Is Egypt the only culture where the bow was considered a royal weapon?
It wasn't the bow itself.
It was the combo of chariot + bow.
Regular chariots had spikes on their wheels and were meant to shock enemy formations.
Royal chariots were for harassing and kiting from a distance.
>>890822
>Regular chariots had spikes on their wheels and were meant to shock enemy formations.
making things up: the post
>>891279
I believe several different cultures used blades on the sides of chariot wheels.
>>891279
Chariots were the tanks of antiquity.
What else do you think they were made for? They blasted through formations and shattered them.
They were vulnerable to javelins and skirmishers though.
>>890817
How about everyone living on that stretch of grass from Hungary to the Pacific ocean
>>891290
>>891292
Early chariots (such as the ones we are discussing) were used for archers because it is much more stable than a horse.
Chariots could also be used for punching through formations although in this they could only do that in perfect terrain and less effectively than cavalry (the soldier is too far back to participate, so you don't get lance chariots etc, the only hope is that the horses are bold enough and that the enemy aren't firm enough to hold them) and egyptian chariots were not sythed, in fact sythed chariots dont appear until about the 5th century BC.
Primarily Egyptian chariots were for archery and whilst they did break infantry they had to do this on favourable ground and with an infantry followup, once the chariots were forced to slow they were in big trouble.
This Rome Total War myth of Chariots as tanks of the ancient world, especially egyptian 1500BC ones, needs to leave. There's a reason they were replaced by heavy cavalry (the actual tanks of the ancient world) once stirrups became widespread.
>>890817
Pretty much all bronze age empires in the middle East and Greece had chariot archers as the highest prime soldier. China and North India too IIRC.
Homer describes the Greeks as using a chariot as battle taxi but in actual fact they would have used it much like Egyptians.
>>891292
>They were vulnerable to javelins and skirmishers though.
Not so sure about that in a bronze age context, light skirmishers with javelins have some trouble dealing with mobile archers.
>>891350
>bronze age
Spotted the evolutionist.
>>890817
>The Bow is said to be one of the oldest and most sacred Japanese weapons; the first Emperor Jimmu is always depicted carrying a bow.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_Yumi
Chinese emperors certainly seemed to enjoy using bows, mostly because they enjoyed hunting (you know like pharaohs)
>>891340
>There's a reason they were replaced by heavy cavalry (the actual tanks of the ancient world) once stirrups became widespread.
>once stirrups became widespread.
What the fuck lol.
Proper stirrups weren't invented until ~2nd-3rd century AD, and didn't reach Europe until the migratory period and the dark ages (IIRC around 6th-7th century). Chariots were superceded by cavalry a thousand years prior to stirrups being used in the west (even if cultures like the Britons kept using them for a few centuries because they had shit horses for riding).
Several gods of hinduism had divine bows. Rama, one of Vishnus incarnations, needed to prove his martial prowess to the King Janaka to marry Sita. He did this by not only being able to draw, but also break the bow of Shiva, called Pinaka.
If you read tales and myths of hinduism you will read how gods and kings in battle would hurl missiles at each other. Especially in the myths about gods fighting demons, when they go full Saiyajin-mode and shower the battlefield with millions of arrows with their thousand arms.
>>890817
Odysseus won Penelope with a bow.
Check this magnificent bastard out.
