Asymmetry in later composites
I recently had the opportunity to examine an unusual composite bow collected in Tibet about a hundred years ago (but probably somewhat older). The bow is basically a Crimean-Tartar design without much recurve/reflex, but with significant asymmetry ? one limb is about 6" longer than the other in an overall length of about 52" nock-to-nock.
Large asymmetry was common in the Hunnic bows, but seems much rarer after the end of the first millennium (the only example that I can think of is a medieval Mongolian bow). Tayburgha records a slight asymmetry in the 14th C Syrian bows, but this is only of the order of 1/2 to 3/4".
Has anyone come across any other noticeably asymmetric later composites (especially Turkish/Crimean-Tartar designs)?
Is there any evidence from artwork that might indicate that the bow was made to an older tradition?
I would be interested to know if this bow is just an example of a known type I have never seen before or something more unique.
Andrew
Large asymmetry was common in the Hunnic bows, but seems much rarer after the end of the first millennium (the only example that I can think of is a medieval Mongolian bow). Tayburgha records a slight asymmetry in the 14th C Syrian bows, but this is only of the order of 1/2 to 3/4".
Has anyone come across any other noticeably asymmetric later composites (especially Turkish/Crimean-Tartar designs)?
Is there any evidence from artwork that might indicate that the bow was made to an older tradition?
I would be interested to know if this bow is just an example of a known type I have never seen before or something more unique.
Andrew
Andrew, this reply doesn?t match your question exactly but it can help.
All the Scythians bowfindings I?ve studied in Siberia were done in an asymmetrical design. Even some of the typical 2-wood- laminated Siberian bows were done this way.
It would be interesting to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of an asymmetrical design. There must have been a time in the history of bowery when asymmetrical designs were prefered.
The University of Bismarck (North Dakota) had done a research about the asymmetrical bowdesign of the Hidatsa Indians. They found out that this design provoques a straighter arrow flight
I experienced while shooting the first of my asymmetrical Scythian reconstructions, that the bow falls ahead, if you shoot it with " a loose grip". This is due to the greater physical weight of the longer upper limb.
This is exactly what hightech archers do with their bows?
Michael
All the Scythians bowfindings I?ve studied in Siberia were done in an asymmetrical design. Even some of the typical 2-wood- laminated Siberian bows were done this way.
It would be interesting to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of an asymmetrical design. There must have been a time in the history of bowery when asymmetrical designs were prefered.
The University of Bismarck (North Dakota) had done a research about the asymmetrical bowdesign of the Hidatsa Indians. They found out that this design provoques a straighter arrow flight
I experienced while shooting the first of my asymmetrical Scythian reconstructions, that the bow falls ahead, if you shoot it with " a loose grip". This is due to the greater physical weight of the longer upper limb.
This is exactly what hightech archers do with their bows?
Michael
When examining a number of Manchu bows side-by-side, I also noticed that they were asymmetrical. The difference in limb length wasn't very big, perhaps 1-2 inches but still present in what I had long time thought to be a symmetrical bow.
I would be very interested in seeing pictures of the bow you mention, and getting some exact measurements. Perhaps some details in the construction of the ears / handle / limb covering may tell us more about its origins.
-Peter
I would be very interested in seeing pictures of the bow you mention, and getting some exact measurements. Perhaps some details in the construction of the ears / handle / limb covering may tell us more about its origins.
-Peter
Michael, It would be interesting to know why asymmetry was normal for over a thousand years and then gradually died out during the latter half of the first millennium, seemingly becoming very rare in the second. What made asymmetry important in earlier times and not later? I can see that a big Hunnic bow will allow more clearance of the horse when asymmetric, a feature becoming less important as the bows became shorter. But the Scythian bows were hardly long. Was it just tradition?
Has the University of Bismark research been published?
Peter, It is interesting that some of the Manchu bows are slightly asymmetric. I will have to run a tape-measure over the bows in the SAA museum when I am next there.
The Tibetan bow is built very much in the Turkish style of construction, but with a more Eastern style of covering - diagonal strips of birch-bark with the horn visible. The string is hide. The general quality of construction is not quite up to the standards of the usual Turkish bow, but a lot better than some "tribal" composites.
I am afraid I do not have permission to post photos of the bow, but I am intending doing a full write-up with measurements (and hopefully a replica) for the Journal of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries.
Andrew
Has the University of Bismark research been published?
Peter, It is interesting that some of the Manchu bows are slightly asymmetric. I will have to run a tape-measure over the bows in the SAA museum when I am next there.
The Tibetan bow is built very much in the Turkish style of construction, but with a more Eastern style of covering - diagonal strips of birch-bark with the horn visible. The string is hide. The general quality of construction is not quite up to the standards of the usual Turkish bow, but a lot better than some "tribal" composites.
I am afraid I do not have permission to post photos of the bow, but I am intending doing a full write-up with measurements (and hopefully a replica) for the Journal of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries.
Andrew
Perhaps the asymmetry indeed may not have had much to do with the horse. It shows from other bows that very large bows can effectively be used from a horse.Andrew Hall wrote:
Michael, It would be interesting to know why asymmetry was normal for over a thousand years and then gradually died out during the latter half of the first millennium, seemingly becoming very rare in the second. What made asymmetry important in earlier times and not later?
Sounds rather Sino-Tibetan indeed. Are you sure the string is hide and not gut? Most of the Western Chinese / Tibetan bows I've seen had gut strings. This didn't work well in more humid regions.Andrew Hall wrote:
The Tibetan bow is built very much in the Turkish style of construction, but with a more Eastern style of covering - diagonal strips of birch-bark with the horn visible. The string is hide.
Great, I'm a member. (I'll probably be in there too with an article.)Andrew Hall wrote:
I am afraid I do not have permission to post photos of the bow, but I am intending doing a full write-up with measurements (and hopefully a replica) for the Journal of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries.
-Peter
This research has been published in a book. I?ve that book, but I can?t find it now. It is written by Mason or Hamilton and deals with the bows of the Native Americans. Maybe another ATARNO could help.
Asymmetrie in bow designs is getting more and more interesting for me, cause every Scythian bow finding I?ve examined in Siberia is asymmetrical. The bow- finding of olon kurin gol has the upper limb almost 2 times longer than the lower limb. The actual state of our research of the Scythian bow design is, that the asymmmetrical design outperforms the symmetrical Scythian bow designs, we did at the beginning of our research.
Due to my knowledge the real English longbow is of an asymmetrical design. I think we?ll have to examine the asymmetrie in bow- designs very seriously.
Michael
Asymmetrie in bow designs is getting more and more interesting for me, cause every Scythian bow finding I?ve examined in Siberia is asymmetrical. The bow- finding of olon kurin gol has the upper limb almost 2 times longer than the lower limb. The actual state of our research of the Scythian bow design is, that the asymmmetrical design outperforms the symmetrical Scythian bow designs, we did at the beginning of our research.
Due to my knowledge the real English longbow is of an asymmetrical design. I think we?ll have to examine the asymmetrie in bow- designs very seriously.
Michael
In what aspect did it perform better than the symmetrical design?redhawk wrote:
The actual state of our research of the Scythian bow design is, that the asymmmetrical design outperforms the symmetrical Scythian bow designs, we did at the beginning of our research.
I've noticed in late Qing pictures that they sometimes appear to nock their arrows in the exact middle of the string. With a normal bow design, the rear end of the arrow would slap the hand like this. The slight assymetry of the Qing bows I've examined may prevent this from happening.
I agree that a lot more study needs done in these. The extremely assymmetrical one you describe sounds very interesting.
-Peter
I rechecked my measurements and the bow is only about 4-5" asymmetric, rather than the 6" I initially reported. It is still much more asymmetric than any other later composite I have heard of.
I have done a quick look on the internet for Tibetan art and found a few representations of bows (there is an interesting collection at http://www.himalayanart.org). Nothing that is obviously asymmetric though.
Peter, the string is listed in the catalogue as being twisted hide. Do you have any tips on how to distinguish hide and gut? The string is dark brown in colour and quite heavily twisted (about 1/2" pitch).
Andrew
I have done a quick look on the internet for Tibetan art and found a few representations of bows (there is an interesting collection at http://www.himalayanart.org). Nothing that is obviously asymmetric though.
Peter, the string is listed in the catalogue as being twisted hide. Do you have any tips on how to distinguish hide and gut? The string is dark brown in colour and quite heavily twisted (about 1/2" pitch).
Andrew
Hi,
We need to be aware with Tibetan arms and armor in artwork from the region, they often seem to represent archaic Indian arms. This is explained in Warriors of the Himalayas by Donald J. Larocca. This book lists a whole range of Tibetan arms that is very different from anything found on Tibetan artwork.
There is only one Tibetan bow in there, but some very nice other archery items.
As far as I know (I've almost only seen gut strings) the gut is more "transparent", it lets the light through better. It is rather smooth as well and tends to get rather hard when dried up, feeling a bit like plastic. I have an old gut string that naturally assumes the straight shape it has been in for so long.
-Peter
We need to be aware with Tibetan arms and armor in artwork from the region, they often seem to represent archaic Indian arms. This is explained in Warriors of the Himalayas by Donald J. Larocca. This book lists a whole range of Tibetan arms that is very different from anything found on Tibetan artwork.
There is only one Tibetan bow in there, but some very nice other archery items.
As far as I know (I've almost only seen gut strings) the gut is more "transparent", it lets the light through better. It is rather smooth as well and tends to get rather hard when dried up, feeling a bit like plastic. I have an old gut string that naturally assumes the straight shape it has been in for so long.
-Peter
I have seen a few hide strings that were twisted from rawhide and were originally white in colour. I agree with Peter in that gut strings often have a translucent, plastic-like look. However there are gut strings made in India that are wrapped in silk and look like pure silk strings. Old strings regularly seem more frayed than silk strings of the same age. The gut itself is remarkable hard and tough.