Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Bronze Age Center. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Akkadians & archery
Topic Started: Feb 23 2011, 08:47 PM (1,320 Views)
Yves Goris
Member
[ * ]
Dan, I believe you love the hamblin book? what did you think of his statement about the Akkadian use of the composite bow?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan Howard
Member Avatar
Patron
[ *  *  * ]
Yadin made the claim first. As with most of these things it comes from a subjective analysis of iconographical evidence. Yadin reckons that the bow carried by Naram Sin (Sargon's grandson) looks like a composite bow because it is fairly short and has recurved limbs. There are no surviving composite bows dating this early.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jamie Szudy
Member Avatar
Member
[ * ]
There appears to have been some more work on the subject: the most recent article I know of is:

Quote:
 
Christophe Zuttermann 2003, "The bow in the ancient Near East, a re-evaluation of archery from the late 2nd millennium BC to the end of the Achaemenid Period," Iranica Antiqua 38, pp. 119-165.


He agrees that recurved compound bows are first really evident in the Old Akkadian period, but this is still based on interpretation of pictoral evidence. No archaeological finds, and texts are lamentably mum on the subject.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yves Goris
Member
[ * ]
tnx for this article. i'm trying to purchase it. it's something that has been bothering me for quite a long time for now... :P the problem i'm having with it is the following: many historians believe that the akkadians used the composite bow. the egyptians used the bow from the hyksos period onwars... i can't seem to find a reason why it took about 500 à 600 years to get from mesopotamia to egypt. that's something that's hard for me to believe even though historians claim that the egyptians did not have any interest in what happened in syria/anatolia/mesopotamia...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan Howard
Member Avatar
Patron
[ *  *  * ]
What is the earliest physical evidence for composite bows in the Near East?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sean Manning
Patron
[ *  *  * ]
Dan Howard,Mar 6 2011
12:52 PM
What is the earliest physical evidence for composite bows in the Near East?

I'm not sure. Physical evidence seems hard because all parts of a composite bow are biodegradable (except for the models which use bone) and conditions for survival of organic material are not favourable in that area. Christopher Zuttermanp. 122 makes the usual claims about the Akkadians with a lot of citations I haven't tracked down. Its not a very good article though and relies on art for evidence.

Note 34 cites an angular composite bow from a 3rd millenium BCE Siberian context.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yves Goris
Member
[ * ]
I think you have to look for the composite bows of tutankhamun then... there are no physical examples known to me before that... (but i'm no professional).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yves Goris
Member
[ * ]
for the guys interested in this; there's an article in the new ancient warfare on this
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Marc320
Member
[ * ]
Hello Yves

An essential book for the Composite Bows in the Tut'Ankhamun's Tomb, remains, in my opinion :

W. Mc Leod: "Composite Bows from the Tomb of Tut'ankhamon"
Tut'Ankhamun's Tomb Series III- Griffith Institute, Oxford.

And for the self bows in the tut'Ankhamun's Tomb :

"W. McLeod: "Self Bows and other archery tackle from the Tomb of Tut'Ankhaun".
Tut'Ankhamun's Tomb Series IV- Griffith Institute Oxford.

I completely agree with Dan on the danger to trust the only representations to try to define - with some certainty - weapons, armors and other elements of the life in previous times.

We could quote the example of the Trajan's column which was taken for a long time as only model for the armament of Trajan's army.

But it is also necessary to remember that many of these representations have religious contexts (or serve to illustrate the glory of a King) which do not allow to draw from it conclusions on the use of objects illustrated at the time of the realization of these paintings or sculptures.

Lastly, the abstraction of the art of the time (as for example the famous Warrior's Vase) or still "the geometric art Period" allows only to have ideas on the armament worn without being able - except archaeological finds - to try to reconstitute it.

Apologize for my English :)


Marc

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Near Eastern Studies · Next Topic »
Add Reply