[Sean Manning]

I'm working on a bibligraphy for a comparative project. I have some resources handy on European longbows and Turkish bows, but I don't have much of a background in East Asian archery. What are some good references on:
- The physical properties of Chinese, Japanese, or Korean military bows in the 15th-17th centuries (length along the belly, length from nock to nock when strung, draw length, draw force, arrow types, arrow weights and lengths, etc.)
- The use of Chinese, Japanese, or Korean military bows in the 15th-17th centuries (draw techniques, training, tactics)?

There seem to be two or three members who have a strong background in that area, and I would appreciate their advice.

Thanks,

Sean

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

Stephen Selby's Chinese Archery provides a wealth of primary sources on the subject.

From what I've read, draw weights for decided archers fall into two basic ranges across the world: 140-180lbs for infantry and 80-120lbs for cavalry.

[Timo Nieminen]

I'll second the recommendation for Selby's Chinese Archery. He also has another book, Archery Traditions of Asia, which might be useful (I haven't seen it, so can't say for sure, and I don't know how much it overlaps Chinese Archery).

For some first-hand accounts of Chinese/Manchu archery in action, The Diary of a Manchu Soldier in Seventeenth-Century China is, as far as I know, a unique source.

For Japanese archery, George Cameron Hurst III, Armed Martial Arts of Japan: Swordsmanship and Archery is the best I've seen. It covers the transition from military archery to sporting archery, which sits right in your period of interest.

For Korean archery, Eugene Y. Park, Between Dreams and Reality: The Military Examination in Late Choson Korea, 1600-1894 has the best coverage I've seen of the archery component of the Korean military examinations (which was, essentially, target archery, flight archery, heavy bow archery, horseback archery, lance, and polo). But it doesn't have much.

For more Korean stuff, the Imjin War/Hideyoshi's Invasion is in your period, and the various books on that might be of some use. The classic 3 are Kenneth M. Swope, A Dragon's Head and a Serpent's Tail: Ming China and the First Great East Asian War, 1592-1598, which has a little but not much, and Hawley's and Turnbull's books, which I haven't read.

There is a book on Korean Traditional Archery which might be of interest. I don't know how relevant it is (haven't read it); it looks to be focussed on later sporting archery. However, Korean sporting archery was closely connected with military examination archery.

For size of bows, Traditional Archery from Six Continents has measurements, and excellent photos.

The various papers I've seen tended to deal with earlier archery, the origin of the composite bow, etc., rather than the later period you ask about.

[Sean Manning]

[Sean Manning]

[Nadeem Ahmad]

Sean

I recommend you get in touch with Stephen Selby and Peter Dekker. Both (and other knowledgeable people) can be contacted on the ATARN message boards.

[Lloyd Winter]

I'll second the ATARN web sites for Stephen Selby

http://atarn.org/frameindex.htm

http://atarn.net/phpBB2/index.php

[Timo Nieminen]

Just ran into another Chinese source: T'ien-Kung K'ai-Wu, , by Sung Ying-hsing (1587-1663). This book is an encyclopedia of technology, discussing grain growing, metallurgy, ceramics, silk, paper, and weapons. The weapons discussed are bows, crossbows, and firearms.

He writes that the typical bow for strong archers is 120 catties in draw weight (1 catty = just under 600g), so 72kg or 155-160lbs. For average archers, he says about 10-20% lower, so 125-140lb, and bows for weak (military) archers, about 1/2 (of 120 catties), so about 80lb.

For very strong archers (with the "strength of tigers"), more powerful than 120 catties.

[William P]

theres a man called bede dwyer who has a fair bit of experience studying the history of asian archery, from persian to chinese http://www.atarn.org/whatis.htm he apears to be part of this research network, see how it goes.

http://www.atarn.org/magyar/niya_2.htm heres ONE webpage showing his thoughts

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

[Bennison N]

Might I suggest contacting Peter Dekker from mandarinmansion(dotcom)?

Peter is an expert archer in the Manchu, or Qing Dynasty style, and very knowledgeable about the whole thing. He'll definitely be able to offer a wealth of knowledge. I've only had short discussions about Archery with him (mainly we discuss Chinese military sabres), and always come away with almost more info than I can process...

[Gary Teuscher]

[Sean Manning]

Thanks for the other references. That Chinese book should be useful because they let us compare contemporary measurements of draw weight to modern calculations and measurements of old bows.

[Gary Teuscher]

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

The specific connection between English and Native American bows comes from Garcilaso de la Vega's La Florida del Inca. This is an English translation. Cabeza de Vaca likewise described Native warriors what's now the southeastern U.S. as wielding massive bows: supposedly 7-8ft and as thick as an arm, though that seems exaggerated. English observers in what's now the northeastern U.S. additionally noted similarities between their bows and Natives as well as the power of Native bows. This book has a number of insightful accounts. In one case during the Pequot War, an a Native arrow struck a English captain's breastplate "as if it had been pushed by pike."

[Sean Manning]

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

In de la Vega's account an Englishman, a Spaniard raised in England, and a Native American all fought on the Spanish side with bows and arrows. (None of the other Spaniards fought with bow and arrow, but rather with the crossbow.) De la Vega made no distinction between the weapons of these three but wrote that they all did good service.

Back to composite bow, Peter Dekker continues to do great work on Manchu archery, such as this treatment of the Manchu bow. The evidence so far indicates that Manchu bow perform much better per unit of draw weight than English-style yew bows, though I'd like to see further tests.

[Sean Manning]

Ok, I see it on p. 524 of "The De Soto Chronicles." The other book by Harold Leslie Peterson has a reference to cotton armour which I can add to my collection.

[Lafayette C Curtis]

I do Eastern-style thumb draw archery myself, though the source I'm working from (Taybugha's late 13th/early 14th Syrian Mamluk archerty manual) is probably too early and too "Western" for your specific inquiry. For something more particularly Chinese, I'd recommend Stephen Selby's video series here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frY5RolIAlE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5MeKDnjtmg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKY9qILBrH4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFPssNiSvOg

[X Zhang]

in Ming dynasty(1368~1644), the Chinese bow can be viewed as a variant of Crimean Tatar bow, light arrow, high muzzle velocity, flat trajectory, long range



And in Qing Dynasty(1644~1912), the Chinese bow has become a radically different kind of weapon, heavy arrow, low muzzle velocity....but high momentum and awesome stopping power.....