Part II

brief opportunity of studying the won- derful collection of Assyrian slabs at the British Museum, and also the Assyrian,collections at the Louvre. In the various scenes of war and hunting so graphically depicted, the most perfect representations of archers in the act of drawing the bow are given. At the outset I met with a very curious and unaccount- able discrepancy in the form of release employed, and that w#,s when the archer was represented with his right side, or shaft hand, toward the observer, the hand was with few exceptions in the attitude of the primary or secondary release ; whereas if the archer was represented with his left side, or bow hand, toward the observer, the release with few exceptions represented the Mediterranean re- lease. Or^ in other words, as one faces the sculptured slab the archers, who are represented as shooting towards the 1 right, show with few exceptions either the primary or secondary release, while those shooting towards the left are with few exceptions practicing the Mediterranean release ! . If in every case the Assyrians were represented on the left, as one faces the tablet, fighting the enemy on the right, then one might assume that the enemy was prac- ticing a different release. In an Egyptian fresco, for ex- 24 ANCIENT AND MODEKN METHODS ample, where Rameses II. is depicted in his chariot fighting the Arabs, the enemy is represented as practicing a differ- ent release. While in many cases the Assyrians are on the left of the picture, in other cases they are on the right, and shooting towards the left. It is therefore diffi- cult to decide which release was practiced by them ; and all the more so, since, with very few exceptions, the re- leases are perfect representations of forms practiced today, which have already been described. I have suspected that in one or two cases the Mongolian release might have been intended, though in no case is the thumb-ring represented, though other details of arm-guards, bracelets, etc., are shown with great minuteness. - Taking the releases as they are represented in the SCUlpt- Fig. 21. Assyrian. . ures without regard to the discrepancies above noted, it is an extremely interesting fact that all the earlier Assy- rian archers, that is, of the time of Assurnazirpal, or 884 B.C., the release represented is the primary one, as shown in Fig. 21 ; while in the archers of the reign of Assurbar- nipal, or 650 B. C, the secondary release is shown, or a variety of it, in which the tips of all three fingers are on the string, as shown in Fig. 22. Between these two epochs the sculptures ranging from 745-705 B. C, notably a slab representing the campaign of Sennacherib showing assault on the Kouyunjik Palace, both the primary and secondary releases are represented. If any reliance can OF ARROW-RELEASE. 25 / be placed on the accuracy of these figures, an interesting s relation is shown in the development of the secondary from the primary release, as urged in the, first part of this paper. Possibly a proof that the primary release is in- Fig. 22. Assyrian. tended is shown in the fact that the arrows are represented with the nock end bulbous. On tablets in the British Museum of this intermediate age, or during the reign of Tiglath Pileser, is the first representation of an archer with the right side towards the Pig. 23. Assyrian. fa observer j^acticing the Mediterranean release : and on slabs of therad ate of 650 B. C, one showing Assurbarni- pal's secoml war against Elam, and another one representing the srege of the city of Al-ammu, a number of archers with their right towards the observer are practicing the Mediterranean release (Fig. 23). In the Mediterranean release, which, as I have before remarked, is represented, 4 26 ANCIENT AND MODERN METHODS �v. with few exceptions, by all the archers having the bowhand toward| the observer, there are two varieties shown one in whichUhree fingers are on the string, and another Fig. 24. Assyrian. with only two fingers drawing the bow, as shown in the accompanying figures (Figs. 24, 25). The Mediterranean release occurs in Assyrian sculpture as early as 884 Fig. 25. Assyrian. ak, B. C, as shown on a marble slab in the British Museum representing the siege of a city by Assurnazirpal (Fig. A 26). curious form is shown in Fig. 27, showing Assur- Fig. 26. Assyrian. barnipal in a chariot, shooting lions. The string below is concealed by the archer's arm. The secondary release is probably intended. OF ARROW-RELEASE. In regard to the bow-hand, the thumb is^sgmetimes represented as straight and guiding the arrow, and in other cases as braced inside of the bow. In this connection it may be interesting to note that in the earliest Assyrian bows the ends of the bows are straight fand blunt, the nocks being a simple groove and the'Agtring being tied Fig. 27. Assyrian. whenever the bow is braced, as in certain modern Indian and Aino practice. Other bows are shown at this period with a nock somewhat oblique, and it is possible that the string might have been looped and slipped into the notch, as in the modern English bow. In the later slabs, that is 650 B.C., the ends of the bow are shown abruptly bent, the bent portion in some cases it Pig. 28. Fig. 29 Fig. 30. being carved to represent a bird's head In the bracing of this bow^the string has a permanent loop, and the assist- ance of a second person is required to slip this loop over the point' of the nock while the archer is employed in bending" the bow, which is done by drawing the ends of the bpw*towards him, the knee at the same time being presled in the middle of the bow. (Figs. 28, 29, 30.) In 28 ANCIENT AND MODERN METHODS the earlier reign, the arrows are shown with larger nocks and the barbs, long and narrow, with their outer edges gen- erally parallelto the shaft. The nock end of the arrow is bulbous, as before remarked; and if this is correctly- represented it wpuld settle the question as to the primary release being the, one intended. In the later slabs, the arrow has shorter barbs, with the feathers tapering forward towards the point, and the nock end of the arrow is not bulbous. A more careful study than I was able to give to these sculptures may probably modify the general statements here made concerning the- variations in time of the bow and arrow. Concerning the practice of archery among the ancient Egyptians, Wilkinson in his classical work mentions only two forms of release. He says their mode of drawing the bow was either with the thumb and forefinger or with the first and second fingers. 1 Rawlinson makes the same statement. 2 These two forms as defined by these authors wou)d be the primary and Mediterranean releases. If the representations of the drawings and frescos in ancient Egyptian tombs, as given by Rosallini, Lepsius, and others, are to be relied on, then the ancient Egyptians practiced at least three, and possibly four, definite and distinct methods of release. That many of the releases depicted in these old sculpt- ures and frescos are conventional simply, there can be no doubt ; indeed, some of the releases are plainly impossible, notably that form which shows the archer daintily draw- ing back a stiff bow with the extreme tips of the first two fingers and thumb . Again , the figure of Rameles II. ( see i Manners and Customs of the Ancient Effyptians, 2nd series, Vol. I ,, 207 3 History of Ancient Egypt, Vol. I., p. 471. OF ARROW-RELEASE. 29 Wilkinson, Vol. L, p. 307), which showsthe bow vertical while the shaft-hand is inverted, that is, with palm uppermost, is an equally impossible attitude. Other releases identify themselves clearly with forms, already described, and with slight latitude in the interpretation of the con- ventional forms we may identify th&se as belonging to known types. The earliest releases are those depicted on the tombs of Beni Hassan of the time of Usurtasen I. which according . Fig. 31. Early Egyptian. to the conservatwe chronology of Professor Lepsius dates 2380 B.C. Kere the Mediterranean release is unmistakably shown. The following figure (Fig. 31) from these tombs, copied from Rosallini's great work, indicates this form of release in the clearest manner. In these figures it is interesting to observe that the arrow is drawn to the ear, andglso that the archers are represented as shooting with theTeft as well as with the right hand. Making a stride ofover a thousand years and coming down to the time of Seti I. (1259 B.C.), we have represented a releafse as well as a mode of drawing the arrow above and �-/- & 30 'ancient and modern methods behind the ear, which recalls in the action of the arm certain forms of the Mongolian release. (Fig. 32.) It is true the attitude of the hand might be interpreted as representing the thumb and bent forefinger as shown in the Kg. 32. Egyptian. Seti I. primary release, but the free and vigorous drawing of the bow as shown in the figure could not possibly be accomplished in the primary form with a bow of any strength. Furthermore, the attitude assumed by the Manchu and Fig. 33. Egyptian. Eamesea II, Japanese archer in the Mongolian release vividly recalls this picture of Seti. Egyptologists state that Seti.1. was occupied early in his reign with wars in the east and in resisting the incursions of Asiatic tribes ; and we venture to w OF ARROW-RELEASE. 31 offer the suggestion that during these wars, he might have acquired the more vigorous release as practiced by the Asiatics. 1 Whatever may be the method depicted in the drawing of Seti, it is quite unlike the releases of the time of Usurtasen, and equally unlike the figures of Rameses II., which are so often portrayed. In Figs. 33, 34, copied from Rosallini, the thumb and the forefinger partially bent may be intended to represent the primary release, as in no other way could be inter- preted the bent forefinger and straightened thumb holding 34. Egyptian. Barneses II. the tip of the a.rv&w, with three other fingers free from the string. In the British Museum are casts of a hunting scene, and also of battle scenes of the time of Rameses II., in which the shaft-hanjf'of the archer is in an inverted position. This form of release associated with a vertical bow is an impossible one. Either the hand is wrongly drawn, or the atti- tude of the bow is incorrectly given. The only explanation of this dfscrepancy is the assumption that the bow was 1 It worad be extremely interesting to know whether any object answering the purpose of a thumb-ring has ever been found among the relics of ancient Egypt. 32 fANCIENT AND MODERN METHODS really held in an horizontal position, and the release practiced was the one I have designated as the tertiary release. The Egyptian artist, igno- rant of perspective drawing and utterly Tillable to represent a bow foreshortened, has drawn the bow in a vertical position. As a further proof of this, we find that the tribes of North American In- jdians and the Siamese Jwho practice the terti- ary release usually hold the bow in an horizontal position. Aii examina- tion of the accompany- ing figures will make Fig. 36. Egyptian. this clear. Fig. 35 is copidBfrom the cast re- ferred% in the British Museum^ Fig. 36, from Wilkinson, Vol. i., p. 307; Fig<# 37, from Wilkinson, Vol. i., p. 309. Eeginald Stuart Poole, Esq., of the British Museum, has Fig. 37. Egyptian. kindly sent me an out- line of the nock end of the ancient Egyptian arrow which shows a straight and ^^|j^ OF ARROW-RELEASE. 33 cylindrical shaft. Figs. 38, 39, 40, and 41 are copied from Eosallini. Fig. 38 is probably, intended for the primary, Fig. 39 the tertiary probably, and Figs. 40 and 41 the Mediterranean form. Turning now to the practice of archery among the ancient Grecians, we should expect to find among these peo- Fig. 38. Egyptian. pie, at least, the most distinct and truthful delineations of the attitude of the hand in shooting. Hansard, in his "Book of Archery," p. 428, says of the ancient Greek archers, "Like the modernTurks/T'ersians, Tartars, and many other Orientals, they drew the bow-string with their thumb, the arrow being retained in place by the forefinger. Many ^ Fig. 39. Egyptian. sculptures ^tant in public and private collections, es- pecially those splendid casts from the Island of Egina now in the British Philosophical and Literary Institution, represent several archers drawing the bow-string as I have described.", A study of a number of ancient Grecian releases as shown in rtfck sculpture and on decorated vases reveals only one release that might possibly be intended to repre- sent the Mongolian method, and this is shown on a Greek 5 34 ANCIENT AND MODEBN METHODS vase (black figures on red) figured in Auserlesene Vaser- bilder. With this exception the releases thus far examined are as various, and many of them quite as enigmatical, as those seen among the ancient Egyptians. I puzzled for a long time over these sculptures from the temple of ]g. 40. Egyptian. Athena to which Mr. Hansard refers, and was forced to come to the conclusion that, despite their acknowledged accuracy, the release was an impossible one. It was not till sometime after that I learned that the figures had been carefully restored by Thovaldsen, and the restored parts corn- Egyptian. prised the hands and arms, as well as the extremities of most of the figures. With this information I had occasion to hunt up a history of these figures, and found the following in a work by Eugene Plon entitled "Thovallsen his Life and Works," republished in this country by Roherts Brothers. The figures were restored by Thovaldsen in 1816. Among the restored parts were the hands of the archers. "The statues were in Parian marble, and he used so- much OF ARROW-KELEASE. 35 care in matching the tints of the new pieces as almost to deceive a practiced eye. He was frequently asked by vis- itors to the Atelier which were the restored paints. 'I cannot say,' he would reply laughing ; 'I neglected to mark them, and I no longer remember. Find them out for yourself if you can'" (p. 56). Of the$e restorations, however, it is possible that Mr. Hansard was not aware, though if he had ever attempted drawing a bow in the manner represented in these figures, he would have seen the absurdity as well as the impossibility of the attitude and, furthermore, had he been at all familiar with the Mongolian release he would have seen that there was really no approach to the form as employed by the Manchu, Korean, Japanese, or Tui'k. ' The following figure (Fig. 42) is sketched from the set of casts in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. An examination of these Fig. 42. Khovaldsen's restoration of hand. figures will show that the angle made by the shaft-hand in A relation to the hcw-hand is also inaccurate. release that might at firstfeight suggest the Mongolian form is shown in the accompanying figure (Fig. 43) representing an Amazon archer, which is painted on a Greek vase of the 4th cen- tury B.C. flffhe forefinger seems to be holding the end of the thumb, but the thumb is not hooked over the string as it ou^ht to be. If the hand be correctly drawn it repre- sents quite jwell