Telhis-i Resail??r-r?mat translated and on market

Gokmen · Post by **Gokmen** » Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:56 pm

Hi all,

good news, Telhis-i Resail??r-r?mat is translated to today's Turkish and can be bought in Turkey.
Unfortunately it is only in Turkish (time to learn Turkish heheh).
This makes the work of Joachim Hein and Klopsteg somewhat obsolete.
I guess this work will clear away some mistakes and misunderstandings.

Telhis-i Resail??r-r?mat
compiled by Mustafa Kani
Istanbul : 1263 [1847],
Dar??t-Tibaat??l-Amire [Imperial Printing House].
278 p.

Pages 4-36 inclusive contain the writings of Abdullah Effendi. He was scribe at the Ayub Ansari Mosque. It consists of a
dedication to the ruler, and the forty hadith about archery, along with other religious material. Kani also includes his own
discussion on the traditions and views of Turkish archers.
Pages 37-60 ? chapter 1 ? deals with traditions, legends, and history of Turkish archery.
Pages 60-116 ? chapter 2 ? describes the course taken by a novice archer through to his full initiation into the Archers
Guild. It also describes the technical side of archery in great detail.
Pages 116-128 ? chapter 3 ? is a detailed account of distances achieved by Sultan Mahmud II and his associates on the ok
maydan.
Pages 128-207 ? chapter 4 ? deals with the technical side of bow construction, along with errors on shooting technique.
Pages 207-272 ? chapter 5 ? is the conclusion, or closing chapter. It gives detail on construction of accessories, and
tournament rules of the archer?s guild.
Pages 223-269 ? is a record of flights made on the 48 ranges of the ok maydan.
Page 269 ? is a statement that the Sheikh of the Archers Guild has read and approved of the book, and that his son,
Bodjet, and archer and arrow maker, has made the drawings.
Page 270 ? contains an appendix to chapter 4, in which details of arrow making are given.

Jos?Dom · Post by **Jos?Dom** » Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:33 pm

Good! Gokmen will kindly translate in English the whole book for us, ha-ha! Just kidding

Is it illustrated? That would make it worthwhile for foreigners.

I don't remember well, but I think the English translation was available online some time ago.

Peto · Post by **Peto** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:09 am

Jos?Dom wrote:I don't remember well, but I think the English translation was available online some time ago.

If you remember where, I will grateful...

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:51 am

Gokmen,
This is a great step forward, but, as one who is working through Hein at the moment, I must point out that the problem in Kani's work is not in the Turkish vocabulary. The large number of Arabic and Persian words that are no longer used in Modern Turkish are the real problem because you cannot just look them up in a dictionary to find out what they mean. You have to have some idea how they were used at the time and whether Kani was quoting an earlier author who used them differently.

Because Hein was not an archer, he misunderstood some of the text through lack of practical experience. Klopsteg did understand archery and physics, but was misled by some of Hein's confusion. I have found Turkish authors are now much more aware of these problems and are very careful about how they explain old books. However, Hein was very aware of the way the Osmanlis wrote and had a good insight into the literary background of the work.

I hope the book is on Amazon or some other easy to access bookseller internationally. I will certainly get a copy. Thanks for letting us know.

For people interested in the sometimes obscure Persian words used in archery and other martial arts, I recommend Lexicon of Arms and Armor from Iran: A Study of Symbols and Terminology by Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani. Aside from New Persian spellings that could be directly related to Ottoman texts, there is a lot of earlier references in Old Persian and Middle Persian.

Here it is on Amazon:http://www.amazon.com/Lexicon-Arms-Armo ... 3932942310

Uli · Post by **Uli** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 2:30 pm

If someone could just translate the chapter on bow making to english that would be interesting.

David C. Sterling · Post by **David C. Sterling** » Fri May 13, 2011 1:58 am

Are there any further developments in terms of printing an English version of Mustafa Kani's "Telhis-i Resailu r-rumat". Just wondering if anyone has any information? Thanks!

Daniel · Post by **Daniel** » Mon May 16, 2011 8:39 pm

"If someone could just translate the chapter on bow making to english"

and one about arrows, and schooting and....

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Tue May 17, 2011 2:22 am

I have Hein's translation into German and I am working through it. However, it is sometimes hard to untangle his comments from those of Mustafa Kani. At the moment I am concentrating on the sections on shooting.

Adam Karpowicz has written a much more accessible book on Ottoman bow making and I think that is a better way to go unless you are familiar with dealing with texts that sometimes quote without any indication so you might end with a sentence with information from two countries and several centuries apart.

Arrow making is more problematic since some of our Turkish colleagues have proved by examining damaged arrows that the construction method of the nocks is somewhat different than some of the English language texts suggest. I have been replicating some of the techniques, but I am not ready to publish yet. It is also important to note that sixteenth through nineteenth century nocks are not only of one type. There are two major shapes of nock slot used in the Turkish empire; the metropolitan made in Istanbul and probably most cities of the empire and the Crimean Tatar. One is a nock with converging cusps and the other has parallel cusps. This is only discussing the shapes of the slot. There are also constructional methods and outside profiles of the nock to consider. Then there are the profiles of arrows, balance, footing, methods of reinforcing the foot, point structure and fletching.

Daniel · Post by **Daniel** » Wed May 18, 2011 12:53 pm

"Turkish colleagues have proved by examining damaged arrows that the construction method of the nocks is somewhat different than some of the English language texts suggest"

Would you shed some light over it? pictures, drawings anything

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Fri May 20, 2011 1:45 am

I think there are pictures on the site somewhere of this. Basically, instead of fixing two cusps of brazil wood to the sides of the site of the nock, the two pieces touch and form the base of the slot of the nock when it is cut out. There are also two slits in the sides of the arrow shaft where the tips of the cusps are lodged. I think that this was to aid in manufacture to fix the pieces in position. All of this was covered by the sinew binding.

In the nock diagram in Payne-Gallwey, the arrow shaft ends in a truncated wedge. This has be replicated in most later discussions. The real construction method explains a problem I had examining old arrows. I could not see a strip of pale wood from the arrow shaft at the base of the nock slot. Once I understood that the brazil wood pieces were glued together as well as to the wooden shaft, it all made sense.

David C. Sterling · Post by **David C. Sterling** » Wed May 25, 2011 11:09 pm

Adam Karpowicz's book is a tremendous contribution to the understanding of the making and design of Turkish bows. However, I believe that it would also be very informative to have a translation in English of Mustafa Kani's work considering it is a cornerstone of Turkish archery literature.

I wonder if there any archery experts out there who have the linquistic skills to interpret his work? One of the reasons that I ask is that I have a late 18th century Turkish archery treatise. However, it contains no illustrations, and I don't really know what aspects of archery are dealt with or even if the work is truly on archery.

Obviously, I'm curious to find out more about the details of this work. If anyone knows of someone who could help me interpret Ottoman Turkish written in Arabic script [Osmanli Turkish] -- at least the first few pages, I would appreciate hearing from you.

Adam Karpowicz · Post by **Adam Karpowicz** » Thu May 26, 2011 9:17 am

Yes, it would be useful to have the book translated, but as Bede said, it may not bring much and confuse people. Such translation would rather be an interpretation (as it is the case with Hein's) and would depend on the skill and experience of the person who does the translation.

Cem translated for me all passages relevant to the construction of the bows and I tried to make the best of it in my book. Bear in mind, Mustafa Kani was not a bowyer and one can not take all information he presented literally, since, I suspect, he probably did not quite understand all details which the bowyer(s) showed him.

Adam

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Fri May 27, 2011 1:47 am

Adam is right. Kani was commissioned by the Sultan to write the treatise. Though he was a good archer by our standards, we was only a courtier to the Turks. He compiled a great deal of information from earlier books and in the fashion of the time did not always distinguish what was his own writing and what was from earlier sources. Even in Hein, I have sometimes had trouble separating the translator from the author from the authorities.

It is a big job if done properly and not worthwhile doing if done poorly.

David C. Sterling · Post by **David C. Sterling** » Tue May 31, 2011 1:17 am

Bede and Adam are certainly on point with their observation that the translation needs to be done carefully and in such a way as to avoid propagating misunderstandings and misinformation. Having said that, I am sure that for many of us, an English translation would be welcomed as well as found valuable.

Mustafa Kani's book is a seminal work on Turkish Archery, not to mention archery in general. After all, his book has been translated in part by a number of individuals including Klopsteg [who obviously concentrated on the more technical aspects of bowmaking, etc.], Hein, the author of "Sacred Archery", Hammer-Purstall as well as others. Even Klopsteg found that between the time of the publication of his first edition of "Turkish Archery" in 1934 and the second edition in 1947 he learned valuable insights that improved his knowledge of the subject and was able to add new information.

Now that the book has been translated into the modern Turkish language, perhaps it may better lend itself to an English translation.

While an English translation might not be perfect -- if it is properly done by an informed individual(s), it could still be extremely informative.

With the availability of Adam's own in-depth book "Ottoman Turkish Bows - Manufacture & Design", along with Faris & Elmer's "Arab Archery", Paterson's "Saracen Archery" and other such material, a knowledgable translator has a lot more technical material and resources available to help produce and develop an accurate translation.

I guess I am just "wishing" but considering the interest in all aspects of Turkish archery along with the technical aspects of bow making, arrow making and shooting there is bound to be a ready audience for such a book. You may recall in 1934 that when the first edition of Klopsteg's book was published, it was actually sold out before it was actually printed -- such was the interest in the subject.

Just some thoughts!

Gokmen · Post by **Gokmen** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:29 am

Hi David,

I found an interesting book which was approximately written at the same time as Kani's. "Grammar of the Turkish Language" by Arthur Lumley Davids 1832. You can see all pages online here: http://www.archive.org/stream/grammarof ... 5/mode/2up

Even though it explains a lot, you should not hope to learn Ottoman Turkish through this book. Nevertheless it is very interesting and reflects a bit the sentiment and atmosphere of the 19th century especially in the introduction text.

Learning Ottoman is indeed a huge problem, even for us Turks, as the grammar and words used are different, mixed with Persian and Arabic.
Another problem is also that the language changes so much during the centuries. Also who writes the text makes a big difference, normal people's Turkish is easier to understand, court texts are very hard to understand. Interestingly sometimes I might decipher Mamluk kipchak texts easier than Ottoman texts.

I have the mentioned book. It is divided into 3 sections.
1. The original pages in Arabic script in Ottoman Turkish.
2. Ottoman Turkish but in Latin alphabet
3. Today's Turkish in Latin alphabet

I think the best approach is to look at the 3 sections of the book to understand a topic. That's how I do it.
Many topics are explained in much more detail than in Hein or Klopstegs book. And some sections "make sense again" after reading the original.

And you are right, I also believe that this book translated into English would be a milestone in the archery literature. But it is a huge project..

thanks

Gokmen