On Drawing the Bow

ON DRAWING THE BOW

SHELLEY WACHSMANN

Institute of Nautical Archaeology at Texas A&M University, College Station

Through the ages archers have developed a number of methods for drawing the bow. Edward S. Morse (1885; 1922), who pioneered ethnological research on this subject, developed a system that, while it could be expanded upon, does cover all the known ways to draw the bow (Wissler 1926; Kroeber 1926: 283; Grimley 1958: 51; Yadin 1963: 9; Bowles 1971). Although Morse termed these forms of handling the bow releases, Elmer (1926: 22-23) rightly notes that the act is more correctly defined as one of pulling, or drawing, the bow, and that is the term used here.

The classification of draws takes on a particular significance for Egyptological and Near Eastern studies as many ancient monuments are sufficiently detailed to permit the identification of the draws used by the archers they depict. This tribute to Ephraim Stem gives an overview of the typology of draws and discusses a selection-by no means complete-of draws depicted in ancient Near Eastern and Egyptian art.!

Draws

Morse defined five basic ways to draw the bow: Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, Mediterranean and Mongolian:2

Primary draw: Here the arrow is placed on the bowstring and its nock is pinched between the thumb and the distal and central phalanges of the index finger (Fig. 1: A-B). The arrow can pass to the right or left of the bow assuming that it is held vertically. In this draw, also assuming the bow is vertical, the palm must face downward. This is the

238*

weakest of all the draws as it depends solely on the friction sustained by the relatively weak finger muscles and is, therefore, used exclusively with weak bows.

Secondary draw: This takes the Primary draw and adds to it the distal falanges of the middle and ring fingers to draw upon the bowstring itself (Fig. 1: C-D). It is the only draw in which traction is placed on both the arrow and the string (Kroeber 1927: 284). Morse considers this draw a natural evolution of the Primary draw and, similarly, the arrow can pass to the right or left of a vertically held bow.

Tertiary draw: In this draw no traction is placed on the arrow, which is held in place by pressure on its nock by the distal phalanx of the thumb guided on the right by the index finger. The bowstring is drawn by the index and middle fingers, and in some variations also by the ring-or the ring and the little-fingers (Fig. 1: E-F). Due to the pressure placed on the arrow by the thumb during the draw, the arrow must pass to the left of the bow irrespective of its position relative to the ground.

Mediterranean draw: Morse (1885: 12; 1922: 4-5) termed his fourth draw Mediterranean because he felt that it had been in common use among cultures that surrounded that sea: in truth it is limited primarily to its European shores (Wissler 1926: 35, Fig. 17; 39, Fig. 19; Kroeber 1927: 287).

In this draw, the thumb normally plays no part. Instead, the tips of the index and middle-or index, middle and ring-fingers pull the bowstring (Fig.

ON DRAWING THE BOW 239*

1: G-H). The index and middle fingers bracket the arrow and hold it lightly against the bowstring. The draw has several variants (Morse 1885: 13-14; Elmer 1926: 220; Faris and Elmer 1945: 43,45).

Mongolian draw: This draw is unique in pulling the bowstring with the thumb locked in place by the index finger (Fig. 1: I-J). The arrow is held in the web between the thumb and index finger. To release the arrow, the locking finger is slipped off the thumb. As the manner in which the arrow is held forces its distal end to the right, the arrow is normally placed against the bow's right side.3 With but few exceptions, the middle, ring and small fingers are not used and are normally curled out of the way.

~ Primary Draw A

~ Secondary Draw C

E Tertiary Draw

B

~ D

F

Mediterranean Draw G H

~MOngOlian Draw * I T

Fig. 1. Morse's five draws (after Morse 1885: p. 6, Figs. 1-2; p. 8, Figs. 4-5; p. 10, Figs. 6-7; p. 13, Figs. 8-9;

p. 16, Figs. 11-12)

A protective device, usually in the form of a ring, is often worn on the thumb to shield it from the concentrated pressure of the bowstring as well as to allow for a smoother release. These thumb-protectors come in several types. The most common are a cylindrical ring either rounded or with polygonal edges used by the Chinese; a ring with a visor-like projection that fits over the thumb's distal phalanx common throughout Asia, while the Japanese employ a glove that protects the thumb, index and middle fingers (Von Luschan 1891; 1922; Morse 1922: 34-43, PIs. I-V; Kroeber 1927: 288; Grayson 1977).

An invaluable source for the different possible effective variants of the Mongolian draw is a 353-page manuscript, entitled A Book on the Excellence of the Bow and Arrow and the Description Thereof written in the fifteenth century by a knowledgeable anonymous Arab Moslem archer (Faris and Elmer 1945). This gives a comprehensive discussion of all aspects of contemporaneous archery among the Arabs. As their armies were the direct successors of ancient Near Eastern composite bow archers, the discussion is one rich and valuable for explaining earlier use of the composite bow. The author of The Excellence of the Bow describes draws based on an Arabic sign language for expressing numbers (Faris and Elmer 1945: 19-23). He defines in this manner six draws that the archery experts of his day considered acceptable: sixty-three, sixtynine, seventy-three, eighty-three, twenty-four and seventy-two, all of which are variations of the Mongolian draw (Fig. 2). Pope (1918: 119-121) recorded a remarkable form of Mongolian draw used by the last Californian Yana Indian, Ishi (Fig. 3).4 Ishi's draw is unique in locking the thumb with the middle finger and representing the only known independent invention of a Mongolian draw.

Strength of draws: In controlled experiments Pope (1918: 120-121), an experienced archer, tested the maximum draw (pull) possible with each of the draws using a spring scale. He found the maximum weight that he could pull with a Primary draw was 25 pounds, although by using arrows with thickened nocks he could pull 35 pounds. A Secondary draw allowed a pull of 40 pounds, while he could

240* SHELLEY WACHSMANN

Fig. 2. The six acceptable fonns of the Mongolian draw as described by the author of The Excellence of the Bow

(from Faris and Elmer 1945, p. 44)

Fig. 3. The modified fonn of the Mongolian draw used by Ishi, the Yana Indian (from Pope 1918, p. 120)

draw 60 pounds with the Tertiary, and 80 pounds with the Mediterranean draw. With a Mongolian draw Pope could pull only a 45-pounds bow without a device to protect the thumb but 55 wearing a Japanese shooting glove. Pope remained convinced that the Mediterranean was the strongest draw. Kroeber (1927: 284 fn. 4) notes, however, that Pope had learned to shoot with the Mediterranean draw, and it is likely that with increased practice he may have been able to draw heavier bows with the other draws, most notably the Mongolian draw.

Draws in Ancient Iconography

When studying ancient representations it is imperative to keep in mind that we are not seeing the draws themselves, but rather representations of them as seen and interpreted through the culture, mind and hand of the artist. We must evaluate these scenes of archery, bowmen and their draws through the lenses of aspective art styles, the inherent conventions of those styles, as well as the skill and attention-or lack thereof-of the artists who created them. While some depictions of draws are unequivocal, many are not. Interpreting them, therefore, by simply comparing them to modem perspective representations, be they photographs or drawings, may easily result in error. 5

We must impart to these images simple common sense. Is the bow weak or powerful, simple or composite? Was the draw deep or shallow? Is the draw represented solely with a specific type of bow? And, finally, and most basically, does the interpretation make sense within the physical context of drawing an actual bow?

Artists could, and more importantly did, make mistakes. This could be as mundane as erring in depicting the location where the bowstring leaves the drawing hand. For example, a group of Assyrian archers in Sennacherib's famous scene of the siege of Lachish use composite bows and draw to the shoulder (Fig. 4). Two of the archers use a two-fingered "Flemish" Mediterranean draw (Fig. 4: A, C, D). In one ofthese cases the specific draw is emphasized by separating the middle and ring fingers (Fig. 4: C). A third archer, however,


A 4 3 2 1

D (4) C (2) B (1)

Fig. 4. A) Sennacherib ' s archers attacking Lach.ish face the viewer' s right using the Mediterranean draw. C- D) Typical twofingered Mediterranean draw, also known as a "Flemish draw;" B) Note how all four of the archer's fingers lie on this string. This also may be a two-fingered draw, with the bowstring coming out from under the archer's small finger due to an artist's

error. Alternately, but less likely, it may represent a four-fingered Mediterranean draw (from Paterson 1915: PI. 68)

has the bowstring exiting his drawing hand from beneath his little finger (Fig. 4: B). In such a case we can easily avoid the temptation to identify this as a Tertiary or four-fingered Mediterranean draw and conclude that the artist probably simply erred in his placement of the bowstring.

Alternately, if we are considering a specific culture using a unique draw with an unusual type of bow, then our conclusions might be different. Ashurbanipal's reliefs depict his troops hunting down Arab warriors (Fig. 5: A; Barnett 1960: 30 nos. 110, 112; 1976: PI. XXXIII; Yadin 1963: 450-451). In two cases Arab archers with asymmetrical

self(simple) bows "riding shotgun" on camels turn to deliver Parthian shots to their pursuers (Rausing 1967: 87- 88). Their draws are shallow- barely to the elbow (Figs. 5: B, 6). In one case an archer appears to have all four fingers on the string and we might interpret it as a variant of the Mediterranean draw (Fig. 6). His colleague on another camel, however, uses what must be the artist's interpretation of a Secondary or a Tertiary draw with the thumb and index finger pinched together and the three remaining fingers on the bowstring (Fig. 5). It seems likely that both of these represent the same draw.


A

Fig. 5. A) An Arab archer on a camel takes a "Parthian shot" at his Assyrian attackers; he draws to the viewer's right with an asymmetrical self bow (relief from Ashurbanipal's northwest palace at Ninveh [Kuyunjik]); B) Detail of the archer (from Barnett

1960, PI. 112) B


Fig. 6. A second Arab archer on a camel takes a "Parthian shot" at his Assyrian attackers; he draws to the viewer's right with an asymmetrical self bow (relief from Ashurbanipal's northwest palace at Ninveh [Kuyunjik) ;from Barnett 1960,

PI. 110)

Drawing the self bow in Egyptian art Morse (1885: 28-33), basing himself on early copyists, concluded that Egyptian art portrays a minimum of three, and possibly as many as four

types of draws. At the Middle Kingdom tombs of Beni Hassan he identified the Mediterranean draw (Figs. 7, 8: D-E). A more recent publication seems to support this (Fig. 9).

Prior to the New Kingdom, however, the draw most frequently depicted is one in which the palm faces upward with the thumb outstretched and the fingers held together and slightly curved upward (Fig. 10). Morse (1885: 32) identifies this draw as his Tertiary (Fig. 8: A-C). Wilkinson (and Birch 1878 [I]: 204) consider this draw to be "either with the forefinger and thumb, or the two forefingers ... " The draw used with self bows is usually represented as remarkably shallow, particularly when compared with the deep draw portrayed with composite bows (Fig. 11: A).

A fragmentary scene of grouped archers found in the core of Amenembet 1's pyramid at Lisht, dates to the early 5th Dynasty (Fig. 12: A; Yadin 1963: 146; Goedicke 1971: 74-77). The thumb and only three fingers are visible (Fig. 12: B). This is presumably due to either the index or the small finger of the drawing hand disappearing behind the two arrows it holds. As in other depictions extra arrows held in the drawing hand are clearly secured by the ring and little fingers, we may presume that

:::d \

Fig. 7. Egyptian archers using the Mediterranean draw according to Morse (after Morse 1885, p. 29, Fig. 31)


A

B

c

D

E

Fig. 8. Egyptian draws collected by Morse (after Morse 1885, p. 32, Figs. 35-37; p. 34, Figs. 40-41)

------ . .-..-.----- .......... Fig. 9. An archer in the tomb of Jnj-jtj.f appears ,to use a two-fingered Mediterranean release; 11th Dynasty (after Jaros-Deckert 1984: Falkart 3, register 3, sixth standing

figure from left)

similarly here, the arrows are held by the little finger (Figs. 10: B, 13: A-B, 15: A-B).

In the Lisht relief, the archers' last three fingers are curled concentrically. The thumb lies on the string. Simply put, it would be impossible to draw a vertical bow in this manner. Morse (1885: 31-32), in discussing similar scenes, suggests that the artist is representing an archer holding the bow horizontally, but due to the artist's inability to foreshorten it he shows the bow upright, but the draw in the correct position with the palm facing upwards (Fig. 8: A-C). Morse identifies this as his Tertiary draw, and brings ethnological parallels to the use of this draw with a bow held horizontally.

The nocked arrow appears in front of the middle and ring fingers, but behind the index finger in what appears to be, on the face of it, an impossible configuration. Perhaps the artist portrays the fingers in this manner to emphasize that the index finger serves a somewhat different purpose than the middle and ring fingers. Given this reservation, it is difficult to identify this draw with any measure


A

c

Fig. 10. Wilkinson describes draws used with se1fbows in Egyptian art (from Wilkinson and Birch 1878, pp. 204,

206[A])

of certainty. If we are correct in assuming that the thumb and all but the little finger are in some way involved in the draw here, then this must represent a variant of either a Secondary or a Tertiary draw.

A remarkably animated scene from the tombchapel of Senbi, nomarch of Cusae, during the 12th Dynasty portrays him hunting animals in a fenced enclosure (Fig. 13: A; Blackman 1914: 80-81). Senbi leans well forward with his left knee bent and draws the bow with his thumb, index and middle finger: his ring and little fingers wrap around three extra arrows (Fig. 13: B). The only draw that fits these criteria is the Tertiary. Some slight confirmation of this conclusion is the consideration that the arrow is shown passing to the left (far side) of the bow (Fig. 13: C). Pope (1926: 104-108) describes a match that he witnessed in Tanganyika among Wassukuma tribe archers. An accompanying photograph shows an archer in a pose uncannily like that of Senbi with the notable difference that he uses a Mediterranean release and his left leg is more bent (Fig. 14).

Another scene from the tomb of Senbi apparently depicts what appears to be the same draw as in Fig. 13: B perhaps rendered by a more conservative artist depicting a bow held horizontally (Fig. 15: A). In this case, however, the artist has placed the drawing hand with the palm up, which allows him to show the ring and little fingers holding the extra arrows (Fig. 15: B). While this representation is strained to the modem eye, the artist's intention is clear. Furthermore, he correctly displays the extra arrows passing, as they must, between the thumb and index/middle fingers.

Drawing the composite bow in Egyptian art It is generally accepted that the composite bow arrived in Egypt with the Hyksos during the Second Intermediate Period (McLeod 1958: 397 n. 5). With it migrated a remarkably different type of draw, which appears clearly here for the first time, although it, like the composite bow, must have had a long gestation period in Asia prior to its arrival in Africa.

The drawn composite bow is easily recognized in iconography by its highly curved form when


A •

Fig. II. A) Min teaches Prince Amenhotep II the use ofthe composite and self bows (from the tomb of Min (T. 109) at Sheikh Abd el Quma); B) An archer hunts ibexes with a composite bow on one of the Megiddo ivories (A from Wilkinson and Birch

1878 [I], p. 406 no. 176; B from Loud 1939: PI. 22, courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

B Fig. 12. A) Scene of a group of archers drawing self bows. From the core of Arnenemhet ]'S pyramid at Lisht; date: early 5th Dynasty; B) Detail of two archers' hands during the draw (from Goedicke 1971 , p. 75, drawing by L. Foote)

in the drawn state. In extreme cases, the bow and string become an oval (Fig. 11 : B). This is the iconographic equivalent ofthe description ofPandarus' composite bow, being drawn almost into a circle (Iliad IV: 124; Balfour 1921: 302).

Invariably with the composite bow the draw is deep, with the drawing hand brought back to the head and at times behind it. The latter draw is indeed employed with the Japanese composite bow (Pope 1965: 389 PI. 51). Such draws depicted in ancient Near Eastern iconography are, however, undoubtedly exaggerated in order to allow the artist to depict the drawing hand. This is clear from a scene in the tomb of Min (Tomb 109) at Sheikh Abd el Qurna in which he is instructing the young Prince Amenhotep II in the use of self and composite bows (Fig. l1 :A; Schafer 1931; Yadin 1963: 82, 201). Even though in the latter case the prince's drawing hand is shown behind his head, in the accompanying caption Min informs us (Davies 1935: 52):


~·Q·Q':O':~ B D",Z?",i)",o. D~0"'~~ ~0",0?09 ~<2::'0':<2~ ,D.e:5.e2$.0 ~"b~d~1 ~e::'le::'l~~ g'g-ua ~o"'o"'o.~ t>.0"tl\~0~ .G.~.~

t)~(f~~~ ~~Q~Q~d ItPL>O",i)~ 1>-':0":0':0'\/ ~",i)",i).z:i ~6.<)XoXq

A c Fig. 13. A) Senbi draws a self bow in a knees-bent position employing a Secondary draw, with the middle and small fingers

holding three additional arrows (from the tomb of Senbi at Meir; date: 12th Dynasty); B) Detail of the drawi ng hand ; C) Detail of the bow hand (from Blackman 1914, PI. VII)

He (Min) gave (the lad) first rules of instruction in archery, saying, 'Stretch thy bow to thy ear,6 use all the strength of thy arms, [fit] the arrow .. . '

Min apparently taught his royal student well to judge from this comment by the author of The Excellence of the Bow (Faris and Elmer 1945: 51):

Drawing to the lobe of the ear is, likewise, an ancient method of shooting and is very accurate. There is not among the ancient methods any which is more accurate or more deadly.

A right-handed archer will normally hold the bow in the left hand and draw with the right. Min's scene is somewhat unusual, although not unique, in this regard in that the bows are being held in the right hand while the bowstrings are drawn with

.... Fig. 14. A Wassukuma archer in Tanganyika draws with knees bent using a Mediterranean draw while holding extra arrows in his right hand (from Pope 1926, PI. opp. p. 108)


B

A

Fig. 15. A) Archer drawing a self bow in the tomb of Senbi at Meir; date: 12th Dynasty; B) Detail (from Blackman 1915, PI. VIII)

the left hand (Smith 1965, Fig. 13). In Egyptian art, to sustain the essentially frontal representation so dominant in that art form, an archer facing the viewer's left may have his right arm outstretched to hold the bow while his left arm draws the bowstring-but the right hand is attached to the left arm and the left hand to th~ right arm (Fig. 16).

The draw used with the composite bow is never portrayed in use with a self bow. Clearly an Egyptian archery student would have learned different draws for self and composite bows, as is clear from Min's scene (Fig. 11: A). In this draw, the arrow and the bowstring appear to be pinched between the outstretched thumb and the bent index finger. The palm faces downward .. The middle, ring and little fingers are curled concentrically inwards behind the arrow and bowstring and play no part in the draw (Figs. 16-17).

This draw has received various identifications: Wolf (1926: 87) considers it Tertiary; Bonnet (1926: 150-152) thought that it represented the Primary, but realizing that a bow of even moderate weight could not be drawn in this manner, he concludes that it must represent the Mediterranean draw; Lorimer (1950: 293~294 n. 1) argues that it represents the Primary draw. Morse takes an unusual

approach. In the case of Seti I he equates it with the Mongolian draw (1885: 29-30; Fig. 18: A) Yet virtually identical renditions ofRamses II drawing the bow he identifies as representing the Primary draw (Fig. 18: B-C).

A process of elimination can determine the true identification of this draw. Firstly, its arrangement could be interpreted as Primary, but to do so would be to ignore the fact that this would juxtapose the most powerfol of bows with the weakest of draws. As the middle, ring and little fingers are bent back and clearly do not playa part in the action it cannot represent a Tertiary or Secondary draw. Finally, the configuration of the fingers-index clenched while the others trail behind the string-is at variance with the shape of the hand and fingers in the Mediterranean draw.

This eliminates all draws but the Mongolian. Alternately, there are additional considerations to support this conclusion:

• The thumb is consistently represented beneath the arrow--exactly where it must be placed in the Mongolian draw. The thumb is depicted as extended straight instead of bent to lock the bowstring. Displaying the thumb in its naturally extended position is to be expected in aspective


B

A

Fig. 16. RamsesIlI fires arrows attheships of the Sea Peoples; facing the viewer's left he stands in afrontal pose; his right arm holds the bow while he draws with his left; however, his hands have been switched atdreend~ of his arms so t1iathe holds the bow with his left hand and draws with his right hand; Medinet Habu (from the Epigraphic Survey 1930, PI. 37)

Egyptian art, which strives to draw any given item in the clearest and most universal manner possible (Schafer 1974).

• The index finger is clenched in the shape it takes in locking the thumb.

• The palm'faees downwards in this draw. This is only true for the Primary and Mongolian draws.

• The entire arrangement of the hand-givell leeway for the Egyptian"maIiner of representing thethum1J:---replicates exactly the sixty-nine form of. the Mongolian draw as described, by the author of The Excellence of the Bow (Fig. 2: 69). Of it he writes (Faris and Elmer 1945: 43):

The strongest and most useful of these draws is the sixty-three, followed by the sixtynine~ which though weaker, is supposed to be'smoother and more accurate. It is weaker because· it lacks the' clench .. Most arcliers use these two draws.

A protective device for the thumb is often used with the Mongolian draw; r am not aware of any evidence for BronzelIronAge thumb rings found in Egypt. Mark the following evidence; however:

• In later titnes the Mongolian draw clearly penetratedandbecame established in the Sudan,presumablyhaving reachetHhere via contact with Egypt. Emery (1918: 233-248) was the first to identify rings found in, burials there-as "arrow looses." In tombs dating to the Meroitic period (300 BCE to 350CE) at Khartoum two excavated skeletons wore rings. on· their right thumbs (Arkell'1949: 121-124 Fig, 10). In her study of Meroitic archers1 rings; Hayes' (1913) defined 22 items of three chronologically well-defined types of rings found in datable· contexts, which rangefrotn the 'sixth century BeE to the fifth century CEo Grayson (1963., 1977: 44)'notes that the Mongolian'draw might have arrived in Sudan as'


B

Fig. 17. A) Ramses III draws his composite bow while facing the viewer's right; Medinet Habu; B) Detail (from Epigraphic Survey 1930, PI. 9)

a result of interaction with Asiatic invaders, possibly during the Persian conquest of Egypt. A simpler explanation, however, might be that the Mongolian draw reached the Sudan from Egypt itself. Perhaps this transfer took place during the rule of the XXVth Kushite Dynasty in Egypt.

• Anthropologists note evidence ofthe Mongolian draw in Sub-Saharan Africa (Wissler 1926: 34-35 Fig. 17,38-39 Fig. 19; Kroeber 1927: 287 map, 288; Ward 1968).

Thumb-rings worn by the men of the modem Longarim tribe of Sudan during dances may be survivals of the Meroitic archers' rings (Kronenberg 1962; Grayson 1977: 44). Today the Longarim

do not use the bow and their rings are purely decorative.

Drawing the composite bow in Assyrian Art The many scenes of warfare and hunting in Assyrian art provide a cornucopia of detailed depictions of archers drawing their bows. Of particular interest are the depictions of draws used by archers opposing the Assyrian forces.

Morse (1885: 23-28) was the first to observe a curious phenomenon in Assyrian art: the draw depicted seems to be determined for the most part by whether the archer aims to the viewer's right or left (Fig. 19). Archers employ the Mediterranean


A

B

D

Fig. 18. 19th Dynasty draws described by Morse (after Morse 1885, p. 30, Figs. 32-33; p. 31, Fig. 34; p. 33,

Fig. 38)

c

F

Fig. 19. Assyrian draws identified by Morse (after Morse 1885,p. 24, Fig. 21;p. 25, Figs. 22-23;p. 26, Figs. 24-26;

p. 27, Fig. 27)


draw when facing left (Fig. 20). The draw when shooting to the viewer's right is identical to the one represented in Egyptian art with the composite bow, identified above as the Mongolian draw (Fig. 19: A- B, 21: A, 22). In it the index finger is clenched, while the middle, ring and little fingers are held concentrically together. The one notable difference between Egyptian and Assyrian art forms of this Mongolian draw is that in the former the thumb is shown extended irrespective of the direction in which the archer is shooting: in Assyrian art when shooting to the viewer's right the thumb is not portrayed.

In one case Tiglath-pileser Ill, although he shoots to the viewer's left, uses a Mongolian draw (Fig. 23: A, C). Here we clearly see the king 's index finger locking his thumb, and the three fingers not used in the draw are swept backward. The overall impression is strained, however, and it is clear that Assyrian artists had trouble creating a standard for representing a thumb-draw when the archer is seen shooting to the viewer's left. This is presumably the reason behind the phenomenon in Assyrian art of normally depicting a Mediterranean draw when the archer faces the viewer's left.

A similar Mongolian draw, although partially hidden, appears in a justly famous scene of Ashurbanipal hunting lions from his chariot in which he draws to the viewer's left (Fig. 24: A). His drawing hand is shown with the index finger clenched above the arrow and the thumb extended below it (Fig. 19: G, 24: C): the remaining fingers are hidden .

Clearly the Assyrians were equally familiar with, and proficient in, the Mediterranean and the Mongolian draws. It is unlikely that artists would depict an Assyrian king in the reliefs of his own palace using both draws were this not the case (Fig. 21).

We have an interesting confirmation of the use of the Mediterranean draw with the composite bow

Fig. 20. Assyrian arti sts tend to portray archers using vari- ~ ants of the Mediterranean draw when they shoot to the viewer's left. A) Assyrian archer facing left using a threefi ngered Mediterranean Draw; B) Assyrian archer facing left using a two-fingered "Flemish" Mediterranean draw

(from Barnett 1960: 12, PIs. 12, 40)

A

B


A B

Fig. 21. A) Assurnasirpal facing the right uses a Mongolian draw; B) When facing the viewer's left, Assurnasirpal dispatches a lion using a three-fingered Mediterranean draw (from Barnett 1960, PIs. 10 & 26)

Fig. 22. Assyrian horse archer, shooting to the viewer's right, uses the Mongolian draw (from Barnett 1960,

PI. 120)

Fig. 23. A) Tiglat-Pileser III shoots at a city during a siege; ~ he faces the viewer's left; B) Detail of the bow hand; C) Detai I of the drawing hand (from Barnett 1962, PI. LII, ©

Copyright the Trustees of the British Museum) B c


A

Fig. 24. Ashurbanipal hunts lions . Here he draws his bow to the viewer's left. The arrow passes to the left (near side) of the bow and his ann guard also protects his index finger. His drawing hand, partially visible, shows a clenched index finger and a straight thumb, similar to the draw used by Tiglat-Pileser III in Fig. 23. In this case the middle, ring and small fingers are hidden behind the

king's shou lder (from Barnett 1960: PI. 63)

in the Iron Age Near East. Von Luschan (1898) published a fascinating Neo-Hittite orthostat from Zinjirli depicting an archer carrying an angular composite bow with typical duck-shaped nocks over his shoulder (Fig. 25). In his left hand he holds an archer's bracer and three finger tabs of the type used with the Mediterranean draw. Despite this, archers are portrayed in other scenes in Neo-Hittite art using the Mongolian draw (Akurgal 1962: PI. 124).

Perhaps for a volume dealing with the Land of Israel the most interesting question is this: what type of draw did the Judeans use? In Sennacherib's relief of the fall of Lachish Judean archers fire at the Assyrians (Fig. 26 A- B; Paterson 1915, PI. 77; Yadin 1963: 428-437; Barnett 1998a: 101-105 Room XXXVI; 1998b: Pis. 322-352). All of the archers are armed with composite bows. Unfortunately, the upper regions of the tableau are

Fig. 25 . Archer with composite bow, arm guard and finger ~ tabs used in the Mediterranean draw (from Von Luschan

1898, Plate X)

B

c


Fig. 26. A-B) Judean archers defend Lachish from Sennacherib ' s army (from Paterson 1915, PI. 77)

badly degraded and, at least under normal lighting, none of these bowmen's drawing hands have survived in sufficient detail to be able to identify the draw. Given their use of composite bows, however, it seems safe to assume that the Assyrian artists portrayed the Judean archers using Mediterranean andlor Mongolian draws.

Recent excavations conducted by the Israel Antiquities Authority at the Western Wall Plaza in Jerusalem revealed a seventh-century BCE stone seal bearing an image of another Judean archer who is shown in typical Assyrian manner, drawing a composite bow to the viewer's right. 7 Unfortunately, the archer's wrist is signified by little more than a dotl hole, making it impossible to determine whether the Mediterranean, or the Mongolian, draw was intended.

Acknowledgments

I thank the editors of this volume for inviting me to contribute to it. lowe a special debt of gratitude to Mr. Jack Farrell for all his sound comments and advice. I am grateful to Ms. Nancy Debono, Ms. Rebekah Luza, Ms. Kristen Smith and Mr. Dante Bartoli for their help during the preparation of this manuscript.

Notes

A more comprehensive discuss ion of draws will appear in my forthcoming book dealing with archery in biblical times.

2 Wissler (1926: 33) modified the typology of the draws by classifying the Primary, Secondary and Tertiary into a single category, which he termed "Primary."

3 Jack Farrell (personal communication) notes that

a lthough it is normal to place the arrow on the right of the bow when using a Mongolian draw, recent photos have circulated on the web showing Mongolian and Tibetian archers using thumb draws but with the arrow placed on the left side of the bow, indicating that although unusual, this is not impossible (Naadam Archery).


4 See also Morse 1922: 32-34 Fig. 31; Wissler 1926: 34; Kroeber 1927: 286.

5 See Davies' (1930: 29, 31) comments on extracting information from ancient art.

6 My italics. S.W. 7 Anonymous 2008.

References Anonymous 2008 "Rare Hebrew Seal from First Temple Period

Discovered in Archaeological Excavations in Jerusalem's Western Wall Plaza," Science Daily. (13 November 2008, http://www.sciencedaily. com!releasesJ2008/11l081110174056.htm)

ArkeII, A. J. 1949 Early Khartoum, London

Balfour,H. 1921 The Archer's Bow in the Homeric Poems,

London

Barnett, R. D. 1960 Assyrian Palace Reliefs and their Irifluence

on the Sculptures of Babylonia and Persia, London

1976 Sculptures from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh (668-627 B.C.), London

Barnett, R. D., Bleibtreu, E., and Turner, G. 1998a Sculptures from the Southwest Palace of

Sennacherib at Nineveh: Text, London 1998b Sculptures from the Southwest Palace of

Sennacherib at Nineveh: Plates, London

Barnett, R. D. and Falkner, M. 1962 The Sculptures of Assur-Nasir-Ap/i II (833-859

B.C.), Tiglath Pileser III (745-727 B.C.), and Esarhaddon (681-669 B. C.) jrom the Central and South- West Palaces at Nimrud, London

Blackman, A.M. 1914 The Rock Tombs of Meir: Part I. The

Tomb-Chapel of Ukh-Hotep's Son Senbi (Archaeological Survey of Egypt), London

1915 The Rock Tombs of Meir: Part II. The Tomb-Chapel of Ukh-Hotep's Son Senbi (Archaeological Survey of Egypt) London

Bonnet, H. 1926 Die Waffen der Volker des Alten Orients,

Leipzig

Bowles, P.H. 1971 "The Evolution of the Archery Release

Technique,." (M.A. Thesis. Sru:ramento State College)

Davies,. N.d.G. 1935 "The King as SportsJna.nl,," Bulletin of the

Metropolitan Museum {Secti01'l. ~ pp. 49:...52

Elmer, R.P. 1926 Archery, Philadelphia:

Emery, W.B. 1938 Mission arc!reolagiqllle de Nubie 1929-/934:

The Royal Tombs of Ballana and Qustul, Cairo

Epigraphic Smvey 1930 Medinet H.I: EarfterHiafJOllicaf R~Cm:d9 of

Ramaes Ill, Chicago

Faris, N.A. and EImer, R.P: 1945 Arab Archery; An' Arabic Manuscript of about

A.D: 150f} "A Book on the Excellence of the Bow &' Al!7'OW" and the Description The1'eoj, Princeton:

Goedicke, H. 1971 Re-UsedBl«b from. the Pyramidaf Amenemhet

I at Lisht(EgyptiaI4Expeditions, 20'), New York

Grayson, C.B. 1963 "Notes 00. African Thumb Rings~~' Journal of

the Society of Archer-Antiqu(ll!ies 6, p. n 1977 "Archers' Thumfy; Guards," Journal of the

Societyoj' Archer-Antiquaries 20, pp. 42-46

Grimley, G. 1958 The lJooIt oj the Bow, London

Hayes,R.O. 1973 "The Distribution of Me rio tic Archer's Rings;

An Outline of Political Borders;" Meriotiea 1, pp~ 113-122

Jaros-Deckert, B. 1984 Das Gi-ab des In}./tjJ: Die Wandmalereien der

Xl Dynastic, Mainz am R1iein

Kroeber~ AL 1927 "Arrow Release Distributions," University of


California Press Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 23(4), pp. 283-296

Kronenberg, A. 1962 "The Thumb-Ring: a Modem Parallel to a

Meroitic Object," Kush, Journal of the Sudan Antiquities Service 10, pp. 336-337, Plates LXXXI-LXXXIV

Lorimer, H.L. 1950 Homer and the Monuments, London

Loud,G. 1939 The Megiddo Ivories (The University of

Chicago Oriental Institute Publications 52), Chicago

McLeod, W.E. 1958 "An Unpublished Egyptian Composite Bow in

the Brooklyn Museum," American Journal of Archaeology 62, pp. 397-401

Morse,E.S. 1885 Ancient and Modern Methods of Arrow Release,

Salem 1922 Additional Notes on Arrow Release, Salem

Naadam Archery n.d (http://www.ub-mongolia.mnlphotos-mongo-

lialthumbnails.php?album= 1)

Patterson, A. 1915 The Assyrian Sculptures: Palace of Sin ache rib,

The Hague

Pope, S.T. 1918 "Yahi Archery," University of California

Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 13, no. 3 (Berkeley, University of California Press), pp. 103-152, Pis. 21-37

1926 The Adventurous Bowman, London 1965 A Study of Bows and Arrows, University

of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 13, no. 9, New York, pp. 329-415, Pis. 45-64.

Rausing, G. 1967 The Bow: Some Notes on Its Origin and

Development (Acta Archaeologica Lundensia, series in 80, No.6), Lund

Schafer, H. 1931 "Weiteres zum Bogenschiessen im alten

Agypten," Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 34,pp.90-96

Schafer, H. 1974 Principles of Egyptian Art (Trans. J. Baines),

Oxford

Von Luschan, F. 1891 "Bogenspannen." Zeitschriftfor Ethnologie 23,

pp.676-678 1898 "Uber den Antiken Bogen," in Benndorf, o.

(ed.), Festschriftfur Otto Benndorfzu seinem 60. Geburtstage, Vienna, pp. 189-197, taf. X

1922 "Appendix: Bending the Bow," (Transactions of the Berlin Society for Anthropology, Ethnology and Primeval History, Meeting of July 18, 1891. English summary of von F. Luschan, 1891. "Bogenspannen," Zeitschriftfor Ethnologie 23, pp. 676-678), in Morse, Edward S., Additional Notes on Arrow Release. Salem, pp. 44-48

Ward,A.W. 1968 "African Oddments," Journal of the Society of

Archer-Antiquaries 11, pp. 17-18

Wilkinson, J.G. and Birch, S. 1878 The Manners and Customs of the Ancient

Egyptians I-III, London

Wissler, C. 1926 The Relation of Nature to Man in Aboriginal

America, New York

Wolf, W. 1926 Die Bewaffnung des altagyptischen Heeres,

Leipzig

Yadin, Y. 1963 The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands, in the

Light of Archaeological Discovery, London

Wachsmann, S., 2009. On Drawing the Bow. In Eretz-Israel 29 (In Honor of Ephraim Stern). J. Aviram, A. Ben-Tor, I. Eph`al, S. Gitin and R. Reich, eds. Jerusalem, Israel Exploration Society: 238*-257*.

On Drawing the Bow

Documents

Transcript of On Drawing the Bow