No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
In the new edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam part of the article “ ‘Arabiyya” is devoted to a study of the Arabic vernaculars. In his treatment of the Eastern dialects H. Fleisch raises the following problem: “Certain loan-words pose questions: how did the Persian keshtebān ‘thimble’, which is not known in literary Arabic or in Turkish reach S-L [Syrian and Lebanese]? How did the Pahlawī randa
‘plane’, an early loan-word, of which there is no evidence in literary Arabic or Turkish (Persian randa), reach Aleppo, and by what route? The comparative study of vocabulary has not yet been pursued sufficiently to enable us to dwell further on this subject here.” To the problem of keshtebān the solution probably lies in an unexpected sphere, namely, that of the toxophilite, and is suggested by the evidence to be outlined below. It is not unlikely that the answer to the question posed by randaj should be sought in the same general field, though on this point I can only surmise.
1 EI 2 Vol. I, p. 577, col. 2.
2 See, for instance, Spiro, S., Arabic–English Dictionary (2nd ed.), Cairo, 1923, s.v.Google Scholar
3 Princeton U.P., 1945.
4 Arab archery, 123.
5 In conjunction with Lieutenant-Commander W. F. Paterson, R.N., an authority on archery and the Oriental composite bow, I have translated and studied this work in detail. It is to be published later this year as: Latham, J. D. and Paterson, W. F., Saracen archery (Holland Press).Google Scholar
6 See Ibn Ḥajar, Inbā' al-ghumr, Bodleian Library MS Huntington 123, fo. 129a. cf. Ritter, H., Der Islam, XVIII, 137.Google Scholar
7 Fo. 36a.
8 Istanbul MS Topkapi Sarayi Müzesi Kütüphanesi, III. Ahmet: 2608, fos. 34b–35a; British Museum MS Or. 1358, fos. 57b–58b; Paris, Bibl. Nationale MS Arabe 2833, fos. 27a–28a.
9 Istanbul MS Aya Sofya 3314, fos. 24a–25a; Bodleian Library MS Huntington 208, fos. 53b–54a.
10 Istanbul MS Aya Sofya 4193: 795/1393, and Paris, Bibl. Nationale MS Arabe, 6160: 799/1397.
11 III. Ahmet: 2608 (see above n. 8).
12 See, for instance, Arabe 6160 (see above n. 10), fo. 26a, and Leiden MS, Bibl. Rijksunivers. Cod. Or. 74, fo. 16a.
13 See e.g. Steingass, , Comprehensive Persian–English Dictionary (1930)Google Scholar, s.v.; Haïm, New Persian–English Dictionary, s.v.; Redhouse, Turkish and English Lexicon, s.v.
14 Information of W. F. Paterson.
15 Bodleian Library MS Huntington 264, fos. 63a–b.
16 Marḍī b. ‘Alī, Tabṣirat arbāb al-albāb fī kayfiyyat an-najāt fī l-ḥurūb (see preceding note). On this work, see Cahen, C., “Un traité d'armurerie composé pour Saladin”, Bull. d'Études Orientales, XII, 1947–1948Google Scholar. The portion relating to archery is to be published shortly by M. Antoine Boudot-Lamotte of the University of Bordeaux.
17 cf. Ghunyah (B.M. Add. 23489), fos. 36a–b.
18 ibid.
19 ibid.
20 See EI2, Vol. I, s.v. ‘Abbāsids (B. Lewis).
21 Manāqib at-Turk, ed. G. van Vloten, , Leiden, 1903, 12, 29 ff.Google Scholar
22 This much seems clear from the Ghunyah. From all accounts archery declined much more slowly in Syria than in Egypt. It is worth noting that in the 14th century Syrian archers were valued as far west as Morocco and that in Fez they inhabited a quarter named after Ḥimṣ (see Le Tourneau, R., Fès avant le Protectorat, Paris, 1949, 66)Google Scholar. The Sasanian design of composite bow was certainly known in Syria as early as the first half of the 8th century: see illustration (apparently reversed in error) of floor fresco from Qaṣr al-Ḥayr al-Gharbī in Gabrieli, F., Muhammad and the conquests of Islam, 1968, p. 96Google Scholar. The country may well, then, have enjoyed a tradition in archery dating from the late Umayyad period, and we cannot exclude the possibility that the term angushtvān was known there long before the 12th century.