574 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1962 



4. The mass- velocity relationship and corresponding mass-energy 

 relationship for arrows of different masses shot from the same bow. 



5. Effect of the mass of the string on the initial velocity and energy 

 of the arrow. 



6. The efficiency of a bow-arrow combination, i.e., the fraction of 

 the stored energy in the bow which appears as kinetic energy in the 

 arrow. 



7. The "virtual mass" of the bow. 



8. Factors which affect performance of arrows: their effects on 

 accuracy, and consistency and distance in flight. 



9. The geometry and methods of aiming. 



10. Psychological factors in shooting. 



The list above is representative of some of the questions in the 

 mind of the observant, analytically minded archer who has serious 

 inclinations toward finding the answers. If he does, he has potential 

 guides to improvement in performance of both the archer and his 

 implements, and the search for the answers will have provided pleasant 

 avocation for those who enjoy such pursuits. Our discussion of these 

 matters will be illustrative rather than exhaustive. 



Known kinds of bows are numerous. They may have long limbs 

 or short limbs, equal or unequal in length. Cross-sectional shapes of 

 the limbs are various. Materials may be wood, of a single kind, in 

 "self" bows, or of different kinds, glued together in layers. There are 

 "composite" bows, with layers of several kinds of organic materials, 

 or, in modern form, of laminae of wood and synthetic plastics rein- 

 forced with fiberglass. 



The two representative types of bow from which the kind now gen- 

 erally used has evolved are the longbow, with which are associated 

 centuries of history and tradition, and the oriental, specifically the 

 Turkish, composite bow. Prototypes of the latter are the bows used 

 by the Saracens and by the conquering hordes of Genghis Khan. We 

 have authentic information, dating back to the 15th century, about the 

 Turkish bow. Through the following centuries its design apparently 

 never changed. In the middle of the 19th century, interest in arch- 

 ery vanished with the end of the reign of Sultan Mahmud II, and few 

 if any bows were made in Turkey thereafter. 



The English longbow had straight limbs when relaxed, i.e., not 

 strung, except as the limbs might have taken a set from having been 

 repeatedly drawn. The limbs terminated in fitted tips of horn with 

 grooves ("nocks") in which the loops of the string were seated. 

 Limbs tapered in both width and thickness from grip to tip. At any 

 cross section, the limb was rounded on the belly side, toward the 

 string, and more or less flattened on the back, on the opposite side. 

 In the drawn bow the belly is rnider compression, the back under ten- 



