BOW 



383 



BOW 



yet predominate over the musketry of modern times. 

 Various publications have appeared on the si 

 some of recent ii, I -maining a bowman's man- 



ual exercise, ani .; to combine the use of the 



bow along with the pikr. The reasons advanced in 

 favour of the bow are undoubtedly plausible at first 

 sight ; but we doubt much if they will bear analysis. 

 They chiefly relate to the great precision and expedi- 

 tion in the use of the bow, to the dread which a shower 

 of arrows in their flight would inspire, and to the con- 

 fusion they would produce. Formerly, indeed, the 

 manual exercise of fire arms, with rests and match- 

 locks, was a slow and circuitous operation, and even 

 themost expert musqueteer could give only a few dis- 

 charges in a limited time. Yet, notwithstanding all 

 the modern improvements, it is maintained bythe parti- 

 zans of the bow, that arrows may be sent still quicker 

 from it. Twelve, it is affirmed, may be shot by an 

 expert archer in a minute, and by one of moderate 

 skill, from six to eight, while not above half as 

 many discharges can be made from a musquet; 

 " so that archers," as one of these writers observes, 

 " could always be enabled to return two shot for 

 one of the enemy. The advantage must be evident, 

 attending the quick discharge of such falling showers 

 of arrows, the danger of which is seen and appre- 

 hended. Is it possible to suppose but the greatest 

 carnage and confusion must take place, even with the 

 best disciplined troops ? Let an idea be formed of the 

 terror of the object, in supposing a body of 1000 

 archers, opposed to a like number, or even to great 

 superiority within their distance. What impression 

 must it not have on the enemy, the sight and effect 

 of at least 6000 arrows, flying upon their line in a 

 minute? Under such flights, kept up without inter- 

 mission, how would it be possible for them, either 

 horse or foot, to perform their evolutions or exercise, 

 or not to fall into rout and disorder, amidst such car- 

 nage and visible slaughter? For musqueteers are 

 enabled to keep their order, as opposed to each other, 

 from not seeing it. But under such galling dischar- 

 ges, if the cavalry could possibly push to the charge 

 of the archers, they would then plant their pikes. 

 This palisade, of a double row of lances, would ef- 

 fectually secure the ranks of the archers from being 

 broke, and enable them, by their terrible discharges, 

 to put their adversaries to rout!" The partizans of 

 the bow also consider musket balls less effectual than an 

 equal number of arrows would prove. Marshal Saxe, 

 a celebrated general, computes, that only one ball of 

 85 takes effect. Others, that only one in 40 strikes, 

 and no more than one in 400 is fatal. At the bat- 

 tle of Tournay, in Flanders, fought on the 22d of 

 May, 179K it is calulated that 236 musket shot were 

 expended in disabling each soldier who suffered. On 

 comparing these results with the precision of the 

 bow, it has been maintained, that, at least, every 

 tenth arrow would be effectual, in a disclir.r <;L' from 

 well trained archers. We apprehend, hov. -ver, that 

 the partiality for archery, as an amusement, > i had no 

 inconsiderable influence in recommending t to th >e 

 who would adopt it as a warlike weapi t mn: y 



important obstacles against its revival 

 looked. See Moseley's Essay on Arc/tc>,:; Ma :>'s 

 Considerations on reviving t'.e Lung Bow and Pike ; 



Boyar. 



Ax:ham's Toxophil:is ; Wood's liou-mnn's Glory; Bower 

 andStrntt's .V/;or/.v and l'n,\times. See also Ancm 

 and (c) , 



BOWER, VVu.Ti.it, abbot of St Colin, the con- 

 tinuator of Fordun's Si-oiirlimnicnn, was born at 

 Haddingtori in the year \'M~>. At the age of IS 

 he assumed the religious habit ; and, after finishing 

 his philosophical and theological studies, visited 1'ana 

 in order to study the civil and canon law. Having re- 

 turned to his native country, he was unanimously elect- 

 ed abbot of St Colm in the year 1418. At the request 

 of Sir David Stewart of Rossyth, he undertook to 

 transcribe the work of Fordun ; but, instead of exe- 

 cuting a mere transcript, he inserted large interpola- 

 tions, and continued the narrative to the death of 

 James I. The principal materials for this continua- 

 tion had, however, been collected by his predecessor. 

 See Irving's Dissertation tin the Literary History of 

 Scotland, p. 70., and the article FOKDUS. (e) 



BOWLESIA, a genus of plants of the class jPen- 

 tandria, and order Monogynia. See BOTANY, page 



179- (w) 



BOWSPRIT. See SHIP-BUILDING. 



BOXING. See PUGILISM. 



BOYAR, or BOIAR, an appellation given to the 

 Russian lords or grandees. This appellation seems 

 to belong properly to the upper nobility ; for in the 

 diplomas of the Czar of Muscovy, the boyars 

 mentioned before the waywodes. Neither the origin 

 of this class of nobility, nor the precise nature and 

 extent of their dignity, can at present be ascer- 

 tained. Some have been of opinion, that they were 

 the privy counsellors of the king ; in which case, un- 

 less we suppose their office hereditary, their prece- 

 dence must have been merely personal and temporary. 

 Others have maintained, that the original boyars were 

 foreigners of distinction, who carried their rank along 

 with them into the Russian empire. Whatever may 

 have been their origin, it does not appear to be of a 

 very ancient date. No trace of them appears during 

 the Tartarian or Mongolian sovereignty ; nor even 

 during the reign of the Czar Ivan Vassilievitch I. 

 We find, however, that, under the Czar Vassilievitch 

 II., they were powerful enough to collect a consider- 

 able force ; and even then, their aspiring and turbu- 

 lent ambition required all the efforts of that monarch 

 to keep them in awe. The distraction into which 

 the empire was afterwards thrown, by the ambitious 

 views of the patriarch and the superior clergy, gave 

 the boyars a favourable opportunity of extending 

 their power. From this period, we find them in pos- 

 session of the principal offices of state, frequently 

 usurping an undue authority, and involving the em- 

 pire in confusion and distress. At the framing of 

 the vloshenie, or old law of the land, the boy- 

 ars were consulted, probably as privy counsellors, 

 under which name they were generally mentioned 

 in the ukases. To check their encroachment, and 

 to repress their presumption, an order was issued 

 by Peter I. in 1701, that their names should not 

 thenceforth be mentioned in the public edicts. Upon 

 the whole, it appears, that the boyars held the first 

 rank after the sovereign ; that they were considered 

 the privileged representatives of the people, and es- 

 pecially of the nobility ; and that they took the lead 



