint. I will post a more obvious example. -j-
I think we can agree that Indo-Persian, Mogol, Mugal and Mughal are synonyms.
There is another splice on many Mugal arrows. This is a tusk tennon splice in the bamboo shaft, sinew lashed, below the fletches. On Reto's pic it can be seen above the word parameters, at about 3cm. There is a slight swelling where the sinew lash occurs and is decorated with paint. I will post a more obvious example. -j-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ivory nocked end of one arrow is at the far right with its mainshaft next to it, the socket visible. The tennon was made by cutting two v-slices out of the tennoned end, maybe heated in boiling water, and reshaped into a cone. The socketed mainshaft was flared out with a device similar to what I have previously shown. The splice would have been glued together, sinewed(prior to flaring), and the splice painted to weatherproof and decorated.
This splice would occur somewhere near the bow when the arrow is nocked. Additionally, the splice occurs above a node on the mainshaft. The finished splice is seen in the third from the right.
Various points are included.
My question is "what is the purpose of the splice"?
The ivory nocked end of one arrow is at the far right with its mainshaft next to it, the socket visible. The tennon was made by cutting two v-slices out of the tennoned end, maybe heated in boiling water, and reshaped into a cone. The socketed mainshaft was flared out with a device similar to what I have previously shown. The splice would have been glued together, sinewed(prior to flaring), and the splice painted to weatherproof and decorated.
This splice would occur somewhere near the bow when the arrow is nocked. Additionally, the splice occurs above a node on the mainshaft. The finished splice is seen in the third from the right.
Various points are included.
My question is "what is the purpose of the splice"?
I'd read that the Turkish bows at their peak were the most highly refined composite bows. Has there been any testing to decide this? I would imagine that they would be fairly similar in performance, being in rather close proximity in geographical and chronological areas.
What was the shape of the Persian/Mogul bow? Would I be wrongif I said that a crab-leg bow is representative of this type of bow?
Dave
What was the shape of the Persian/Mogul bow? Would I be wrongif I said that a crab-leg bow is representative of this type of bow?
Dave
Dave,
I have been told there are four main types of composite bow used in India. The crab bow is only one of them. There is the Sind bow or the Chahar Kham bow with a set back grip and angles at the neck and base fo the siyah. There is another type which I think is called Kashmiri which is very like a Safavid Persian bow.
I don't remember them all off the top of my head. I know that Stephen illustrated one of the other types on this web site. I will see if I have a reference at home.
To answer the question, not all composite bows were created equal. Some were specifically designed for their climate and their performance was compromised as a result. Some were designed to shoot heavy arrows accurately and others to shoot light arrows.
In India, many of the bows were made with the bellies constructed of parallel strips of horn. The complex grooving the Turks used was not part of the structure and it is possible they could not sustain the stress between the core and the belly as well as the Turkish bows.
In the case of crab bows there were very large siyahs that must have contributed to a slower but more predictable bow. Maybe there was an increase in accuracy as a result.
I have been told there are four main types of composite bow used in India. The crab bow is only one of them. There is the Sind bow or the Chahar Kham bow with a set back grip and angles at the neck and base fo the siyah. There is another type which I think is called Kashmiri which is very like a Safavid Persian bow.
I don't remember them all off the top of my head. I know that Stephen illustrated one of the other types on this web site. I will see if I have a reference at home.
To answer the question, not all composite bows were created equal. Some were specifically designed for their climate and their performance was compromised as a result. Some were designed to shoot heavy arrows accurately and others to shoot light arrows.
In India, many of the bows were made with the bellies constructed of parallel strips of horn. The complex grooving the Turks used was not part of the structure and it is possible they could not sustain the stress between the core and the belly as well as the Turkish bows.
In the case of crab bows there were very large siyahs that must have contributed to a slower but more predictable bow. Maybe there was an increase in accuracy as a result.
Reto; Is that your arrow? Do you have it at hand? -j-
Persian arrows
Reto; I am just trying to get a discussion started about why the shafts are spliced. If you have an opinion, please post on the thread. Thanks. -j-
Jack; as you certainly know I am very much interested in Korean, Turkish and Indo-Persian bows, arrows, quivers and miscellaneous. So far I have been visiting some European Museums to take pictures (another example see at: http://198.66.52.119/phpBB2/viewtopic.p ... ight=#1864) , measurements and weight for my private research. I had these and many other arrows at hand - thanks to private contact.
The posted example is just one type of arrows and shows you how I get organized on my computer. I file those things according to different categories (Region, Museum, type, age.....and so on). This procedure/way helps me to make good repiclas, ... some day....(too busy at the moment)
About your discussion:
As far as I rembember in the magazin "Primitve Archer", in Bowyers Bible and in some issues of "The Society of Archer-Antiquaries" their are some articles about this topic. Jim Hamm also shows nice American arrows with hardwoods in his books.
My understanding:
Although originally made of a single length of wood, many archers used to splice different types of wood together to enhance the properties of the arrow. Hardwoods were often spliced into the head and/or heel (fletching end) of the arrow and softwoods used for the central shaft. Such spliced hardwoods are known as a footing. The softwoods allow the arrow to retain its flex and lowers the weight of the arrow. The hardwoods in the head and/or heel allow these areas of the arrow to withstand the major stresses in the arrow namely the splitting stress of the string thrusting against the centre of the arrow (if separate nocks aren't used), pushing it forward and possibly splitting the wood, and also the compressive stress of the arrow hitting it's target.
In the lastest issue of the German "Traditionell Bogenschiessen" you will find a very interesting article (how-to-make) about the spliced and barreled arrows as well as some hints and further explanations. Excellent pictures and explanation! If you are interested in - I am going to send you the article.
I think, talking about spliced arrows means also to start with the "Atlatl" or the long spliced arrows of the days before bows and arrows got invented. Then it goes further to regions, availability of raw materials, different kind of usage, strength and weaknesses etc.. To make those things clear to ATARN-Members it may also be important to show as many pictures as possible to illustrate what has been written. This makes it easier to make good copies out of them so it will be possible to keep the past alive.
Best regards
Reto
Reto; I am just trying to get a discussion started about why the shafts are spliced. If you have an opinion, please post on the thread. Thanks. -j-
Jack; as you certainly know I am very much interested in Korean, Turkish and Indo-Persian bows, arrows, quivers and miscellaneous. So far I have been visiting some European Museums to take pictures (another example see at: http://198.66.52.119/phpBB2/viewtopic.p ... ight=#1864) , measurements and weight for my private research. I had these and many other arrows at hand - thanks to private contact.
The posted example is just one type of arrows and shows you how I get organized on my computer. I file those things according to different categories (Region, Museum, type, age.....and so on). This procedure/way helps me to make good repiclas, ... some day....(too busy at the moment)
About your discussion:
As far as I rembember in the magazin "Primitve Archer", in Bowyers Bible and in some issues of "The Society of Archer-Antiquaries" their are some articles about this topic. Jim Hamm also shows nice American arrows with hardwoods in his books.
My understanding:
Although originally made of a single length of wood, many archers used to splice different types of wood together to enhance the properties of the arrow. Hardwoods were often spliced into the head and/or heel (fletching end) of the arrow and softwoods used for the central shaft. Such spliced hardwoods are known as a footing. The softwoods allow the arrow to retain its flex and lowers the weight of the arrow. The hardwoods in the head and/or heel allow these areas of the arrow to withstand the major stresses in the arrow namely the splitting stress of the string thrusting against the centre of the arrow (if separate nocks aren't used), pushing it forward and possibly splitting the wood, and also the compressive stress of the arrow hitting it's target.
In the lastest issue of the German "Traditionell Bogenschiessen" you will find a very interesting article (how-to-make) about the spliced and barreled arrows as well as some hints and further explanations. Excellent pictures and explanation! If you are interested in - I am going to send you the article.
I think, talking about spliced arrows means also to start with the "Atlatl" or the long spliced arrows of the days before bows and arrows got invented. Then it goes further to regions, availability of raw materials, different kind of usage, strength and weaknesses etc.. To make those things clear to ATARN-Members it may also be important to show as many pictures as possible to illustrate what has been written. This makes it easier to make good copies out of them so it will be possible to keep the past alive.
Best regards
Reto
Reto,
Firstly, perhaps we should get the naming of the parts of the arrow straightened out. In typical archery fashion, the foot of an arrow is next to its head. A footing is the splicing of a piece of extra material into that position. Strangely, even in Turkish this part of the arrow was called ayak, which means foot. The nock end of the arrow is sometimes called a head piece and the part below that is the neck.
To be honest, the rest of the arrow has odd names that are not entirely consistent even in one language.
Early atlatl darts had separate foreshafts (yet another name) and the arguments I have seen made suggest this was partly to allow recovery of the shaft. In primitive societies, the work that went into making a weapon used up time that could be otherwise used in collecting food. The San Bushmen in the Kalahari used arrows with detachable heads with poison on them which seems to be a similar approach to the dart.
Ancient Egyptian arrows had reed shafts and wooden footings and inserted nock pieces. Arrows found at Masada from Roman times have wooden foreshafts and reed bodies. The arrows recovered from Dura Europus have similar construction. The Roman writers refer to the Persians of their time using reed arrows and Arrian refers to the Indians fighting Alexander the Great as using cane arrows.
So it looks like many different peoples used reed, bamboo and cane in composite arrows. Perhaps one of the great advantages was ease of construction once you had worked out a system. You only had to shape the footings and the nocks: reed and bamboo need little rounding and are both light and strong.
Your arguments about the mechanical advantages of footings are a strong reason fo using them. With stronger bows, reinforced nocks would become popular. This was also true of wooden arrows as you pointed out. In England in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, both footings and reinforced nocks were used in expensive taget arrows.
Firstly, perhaps we should get the naming of the parts of the arrow straightened out. In typical archery fashion, the foot of an arrow is next to its head. A footing is the splicing of a piece of extra material into that position. Strangely, even in Turkish this part of the arrow was called ayak, which means foot. The nock end of the arrow is sometimes called a head piece and the part below that is the neck.
To be honest, the rest of the arrow has odd names that are not entirely consistent even in one language.
Early atlatl darts had separate foreshafts (yet another name) and the arguments I have seen made suggest this was partly to allow recovery of the shaft. In primitive societies, the work that went into making a weapon used up time that could be otherwise used in collecting food. The San Bushmen in the Kalahari used arrows with detachable heads with poison on them which seems to be a similar approach to the dart.
Ancient Egyptian arrows had reed shafts and wooden footings and inserted nock pieces. Arrows found at Masada from Roman times have wooden foreshafts and reed bodies. The arrows recovered from Dura Europus have similar construction. The Roman writers refer to the Persians of their time using reed arrows and Arrian refers to the Indians fighting Alexander the Great as using cane arrows.
So it looks like many different peoples used reed, bamboo and cane in composite arrows. Perhaps one of the great advantages was ease of construction once you had worked out a system. You only had to shape the footings and the nocks: reed and bamboo need little rounding and are both light and strong.
Your arguments about the mechanical advantages of footings are a strong reason fo using them. With stronger bows, reinforced nocks would become popular. This was also true of wooden arrows as you pointed out. In England in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, both footings and reinforced nocks were used in expensive taget arrows.
So it seems that there is an engineering reason for the splice on a Mughal arrow. Most of all other instances that I can think of, joined two dissimilar materials nearer to the point. In this case, bamboo has been joined to bamboo nearer to the nock end. This technique would appear to be unique to Mughal archery. Why? -j-
Jack,
As you know the Turks regularly repaired flight arrows. Perhaps the second splice was a repair. However, I have seen arrows with a sinew binding in front of the fletchings where there was no splice. I wonder if is was a reinforcement for the tip of the nock insert which might have fractured the shaft at that point. I have arrows that have bindings at the mid point which I always regarded as a reinforcement of a longitudinal crack in the reed.
I have other arrows where the shaftment area (from the nock to in front of the end of the feathers) was shaved down to remove the surface and a fine binding used to cover the same area. This was painted and the feathers glued to it. The argument was that the smooth surface fo the shaft would not hold the glue properly. Whenever I glued feathers to bamboo, they stayed in place, but I don't think the ancients were using the same glue.
As you know the Turks regularly repaired flight arrows. Perhaps the second splice was a repair. However, I have seen arrows with a sinew binding in front of the fletchings where there was no splice. I wonder if is was a reinforcement for the tip of the nock insert which might have fractured the shaft at that point. I have arrows that have bindings at the mid point which I always regarded as a reinforcement of a longitudinal crack in the reed.
I have other arrows where the shaftment area (from the nock to in front of the end of the feathers) was shaved down to remove the surface and a fine binding used to cover the same area. This was painted and the feathers glued to it. The argument was that the smooth surface fo the shaft would not hold the glue properly. Whenever I glued feathers to bamboo, they stayed in place, but I don't think the ancients were using the same glue.
Bede; When Stephen got his Sind bow, some time ago, it came with arrows which were spliced at the same place. Reto's arrow had the same splice, and I own many arrows with a splice at the same place. It is unlikely, to say the least, that all these arrows were broken 6-8inches from the nock. No, it has something to do with the harmonics of archer's paradox, how this paradox would break these thin arrows, and how a splice at this place would change those harmonics. The heavy points found on many of these arrows would intensify the problem.
I do not know how one would test this theory. It might be dangerous for a hand-held model, and I cannot shoot a heavy bow at any rate. -j-
I do not know how one would test this theory. It might be dangerous for a hand-held model, and I cannot shoot a heavy bow at any rate. -j-
Jack,
I think from your comments it is worthwhile to recheck all my Indo-Persian arrows to see if they match yours. Manu of the heavy points have excessively long tangs. I have one where I measured the tang at 13 inches in a 27 inch arrow. So your idea of reinforcing the other end has merit.
One problem with the archer's paradox on these arrows is that they are often stiffer at the ends than they need to be for the normal bending of the arrow around the bow. The Turks barreled their arrows because they needed the greatest stiffness in the centre section. It is the same engineering principle that had self bow limbs taper towards the tips to ensure even bending.
I think from your comments it is worthwhile to recheck all my Indo-Persian arrows to see if they match yours. Manu of the heavy points have excessively long tangs. I have one where I measured the tang at 13 inches in a 27 inch arrow. So your idea of reinforcing the other end has merit.
One problem with the archer's paradox on these arrows is that they are often stiffer at the ends than they need to be for the normal bending of the arrow around the bow. The Turks barreled their arrows because they needed the greatest stiffness in the centre section. It is the same engineering principle that had self bow limbs taper towards the tips to ensure even bending.
Ok it looks like i have to be alot more specific in my requests, what i am trying to do is determine the weight and maximum velocity of the arrows around the 7th 6th and 5th centuries BC, ie the Persian Wars. This is to work out the possible effectivness of greek linen armour. Much of the information that i have been using is garnered from the Assyrian bow and arrow found in Egypt and dated around 1000 BC.
I attach a picture of the arrows i have collected, can people comment as to whether they feel that they are representative of arrowheads of that time.
Many Thanks
Jason
I attach a picture of the arrows i have collected, can people comment as to whether they feel that they are representative of arrowheads of that time.
Many Thanks
Jason
Jason; I will attempt a reply to your questions. The top point is not familiar to me but appears to be a bi-lobed point which has had the flanges sharpened down to nothing. The middle point is similar to one of mine from Turkey with good provenance from a Greek city. The lower is roughly equal to one from Palestine.
According to Edward McEwen, Experimental archery; project velocities and comparison of bow performance. Antiquity 62.
A accurately-made angular composite 153 cm reproduced from an actual prototype, shot a 90 gram bamboo arrow with bronze point 32 mps to 109m; 50 gr 40mps; 40gr 47mps; and 25gr arrow with hardwood tip 52mps to 221m.
In my estimation, the correct reproduction of this bronze point would be a leaf shaped point with a tang, not socket, from Hudson's Bay company in Germany. The point is not sufficiently hardened, though. Hope this helps. -j-
According to Edward McEwen, Experimental archery; project velocities and comparison of bow performance. Antiquity 62.
A accurately-made angular composite 153 cm reproduced from an actual prototype, shot a 90 gram bamboo arrow with bronze point 32 mps to 109m; 50 gr 40mps; 40gr 47mps; and 25gr arrow with hardwood tip 52mps to 221m.
In my estimation, the correct reproduction of this bronze point would be a leaf shaped point with a tang, not socket, from Hudson's Bay company in Germany. The point is not sufficiently hardened, though. Hope this helps. -j-
Bede; What did the point look like that had the 13 inch tang?
My prefered way to prepare a bamboo shaft is to straighten with direct heat first then flatten on a perfect surface using a 6 or 8 in. sanding block with #80 grit abrasive. Indo persian arrows do not have all the skin removed; Japanese, for instance, do. It is necessary to abrade prepatory to gluing or sinewing with water based glues.
Persian and Japanese arrows will have the decoration scraped away directly under the quill for direct contact to the wood (bamboo). This is so useful for alignment when fletching without a jig. -j-
My prefered way to prepare a bamboo shaft is to straighten with direct heat first then flatten on a perfect surface using a 6 or 8 in. sanding block with #80 grit abrasive. Indo persian arrows do not have all the skin removed; Japanese, for instance, do. It is necessary to abrade prepatory to gluing or sinewing with water based glues.
Persian and Japanese arrows will have the decoration scraped away directly under the quill for direct contact to the wood (bamboo). This is so useful for alignment when fletching without a jig. -j-
In regards to the Indo-Persian equipment, Jack made the assertion that the intercultural mixes of India and Persia during the Mughal Dynasty created the finest archery equipment...arrows and bows.
Bede mentioned that in the Qajar dynasty they lengthened the draws and shot longer arrows. Does anyone have any pictures of the bows and arrows they shot then? Are these the bows that were wider at the limbs and had horn strips as opposed to whole pieces of horn?
In the Grayson Collection, there is a bow that is wide at the limbs that is from 18th to 19th century Iran; is this the kind that was typical of the Qajars?
http://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayso ... nbow.shtml
And here is another bow style of the same period:
http://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayso ... nbow.shtml
Is this the Indian "Kashmiri" or whatever kind of bowstyle, Bede, that you were referring to which was also shared with the Persians?
Bede mentioned that in the Qajar dynasty they lengthened the draws and shot longer arrows. Does anyone have any pictures of the bows and arrows they shot then? Are these the bows that were wider at the limbs and had horn strips as opposed to whole pieces of horn?
In the Grayson Collection, there is a bow that is wide at the limbs that is from 18th to 19th century Iran; is this the kind that was typical of the Qajars?
http://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayso ... nbow.shtml
And here is another bow style of the same period:
http://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayso ... nbow.shtml
Is this the Indian "Kashmiri" or whatever kind of bowstyle, Bede, that you were referring to which was also shared with the Persians?
Jack,
The arrowhead was of the amaji type. It was polygonal in cross section, expanding from its base to just before the tip where it suddenly tapered to a point.
Most of the bows labelled as Persian in foreign collections are probably Qajar. The two in the Grayson Collection look to be. The second one is clearly some sort of decorative practice bow, possibly for teaching young princes to shoot. It is difficult to tell anything about their construction since the belly is usually covered with painted leather of bark. The ones in the Topkapi are almost certainly early (Safavid) and resemble the ones Dr Khorasani photographed for his book. Since there was more than one type of bow being made in Iran, it is likely that there are bows in foreign collections that have not been recognised as Persian, but might be identified if they have inscriptions.
The arrowhead was of the amaji type. It was polygonal in cross section, expanding from its base to just before the tip where it suddenly tapered to a point.
Most of the bows labelled as Persian in foreign collections are probably Qajar. The two in the Grayson Collection look to be. The second one is clearly some sort of decorative practice bow, possibly for teaching young princes to shoot. It is difficult to tell anything about their construction since the belly is usually covered with painted leather of bark. The ones in the Topkapi are almost certainly early (Safavid) and resemble the ones Dr Khorasani photographed for his book. Since there was more than one type of bow being made in Iran, it is likely that there are bows in foreign collections that have not been recognised as Persian, but might be identified if they have inscriptions.
Bede, do you happen to have any pictures or representations of how the Iranians made their wooden arrows? Poplar you said? I suppose that the ones who used wooden arrows would have made them Turkic in design?
LC
LC
Lucas
They very often used reeds, a kind of "bamboo/grass", thin and very stiff.
BR
Reto
They very often used reeds, a kind of "bamboo/grass", thin and very stiff.
BR
Reto
Okay thanks Reto, and I can't find the post on ATARN, but I recall seeing a post that says that Iranian arrows or Mughal arrows are never bigger than .8cm in diameter...do you know where that would be?
There are some descriptions of arrow making in Persian literature. Usually a manual will concentrate either on reed or wooden arrows. For wooden arrows some degree of barrelling was normal. Reed arrows were made in the same manner as in India, which is not much different from Ancient Egyptian arrows. The biggest change was the replacement of the fore shaft by filling the hollow of the reed with plant resin which set hard when it cooled.
Some Indo-Persian arrows have almost all the shaftment made from a wooden insert which also forms the nock. This might have been done to control the balance of the shaft in the same way that barrelling contributed to the balance of a wooden shaft.
Some Indo-Persian arrows have almost all the shaftment made from a wooden insert which also forms the nock. This might have been done to control the balance of the shaft in the same way that barrelling contributed to the balance of a wooden shaft.