| # | Polity | Coded Value | Tags | Year(s) | Edit | Desc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
"Little is known about warfare in Mesoamerica before the Middle Formative [...] warfare was relatively unorganized, conducted by small groups armed with unspecialized tool-weapons".
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 12-13) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
"Little is known about warfare in Mesoamerica before the Middle Formative [...] warfare was relatively unorganized, conducted by small groups armed with unspecialized tool-weapons".
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 12-13) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
"There is no substantial evidence of bows and arrows at this time [Middle and Late Formative]".
[1]
First introduced into Central Mexico during the Middle Postclassic by Chichimec invaders from Northern Mesoamerica.
[2]
[3]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 197) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. [2]: Hassig, Ross. (1992). "War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica." Berkeley: University of California Press, p.47, 119-20. [3]: Tolstoy, Paul (1971). "Utilitarian Artifacts of Central Mexico." In The Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 10, ed. G. F. Ekholm, and I. Bernal. Austin: University of Texas Press, 270-296. |
||||||
|
"There is no substantial evidence of bows and arrows at this time [Middle and Late Formative]".
[1]
First introduced into Central Mexico during the Middle Postclassic by Chichimec invaders from Northern Mesoamerica.
[2]
[3]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 197) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. [2]: Hassig, Ross. (1992). "War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica." Berkeley: University of California Press, p.47, 119-20. [3]: Tolstoy, Paul (1971). "Utilitarian Artifacts of Central Mexico." In The Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 10, ed. G. F. Ekholm, and I. Bernal. Austin: University of Texas Press, 270-296. |
||||||
|
"Bows and arrows were still unknown."
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 47) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
There was no significant change in arms compared to the Classic period—thrusting spears and atlatls continued to dominate.
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 82) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
Not mentioned in detailed descriptions and lists of Toltec weaponry.
|
||||||
|
"Weapons in military contexts (arsenals, outposts, forts): knives, blades, projectile points (arrow and dart), spear points (for thrusting spears)."
[1]
[1]: (Carballo and Pastrana 2016: 6) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/R36BBMEZ. |
||||||
|
Listed by Hassig.
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 248) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
Introduced in the Mississippian region 300-400 CE. However, first evidence of use of arrow points for intergroup violence is from 600 CE.
[1]
atlatl primary weapon. no bow and arrow.
[2]
[1]: (Blitz and Port 2013, 89-95) [2]: (Iseminger 2010, 24) Iseminger, W R. 2010. Cahokia Mounds: America’s First City. The History Press. Charleston. |
||||||
|
Introduced in the Mississippian region 300-400 CE. However, first evidence of use of arrow points for intergroup violence is from 600 CE.
[1]
atlatl primary weapon. no bow and arrow.
[2]
[1]: (Blitz and Port 2013, 89-95) [2]: (Iseminger 2010, 24) Iseminger, W R. 2010. Cahokia Mounds: America’s First City. The History Press. Charleston. |
||||||
|
"Beginning A.D. 300-400, the bow replaced the atlatl in most regions"
[1]
However, not regularly used as a weapon: evidence of victims "struck by arrows and clubs" increased only during "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[2]
[1]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95) [2]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
"Beginning A.D. 300-400, the bow replaced the atlatl in most regions"
[1]
However, not regularly used as a weapon: evidence of victims "struck by arrows and clubs" increased only during "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[2]
[1]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95) [2]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
"Beginning A.D. 300-400, the bow replaced the atlatl in most regions"
[1]
However, not regularly used as a weapon: evidence of victims "struck by arrows and clubs" increased only during "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[2]
[1]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95) [2]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
"Beginning A.D. 300-400, the bow replaced the atlatl in most regions"
[1]
However, not regularly used as a weapon: evidence of victims "struck by arrows and clubs" increased only during "last half of the first millennium"
[2]
First evidence of intergroup violence appears in the archaeological record after 600 CE. "For the first time, there is evidence, in the form of group and individual burials with embedded arrow points, of the bow as the primary weapon of intergroup violence."
[1]
[1]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95) [2]: (Milner 2006, 174) |
||||||
|
Arrow points from at least c600 CE.
[1]
"Projectile points thought to be from arrows were common by the Patrick phase, having been introduced earlier in Late Woodland times. The timing of their appearance coincides roughly with the earliest widespread use of the bow-and-arrow throughout eastern North America."
[2]
"bow and arrow introduced sometime around AD 400"
[3]
[1]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 16) [2]: (Milner 2006, 83) [3]: (Iseminger 2010, 26) |
||||||
|
Arrow points from at least c600 CE.
[1]
"Projectile points thought to be from arrows were common by the Patrick phase, having been introduced earlier in Late Woodland times. The timing of their appearance coincides roughly with the earliest widespread use of the bow-and-arrow throughout eastern North America."
[2]
"bow and arrow introduced sometime around AD 400"
[3]
[1]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 16) [2]: (Milner 2006, 83) [3]: (Iseminger 2010, 26) |
||||||
|
Arrow points from at least c600 CE.
[1]
"Projectile points thought to be from arrows were common by the Patrick phase, having been introduced earlier in Late Woodland times. The timing of their appearance coincides roughly with the earliest widespread use of the bow-and-arrow throughout eastern North America."
[2]
"bow and arrow introduced sometime around AD 400"
[3]
[1]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 16) [2]: (Milner 2006, 83) [3]: (Iseminger 2010, 26) |
||||||
|
"Beginning A.D. 300-400, the bow replaced the atlatl in most regions"
[1]
However, not regularly used as a weapon: evidence of victims "struck by arrows and clubs" increased only during "last half of the first millennium"
[2]
First evidence of intergroup violence appears in the archaeological record after 600 CE. "For the first time, there is evidence, in the form of group and individual burials with embedded arrow points, of the bow as the primary weapon of intergroup violence."
[1]
[1]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95) [2]: (Milner 2006, 174) |
||||||
|
"In 1879, M. Moura obtained bronze artifacts from villagers at Samrong Sen in Cambodia, including an axe, fishhooks, arrowheads, and bangles" from the Bronze Age.
[1]
These arrowheads may have been from a bow and arrow, however the dates and details were not confirmed.
[1]: (Miksic and Goh 2016: 106) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2EZ3CBBS. |
||||||
|
No evidence for bows and arrows in Cambodia but others have been found in mainland SEA: "at Noen U-Loke [Thailand], for instance, Higham found remains of a young man whose spine had been severed by an arrowhead."
[1]
However projectile points found at the Phum Snay site could be arrow heads.
[2]
[1]: (Miksic and Goh 2016: 111) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2EZ3CBBS. [2]: (Domett et al. 2011: 452) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/RJH39GGM. |
||||||
|
According to Coe (2003), iron was used in weaponry, including knives, spears and arrowheads since Iron Age chiefdoms (c. 500 BC to c. 200-500 CE). ’Iron was used not only for axes (for land clearance) and digging implements, but also for weaponry, principally knives, spears and arrowheads; in fact, weapons are often found in burials’
[1]
[1]: (Coe 2003, p. 49) |
||||||
|
According to Coe (2003), iron was used in weaponry, including knives, spears and arrowheads since Iron Age chiefdoms (c. 500 BC to c. 200-500 CE). ’Iron was used not only for axes (for land clearance) and digging implements, but also for weaponry, principally knives, spears and arrowheads; in fact, weapons are often found in burials’
[1]
[1]: (Coe 2003, p. 49) |
||||||
|
According to Coe (2003), iron was used in weaponry, including knives, spears and arrowheads since Iron Age chiefdoms (c. 500 BC to c. 200-500 CE). ’Iron was used not only for axes (for land clearance) and digging implements, but also for weaponry, principally knives, spears and arrowheads; in fact, weapons are often found in burials’
[1]
’With the later Iron Age, these have been identified through the banks that ringed the sites to retain and control the flow of water. Smiths fashioned heavy iron ploughshares and sickles. At Lovea in Cambodia, rice field boundaries radiated out from the moats. The division and improvement of land and increased production occurred as elites at Noen U-Loke were being interred in graves filled with rice, along with outstanding sets of exotic ornaments. Smiths also forged iron arrowheads and heavy spears. Some settlements grew to be much larger than others. Valued cattle and water buffalo were protected in corrals within the moats, and substantial houses were constructed in the residential quarters of the moated towns. It is suggested that this was a period of formative social change involving the emergence of powerful leaders rooted in hereditary inequality.’
[2]
[1]: (Coe 2003, 49) [2]: (Higham 2014, p 833-834) |
||||||
|
The date of the inscription of Baset—the only inscription that got away from the Mekong and its path to the sea—hints that it may have been carved before Jayavarman I was really settled on the throne. The inscriptions seem to indicate that after long campaigns he pacified the country; but the location of his inscriptions hint that he may have made a mistake in abandoning his bow and arrows. During his later years at least he does not seem to have had all Chenla under his control; for, in a reign of perhaps more than 40 years, with more inscriptions than any other king before Yasovarman I, the inscriptions of his reign seem but once or twice to get away from the immediate region of the Mekong and its route to its port.’
[1]
According to Coe (2003), iron was used in weaponry, including knives, spears and arrowheads since Iron Age chiefdoms (c. 500 BC to c. 200-500 CE). ’Iron was used not only for axes (for land clearance) and digging implements, but also for weaponry, principally knives, spears and arrowheads; in fact, weapons are often found in burials’
[2]
’But before we do this, to avoid repetition, we shall consider what was the technological level of this army, that is, what were the weapons it used, for, of course, contrary to what Zhou Daguan affirms, namely that the use of bows, arrows, ballistae, and breastplates was unknown to the Khmer army, it did in fact have these arms.’
[3]
’After the lance, the bow, at least at Angkor Wat, is the most common weapon.’
[4]
[1]: (Briggs 1951, p. 57) [2]: (Coe 2003, p. 49) [3]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2007, p. 13) [4]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, p. 21) |
||||||
|
The date of the inscription of Baset—the only inscription that got away from the Mekong and its path to the sea—hints that it may have been carved before Jayavarman I was really settled on the throne. The inscriptions seem to indicate that after long campaigns he pacified the country; but the location of his inscriptions hint that he may have made a mistake in abandoning his bow and arrows. During his later years at least he does not seem to have had all Chenla under his control; for, in a reign of perhaps more than 40 years, with more inscriptions than any other king before Yasovarman I, the inscriptions of his reign seem but once or twice to get away from the immediate region of the Mekong and its route to its port.’
[1]
According to Coe (2003), iron was used in weaponry, including knives, spears and arrowheads since Iron Age chiefdoms (c. 500 BC to c. 200-500 CE). ’Iron was used not only for axes (for land clearance) and digging implements, but also for weaponry, principally knives, spears and arrowheads; in fact, weapons are often found in burials’
[2]
’But before we do this, to avoid repetition, we shall consider what was the technological level of this army, that is, what were the weapons it used, for, of course, contrary to what Zhou Daguan affirms, namely that the use of bows, arrows, ballistae, and breastplates was unknown to the Khmer army, it did in fact have these arms.’
[3]
’After the lance, the bow, at least at Angkor Wat, is the most common weapon.’
[4]
[1]: (Briggs 1951, p. 57) [2]: (Coe 2003, p. 49) [3]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2007, p. 13) [4]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, p. 21) |
||||||
|
The date of the inscription of Baset—the only inscription that got away from the Mekong and its path to the sea—hints that it may have been carved before Jayavarman I was really settled on the throne. The inscriptions seem to indicate that after long campaigns he pacified the country; but the location of his inscriptions hint that he may have made a mistake in abandoning his bow and arrows. During his later years at least he does not seem to have had all Chenla under his control; for, in a reign of perhaps more than 40 years, with more inscriptions than any other king before Yasovarman I, the inscriptions of his reign seem but once or twice to get away from the immediate region of the Mekong and its route to its port.’
[1]
According to Coe (2003), iron was used in weaponry, including knives, spears and arrowheads since Iron Age chiefdoms (c. 500 BC to c. 200-500 CE). ’Iron was used not only for axes (for land clearance) and digging implements, but also for weaponry, principally knives, spears and arrowheads; in fact, weapons are often found in burials’
[2]
’But before we do this, to avoid repetition, we shall consider what was the technological level of this army, that is, what were the weapons it used, for, of course, contrary to what Zhou Daguan affirms, namely that the use of bows, arrows, ballistae, and breastplates was unknown to the Khmer army, it did in fact have these arms.’
[3]
’After the lance, the bow, at least at Angkor Wat, is the most common weapon.’
[4]
[1]: (Briggs 1951, p. 57) [2]: (Coe 2003, p. 49) [3]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2007, p. 13) [4]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, p. 21) |
||||||
|
The date of the inscription of Baset—the only inscription that got away from the Mekong and its path to the sea—hints that it may have been carved before Jayavarman I was really settled on the throne. The inscriptions seem to indicate that after long campaigns he pacified the country; but the location of his inscriptions hint that he may have made a mistake in abandoning his bow and arrows. During his later years at least he does not seem to have had all Chenla under his control; for, in a reign of perhaps more than 40 years, with more inscriptions than any other king before Yasovarman I, the inscriptions of his reign seem but once or twice to get away from the immediate region of the Mekong and its route to its port.’
[1]
According to Coe (2003), iron was used in weaponry, including knives, spears and arrowheads since Iron Age chiefdoms (c. 500 BC to c. 200-500 CE). ’Iron was used not only for axes (for land clearance) and digging implements, but also for weaponry, principally knives, spears and arrowheads; in fact, weapons are often found in burials’
[2]
’But before we do this, to avoid repetition, we shall consider what was the technological level of this army, that is, what were the weapons it used, for, of course, contrary to what Zhou Daguan affirms, namely that the use of bows, arrows, ballistae, and breastplates was unknown to the Khmer army, it did in fact have these arms.’
[3]
’After the lance, the bow, at least at Angkor Wat, is the most common weapon.’
[4]
[1]: (Briggs 1951, p. 57) [2]: (Coe 2003, p. 49) [3]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2007, p. 13) [4]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, p. 21) |
||||||
|
"While the Neolithic Javanese had the bow and arrow, we have no arrow point specimens in the Bronze Age. In fact, this lack of the bow and arrow in Bronze Age Indonesia explains the comparative lack of the bow and arrow in Western Indonesia, and its presence in modern Eastern Indonesia and the Mentawei Islands. The words for "bow" (gendwa,"
[1]
[1]: (American Oriental Society 1944, 123) American Oriental Society. 1944. Journal of the American Oriental Society, Volume 64. |
||||||
|
"While the Neolithic Javanese had the bow and arrow, we have no arrow point specimens in the Bronze Age. In fact, this lack of the bow and arrow in Bronze Age Indonesia explains the comparative lack of the bow and arrow in Western Indonesia, and its presence in modern Eastern Indonesia and the Mentawei Islands. The words for "bow" (gendwa,"
[1]
[1]: (American Oriental Society 1944, 123) American Oriental Society. 1944. Journal of the American Oriental Society, Volume 64. |
||||||
|
The ruling class were Hindu Indians and their contemporaries in the Indian Chalukyan Kingdom had "swords, shields, spears, clubs, lances, bows and arrows etc."
[1]
[1]: (Sreenivasa Murthy and Ramakrishnan 1975, 93) H V Sreenivasa Murthy and R Ramakrishnan. 1975. A History of Karnataka. Vivek Prakashan. |
||||||
|
Borobudur and Prambanan temples contain murals showing the weaponry of early times - swords, bows and arrows, spears, shields, armour, clubs, knives, halberds. The Plaosan temple group 3 miles from Prambanan depicts stone carved gate guards armed with clubs and swords.
[1]
[1]: (Draeger 1972, 23, 27) |
||||||
|
Coded present on the basis of this reference.
[1]
Old Mataram was a ’highly Indianized culture’ until it was replaced by an East Javanese one "that increasingly promoted various elements of the island’s older indigenous traditions."
[2]
The switch-over did not occur until the end of the Kediri Kingdom: it was the Singhasari Kingdom that witnessed ’the decline of Hindu culture and civilisation in Java and the succession of Javanese culture.’
[3]
Temple reliefs from earlier periods contain murals showing bows and arrows.
[4]
[1]: (Sedwayati in Ooi 2004 (b), 707) [2]: (Unesco 2005, 233) Unesco. 2005. The Restoration of Borobudur. Unesco. [3]: (Rao 2005, 213) B V Rao. 2005. History of Asia. Sterling Publishers Pvt Ltd. New Dawn Press, Inc. Elgin. [4]: (Draeger 1972, 23, 27) D F Draeger. 1972. Weapons and Fighting Arts of Indonesia. Tuttle Publishing. |
||||||
|
Coded present based on this
[1]
source. "Weapons, notably axes, clubs, swords, and daggers, seem to have been Indian, though the curved swords are of a later type than those on the Central Javanese reliefs. The reappearance of the spear in these reliefs, while the use of the bow is confined to human heroes, suggests an increasing pressure to resume use of local types of weapons."
[2]
[1]: (Sedwayati in Ooi 2004 (a), 707) [2]: (Powell 2002, 325) John Powell. 2002. Weapons & Warfare: Ancient and medieval weapons and warfare (to 1500). Salem Press. |
||||||
|
Not mentioned in the literature.
|
||||||
|
Not mentioned in the literature.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"The hieroglyphs include bows, arrows, spears and daggers, Molloy wrote. As the script is untranslated, these hieroglyphs may not represent literal spears, daggers and weapons, he said, but their existence reveals that weaponry was key to Minoan civilization."EXTERNAL_INLINE_LINK: http://www.livescience.com/26275-peaceful-minoans-surprisingly-warlike.html
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Projectile points had been found in earlier periods.
|
||||||
|
Projectile points had been found in earlier periods.
|
||||||
|
Wari may have controlled the Quispisisa obsidian quarry. "Obsidian was one of the best materials available for making sharp knives and points for spears and arrows."
[1]
Representations of bows and arrows in the iconography on an urn found at Conchopata
[2]
[1]: (Schreiber in Bergh 2012, 42) [2]: (Chamussy 2009, 112) |
||||||
|
No archaeological reference, but this can be inferred from the ubiquitous presence of bows and arrows in Wari and Inca times, and the presence of conflicts in the Late Intermediate Period.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological reference, but this can be inferred from the ubiquitous presence of bows and arrows in Wari and Inca times, and the presence of conflicts in the Late Intermediate Period.
|
||||||
|
Inferred from presence of self bows from previous and subsequent polities in Cuzco. Did Spanish soldiers ever use New World weapons? Used against the Spanish by Aztecs, Inca, and Maya, etc.
[1]
[1]: (Pemberton 2011, preview) Pemberton, John. 2011. Conquistadors: Searching for El Dorado: The Terrifying Spanish Conquest of the Aztec and Inca Empires. Canary Press eBooks Limited. https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/3SI549GS |
||||||
|
Rock-art dated to the South Indian Neolithic, for example at the site of Kupgal, in Northern Karnataka, occasionally depicts anthropomorphic figures equipped with bows and arrows: these may have been "cattle raiding" scenes.
[1]
. NOTE: Bow type not specified.
[1]: N. Boivin, Rock Art and Rock Music: Petroglyphs of the South Indian Neolithic (2004), in Antiquity 78:299, pp. 38-53 |
||||||
|
Arrowheads have been excavated
[1]
(bow type not specified). ’From the Kushans, the Indians learnt the use of composite bows. The Sanchi sculptures which can be dated to the first century BC show many soldiers carrying strung and unstrung composite bows. Murray B. Emeneau writes that the Guptas used Sassanian types of composite bows.’
[2]
[1]: J. Sudyka, The "Megalithic" Iron Age Culture in South India: Some General Remarks (2011), Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia 5: pp. 359-401 [2]: (Roy 2013, 23) Kaushik Roy. 2013. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
According to a military historian (this needs confirmation from a Mauryan specialist): The Indian bow was between five or six feet long and made of bamboo, and was used to fire cane arrows. The bow was fired by resting the base on the ground, making it less effective when muddy.
[1]
Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions bows made from palmyra (karmuka), bamboo (kodanda), wood (druna), bone or horn (dhanus) that could fire iron, bone or wooden arrowheads (Book II, The Duties of Government Superintendents").
[1]: Gabriel, Richard A. The great armies of antiquity. p. 218-220 |
||||||
|
Arrowheads have been excavated
[1]
(bow type not specified). In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition."
[2]
[1]: J. Sudyka, The "Megalithic" Iron Age Culture in South India: Some General Remarks (2011), Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia 5: pp. 359-401 [2]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco. |
||||||
|
In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition."
[1]
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[2]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[2]
Iron arrow heads.
[3]
The Satavahanas used many foot archers.
[4]
[1]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco. [2]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. [3]: (Sawant 2009) Reshma Sawant. 2008. ‘State Formation Process In The Vidarbha During The Vakataka Period’. Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 68-69: 137-162. [4]: (Roy 2013, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition."
[1]
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[2]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[2]
Iron arrow heads.
[3]
Weapons included bows and arrows.
[4]
[1]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco. [2]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. [3]: (Sawant 2009) Reshma Sawant. 2008. ‘State Formation Process In The Vidarbha During The Vakataka Period’. Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 68-69: 137-162. [4]: (Majumdar and Altekar 1986, 277) Anant Sadashiv Altekar. The Administrative Organisation. Ramesh Chandra Majumdar. Anant Sadashiv Altekar. 1986. Vakataka - Gupta Age Circa 200-550 A.D. Motilal Banarsidass. Delhi. |
||||||
|
In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition."
[1]
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[2]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[2]
[1]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco. [2]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
Artistic and written evidence for the use of bow and arrow (bow type not specified)
[1]
In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition."
[2]
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[3]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[3]
[1]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 266 [2]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco. [3]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition."
[1]
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[2]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[2]
[1]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco. [2]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition."
[1]
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[2]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[2]
[1]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco. [2]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[1]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[1]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[1]
Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India."
[1]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
Bows and arrows became quite uniform for the Iroquois as early as 600 CE. Bows used were not composite bows, as they were often made from one piece of wood, and were often as long as the size of the individual carrying them.
[1]
[2]
[1]: (Engelbrecht 2003: 8) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/FJ3EAI76. [2]: (Jones 2004: 48) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/IPU9UA8I. |
||||||
|
"The men of the Five Nations devised a number of weapons effective in aggressive warfare, which they fashioned with much skill. The making of spears, bows and arrows, and the tomahawk or war club occupied much of their time."
[1]
"The Indian bow was usually from three and a half to four feet in length, with such a difficult spring that an inexperienced person could scarcely bend it sufficiently to set the string... With such an arrow, it was an easy matter to bring down the deer, the wild fowl, or the warrior himself. Skeletons have been disentombed, having the skull penetrated with an arrow-head of this description, with the flint-head itself still in the fracture, or entirely within the skull."
[2]
[1]: Lyford 1945, 44 [2]: Morgan & Lloyd 1901, 296 |
||||||
|
"The men of the Five Nations devised a number of weapons effective in aggressive warfare, which they fashioned with much skill. The making of spears, bows and arrows, and the tomahawk or war club occupied much of their time."
[1]
"The Indian bow was usually from three and a half to four feet in length, with such a difficult spring that an inexperienced person could scarcely bend it sufficiently to set the string... With such an arrow, it was an easy matter to bring down the deer, the wild fowl, or the warrior himself. Skeletons have been disentombed, having the skull penetrated with an arrow-head of this description, with the flint-head itself still in the fracture, or entirely within the skull."
[2]
[1]: Lyford 1945, 44 [2]: Morgan & Lloyd 1901, 296 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"Le antiche figurazioni e i reperti archaeologici suggeriscono inoltre la presenza di soldati di fanteria dotati di lance, pugnali, asce e mazze, ma scarsamente protetti da armi difensive, quali elmi, corazze e scudi, che compaiono raramente nei repertori figurati; risulta, infine, la presenza di corpi di arcieri."
[1]
TRANSLATION: "Ancient iconography and archaeological findings suggest that the infantry was armed with spears, daggers, axes, and clubs, but was only rarely clad in defensive gear such as helmets, armour and shields; finally, armies also included archers’ corps." Bow type not specified. While composite bows were standard, it is possible that some self bows were in use as well. Interestingly, 61 bronze arrowheads have been discovered from the 10th-12th centuries BCE that were inscribed in Phoenician with the names of their owners, possibly so that arrows could be recovered after a battle.
[2]
[1]: Bartoloni, P. 1988. L’esercito, la marina e la guerra. In Moscati, S. (ed) I Fenici pp. 132-138. Milano: Bompiani. [2]: Dixon (2013:51-55). |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
Ethiopians had "rudimentary archery equipment."
[1]
According to one military historian (data needs to be checked by an expert for this polity): "The greatest number of Persian cavalry were light cavalry armed with the simple bow (noncomposite) and comprised mostly of irregular nationality troops, sometimes officered by Persians."
[2]
[1]: (Farrokh 2007, 77) Farrokh, K. 2007. Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War. Osprey Publishing. [2]: (Gabriel 2007, 161-162) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
[1]: Kosmin, P. J. 2013. Alexander the Great and the Seleucids in Iran. In, Potts, D. T (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.671-689. p.680 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
"In western Asia, [the self bow] was replaced by the composite bow. In Egypt, the self-bow continued to be widely used, especially by Nubian troops."
[1]
Used to attack elephants and their drivers (bow type not specified).
[2]
Cretan archers
[3]
[1]: (Morkot 2010: 50) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/AHFJE5Z2. [2]: (Lloyd 2000, 395) [3]: (Fischer-Bovet 2014, 135-138) |
||||||
|
Though not commonly used by militaries because of the prevalence of the composite bow.
|
||||||
|
It is unclear from these descriptions whether self bows or composite bows were in use: ‘Bows and arrows are well known to the Garos, but they are very seldom used; in fact, I have never seen a bow in the Garo Hills. Garo atés, or choppers, vary in shape according to locality and the source from which they are obtained, for they are not made in the hills. In the south, the pattern is that which the Bengali ryot makes use of; in the north, the implements are purchased from, and are of the pattern used by the inhabitants of the western Khasi Hills.’
[1]
‘Bows and arrows are not used by them now. They say they used them formerly. In folktales, mention of bows and arrows is found. Spear is very rarely used for killing animals. They are rather used for self protection. Very few people have guns. Others remain satisfied with spear, mongreng, banuk, dao (all three are different forms of axe), etc., for their self protection and also for occasional huntings. Those who live near a river or a stream pass many hours of the day and at times of night as well in fishing. They use various methods in catching fish. For the purpose of this paper, it is not necessary to describe them here.’
[2]
We have assumed self bows for the time being.
[1]: Playfair, Alan 1909. “Garos”, 32 [2]: Sinha, Tarunchandra 1966. “Psyche Of The Garos”, 21 |
||||||
|
‘Bows and arrows are well known to the Garos, but they are very seldom used; in fact, I have never seen a bow in the Garo Hills. Garo atés, or choppers, vary in shape according to locality and the source from which they are obtained, for they are not made in the hills. In the south, the pattern is that which the Bengali ryot makes use of; in the north, the implements are purchased from, and are of the pattern used by the inhabitants of the western Khasi Hills.’
[1]
‘Bows and arrows are not used by them now. They say they used them formerly. In folktales, mention of bows and arrows is found. Spear is very rarely used for killing animals. They are rather used for self protection. Very few people have guns. Others remain satisfied with spear, mongreng, banuk, dao (all three are different forms of axe), etc., for their self protection and also for occasional huntings. Those who live near a river or a stream pass many hours of the day and at times of night as well in fishing. They use various methods in catching fish. For the purpose of this paper, it is not necessary to describe them here.’
[2]
[1]: Playfair, Alan 1909. “Garos”, 32 [2]: Sinha, Tarunchandra 1966. “Psyche Of The Garos”, 21 |
||||||
|
It is unclear from this description whether self bows or composite bows were used: "Ansa the king appeared in full state, accompanied by a large retinue. Before him went his men ... His Gyasi men, that is, bodyguard, were armed with spears, javelins, shields, bows and arrows".
[1]
General reference for West Africa: "The self or simple bow consists essentially of a bent stave of pliant wood and a bowstring of a sufficient elasticity. Most West African types may be characterized as shortbows, being from about two and a half to five feet in height ... however, Wilhelm Muller describes the war-bows which he saw in the Fetu country (near Elmina) in the mid-seventeenth century as being ... nearly six feet."
[2]
[1]: Sarbah, John Mensah 1968. “Fanti National Constitution: A Short Treatise On The Constitution And Government Of The Fanti, Asanti, And Other Akan Tribes Of West Africa Together With A Brief Account Of The Discovery Of The Gold Coast By Portuguese Navigators, A Short Narration Of Early English Voyages, And A Study Of The Rise Of British Gold Coast Jurisdiction, Etc., Etc.”, 57 [2]: (Smith 1989, 72) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. |
||||||
|
It is unclear from this description whether self bows or composite bows were used: "Ansa the king appeared in full state, accompanied by a large retinue. Before him went his men ... His Gyasi men, that is, bodyguard, were armed with spears, javelins, shields, bows and arrows".
[1]
General reference for West Africa: "The self or simple bow consists essentially of a bent stave of pliant wood and a bowstring of a sufficient elasticity. Most West African types may be characterized as shortbows, being from about two and a half to five feet in height ... however, Wilhelm Muller describes the war-bows which he saw in the Fetu country (near Elmina) in the mid-seventeenth century as being ... nearly six feet."
[2]
[1]: Sarbah, John Mensah 1968. “Fanti National Constitution: A Short Treatise On The Constitution And Government Of The Fanti, Asanti, And Other Akan Tribes Of West Africa Together With A Brief Account Of The Discovery Of The Gold Coast By Portuguese Navigators, A Short Narration Of Early English Voyages, And A Study Of The Rise Of British Gold Coast Jurisdiction, Etc., Etc.”, 57 [2]: (Smith 1989, 72) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. |
||||||
|
[This link (EXTERNAL_INLINE_LINK: http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_bow.htm ) claims that self bow (longbows) were common among Vikings but composite bows may also have been present. Sources usually do not make clear whether bows were self or composite bows. We think the self bow was present and the composite bow probably also although neither was common.]
|
||||||
|
[This link (EXTERNAL_INLINE_LINK: http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_bow.htm ) claims that self bow (longbows) were common among Vikings but composite bows may also have been present. Sources usually do not make clear whether bows were self or composite bows. We think the self bow was present and the composite bow probably also although neither was common.]
|
||||||
|
Not mentioned in detailed descriptions/lists of finds from Mehrgarh. "War technology is not well represented".
[1]
Only flint, bone and copper tools tools have been found at Mehrgarh
[2]
[1]: (Kenoyer 1991: 347) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/A7DS8UKX/q/kenoyer. [2]: Petrie, C. A. (in press) Chapter 11, Case Study: Mehrgarh. In, Barker, G and Goucher, C (eds.) Cambridge World History, Volume 2: A World with Agriculture, 12,000 BCE - 500 CE. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge |
||||||
|
Not mentioned in detailed descriptions/lists of finds from Mehrgarh. "War technology is not well represented".
[1]
Only flint, bone and copper tools tools have been found at Mehrgarh
[2]
[1]: (Kenoyer 1991: 347) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/A7DS8UKX/q/kenoyer. [2]: Petrie, C. A. (in press) Chapter 11, Case Study: Mehrgarh. In, Barker, G and Goucher, C (eds.) Cambridge World History, Volume 2: A World with Agriculture, 12,000 BCE - 500 CE. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge |
||||||
|
Not mentioned in detailed descriptions/lists of finds from Mehrgarh. "War technology is not well represented".
[1]
Only flint, bone and copper tools tools have been found at Mehrgarh
[2]
[1]: (Kenoyer 1991: 347) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/A7DS8UKX/q/kenoyer. [2]: Petrie, C. A. (in press) Chapter 11, Case Study: Mehrgarh. In, Barker, G and Goucher, C (eds.) Cambridge World History, Volume 2: A World with Agriculture, 12,000 BCE - 500 CE. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge |
||||||
|
Not mentioned in detailed descriptions/lists of finds from Mehrgarh. "War technology is not well represented" before the Indus period.
[1]
[1]: (Kenoyer 1991: 347) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/A7DS8UKX. |
||||||
|
"almost all arrows found are swallow-tailed and un-tanged". However, Cork himself notes that the scholarly consensus is that there is little direct evidence for warfare in the region at this time, and that Indus weaponry has been interpreted as having been used for hunting rather than fighting.
[1]
A copper arrowhead has been uncovered at Nausharo.
[2]
[1]: (Cork 2005: 413, 416) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ECMD5V2D/q/cork. [2]: Agrawal, D. P. (2007) The Indus Civilization: An interdisciplinary perspective. Aryan Books International: New Delhi. PL. 6.20. |
||||||
|
"almost all arrows found are swallow-tailed and un-tanged". However, Cork himself notes that the scholarly consensus is that there is little direct evidence for warfare in the region at this time, and that Indus weaponry has been interpreted as having been used for hunting rather than fighting.
[1]
A copper arrowhead has been uncovered at Nausharo.
[2]
[1]: (Cork 2005: 413, 416) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ECMD5V2D/q/cork. [2]: Agrawal, D. P. (2007) The Indus Civilization: An interdisciplinary perspective. Aryan Books International: New Delhi. PL. 6.20. |
||||||
|
"almost all arrows found are swallow-tailed and un-tanged". However, Cork himself notes that the scholarly consensus is that there is little direct evidence for warfare in the region at this time, and that Indus weaponry has been interpreted as having been used for hunting rather than fighting.
[1]
A copper arrowhead has been uncovered at Nausharo.
[2]
[1]: (Cork 2005: 413, 416) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ECMD5V2D/q/cork. [2]: Agrawal, D. P. (2007) The Indus Civilization: An interdisciplinary perspective. Aryan Books International: New Delhi. PL. 6.20. |
||||||
|
"almost all arrows found are swallow-tailed and un-tanged". However, Cork himself notes that the scholarly consensus is that there is little direct evidence for warfare in the region at this time, and that Indus weaponry has been interpreted as having been used for hunting rather than fighting.
[1]
A copper arrowhead has been uncovered at Nausharo.
[2]
[1]: (Cork 2005: 413, 416) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ECMD5V2D/q/cork. [2]: Agrawal, D. P. (2007) The Indus Civilization: An interdisciplinary perspective. Aryan Books International: New Delhi. PL. 6.20. |
||||||
|
Barbed arrowheads and tangled blades were found at Pirak in the Iron Age which implies that foot soldiers/horse-mounted warriors used bows and arrows.
[1]
And: “At Pirak, (Jarrige and Santoni 1989:400) a handful of bone points in the early, Chalcolithic, stratum contrasts with mass-produced square-sectioned and tanged bone points/arrows in iron-using Period III - debitage pieces occur here in the thousands.”
[2]
[1]: Ratnagar, S. (2007) Markers and Shapers, Early Indian technology in the household, village and urban workshop. Tulika Books: New Delhi. p191 [2]: Ratnagar, S. (2007) Markers and Shapers, Early Indian technology in the household, village and urban workshop. Tulika Books: New Delhi. p198 |
||||||
|
“At Pirak, (Jarrige and Santoni 1989:400) a handful of bone points in the early, Chalcolithic, stratum contrasts with mass-produced square-sectioned and tanged bone points/arrows in iron-using Period III - debitage pieces occur here in the thousands.”
[1]
Arrowheads found in archaeological contexts.
[2]
If "the first archaeologically recognizable, large post-Indus urban settlements are not earlier than the fifth century BC ... solidly visible states ... appear in a sudden profusion in the late first millennium B.C."
[3]
- who was king Stabrobates of India who used war elephants against a queen of Assyria (considered Shammuramat?) in the 9th century BCE?
[4]
One could infer king Stabrobates, if not based there himself, must have subdued and controlled the Kachi Plain region in order to invade Mesopotamia from ’India’. (Another source says Assyria invaded India and were driven out of Pakistan and India).
[5]
Diodorus Siculus says this too, queen Semiramis was based in Bactra (Bactria?).
[6]
If king Stabrobates’s polity controlled the Kachi Plain, then we code the according to the military technology he possessed. This would have included weapons of war. Note: one military historian estimates that the Assyrian army had a strategic range of 2000 km
[7]
which places the Indus region in reach of their forces.
[1]: Ratnagar, S. (2007) Markers and Shapers, Early Indian technology in the household, village and urban workshop. Tulika Books: New Delhi. p198 [2]: Ceccarelli, pers. comm. to E. Cioni, Feb 2017 [3]: (Ahmed 2014, 64) Mukhtar Ahmed. 2014. Ancient Pakistan - An Archaeological History: Volume V: The End of the Harappan Civilization, and the Aftermath. Foursome Group. [4]: (Mayor 2014, 289) Adrienne Mayor. Animals in Warfare. Gordon Lindsay Campbell. ed. 2014. The Oxford Handbook of Animals in Classical Thought and Life. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (Kistler 2007, 18) John M Kistler. 2007. War Elephants. University of Nebraska Press. Lincoln. [6]: Diodorus Siculus. Delphi Complete Works of Diodorus Siculus. Delphi Classics. [7]: (Gabriel 2002, 9) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Inferred absent due to availability of more powerful composite bow.
|
||||||
|
inferred absent from presence of more powerful composite bow.
|
||||||
|
Powerful composite bows suggest these weapons had become obsolete
|
||||||
|
inferred absent from presence of more powerful composite bow.
|
||||||
|
’Arab’ and Persian’ bows mentioned in sources, both composite bows.
[1]
Unlike Medieval Europe, archery was seen as a noble pursuit. Bows were present, but no evidence of compound steppe bows appears until the Abbasid period. More esoteric weaponry such as fire arrows were also present and reportedly used to ignite dwellings. Volunteers and informal levies were reported to have used slings, makeshift spears and other unconventional weapons. The large scale conquests during the period attracted large numbers of volunteers armed with an array of weapons taken from the conquered.
[2]
[1]: (Kennedy 2001, 177-178) [2]: (Kennedy 2001, 168-182) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful. Making bows that would fit with the highly regularized 10,000-year-long Jomon archery tradition would have required the use of staves that were carefully harvested from plants nurtured during growth
[1]
[1]: Peter Bleed & Akira Matsui, ‘Why Didn’t Agriculture Develop in Japan? A Consideration of Jomon Ecological Style, Niche Construction, and the Origins of Domestication’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 4, p. 364 |
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
[1]
[2]
[1]: Peter Bleed & Akira Matsui, ‘Why Didn’t Agriculture Develop in Japan? A Consideration of Jomon Ecological Style, Niche Construction, and the Origins of Domestication’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 4, p. 362 [2]: Peter Bleed & Akira Matsui, ‘Why Didn’t Agriculture Develop in Japan? A Consideration of Jomon Ecological Style, Niche Construction, and the Origins of Domestication’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 4, p. 364 |
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
[1]
[2]
[1]: Peter Bleed & Akira Matsui, ‘Why Didn’t Agriculture Develop in Japan? A Consideration of Jomon Ecological Style, Niche Construction, and the Origins of Domestication’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 4, p. 362 [2]: Peter Bleed & Akira Matsui, ‘Why Didn’t Agriculture Develop in Japan? A Consideration of Jomon Ecological Style, Niche Construction, and the Origins of Domestication’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 4, p. 364 |
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
[1]
[2]
[1]: J. Edward Kidder, Jr., ‘The earliest societies in Japan’, in Delmer M. Brown The Cambridge History of Japan, Cambrudge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, pp. 73-74 [2]: Peter Bleed & Akira Matsui, ‘Why Didn’t Agriculture Develop in Japan? A Consideration of Jomon Ecological Style, Niche Construction, and the Origins of Domestication’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 4, p. 364 |
||||||
|
1m long bows with poison tipped arrows have been found for this polity, which could kill anything up to about 50 kg in weight, including people.
[1]
Making bows that would fit with the highly regularized 10,000-year-long Jomon archery tradition would have required the use of staves that were carefully harvested from plants nurtured during growth
[2]
[1]: J. Edward Kidder, Jr., ‘The earliest societies in Japan’, in Delmer M. Brown The Cambridge History of Japan, Cambrudge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, pp. 73-74 [2]: Peter Bleed & Akira Matsui, ‘Why Didn’t Agriculture Develop in Japan? A Consideration of Jomon Ecological Style, Niche Construction, and the Origins of Domestication’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2010, Volume 17, Issue 4, p. 364 |
||||||
|
"Instead, without ready access to supplies of bone and horn, the Japanese fashioned their bows from wood or from laminates of wood and bamboo. The earliest designs were of plain wood ... "
[1]
"The earliest arrowheads made by iron appeared during Middle Yayoi, and almost all of them are from northern Kyushu. The arrowheads in Kyushu were 3-4 cm long and shaped like a narrow triangle with a vault-shaped base. This shape is the traditional shape of stone arrowheads."
[2]
[1]: (Friday 2004, 68) Karl F Friday. 2005. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Routledge. New York. [2]: Lars Vargo. 1982. Social and economic conditions for the formation of the early Japanese state. Stockholm University. |
||||||
|
"Instead, without ready access to supplies of bone and horn, the Japanese fashioned their bows from wood or from laminates of wood and bamboo. The earliest designs were of plain wood ... "
[1]
"The earliest arrowheads made by iron appeared during Middle Yayoi, and almost all of them are from northern Kyushu. The arrowheads in Kyushu were 3-4 cm long and shaped like a narrow triangle with a vault-shaped base. This shape is the traditional shape of stone arrowheads."
[2]
[1]: (Friday 2004, 68) Karl F Friday. 2005. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Routledge. New York. [2]: Lars Vargo. 1982. Social and economic conditions for the formation of the early Japanese state. Stockholm University. |
||||||
|
"Instead, without ready access to supplies of bone and horn, the Japanese fashioned their bows from wood or from laminates of wood and bamboo. The earliest designs were of plain wood ... "
[1]
Arrowheads have been found in the Yayoi villages. Nevertheless, it is difficult to assess if they belonged to self bows, composite bows or crossbows.
[2]
[1]: (Friday 2004, 68) Karl F Friday. 2005. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Routledge. New York. [2]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 284. |
||||||
|
"Instead, without ready access to supplies of bone and horn, the Japanese fashioned their bows from wood or from laminates of wood and bamboo. The earliest designs were of plain wood ... "
[1]
[1]: (Friday 2004, 68) Karl F Friday. 2005. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Routledge. New York. |
||||||
|
"Instead, without ready access to supplies of bone and horn, the Japanese fashioned their bows from wood or from laminates of wood and bamboo. The earliest designs were of plain wood ... "
[1]
[1]: (Friday 2004, 68) Karl F Friday. 2005. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Routledge. New York. |
||||||
|
although single piece bows were used in earlier times, and could technically have been used, the composite bow had been standard military equipment since the 9th century.
|
||||||
|
although single piece bows were used in earlier times, and could technically have been used, the composite bow had been standard military equipment since the 9th century.
|
||||||
|
although single piece bows were used in earlier times, and could technically have been used, the composite bow had been standard military equipment since the 9th century.
|
||||||
|
although single piece bows were used in earlier times, and could technically have been used, the composite bow had been standard military equipment since the 9th century.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
At Çatalhöyük clay balls have been interpreted as sling ammunition."The use of the sling is alos attested in wall art that features a purported slinger."
[1]
According to a military historian (this data needs to be checked by a polity specialist) "The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
Was the bow used in warfare?
[1]: (Knüsel: Glencross and Milella 2019: 83) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/WH6NHDHM. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
At the site of Tepecik-Çiftlik, obsidian arrowheads were recorded, part of which were made in a high-skilled technique (on symmetrical bipolar points).
[1]
This can suggest special purpose of arrows, maybe in warfare, but it is quite unknown. At the site of Pιnarbașι, obsidian projectile points were found, which can be identified as arrowheads. However, even if self bow was used, it was not for warfare purpose but mainly produced for hunting-related activities
[2]
. At the site of Çatalhöyük, the men depicted on wall paintings are equipped with some kind of weapon, probably bows, but due to the presence of zoomorphic creatures, in that case it is more likely to be connected with hunting activity. However, there is no certainty to these statements
[3]
. Furthermore, at Çatalhöyük settlement elaborate obsidian bifacially flaked projectile points are recorded. It could have been used as arrowheads.
[4]
Even so, was self bow used in terms of warfare is unknown. According to Hodder these large projectile points may have been used as a weapon in herding (to protect domesticated animals from wild predators), as knives to cut up domesticated animals, and in social or ritual killing/processing of wild animals or human flesh.
[4]
[1]: Bιçakçι E., Çakan Y.G., Godon M.. 2012. Pιnarbașι: Tepecik-Çiftlik[in]: Bașgelen N., P. Kuniholm, M. Özdoǧan (eds.) "The Neolithic in Turkey: New Excavations and New Research", Istanbul. pg. 99-100. [2]: Baird D., Carruthers D., Fairbairn A., Pearson J. 2011. Ritual in the landscape: evidence from Pιnarbașι in the seventh-mlilenium cal BC Konya Plain. Antiquity 85. pg. 387. [3]: Czeszewska A. 2013. Wall paintings at Çatalhöyük [in]: Hodder, I (ed.) Integrating Çatalhöyük: themes from the 2000-2008 seasons. [4]: Hodder I., Meskell L. 2010. The Symbolism of Çatalhöyük in its Regional Context [in]: Hodder I. (ed.)"Religion in the emergence of civilisation: Çatalhöyük as a case study", Cambridge. pg.60. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Triangular arrowheads with wings made of flint stone were found
[1]
4000 BCE in the Middle East and southeastern Europe: "sling, dagger, mace, and bow are common weapons".
[2]
[1]: Yilmaz D., "Burial Customs of The Chamber Tombs in Southeast Anatolia during The Early Bronze Age", Anatolia 2006. [2]: (Gabriel 2007, xii) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
There is no information about bows, but during excavations arrowheads are often found in such contexts as dwellings, graves and workshops
[1]
. "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
Self bows still in general use after composite bow introduced.
[2]
[1]: Yıldırım T. 2010. Weapons of Kültepe. [in:] Kulakoğlu F., Kangal S. (eds.) Anatolia’s Prologue, Kültepe Kanesh Karum, Assyrians in Istambul. Istambul. pg. 121 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
[1]
. The bow is regularly depicted as the weapon of the king. "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 131 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-138 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
[1]
. The bow is regularly depicted as the weapon of the king. "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 131 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-138 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
[1]
. The bow is regularly depicted as the weapon of the king. "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 131 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-138 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region.
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
Known from Phrygian drawings
[1]
. ‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region.
[2]
[1]: Roller, L., 1999, “Early Phrygian Drawings from Gordion and the Elements of Phrygian Artistic Style”, Anatolian Studies, Vol. 49, pg:145 [2]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480 |
||||||
|
‘Knives, daggers, swords, arrowheads, spearheads, armor scales, and helmets discovered in these fortresses were produced on a mass scale and speak to an impressive military apparatus, unprecedented for this region.
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
[1]: Lori Khatchadourian, ‘The Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 480 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
Bows were used by the Greeks and Romans but they didn’t place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat.
[3]
[1]: (Rich 2012) Rich, Kurt M V. 2012. Chasing the Golden Hoard: A Tale of Theft, Repatriation, Greed & Deceit. Authorhouse. [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
Bows were used by the Greeks and Romans but they didn’t place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat.
[3]
[1]: Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Inferred, based on the presence of the bow in the contemporary Pontic kingdom.
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
Bows were used by the Greeks and Romans but they didn’t place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat.
[3]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill. p95 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
inferred from presence of composite bow?
|
||||||
|
if composite bow used
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Inferred from flint arrowheads.
[1]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
Weapons of war existed at this time.
[1]: A.P. Anzidei, A.M. Bietti Sestieri and A. De Santis, Roma e il Lazio dall’età della pietra alla formazione della città (1985), p. 98 [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Inferred from flint arrowheads found in earlier period.
[1]
According to a military historian "The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
Weapons of war existed at this time.
[1]: A.P. Anzidei, A.M. Bietti Sestieri and A. De Santis, Roma e il Lazio dall’età della pietra alla formazione della città (1985), p. 98 [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Inferred from flint arrowheads found in earlier period - but were they used in a military capacity?
|
||||||
|
Arrowheads found in earlier period. Expert advice is needed as to whether bows used during the Roman Kingdom period were used in a military capacity.
|
||||||
|
Inferred from flint arrowheads found in earlier period.
|
||||||
|
Inferred from flint arrowheads found in earlier period.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Unlikely in use at this time.
|
||||||
|
Unlikely in use at this time.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"Yakut warriors ( säpi, säpi kisita ) were usually mounted horsemen ( minjär ), but there were also foot soldiers ( sat[unknown]ykisita ). Their weapons ( säp ) consisted of a light bent bow ( s[unknown]a ), a quiver ( käsäx, s[unknown]adax ), and arrows ( aya ) ."
[1]
"The bifurcated iron arrow point ( c[unknown]yra ) and the bifurcated bone arrow point ( muos c[unknown]yra ) are characteristic of the Yakut."
[2]
"They are very expert archers, and have a plentiful supply of arrows in their quivers."
[3]
[1]: Jochelson, Waldemar. 1933. “Yakut.” Anthropological Papers, 172 [2]: Jochelson, Waldemar. 1933. “Yakut.” Anthropological Papers, 167 [3]: Sauer, Martin. 1802. “Account Of A Geographical And Astronomical Expedition To The Northern Parts Of Russia By Commodore Joseph Billings, In The Years 1785-1794.”, 130[2] |
||||||
|
"Yakut warriors ( säpi, säpi kisita ) were usually mounted horsemen ( minjär ), but there were also foot soldiers ( sat[unknown]ykisita ). Their weapons ( säp ) consisted of a light bent bow ( s[unknown]a ), a quiver ( käsäx, s[unknown]adax ), and arrows ( aya ) ."
[1]
"The bifurcated iron arrow point ( c[unknown]yra ) and the bifurcated bone arrow point ( muos c[unknown]yra ) are characteristic of the Yakut."
[2]
"They are very expert archers, and have a plentiful supply of arrows in their quivers."
[3]
[1]: Jochelson, Waldemar. 1933. “Yakut.” Anthropological Papers, 172 [2]: Jochelson, Waldemar. 1933. “Yakut.” Anthropological Papers, 167 [3]: Sauer, Martin. 1802. “Account Of A Geographical And Astronomical Expedition To The Northern Parts Of Russia By Commodore Joseph Billings, In The Years 1785-1794.”, 130[2] |
||||||
|
Bows and arrows were in use until the 17th century and later replaced with blowguns: ’Sometime during the latter part of the seventeenth century the bow and arrow and the spear thrower began to go out of use, being replaced by the blowgun with poison darts... The use of the spear thrower appears now to be entirely forgotten by the Jivaros.’
[1]
’Ordinary bows and arrows of the kind used by most other South American Indians, are entirely unknown both to the Jibaros and the Canelos Indians.’
[2]
’Some words may be added as to the arrows used for the poison and the blowgun with which they are shot off. The arrows bear no similarity to the ordinary long arrows known from most South American tribes and let off with a bow, a type of weapon entirely unknown to the Jibaros.’
[3]
’The speed with which the darts are produced makes the blowgun an extremely economical weapon to operate compared, for example, to the bow and arrow, with which the Jívaro are not acquainted.’
[4]
1675 was selected as a provisional date of transition, although the historical process was more fluid than that.
[1]: Stirling, Matthew Williams. 1938. “Historical And Ethnographical Material On The Jivaro Indians.”, 79-86 [2]: Karsten, Rafael. 1935. “Head-Hunters Of Western Amazonas: The Life And Culture Of The Jibaro Indians Of Eastern Ecuador And Peru.”, 107 [3]: Karsten, Rafael. 1935. “Head-Hunters Of Western Amazonas: The Life And Culture Of The Jibaro Indians Of Eastern Ecuador And Peru.”, 156 [4]: Harner, Michael J. 1973. “Jívaro: People Of The Sacred Waterfalls.”, 57 |
||||||
|
Bows and arrows were in use until the 17th century and later replaced with blowguns: ’Sometime during the latter part of the seventeenth century the bow and arrow and the spear thrower began to go out of use, being replaced by the blowgun with poison darts... The use of the spear thrower appears now to be entirely forgotten by the Jivaros.’
[1]
’Ordinary bows and arrows of the kind used by most other South American Indians, are entirely unknown both to the Jibaros and the Canelos Indians.’
[2]
’Some words may be added as to the arrows used for the poison and the blowgun with which they are shot off. The arrows bear no similarity to the ordinary long arrows known from most South American tribes and let off with a bow, a type of weapon entirely unknown to the Jibaros.’
[3]
’The speed with which the darts are produced makes the blowgun an extremely economical weapon to operate compared, for example, to the bow and arrow, with which the Jívaro are not acquainted.’
[4]
1675 was selected as a provisional date of transition, although the historical process was more fluid than that.
[1]: Stirling, Matthew Williams. 1938. “Historical And Ethnographical Material On The Jivaro Indians.”, 79-86 [2]: Karsten, Rafael. 1935. “Head-Hunters Of Western Amazonas: The Life And Culture Of The Jibaro Indians Of Eastern Ecuador And Peru.”, 107 [3]: Karsten, Rafael. 1935. “Head-Hunters Of Western Amazonas: The Life And Culture Of The Jibaro Indians Of Eastern Ecuador And Peru.”, 156 [4]: Harner, Michael J. 1973. “Jívaro: People Of The Sacred Waterfalls.”, 57 |
||||||
|
Ordinary bows and arrows of the kind used by most other South American Indians, are entirely unknown both to the Jibaros and the Canelos Indians.
[1]
Some words may be added as to the arrows used for the poison and the blowgun with which they are shot off. The arrows bear no similarity to the ordinary long arrows known from most South American tribes and let off with a bow, a type of weapon entirely unknown to the Jibaros.
[2]
The speed with which the darts are produced makes the blowgun an extremely economical weapon to operate compared, for example, to the bow and arrow, with which the Shuar are not acquainted.
[3]
[1]: Karsten, Rafael. 1935. “Head-Hunters Of Western Amazonas: The Life And Culture Of The Jibaro Indians Of Eastern Ecuador And Peru.”, 107 [2]: Karsten, Rafael. 1935. “Head-Hunters Of Western Amazonas: The Life And Culture Of The Jibaro Indians Of Eastern Ecuador And Peru.”, 156 [3]: Harner, Michael J. 1973. “Jívaro: People Of The Sacred Waterfalls.”, 57 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"In western Asia, [the self bow] was replaced by the composite bow. In Egypt, the self-bow continued to be widely used, especially by Nubian troops."
[1]
[1]: (Morkot 2010: 50) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/AHFJE5Z2. |
||||||
|
Archers.
[1]
"The Carian equipment may resemble that of the hoplites representated on the Amathus bowl found in a tomb in Cyprus and dated to the time of Psamtek (see Figure 2.1)." Artwork in figure 2.1 shows: shields, throwing spears, cavalry, archers, crested helmets.
[2]
[1]: (Agut-Labordere 2013, 986) [2]: (Fischer-Bovet 2014, 20-21) |
||||||
|
[1]
Cretans were famous archers.
[2]
refers to Greek mercenaries, who were likely used similar to Saite period and contemporary Greeks.
[3]
"In western Asia, [the self bow] was replaced by the composite bow. In Egypt, the self-bow continued to be widely used, especially by Nubian troops."
[4]
[1]: Everson, T. 2004. Warfare in Ancient Greece: Arms and Armour from the Heroes of Homer to Alexander the Great, Sutton. [2]: Fischer-Bovet. 2014, Army and Society in Ptolemaic Egypt, Cambridge 135-138. [3]: (Fischer-Bovet 2014, 17) Christelle Fischer-Bovet. 2014. Army and Society in Ptolemaic Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [4]: (Morkot 2010: 50) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/AHFJE5Z2. |
||||||
|
"In western Asia, [the self bow] was replaced by the composite bow. In Egypt, the self-bow continued to be widely used, especially by Nubian troops."
[1]
Used to attack elephants and their drivers (bow type not specified).
[2]
Cretan archers
[3]
[1]: (Morkot 2010: 50) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/AHFJE5Z2. [2]: (Lloyd 2000, 395) [3]: (Fischer-Bovet 2014, 135-138) |
||||||
|
"clubs, bows and arrows, and spears" however they were most often used to acquire food
[1]
archers of Samaqanda (town between Ghana and Ghiyaru) "are the best archers among the Sudan"
[2]
"The Bukum are very skillful archers and use poisoned arrows."
[3]
[1]: (Reader 1998, 260) [2]: (Al-Bakri 1068 CE in Levtzion and Spaulding 2003, 17) [3]: (Al-Bakri 1068 CE in Levtzion and Spaulding 2003, 19) |
||||||
|
"clubs, bows and arrows, and spears" however they were most often used to acquire food
[1]
archers of Samaqanda (town between Ghana and Ghiyaru) "are the best archers among the Sudan"
[2]
"The Bukum are very skillful archers and use poisoned arrows."
[3]
[1]: (Reader 1998, 260) [2]: (Al-Bakri 1068 CE in Levtzion and Spaulding 2003, 17) [3]: (Al-Bakri 1068 CE in Levtzion and Spaulding 2003, 19) |
||||||
|
Inferred from presence of self bows from previous and subsequent polities in Upper Egypt.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Inferred from presence of self bows from previous and subsequent polities in Middle Yellow River Valley.
|
||||||
|
present but may not have been used in warfare - if the more powerful composite bow is the weapon referred to in the sources.
|
||||||
|
Inferred from previous polity. Perhaps actually absent for warfare - if the more powerful composite bow is the weapon referred to in the sources.
|
||||||
|
Composite bow was used by the military. Was the self bow used as well?
|
||||||
|
Unlikely due to use of crossbows and composite bows.
|
||||||
|
although single piece bows were used in earlier times, and could technically have been used, the composite bow had been standard military equipment since the 9th century CE.
|
||||||
|
Unlikely due to use of crossbows and composite bows.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
In the late fourteenth century, soldiers in southwestern Yunnan were still primarily armed with spears and crossbows, while firearms were being used primarily by the Ming troops which contributed to their military success. The Ming troops frequently employed fire arrows and ’rocket-arrows’ in addition to the stone projectiles launched from their firearms against Maw Chan soldiers and elephant cavalry.
[1]
[1]: (Laichen, 2008, p.499-500) |
||||||
|
"The arranged military system has formed the basis for the domination of the Xiongnu in Inner Asia. The Chinese sources repeatedly mention the aggressive way of life of the northern neighbor. From early childhood, boys and youths were in training in archery and horse races."
[1]
[1]: (Kradin 2011, 82) |
||||||
|
"The arranged military system has formed the basis for the domination of the Xiongnu in Inner Asia. The Chinese sources repeatedly mention the aggressive way of life of the northern neighbor. From early childhood, boys and youths were in training in archery and horse races."
[1]
Probably refers to composite bow.
[1]: (Kradin 2011, 82) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"The only corroboration of the presence of the Kidarites in Sogdiana is provided by early Sogdian coins (see also pages 128 et seq.) with the image of an archer on the reverse and the word kydr (Kidara) in the obverse legend."
[1]
[1]: (Zeimal 1996: 125) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/M2SDP5ZM/q/zeimal. |
||||||
|
"Lively contacts and easy communications promoted the rise and spread of a fairly uniform nomadic culture in the steppe zone. The same types of horse-harness (bridle, bit, cheek-piece, saddle, trappings), arms (bow, bow-case, arrow and quiver, sword, battle-axe, mail) and garments (trousers, caftan, waist-girdle, boots, pointed cap) were used in the steppe zone from Central Europe to Korea."
[1]
[1]: (Harmatta 1994: 476-477) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/PMC5FWXF/q/harmatta. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Inferred absent due to use of the more powerful composite bow.
|
||||||
|
"With the military system of the Liao dynasty, every regular soldier was provided with a full set of military equipment, including three horses and nine iron weapons (namely, four bows, 400 arrows ..."
[1]
[1]: (Huang and Hong 2018) Fuhua Huang. Fan Hong. 2018. A History of Chinese Martial Arts. Routledge. Abingdon. |
||||||
|
Inferred absent if the more powerful composite bow was available.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Bows and quivers
[1]
Merovingians and Carolingians used a "short, simple bow" which was "gradually replaced, beginning in the ninth century, by the composite bow."
[2]
[1]: (Halsall 2003, 163-176) Halsall, Guy. 2003. Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West, 450-900. Routledge. London. [2]: (Frassetto 2003, 366) Frassetto, M. 2003. Encyclopedia of Barbarian Europe: Society in Transformation. ABC CLIO |
||||||
|
Bows and quivers
[1]
Merovingians and Carolingians used a "short, simple bow" which was "gradually replaced, beginning in the ninth century, by the composite bow."
[2]
[1]: (Halsall 2003, 163-176) Halsall, Guy. 2003. Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West, 450-900. Routledge. London. [2]: (Frassetto 2003, 366) Frassetto, M. 2003. Encyclopedia of Barbarian Europe: Society in Transformation. ABC CLIO |
||||||
|
"The bow was first used by the Franks in the 4th century but did not become a required arm of the Frankish infantry until the time of Charlemagne."
[1]
Cart-drivers given bow and arrow.
[2]
Wooden staffs were banned and bows were encouraged instead.
[3]
"The early Frankish bow was a very long (five- to six-foot) yew bow. By the ninth century, a shorter bow was more typical. Unlike the late Roman double-convex bow, which was very much like modern bows, the Frankish bow was straight and flat..."
[4]
[1]: (De Vries in Kibler et al 1995, 114) [2]: (Hooper and Bennett 1996, 13) Nicholas Hooper. Matthew Bennett. 1996. The Cambridge Illustrated Atlas of Warfare: The Middle Ages, 768-1487. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [3]: (Hooper and Bennett 1996, 14) Nicholas Hooper. Matthew Bennett. 1996. The Cambridge Illustrated Atlas of Warfare: The Middle Ages, 768-1487. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [4]: (Butt 2002, 43) John J Butt. 2002. Daily Life in the Age of Charlemagne. Greenwood Publishing Group. Westport. |
||||||
|
"The bow was first used by the Franks in the 4th century but did not become a required arm of the Frankish infantry until the time of Charlemagne."
[1]
Cart-drivers given bow and arrow.
[2]
Wooden staffs were banned and bows were encouraged instead.
[3]
"The early Frankish bow was a very long (five- to six-foot) yew bow. By the ninth century, a shorter bow was more typical. Unlike the late Roman double-convex bow, which was very much like modern bows, the Frankish bow was straight and flat..."
[4]
[1]: (De Vries in Kibler et al 1995, 114) [2]: (Hooper and Bennett 1996, 13) Nicholas Hooper. Matthew Bennett. 1996. The Cambridge Illustrated Atlas of Warfare: The Middle Ages, 768-1487. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [3]: (Hooper and Bennett 1996, 14) Nicholas Hooper. Matthew Bennett. 1996. The Cambridge Illustrated Atlas of Warfare: The Middle Ages, 768-1487. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [4]: (Butt 2002, 43) John J Butt. 2002. Daily Life in the Age of Charlemagne. Greenwood Publishing Group. Westport. |
||||||
|
"The rise of crossbows lead to the virtual disappearance of the simple bows as war weapons in France and no hand bows are recorded in surviving castle inventories from 1230 to the mid-14th century."
[1]
Longbowmen and mounted archers hired as mercenaries.
[2]
Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453 CE) reference: use of longbowman and mounted archer increased.
[3]
[1]: (Nicolle 1991, 11-12) David Nicolle. 1991. French Medieval Armies 1000-1300. Osprey Publishing Ltd. London. [2]: (De Vries 1995, 114) W W Kibler. G A Zinn. 1995. Medieval France: An Encyclopedia. Routledge. [3]: (Wagner 2006, 27-29) John A Wagner. 2006. Encyclopedia of the Hundred Years War. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Present in previous and subsequent polities.
|
||||||
|
Code inferred from Abbasid Caliphate which occupied Yemen between 751-868 CE.
|
||||||
|
Present for Abbasid Caliphate: ’Arab’ and Persian’ bows mentioned in sources, both composite bows.
[1]
Unlike Medieval Europe, archery was seen as a noble pursuit. Compound bows and Crossbows were present, as well as more esoteric weaponry such as fire arrows, were used on some occasions. Volunteers and informal levies were reported to have used slings, makeshift spears and other unconventional weapons.
[2]
[1]: (Kennedy 2001, 177-178) [2]: Kennedy, Hugh N. The armies of the caliphs: military and society in the early Islamic state. Vol. 3 Routledge, 2001. pp. 168-182 |
||||||
|
Under the Abbasids, ’Arab’ and Persian’ bows mentioned in sources, both composite bows.
[1]
More powerful composite bow likely used at the expense of the self bow.
[1]: (Kennedy 2001, 177-178) Kennedy, Hugh N. 2001. The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the early Islamic State. Vol. 352. Routledge. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
likely obsolete, due to the use of composite bows
|
||||||
|
Unnecessary as they used the more powerful composite bow.
|
||||||
|
Inferred from mentions of bow, arrow and bow string makers in Vedic texts, in addition to the remains of arrowheads in burials in Baluchistan and in many PGW [Later Vedic] sites and levels.
[1]
[1]: Upinder Singh, A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century (New Delhi: Pearson Education, 2008), p.199, 245. |
||||||
|
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): "The Indian bow was made of bamboo, was between five and six feet long, and fired a long cane arrow with metal or bone tips. ... The arrow fired from the bamboo bow could penetrate any armor."
[1]
Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity .
[2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon. |
||||||
|
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[1]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[1]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[1]
Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Elephants had their bodies covered with armour and tasks [tusks?] provided with arms. ... On their backs sat archers, partly protected by their howdahs."
[2]
"Further details about military dress and equipment can be had from the Kathakosaprakarana, Yasastilaka champu and the Tilakamanjari."
[2]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. [2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
Not mentioned by sources in lists of artefacts found at sites in the region dating to this time.
|
||||||
|
Not mentioned by sources in lists of artefacts found at sites in the region dating to this time.
|
||||||
|
Iron arrowheads found at Kausambi (of the post-Mauryan period).
[1]
Military equipment depicted on the Bhilsa Topes statues include bows and arrows.
[2]
The Bhilsa topes are Buddhist monuments from central India thought to date to c100 BCE. Bow ("drawn in the perpendicular fashion of English archers) known from later period illustrations in hill caves in Orissa (eastern India 200 BCE - 474 CE).
[3]
[1]: (Allchin et al. 1995, 298) F R Allchin. George Erdosy. R A E Coningham. D K Chakrabarti. Bridget Allchin. The Mauryan Empire and its aftermath. F. R. Allchin. ed. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [2]: (Egerton 2002, 12) Wilbraham Egerton. 2002 (1880). Indian and Oriental Arms and Armour. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola. [3]: (Egerton 2002, 13-14) Wilbraham Egerton. 2002 (1880). Indian and Oriental Arms and Armour. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola. |
||||||
|
Quivers: "In the Uttararama-carita a great contingent of soldiers armed with corslets, staves and quivers..."
[1]
[1]: (Mishra 1977, 146) Shyam Manohar Mishra. 1977. Yaśovarman of Kanauj: A Study of Political History, Social, and Cultural Life of Northern India During the Reign of Yaśovarman. Abhinav Publications. |
||||||
|
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows."
[1]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi. |
||||||
|
"Common stone tools included celts, adzes, chisels, shovels, knives, and arrowheads. Bone was the other common tool-making material for arrowheads, harpoons, and fishhooks."
[1]
Composite bow not known to have been developed at this early time.
[1]: (Lee in Peregrine and Ember 2001, 335) Peregrine, P. and M. Ember (eds.) 2001. East Asia and Oceania (Encyclopedia of Prehistory, Volume 3). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. |
||||||
|
At Miaodigou II (Early Longshan) sites in Central Henan "Several different kinds of stone and bone tools have been found that indicate an agricultural subsistence economy supplemented by hunting and gathering. The stone tools include fu 斧 axes, ben 锛 adzes, chan 铲 shovels, and zu 镞 arrowheads. The bone tools include zhui 锥 awls, zhen 针 needles, zu arrowheads, and yucha 鱼叉 spears for fishing. "
[1]
[1]: (Zhao 2013, 238) |
||||||
|
Arrowheads: "The workshops include bronze foundries to the north and south, a bone workshop to the north, and a pottery workshop to the west. Pollution and the danger of fire were no doubt sufficient reasons for locating foundries and kilns outside the city. Judging from mold fragments, the foundries produced vessels, craft tools, and a few weapons (ge blades and arrowheads)."
[1]
In Yanshi: "In addition, some bone artifacts were discovered to the west of the phase I palace-temple compound wall—mostly consisting of arrowheads, spatulas, or pins, with some production waste and semifinished bone artifacts as well—suggesting a bone workshop in the area (ZSKY 2003)."
[2]
At Panlongcheng, arrow points.
[3]
[1]: (Bagley 1999, 166) [2]: (Campbell 2014, 77) [3]: (Thorp 2013, 106) Thorp, Robert L. 2013. China in the Early Bronze Age: Shang Civilization.University of Pennsylvania Press. |
||||||
|
Arrowheads: "The workshops include bronze foundries to the north and south, a bone workshop to the north, and a pottery workshop to the west. Pollution and the danger of fire were no doubt sufficient reasons for locating foundries and kilns outside the city. Judging from mold fragments, the foundries produced vessels, craft tools, and a few weapons (ge blades and arrowheads)."
[1]
In Yanshi: "In addition, some bone artifacts were discovered to the west of the phase I palace-temple compound wall—mostly consisting of arrowheads, spatulas, or pins, with some production waste and semifinished bone artifacts as well—suggesting a bone workshop in the area (ZSKY 2003)."
[2]
At Panlongcheng, arrow points.
[3]
[1]: (Bagley 1999, 166) [2]: (Campbell 2014, 77) [3]: (Thorp 2013, 106) Thorp, Robert L. 2013. China in the Early Bronze Age: Shang Civilization.University of Pennsylvania Press. |
||||||
|
Inferred from presence of self bows from previous and subsequent polities in Middle Yellow River Valley.
|
||||||
|
Unlikely due to use of crossbow and composite bow
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Arrows.
[1]
Reference for pre-colonial West Africa: "conventional weapons (as opposed to firearms) continued to play an effective role in West African warfare until as late as the middle of the last century." (i.e. 19th century).
[2]
Reference for pre-colonial West Africa: self bows.
[3]
"The self or simple bow consists essentially of a bent stave of pliant wood and a bowstring of a sufficient elasticity. Most West African types may be characterized as shortbows, being from about two and a half to five feet in height ... however, Wilhelm Muller describes the war-bows which he saw in the Fetu country (near Elmina) in the mid-seventeenth century as being ... nearly six feet."
[4]
"Their effective range was some 50 to 75 yards, compared with some 250 yards for the longbow".
[4]
[1]: (Smith 1989, 79) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [2]: (Smith 1989, 80) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [3]: (Smith 1989, 74) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [4]: (Smith 1989, 72) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. |
||||||
|
Arrows.
[1]
Reference for pre-colonial West Africa: "conventional weapons (as opposed to firearms) continued to play an effective role in West African warfare until as late as the middle of the last century." (i.e. 19th century).
[2]
Reference for pre-colonial West Africa: self bows.
[3]
"The self or simple bow consists essentially of a bent stave of pliant wood and a bowstring of a sufficient elasticity. Most West African types may be characterized as shortbows, being from about two and a half to five feet in height ... however, Wilhelm Muller describes the war-bows which he saw in the Fetu country (near Elmina) in the mid-seventeenth century as being ... nearly six feet."
[4]
"Their effective range was some 50 to 75 yards, compared with some 250 yards for the longbow".
[4]
Present. Bow type not specified.
[5]
[1]: (Smith 1989, 79) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [2]: (Smith 1989, 80) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [3]: (Smith 1989, 74) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [4]: (Smith 1989, 72) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [5]: M. Izard and J. Ki-Zerbo, From the Niger to the Volta, in B.A. Ogot (ed), General History of Africa, vol. 5: Africa from the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries (1992), pp. 327-367 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"There is a close relationship between palms and areas of human activity in the archaeological past. This relationship is born out at Ciudad Perdida where Dictyocaryum schultzei (ivory-nut palm) predominates in the neighboring rainforest. The importance of this palm is in construction of roofs and walls. A dense population of Bactris sp. at 920 masl also relates to Ciudad Perdida. This palm, known as “chonta”, was important for making archers’ bows and other tools."
[1]
More details about archery given by Reichel-Dolmatoff: the arrows could be made of wood or stingray spine, and there were also bow-tensors. They had fire arrows and poison arrows. "Los indios de Bonda tenían arcos, flechas, carcajs y macanas (32, V, 35) y usaban también tensores de arco (32, IV, 368; 2, I, 96) así como también flechas incendarias con las puntas envueltas en algodón (32, V, 205-212; 28, 739) y flechas silbantes (8, 258). Los indios de Gaira usaban asimismo arco y flecha (23, VI, 137). Las puntas de flecha eran de madera o de espina de raya, según menciona Oviedo en Santa Marta (23, VI, 136) y estaban generalmente envenedadas (8, 258). Los indios del Valle de Tairona tenian flechas, dardos, macanas y usaban también piedras como proyectiles (32, II, 49); los del rio Don Diego y Taironaca usaban arcos, flechas, carcajs y macanas (8, 323; 32, IV, 358)."
[2]
[1]: (Oyuela-Caycedo 2008, 423) [2]: (Reichel-Dolmatoff 1951, 87) |
||||||
|
"The importance of archery, and therefore of hunting, is shown by the more than 50 bow ends and 240 arrowheads discovered as well as by the horses and dogs found buried with the human dead."
[1]
[1]: Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, p. 73 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
The use of bows and arrows has been reported for other Papua New Guinean societies, such as the Wola: ’Food. Highlanders were able to meet their food requirements easily and with scarcely any direct use of flaked lithics. Garden vegetables are available all year and the domestic pig is the main source of meat. Some animals are hunted, but hunting is not important to subsistence (Pospisil 1963; Salisbury 1962; Sillitoe 2001). Wild pig is the largest and most dangerous animal hunted and people use their most effective weapons to hunt it, or employ other techniques such as trapping. Though hunting is relatively danger-free, the same equipment is used for warfare, thus relating it to danger. Hunting equipment comprises bows and arrows hafted with slivers of bamboo and palm. Stone arrowheads were not made. There is no connection between perilous activities and stone which might enhance its status. The all-important agricultural tools are made predominantly of wood. Not only is more care taken with these extractive tools, they also take considerably longer to make (e.g. digging sticks took on average four hours using stone tools) (Sillitoe 1988).’
[1]
This code may therefore be in need of reconsideration.
[1]: Sillitoe, Paul and Hardy, Karen 2003. "Living Lithics: ethnoarchaeology in Highland Papua New Guinea", 562p |
||||||
|
The use of bows and arrows has been reported for other Papua New Guinean societies, such as the Wola: ’Food. Highlanders were able to meet their food requirements easily and with scarcely any direct use of flaked lithics. Garden vegetables are available all year and the domestic pig is the main source of meat. Some animals are hunted, but hunting is not important to subsistence (Pospisil 1963; Salisbury 1962; Sillitoe 2001). Wild pig is the largest and most dangerous animal hunted and people use their most effective weapons to hunt it, or employ other techniques such as trapping. Though hunting is relatively danger-free, the same equipment is used for warfare, thus relating it to danger. Hunting equipment comprises bows and arrows hafted with slivers of bamboo and palm. Stone arrowheads were not made. There is no connection between perilous activities and stone which might enhance its status. The all-important agricultural tools are made predominantly of wood. Not only is more care taken with these extractive tools, they also take considerably longer to make (e.g. digging sticks took on average four hours using stone tools) (Sillitoe 1988).’
[1]
This code may therefore be in need of reconsideration.
[1]: Sillitoe, Paul and Hardy, Karen 2003. "Living Lithics: ethnoarchaeology in Highland Papua New Guinea", 562p |
||||||
|
"The need for prestige goods probably underlies the widespread adoption of new styles of pottery, particularly Corded Ware and Beakers, which were associated with other distinctive artifacts, such as battle-axes, archery equipment, and ornaments of metal and other exotic materials."
[1]
[1]: (McIntosh 2006, 55-58) |
||||||
|
"The story of the Bronze Age is also to some extent the story of the inven- tions that occurred during it. High up on the list of these come the series of new weapons created during the period. The bow and arrow had existed since at least the Mesolithic, the dagger since the Neolithic."
[1]
[1]: (Harding 2000, 275) |
||||||
|
"The story of the Bronze Age is also to some extent the story of the inven- tions that occurred during it. High up on the list of these come the series of new weapons created during the period. The bow and arrow had existed since at least the Mesolithic, the dagger since the Neolithic."
[1]
[1]: (Harding 2000, 275) |
||||||
|
Finds close to Paris Basin region.
[1]
Bows used on the continent.
[2]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) [2]: (Koch ed. 2006, 1469) John T. Koch ed. Celtic Culture. A historical Encyclopedia. Volume I. A-Celti. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara. |
||||||
|
Finds close to Paris Basin region.
[1]
Bows used on the continent.
[2]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) [2]: (Koch ed. 2006, 1469) John T. Koch ed. Celtic Culture. A historical Encyclopedia. Volume I. A-Celti. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara. |
||||||
|
Finds close to Paris Basin region.
[1]
Bows used on the continent.
[2]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) [2]: (Koch ed. 2006, 1469) John T. Koch ed. Celtic Culture. A historical Encyclopedia. Volume I. A-Celti. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara. |
||||||
|
Finds close to Paris Basin region.
[1]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) |
||||||
|
Bows and quivers
[1]
Merovingians and Carolingians used a "short, simple bow" which was "gradually replaced, beginning in the ninth century, by the composite bow."
[2]
[1]: (Halsall 2003, 163-176) Halsall, Guy. 2003. Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West, 450-900. Routledge. London. [2]: (Frassetto 2003, 366) Frassetto, M. 2003. Encyclopedia of Barbarian Europe: Society in Transformation. ABC CLIO |
||||||
|
Simple bow was little used.
[1]
Was it used a little? - Yes. With the influx of crossbows, the use of short bows died out in French armies, and by the 13th century they were not considered a weapon of war.
[2]
[1]: (Boulton 1995 67-68) Jonathan D Boulton. Armor And Weapons. William W Kibler. Grover A Zinn. Lawrence Earp. John Bell Henneman Jr. 1995. Routledge Revivals: Medieval France (1995): An Encyclopedia. Routledge. Abingdon. [2]: (De Vries in Kibler et al 1995, 114) |
||||||
|
Simple bow was little used.
[1]
Was it used a little? With the influx of crossbows, the use of short bows died out in French armies, and by the 13th century they were not considered a weapon of war.
[2]
Indicative: In the 1475-1477 Swiss-Burgundian War, Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, hired Italian and English mercenaries - especially English longbowmen."
[3]
[1]: (Boulton 1995 67-68) Jonathan D Boulton. Armor And Weapons. William W Kibler. Grover A Zinn. Lawrence Earp. John Bell Henneman Jr. 1995. Routledge Revivals: Medieval France (1995): An Encyclopedia. Routledge. Abingdon. [2]: (De Vries in Kibler et al 1995, 114) [3]: (Devries and Smith 2007, 166) Kelly Devries. Robert D Smith. 2007. Medieval Weapons: An Illustrated History of Their Impact. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara. |
||||||
|
Simple bow was little used.
[1]
Was it used a little? With the influx of crossbows, the use of short bows died out in French armies, and by the 13th century they were not considered a weapon of war.
[2]
Indicative: In the 1475-1477 Swiss-Burgundian War, Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, hired Italian and English mercenaries - especially English longbowmen."
[3]
[1]: (Boulton 1995 67-68) Jonathan D Boulton. Armor And Weapons. William W Kibler. Grover A Zinn. Lawrence Earp. John Bell Henneman Jr. 1995. Routledge Revivals: Medieval France (1995): An Encyclopedia. Routledge. Abingdon. [2]: (De Vries in Kibler et al 1995, 114) [3]: (Devries and Smith 2007, 166) Kelly Devries. Robert D Smith. 2007. Medieval Weapons: An Illustrated History of Their Impact. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara. |
||||||
|
Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453 CE) reference: use of longbowman and mounted archer increased.
[1]
Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453 CE) reference: use of longbowman and mounted archer increased.
[1]
[1]: (Wagner 2006, 27-29) John A Wagner. 2006. Encyclopedia of the Hundred Years War. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Lances, swords, crossbowmen, longbows, pikemen were of central importance on the battlefield for at least 200 years after the first guns until the Battle of Carignola (1503 CE) which was probably decided by guns and Marignano (1515 CE) when Swiss squares were beaten by cavalry shooting pistols and cannon artillery.
[1]
The first Bourbon era 1589-1660 CE is firmly after the transition to firearm dominance so at this time the old weapons must have played only a minor role in warfare or had been completely abandoned.
[1]: (Nolan 2006, 367) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
"More than 150 metal artefacts (bronze: axes, arrowheads, knives, spears, hair pins, needles, lead blocks for export, lead stamps; silver and gold jewels) and numerous artefacts made of stone (grinding grains, leather, wood, showcases, bow and arrows, tools, marble cups and goblets) were found."
[1]
[1]: (Razzokov and Kurbanov 2005: 22) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/IDTTJNJT. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
"Other finds include bronze artefacts - a needle with an eye, a sickle with a shaped handle, a bronze arrow-head with a shaft - and stone moulds for casting shaft-hole arrowheads and sickles."
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
[1]: (Askarov 1992, 441-443) A Askarov. The beginning of the Iron Age in Transoxania. Ahmad Hasan Dani, Vadim Mikhailovich Masson. ed. History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Volume 1. The dawn of civilization: earliest times to 700 B.C. UNESCO. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited. Delhi. [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
Likely made obsolete by composite bow.
|
||||||
|
Inferred absent due to use of more powerful composite bow.
|
||||||
|
we need expert input in order to code this variable
|
||||||
|
we need expert input in order to code this variable
|
||||||
|
"As with the rest of the Near East, there is little evidence for warfare in Neolithic Mesopotamia."
[1]
[1]: (Hamblin 2006: 33) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD. |
||||||
|
"We have no evidence for warfare. In contrast with later periods, ’Ubaid seals show no depictions of weapons, prisoners, or combat scenes".
[1]
There were found arrowheads at many sites, but there is impossible to discern between their military usage and hunting.
[2]
[1]: (Stein 1994: 39) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/V94SXJRJ. [2]: Healey 2010, 186 |
||||||
|
A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well".
[1]
[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD. |
||||||
|
A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well".
[1]
[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD. |
||||||
|
"Troops also included archers and soldiers armed with slings and ovoid stones, probably mainly recruited among the hunters and fishermen of the south."
[1]
arrowheads were discovered in many graves dated to Early Dynastic Period
[2]
[1]: (McIntosh 2005: 187-188) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/KK2E3KMD. [2]: Charvat 2012, 198 |
||||||
|
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
"Ranged weapons were featured more prominently, with Akkadian soldiers typically depicted carrying bows, broad-bladed battle axes,7 and spears (Westenholz 1999: 65–6)."
[3]
[1]: Hamblin 2006, 93 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [3]: (Stefanski, Arthur. 2008. “The Material Culture of Early Dynastic Akkadian Period Conflict: Copper and Bronze Melee Weapons from Khafajah.” The Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies. 13: 15) |
||||||
|
[1]
[2]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[3]
[1]: Rutkowski 2007, 21 [2]: Lafont 2009, 15 [3]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. |
||||||
|
Inferred absent due to availability of more powerful composite bow.
|
||||||
|
Under the earlier Abbasids, ’Arab’ and Persian’ bows mentioned in sources, both composite bows.
[1]
More powerful composite bow likely used at the expense of the self bow.
[1]: (Kennedy 2001, 177-178) Kennedy, Hugh N. 2001. The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the early Islamic State. Vol. 352. Routledge. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows though
[1]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows though
[1]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows though
[1]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows though
[1]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows.
[1]
They had become more sophisticated here but still not yet specialized for warfare.
[2]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Leverani 2014, 41) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows.
[1]
They had become more sophisticated here but still not yet specialized for warfare.
[2]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[3]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Leverani 2014, 41) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows.
[1]
They had become more sophisticated here but still not yet specialized for warfare
[2]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[3]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Leverani 2014, 41) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Stone arrowheads found for this time, but it is unclear if used for warfare or hunting. There is no reason to believe that other humans couldn’t be the target for these arrows.
[1]
They had become more sophisticated here but still not yet specialized for warfare.
[2]
[1]: (Leverani 2014, 36) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. [2]: (Leverani 2014, 41) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
Seal impressions from Susa ca 2350 BCE depicting Elamite deities have representations of bows. This seal is housed in Paris at the Musée du Louvre, Sb6680.
[1]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
4000 BCE in the Middle East and southeastern Europe: "sling, dagger, mace, and bow are common weapons".
[3]
[1]: (Tallon 2013: 6) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4HNKHM6E. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2007, xii) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Arrowheads found as grave goods in a tomb in the palace hypogeum in Choga Zanbil.
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[3]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[4]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Potts, D.T. 1999. The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p.227 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [4]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
Arrowheads found as grave goods in a tomb in the palace hypogeum in Choga Zanbil.
[1]
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[2]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[3]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[4]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Potts, D.T. 1999. The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p.227 [2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [4]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
In his discussion of weapons used by the Achaemenid army Gabriel (2002) mentions the "noncomposite" simple bow directly for light cavalry and chariots and the ’bow’ for light infantry and heavy infantry and notably does not mention use of the composite bow by Persian forces.
[2]
Earlier Gabriel mentions the composite bow was used from the late third millennium BCE but that it was difficult to manufacture and it was "very susceptible to moisture, which rendered it useless."
[3]
This suggests the simple bow was most likely the standard weapon. Hypothesis: nomads who were full-time warriors were able maintain their composite bows every day. Agricultural polities who did not wanted to store the weapons. This may have meant they probably relied most on their stocks of easy to preserve simple bows, even though arrows shot from them carried less range.
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 162-164) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."
[1]
Used by the Greeks and Romans who didn’t place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat.
[2]
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
[1]
Probably present - arrowheads finds
[2]
. Arrowheads represent weapon finds as often as spearheads
[2]
. "The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[3]
[1]: (http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/badari/tools.html) [2]: Brezillon, M. 1981. Encyklopedia klutur pradziejowych. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Artystycze i Filmowe. Pg. 25. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
[1]
"The bow was probably between 6,000 and 10,000 years old by the dawn of the Bronze Age".
[2]
"The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)."
[3]
[1]: Gilbert, G. P. 2004. Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208: Oxford. pg: 34-70, 166-183 [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 27-28) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [3]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"The principal weapons in the late Predynastic and Protodynastic Periods were undoubtedly the bow and arrow, spear, axe and mace. These are frequently shown in relief depictions of hunting and battle scenes (figure 18)."
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 31) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"By the Dynastic Period, archers were most commonly depicted using a ’self’ (or simple) bow"
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 37) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"By the Dynastic Period, archers were most commonly depicted using a ’self’ (or simple) bow"
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 37) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
Present.
[1]
"By the Dynastic Period, archers were most commonly depicted using a ’self’ (or simple) bow"
[2]
Evidence for bronze arrowheads and spearheads. Spearheads and arrowheads initially flintstone and bone, then replaced by bronze.
[1]
[1]: (Gnirs 2001) [2]: (Shaw 1991: 37) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
Present.
[1]
"By the Dynastic Period, archers were most commonly depicted using a ’self’ (or simple) bow"
[2]
[1]: (Gnirs 2001) [2]: (Shaw 1991: 37) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"By the Dynastic Period, archers were most commonly depicted using a ’self’ (or simple) bow"
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 37) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
Middle Kingdom infantry based on powerful archer divisions.
[1]
[2]
Self-bow was used.
[3]
"One of the most important sources for the study of Egyptian weapons in the early Middle Kingdom is a pair of painted wooden models (Cairo, Egyptian Museum) from the tomb of Mesehti, a provincial governor at Asyut in the Eleventh Dynasty (figure 22). Forty Egyptian spearmen and forty Nubian archers are reproduced in faithful detail, showing the typical costume and arms of the common soldier."
[4]
"By the Dynastic Period, archers were most commonly depicted using a ’self’ (or simple) bow"
[5]
[1]: (Garcia ed. 2013, 433) [2]: (Gnirs 2001) [3]: (Fields 2007, 16) [4]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. [5]: (Shaw 1991: 37) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"In western Asia, [the self bow] was replaced by the composite bow. In Egypt, the self-bow continued to be widely used, especially by Nubian troops."
[1]
According to this source, for which we require expert confirmation: "Kushite soldiers were expert archers. Nubian bows were about six feet in length. Arrows were short with poisonous tips."
[2]
Arrow-heads.
[3]
[1]: (Morkot 2010: 50) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/AHFJE5Z2. [2]: (http://www.afropedea.org/kush#TOC-Military) [3]: (Mokhtar ed. 1981, 278) |
||||||
|
Relative to this period, sources only mention the atlatl and spears.
[1]
However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so the absence of weapons other than the atlatl and spears in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. It is also worth noting that Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Relative to this period, sources only mention the atlatl and spears.
[1]
However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so the absence of weapons other than the atlatl and spears in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. It is also worth noting that Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.
[2]
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. [2]: Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8 |
||||||
|
Some expert disagreement on whether an object commonly held by "warriors" in North Yemeni rock-art from the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age should be interpreted as a shield or a bow.
[1]
[1]: (Jung 1991: 57) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/JP9KX5BK. |
||||||
|
Some expert disagreement on whether an object commonly held by "warriors" in North Yemeni rock-art from the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age should be interpreted as a shield or a bow.
[1]
[1]: (Jung 1991: 57) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/JP9KX5BK. |
||||||
|
Some expert disagreement on whether an object commonly held by "warriors" in North Yemeni rock-art from the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age should be interpreted as a shield or a bow.
[1]
[1]: (Jung 1991: 57) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/JP9KX5BK. |
||||||
|
Some expert disagreement on whether an object commonly held by "warriors" in North Yemeni rock-art from the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age should be interpreted as a shield or a bow.
[1]
[1]: (Jung 1991: 57) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/JP9KX5BK. |
||||||
|
"Battle-scenes". found in"Assurbanipal’s palace at Nineveh". depict"The battle between Assurbanipal and the Arabian queen Adiya in 650 BC". in which Adiya’s"Camel-riders [...] are armed with bow and arrows".
[1]
[1]: (Jung 1994: 242-243) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/UR2Z7N3W. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Arrows with bone points point to evidence of some type of bow.
[1]
Composite bow not known to have been developed at this early time.
[1]: (Peregrine 2001: 283) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/QUL2KD3Z. |
||||||
|
Used by indigenous forces under British command?
|
||||||