Bulgarian findings regarding composite bows

And here are some thumbrings. Those are dated 7 th to 14th c.

Lord Ruthven, you are right. Archeologists never seen working bow. If you want to find out anything about old bows, you need archeologist, historian, bow maker, and archer!!! And that's the main problem.
Write some basic Bulgarian history, for me and for others. Mix of Slavs and old Bugars, who were Turkish tribe, right? Archery tradition came from Turkish side? But Slavs were also archers, just not horse archers?

You are absolutely right about archaeologists, historians, bow makers and archers. Actually the problem is not only regarding bows - it's the same with every piece of armory and weapons.

About the history - Well, there's dispute what are the origins of the old bulgars - turkick or sarmathian. There is historical, archaeological and linguistical evidence of both. The problem here is very politically charged - pro-rusian historians say old bulgars that came here were verry litle turkick tribe in the sea of slavs, anti-rusian historians - the bulgars were about the same number as slavs and were sarmathians. So for now there's a mess of opinions.
I hope the next generation historians will not be so politically charged so there might be a reason behind theories.
However, what is known is bulgars were good horse-archers who used only composite bows.
The slavs on the other hand also used bows with great success, but their bows, according to byzantine authors were selfbows. They were foot-archers. After the union of the ethnic groups and adoption of christianity during the reign of knyaz Boris it seems that the composite bow was addopted from all.

Later invaders (and in most cases - allies) were pechenegs, magyars, kummans who also used composite bows.

Best regards

Ohohoo guys, if this thumbrings are earlier then Otomans - i mean from Avars or Bulgars times ,that is ,what i know very first thumbrings in European archeological founs. But this gold looks like turkish...

Probably some of the thumb rings are Byzantine too. The introduction of thumb rings into the Balkans probably had several sources. The Avars and the Avarian influenced Byzantines are good ones. However, it would be best to be cautious. The majority are likely to be Ottoman.

Regarding the ethnicity of the Bulgars, linguistic evidence indicates a Turkic origin. There are Turkish names and titles in early times. Later they merged into their Slavic neighbours, but it would be interesting to know if they picked up Slavic groups on their move West. Nothing was as clear cut as nineteenth century historians thought. Many invasions leave little or no genetic traces. Language and culture are often all that survives.

Modern nationalistic sentiments aside, the Balkans are a rich melting pot of cultures and civilisations. People living there today have many cultural traditions to be proud of. History has been hard on the area with many wars and invasions, but the people who are alive now can claim many cultural inheritances.

More great archaeological discoveries are sure to be made in Bulgaria and neighbouring countries. I hope some of the people writing here will help the archaeologists interpret the archery remains.

There is no question Bede. In this territory was long time before slavic people. Bulgars was runing from Big Bulgars kingdom from north steppes . Mongols army attacking Bullgars from his mother land.If there no so much Slavs , Bulgars save his turcic language and more original cultur. Same proces is in Russians ( or our brother country Czechs ). Rul control and warriors was vikings, but bigger cultural pressure from Slavs was vin.

Nah, actually slavs came here in the 6-th c. AD from the north. Between 6th and 7th c. they layed 5 sieges of Solun (Thesaloniki). Later when one of the Kubrat's sons - Asparukh came with part of the bulgars in the late 7th c. they formed an alliance.
One of the other brothers, the oldest - Bat Bayan, remained with part of the bulgars in the land of the Old Great Bulgaria (Παλαιά Μεγάλη Βουλγαρία in Byzantine chronicles) and was conquered by the Khazars (NOT THE MONGOLS). Other established the Volga-Bulgaria, which later adopted Islam and was destroyed in the 14th c. by the mongols. One went to Italy and the traces of him disappeared. 2 came to the Balkan penincula before Asparukh and settled near modern day Bitola in FYROM. The last written account about them is from the early 8th c. from a rock inscription regarding Tervel's help to Justinian II.

@Bede - some of the titles are definately turkic, the others - are not, and there are quite a lot sarmathian names, toponims and words, as well as the turkic ones. So the lingistic and archaeological evidence is that bulgars were not homogeneous turkic tribe, but maybe a mix of turkic and sarmathian tribes, or maybe turkic tribe with strong sarmathian influence or vice versa.


As for the thumbrings - those from archaeological sketches are dated 7th - 9th c. and are 100% bulgarian, from burrials. The bronze one (actually it's not gold, it's bronze) is 14th c. and really looks like ottoman, and the other is 13th c., origin - unknown.

This Slavs coming in 6 -th c. is old oficial and today not very serious theorie. Bud stil function. Most historicians stay in new theorie , but very controverse - because is not oficial chronical surces that Slavs was in Europa teritory much more earlier...I mean the Great Bulgar state in Volga .

I think that we should not discuss when Slavs come, and what nationality were Bulgar, topics like that can make confrontations that we don't need.
Lord, about Slav bows, are you sure that Byzantine sources says that Slavs used selfbows? I reed only one, and not original, then translation. It says-Slavs don't use knifes, then two small spears, wooden bow and small poisoned arrows. (Jovan Efeski) Wooden bow can be more then selfbow, and it have sense, if it is true that Slavs were well known archers, but on the other hand small (short) arrows can meen short draw=primitive bow=selfbow?

Actually, you are correct. What is said is "wooden bow" (it's in Strategicon by Pseudo Maurice actually, not in Joan Efeski). But the logic I use is the same as yours: "but on the other hand small (short) arrows must mean short draw=primitive bow=selfbow?"

I dont try any flame , Mupko, but here all time talking about history. You are interesting about slaws bows ,but not about Slaws and his contact with nomads tribes ..? Its important i mean . For example Novgorod bow. Everybody mean that if he was found in Nowgorod - its Slaws bow .Realy ? This bow have same construction like many of nort nomads tribes bows without horn ...Entusiats in Czech and Slovak rep. was in very intensive discusin about same thema, but without real end . No archelogical foundings . Only some text (same Byzantine sources), more iron arrowheads , but many more nomads arrowheads and nomad(Avars, Huns, Sarmats, Old Magyars..) horsearchers graves.

Lord Ruthven,
thanks for posting the pictures of the bone plates. Do you have any dating information? (I would assume they are comparable in date with the early Avar types, which the complete example of item 16 resembles with the exception of the distinctive rounded tip.)

I have seen fragments like 30 and 31 being reported as handles for Hungarian bow cases.

There are mentions of a Hunno-Bulgar bow type linked to the ancient Bulgars in southern Russian in some of the Russian archaeological sources. I have yet to see any drawings of this type type but from the descriptions it would appear to be similar to the early Avar types. Most of the finds are just bone plates, but a more intact 6th C "proto-Bulgarian" bow was found at Porechny Island in the lower Don. Unfortunately this has yet to be published.

Andrew

Andrew, the bone plates (## 29, 30, 31) reminds me the end plates of soft Hungarian bow case. Here the reconstruction version of such a bow case made by a Russian researcher and published at Tozje Gorod (reconstruction-reenactment forum). The only thing these plates usually came in pairs.

more pictures

Andrew, thanks for the information. I'm impatiantly looking forward to see this information about the bow when it's published.
As for the dating - those plates are dated 7th - 9th c.

The plates nubered 30 and 31 are supposed to be exactly bone plates from soft bowcase.
Gleb, thank you verry much for the photoes. Could you please post the link to the article, I'm familiar with Тоже Город, but I have missed this particular article.
Thanks in advance.

Beatiful , Gleb ! I was there (Toze forum) , But dont see this . Thank you .

Lord Ruthven, mia culpa, the publication was on Gardarica site, not Tojzhe Gorod. It looks that that site on reconstruction now. So I can send the text and pictures separatedly. Need your e-address.

[email protected]

Thanks

Gleb, you are correct, the plates do look like the end covers. I can't seem to find my copy of an article on them to see if I was imagining some of them having handles. (I put a handle on the one I made, though from leather).

Lord Ruthven, thanks for the dates. I am interested in all the different forms of bone plates and these help to fill in one of the geographic holes.

Andrew

Dusan, of course that I'm interested in Slav history. I'm interested very much, but I am just afraid that sensitive topics about nations can hurt cooperation here. If I know well, there is no much evidence that Slavs are natives of Europe, but also there is not much evidence about their coming (just one-Constantin Porfirogenit).
Lord Ruthven, it was probably selfbows that Slavs used with great success. English archers were one of the best, and English longbow is also simple weapon. But, we can not make conclusions so easy, if it is written wooden bow, let it stay wooden bow, until we know better.

Mupko i understand you.Maybe my post looks like sensitive nationalist screemeng , but its only mi mistake in bad english. :roll: but in another site, if we- Slaws - dont started and litle provokate vith new historical position, who does ? Back to the bows 8)

Little prove about Slav archery- Jovan (Joan) Kamenijat-About Arab capturing Solun (Thessaloniki) 904. ( Written around 915.) -Niko nije veshtiji od Slovena da gadja cilj i zestini njihovih strela nishta ne moze odoleti.- (Nobody isn't more skilled then Slavs in hitting target, and nothing can't stop power of their arrows!)

correct translation: Nobody is more skilled in hitting target then Slavs, and nothing can stop power of their arrows!
Sorry for that

Man that bow case looks like an intelligent design...

I'll keep that in mind for future projects.

The last post confused me for it looked like it contained two cases of double negatives in the use of english. "Nobody can't...," would mean that "somebody can," or "everybody can..."

Did you mean that every one can shoot better than Slavs, or that no one can shoot better than Slavs?

Hey, I'm pro Slav if that makes anybody feel better.

Double negative in classic logic negates each other.

Languages seldomly follow classic logic.

The double negative is used in practical english at least for sign of strong denial. At least in americal Police series that is...

:lol: In fact we dont know nothing more about slaws archery... :D But history sources sayd that nomadic Avars introduce slaws soldiers to his army. Same do it Huns,Germans and oldest nomadic tribes who come to Dunai river steps.Than we can think that slaws "maybe" use hornbows- who know ? :shock:
Bulgars friendship vith slaws people is clearly visible to this days.

[external image]


9th century yew bow fragment from Mikulcice (Southern Czech Republic). It?s basically a flatbow with a long narrow nock. I suspect the handle which is missing to have been quite thick like in the Alamannic bows from South Germany. The Alamannic people used short arrows , too ... (about 60 cm long).

I have not been able to find much information on this bow find up till now. Somebody on Atarn knows more? Where it is kept, for example?

JJ

Thank you JJ :lol: . More than this bow was still founds in Slovakia territory bone siahs plates from Avar or Huns. Many skitas bronze arrow heds, Cetic and Romans iron heads...

Bone plate vith text ! Mikulčice-Moravia(Czech rep.)

[external image]

Avar bones plates- ?elovice-east Slovakia:

[external image]

Nitra -Mikov Dvor arrowhead :

[external image]

Arowheads from mi collection :

[external image]

[external image]

This bronze ar.H. are from Ukraina , but in Slovakia was same:

[external image]

JJ,
Regarding the 9th century yew bow fragment from Mikulcice. There is quite a similar bow fragment found in Krak?w, Poland, it?s a long fragment of the limb of a yew longbow, very similar deep and narrow nock area, two bowstring notches are present, dating about X cent.

Two points about bow from Krakow (Wawel castle). It is quite short fragment of the limb and it is rather oval not flat in cross-section.
But the ending is very similar.

A

I owe you explanation... In Serbian and other southern Slavic languages we use double negations. I use that in English, too, as we see. :D :D :D
Double negations do not negate each other, like in math or logic. They are all pointed in same direction. So it's a strong negation.

Our popular song even have triple negation:
Не може нам нико ништа
Јачи смо од судбине...
(nobody can not do nothing to us
we are stronger than destiny...)

:D :D :D

Double and sometime even triple negation seem to be common in some black american english dialects for strong negation.

More informstion from america crime series.

Chinese language negation seem to go by the formal logic. Could explain more, but here are so many people who actually know the language ...

Hello to you!

I am at first sorry, that I was not able to introduce myself, because I didn't find a thread to it.

Nonetheless: I am a reenactor, ,and am reenacting a bulgarian archer of the late 14th century. So I am in very intensive use of the Composite Bow :)

[external image]

I found in the National Museum of History in Sofia this Bow. Its in the Hall exhibited, which is for the Ottoman Period. For me is very interesting, that it seems to be a Manchu-like Bow, but has ottoman floral motives painted on it.

What do you say about that? Was this kind of bow used till the 15th and 16th century on the Balkan Peninsula?

btw.: Sorry,that I am reactivating a quite old thread :)

Chinese made bow. Please show closeup of the decoration. Welcome to this site. -j-

Thank you! :)

Here a closeup

Sorry, I cannot make out the decoration. Maybe Peter or Stephen can. You are the second person the find a Chinese bow provenienced to the Ottoman army. I do not believe there is any mistake since at least three other countries' national museums have similar bows attributed to local armies.

jack farrell wrote:

Sorry, I cannot make out the decoration. Maybe Peter or Stephen can.

The problem is, that I was not able to make a better Photo of the Decoration, so it can be hardly seen.

jack farrell wrote:

You are the second person the find a Chinese bow provenienced to the Ottoman army. I do not believe there is any mistake since at least three other countries' national museums have similar bows attributed to local armies.

But what conclusion can I make:

A, The Bows were imported from China or the Border Regions of China (I personally don't believe it at all)

B, This Type of Bow came through the Mongol Invasion of the Northern Black Sea to the Balkan Peninsula, and co-existed with the later Ottoman and Tatar Bows. So that Tatar, Turkish and this kind of Bow were produced and used on the Balkan Peninsula.

I think it is quite clear that the Chinese had a very organized bow making culture. This is not entirely a Manchu development as there is ample evidence that production bow making far preceded this, last dynasty. Not only are the Chinese at the epicenter of bow making materials, waterbuffalo horn and bamboo, but the labor force for this manufacture was well organized from an early time.

Surely there was some Chinese governmental consent to this trade as the bow making shops were licensed by the government. How this particular bow came to the army and or museum is another matter. You will be the richer for finding a trade route from China to the Ottoman army that suits the time and place of collection; overland or by sea.

I personally think, that this patricular type of bow came with the Mongols and Tatars to the Balkan Peninsula in Mit 13th Century, where it was then also by the Locals used, till the 15th century or maybe even 16th century, beginning from the 14th century to co-exist with other types, like the Turkish Bow.

I don't think that it was imported, because it would be to expensive. The Distance between the Ottoman's Border in the East in the 15th century and China seems to me quite long, so it would be very expensive to transport, especially if thinking of that on the Balkan Peninsula were plenty of bowmakers, especially in ottoman times.

This is not a Mongol type bow. Mongol type bows were succeeded by Turkic type bows. Qing Manchu bows followed a separate but parallel development.

If you were to be able to secure pics of the decoration, you would most likely see Chinese decorative motifs.

I am sure we would all be interested in some proof to support your theory.

jack farrell wrote:

This is not a Mongol type bow. Mongol type bows were succeeded by Turkic type bows. Qing Manchu bows followed a separate but parallel development.

I know, but the Mongols made also use of the Manchu-Bows.

jack farrell wrote:

If you were to be able to secure pics of the decoration, you would most likely see Chinese decorative motifs.

As I saw, were the motifs absolutely ottoman. I have no doubt about it

jack farrell wrote:

I am sure we would all be interested in some proof to support your theory.

These are all Photos I have :)

second attachment-series

Kalojan,
Sure, this is not a bow type used in Balkans at the time you mentioned. Composite bows in Balkan peninsula had more turkic/Kipchac characteristics/influences. Ears are of smaller dimension judging by painted records, no knees, reflex at the grip goes between 160 and 150 degrees, in some cases less, ears and grip are often strenghten by bone plates (i am talking about most Serbian bows, Bulgarian ones do not have bone stiffeners).

Most of depicted bows seem to be covered by birch bark lacquered in white on the belly side (olifa) and also leather covered back painted in different colors. Olifa is lacquer mentioned in several Serbian medieval manuals such as Erminia by greek zograph Dionisius of Furna, Serbian Erminia and Tipicon of Nectarius.There's also manuals for making colors (not for painting the bows but it can explain how colors for (even) bows decorations were prepared).

Interesting that Serbs, Greeks and Bulgarians used lead for making white color (same as Tan T'an Chiung reports about bowmaking in Chengtu).

I believe that this bow came to museum from some other collection as it is case of some artefacts in Serbian museums ( i had a chance to see two unexposed Chinese bow in the museum's store.

There's no so much representation of Bulgarian bows in mural painting as it is in Serbian or Greek mural painting but you should start with mural painting. Check this topic i started long time ago. You can notice something like a birch bark cover over the back of the bow(s)
http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t ... rbian+bows
Cheers!

I know that this kind of bows was very unusual on the Balkan Peninsula, thats why I was wondering about this bow.

I actually used for the reenacting a Turkish Bow by Sand?r Moln?r. Turkish Bows are on many murals, for example of the Kremikovtsi Monastery and Dragalevtsi Monastery in Bulgaria Also in some Manuscripts, like the Tetraevangeila of Tsar Ivan Aleksandr or the Manasses Chronicle seem to be Turkish (although its difficult to say cause the lack of detail)

I was searching for a less sensitive and less expensive alternative, cause the bow will face conditions which are quite bad for a bow.

BTW: I don't think that there is much difference between the Bows used by the Byzantines, Bulgarians and Serbs in this Period: Same influences leaded to similar kind of Armory, same if you look at Sabers depicted in the 14th Century.

I found something interesting on a German archery forum. A new member showas a Roman bow, looking very manchu in my eyes. He is a histrian and currently working in a museum - and rumor tells, he works accurate.

Here is the the link to the forum:

http://www.fletchers-corner.de/viewtopi ... =5&t=18082

And here a (hopefully) working link to a google-translation from German to English:

http://translate.google.de/translate?sl ... 82&act=url


Could it be possible the "Chinese looking bow" is in fact an old Roman design?

The Hunnic bow of the Roman era has a superficial resemblance to Qing-Manchu type bows. But there is at least 1200 years separating the types and the constructions are very dissimilar. See Andrew Hall's two articles in JSAA for numerous fine illustrations of Hunnic type bows. One will find his articles most informative.

If one is not so familiar with a violin, then it would look like a mandolin.

I went to the German site and others which reenact events at Roman forts in Germany. Very interesting. Of course, machine translations do not convey technical meaning so well so the arguments are difficult to follow. frankly, I was embarrased by the man who built a Chinese type bow to equip a Roman soldier. I did not see this man whit his outfit but must imagine that this bow is a poor historic representation of an original.

Roman history is not my specialty but this I do know. They subjugated the Sarmatians of the Caspian sea area and impressed many archers into their auxiliaries, among others. These archers were brought to Britian to fight the locals. Bone ear laths, the only remains of their bows, have been found in numbers of Roman era forts as far north as Scotland. This presumably prompts the quote that Hunnic type bows were such a successful, long-lived design that their remains are found from Korea to Scotland.

An easy, commercially available prop would be a Hunn or Magyar reproduction from a manufacturer or else a more accurately home made version. Hunnic type bows do not have bridges, Qing Chinese do.

This is a misinterpretation from some relief depiction, I guess. Nobody used string bridges in Roman time. The hornbows of this period are Hunnic type, non-contact siyah bows, of course.

On a similar note, it always really annoys me how re-enactors press absolute authenticity in textiles, weapons, stitching (always requiring 100 % authenticity) but then go and equip themselves with poorly made, fibreglass "Scythian" "Tatar" or "Mongol" (all of which are entirely incorrect for late Roman)

/speaking from personal experience here.

I am also using a fiberglass-bow (can't afford for 1000? an ottoman hornbow), but I look at least that the Bows should be of the "authentic Type"..meaning, that an ottoman is not using a Magyar Bow, but a Crimean Tatar or a Turkish one....