Question about very large Korean bows.(More like Qing bows)

Greetings Sinsigel; We have not heard from you in some time, I hope all is well.

I would assume these two bows are numbers 7 and 8 of the Military Museum collection in Seoul. I am not aware of any master from Korea who made bows in this tradition. They are not like other old war bows in that collection. Are there other collections of war bows in Korea?

The simplest answer is that they are import bows of the Qing dynasty. By other posts on ATARN you may be aware that there are other such bows in museums in Sweden, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan whose most likely origin is trade. It is well known that these type bows replaced the original types of the people of Mongolia, who are now unaware of their own bow types.

Please excuse my preempting Thomas. I would be interested to hear his and everyones opinion. Jack

hello, Sinsigel, :)
I think, these bows are korea dynasty (918~1392) style.
It`s a red painted bow. Red dye is cinnabar(HgS).
It`s very rare mineral.(it has really bloody-red color)

Cinnabar is most important material in shamanism of korea.
It was used in exorcism or drawing charms, tomb, medical care, and some important sharmanism tools. (until now :D)
My ancestors believes that cinnabar has divine power, and used it from very ancient times.


청나라 활의 영향을 받은 모양이라기 보단 고구려-고려를 거치는 동안 사용된 활과 거의 비슷한 모양이라고 보이는데요.
고구려에서 쓰던 골궁(뼈활)이 발전해오는 과정에서 고자의 모양이 유지된채로 나무로 대체되면서 저런 모양이 됐다고 봅니다.
그리고 왕 혹은 장군들이 쓰던것으로 보아 동궁은 사냥용이나 전투용보다는 다른 용도로 쓰이지 않았을까 합니다. 경면주사를 칠했다는 것은 다분히 의식용 활로 쓰였을 가능성이 높고, 조선시대에 와서도 어느정도 고대의 모양을 유지해서 제작했겠죠. 주제넘게 답글 달아서 죄송 ㅡㅡ

[quote="jack farrell"]Greetings Sinsigel; We have not heard from you in some time, I hope all is well.[/quote]

Thank you. I'm having a fine time these days. It's good to see someone remembering me.


[quote="jack farrell"]I would assume these two bows are numbers 7 and 8 of the Military Museum collection in Seoul. I am not aware of any master from Korea who made bows in this tradition. They are not like other old war bows in that collection. Are there other collections of war bows in Korea?[/quote]

From what I know the first bow is being exhibited in the Korean Military Museum. Since there is no valuable Korean study that focus specifically on the types of Korean bows(e.g. target bows, war bows) I can't be certain about my conjecture; However, it seems some of the large and robust wooden bows in several Korean museums might be classified as war bows.


[quote="jack farrell"]Please excuse my preempting Thomas. I would be interested to hear his and everyones opinion. Jack[/quote]

No, I don't mind it. Thanks for the comment.

[quote="mechwar"]hello, Sinsigel, :)
I think, these bows are korea dynasty (918~1392) style.
It`s a red painted bow. Red dye is cinnabar(HgS).
It`s very rare mineral.(it has really bloody-red color)

Cinnabar is most important material in shamanism of korea.
It was used in exorcism or drawing charms, tomb, medical care, and some important sharmanism tools. (until now :D)
My ancestors believes that cinnabar has divine power, and used it from very ancient times.


청나라 활의 영향을 받은 모양이라기 보단 고구려-고려를 거치는 동안 사용된 활과 거의 비슷한 모양이라고 보이는데요.
고구려에서 쓰던 골궁(뼈활)이 발전해오는 과정에서 고자의 모양이 유지된채로 나무로 대체되면서 저런 모양이 됐다고 봅니다.
그리고 왕 혹은 장군들이 쓰던것으로 보아 동궁은 사냥용이나 전투용보다는 다른 용도로 쓰이지 않았을까 합니다. 경면주사를 칠했다는 것은 다분히 의식용 활로 쓰였을 가능성이 높고, 조선시대에 와서도 어느정도 고대의 모양을 유지해서 제작했겠죠. 주제넘게 답글 달아서 죄송 ㅡㅡ[/quote]

Greetings. Good to see another Korean member in this forum.

One of the most perplexing things about studying the history of ancient/medieval Korean bows is that there are few sources left.

While there are some remainings of bows and quite abundant mural paintings from the Three Kingdoms Era(~7th century AD), almost nothing is to be found from the Koryo dynasty(10th century~14th century).

The only sources I know is an account written by Song dynasty ambassador(Even then, he mentions very briefly), bow of the founder of Chosun dynasty(1392~1910), and the large bow from the Japanese shrine which is supposedly know as the bow of Koryo general, who led Korean forces joined by Mongolians during the invasion of Japan.(Although it seems that there should be more thorough study on this.)

That's why I'm still dubious about the origin of the bows I've posted, even though you've made some points in your argument. I might be wrong, but I can't see the similarities between the siyah of the bows in the picture and the siyah of Koguryo bone siyahs, in terms of shape, material, etc. How can we be certain that the bone siyahs of 5,6th century evolved to the wooden siyah of such type? There is a big gap between the Koguyo era and Koryo era, and we just have too few sources left to trace the history of how Korean bows have changed.

Anyway, thanks for the argument. Hope I didn't offend you much.

i'm happy :)
plz check this Mr. farrell's post.

http://www.atarn.org/chinese/miran/Bows ... Miran.html

Sensigel; Here are some ideas which are indicated by your search.

You might go to the museum and make drawings on all aspects of these bows. Note the decorations, method of putting on bark covering, all dimensions, evidence that there was once bridges and the shape of their bases. Take pictures. You may be able to receive permission for research purposes. Make a complete plan of these bows.

Ask for the accession information and provenience.

Go see the director of the Bows and Arrows museum to investigate his Qing bows. Pick his brain on this subject.

There are many people who follow your interest in investigating the origin of the Korean bow.

When investigating the Bactrian Gold hoard archaeologists noted that for certain pieces the only comparable pieces were found in Korean burials. The connection is thought to be through Siberia. I found the article on the Silk Road Foundation site, back journals.

Please keep us informed about your progress. Jack

Maybe, there is a possibility, that these bows were left by the army of Qing Empire.

The Qing's army were very active in Korea, even the father(大院君) of Korean's last Emperor ( 高宗) had been kidnapped and imprisoned into Qing Empire...

The name "red bow" (彤弓) which is how Korean call this kind of bows, mainly because these kind of bows usually covered in birch bark, then painted(in Camouflage patterns) by using Cinnabar and lacquer... It looks red and Camouflaged..

It looks Brilliantly red to Korean people, so it been called "彤弓"..."彤"means Brilliantly red...


Cause, I have a collection of about 20 antique bows of this kind. All from Chinese Qing Dynasty.... and There is impossible for a horn bow can remain such a good condition from 15th century... Unless in the desert environment..

By the way, the reason why I assert that these are 100% Qing bow in stead of bows in the 13th century are as followings....

1. The bow limbs of these bows are not broad enough, bows from the 13~15 century have much broad limbs..

2. The angle of bow's long ears are not the same. It is very obvious to me that the string bridges are lost.. I build horn bows for years, it is quite clear that without string bridges, a bow ear with this angle is not functional...

I happened to have built couple horn bows from 13 century.. Take a look carefully and you will tell the difference..

And this is a functional "Dong-Gung "

The pictures do not show.

Good bows Yokhua. I enjoy them both. -j-

Sorry, guys--I don't get back here all that often, so I only now saw this thread.

I have a couple of those types of bows. I believe they are actually Chinese bows, although many Koreans are adamant that they are Korean (one I talked to is vehement that they were huge crossbow prods!). One of the bows I have has etched in the siyah insert 三品, which denotes it as a third-level strength testing bow. The other one I have was probably a shooting bow.

what case about korean archery and bowyer in korean 1600-1900?see my questions
http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1565

I agree that they are definitely Qing styled bows that lost their bridges. There was a lot of contact between the Qing and Korea in the time, and Korea was highly influenced by the Ming and Qing. For example, traditional Korean dress is almost identical to Ming dress while some early Korean helmets are almost identical to Qing helmets. A part of the conquest-era Manchus were in fact Korean frontiersmen that joined the Manchu cause.

Today, most Asian cultures tend to assume their empires have always been islands that came up with their various cultural aspects by themselves. But in reality it was one big melting pot with a lot of cultural exchange, Tungustic shamans ruling China according to Confucian principles while having totem poles in their backyard, parts of the Ming army that were trained and lived like Turkic horsemen, the Japanese sword being a copy of a Sui dynasty gift to a Japanese prince, to name just a few politically sensitive subjects. Modern scholarship in China, Japan, and Korea all tend to focus on the idea that they are part of very distinct cultures of their own but ideas, technology, ideologies and artistic elements moved back and forth all the time.

So that Qing bows are found there is not strange at all. The Manchu / Jurchen were originally also shamans and the use of cinnabar for that purpose is not just Korean, it is more widespread in the region: Manchu archery equipment had cinnabar red details such as nocks, parts of shafts, and details on bows. These cinnabar details are among others described in 1759 and 1766 editions of the Huangchao Liqi Tushi and also in the Guangxu era Da Qing Huidian Tu, and can be seen on remaining antique bows and arrows in various museum collections. The practice largely seemed to have ended in the early 19th century, perhaps due to the high cost of cinnabar.

While most are typical Qing work, we can't rule out that at least some of these bows were made in Korea by Korean bowyers but they were made in a Qing style, probably for the Chinese / Manchu market. There are persisting rumors of Koreans making Qing bows during the time but I haven't yet been pointed to a primary source confirming this. It sure sounds possible and plausible, considering the proximity of Manchuria and Korea and the trade that went back and forth.

-Peter

A word about the name "red bow" (彤弓) . This is a loanword from Chinese into Korean. It is the word used in the Chinese classics (and even bronze vessel inscriptions) from the Western Zhou dynasty to describe a bow bestowed by the King as a gift to a lord. The word simply meant 'red lacquer' (not 'cinnabar') in those times. The king would regularly bestow one red bow and 100 black arrows. The word subsequently became used to denote ' bow of the best quality'.

I have no doubt that the bows in the photographs are Manchu bows from the Qing Dynasty. It is quite possible that they were presents from the Qing Emperor to the Korean ruling house.

Alternatively they may have been heavy bows for the military examination (i.e. for displaying strength and not for shooting.)

Hi,

Thanks for that. Indeed the word used for cinnabar red in the texts I mentioned is 朱, used alongside 紅 to distinguish it from regular red.

The top bow most certainly appears Chinese-made, second half of the 18th century. (Slender ears, no use of ray-skin, relatively simple, understated design.) The bottom is so far gone that it's hard to tell, I share Stephen's hunch that it might be a strength tester.

The Young Yip museum also has some excellent bows, some rather early and rare that can't be found anywhere else anymore. Some of these are probably in Korea for quite a while, some perhaps as early as the late 17th century. One of these early features are bone plates on either side of the handle.

-Peter

When one sees red lacquer, for instance from an imperial workshop piece; what is that pigment?

And on a Japanese red lacquered bow; what is that pigment?

Stephen; when you say lacquer do you mean urushi? Poison sumac base lacquer?

Hi Jack,

To be honest, I am not sure. We are lucky that Qianlong was quite keen on having all his posessions and those of his ancestors carefully cataloged, but at the same time we should be cautious because species of plants and animals as well as minerals were not as clearly differentiated as they are today. To name a few examples: Today's word for ruby for may have been about any randon translucent red stone during the Qing. What today is dark green "shiqing", used to be dark blue, and what is called a yellow goat (huangyang) is actually a species of gazelle.

Texts describing items differentiate between things being painted and lacquered, and between red and vermillion. The word used for lacquered is 漆, the same that describes the Urushi tree. When Jaap Koppedrayer visited me he was positive that the lacquer on one of my Chinese bows was also urushi, so that's at least confirmed.

The pigment seen between the feathers of 18th cent. arrows is indeed the typical orange-red of vermillion. It is not shiny on most arrows (save for those for the stag hunt), so likely applied in a way other than lacquering. But to answer your question, it does seem to be actual cinnabar.

Most of what I know is restricted to the Qing, though. For no other period do we have such a wealth of textual references paired with remaining examples.

-Peter

By understanding is that the word 'lacquer' denotes two different things:

The first is urushi and its chemical imitators. (= Shensi lacquer). This is a vegetable product (allergenic, as you say) which polymerizes on contact with moisture. Basically the more contact with moisture, the harder/more moisture-resistant it gets. The product is normally applied unrefined in a spirit base and is honey-coloured/transparent.

The second is Indian lacquer. This is a dye made from the crushed carapaces of very small insects that congregate (Hindi 'lakh='myriads') on a lacquer tree. The ground shells are scarlet and are used as a dye.

The former coloured with the latter created the familiar dull-red of Chinese classic lacquer ware. Other colourings used were ochre (dull yellow), copper sulphate (blue-green) and black. Indian lacquer may have been indigenous to central China in the Shang and Zhou times, when the climate was warmer. Some Shang and Zhou lacquer has survived (I saw a newly-excavated Zhou chariot wheel last week.) In later times it was probably imported.

Thanks Stephen, that is clarifying.

I've doe some further reading and it appears that the "lac" bug is still indigenous to China so it's likely to also have been produced there in later times also.

As for the red commonly found on lacquerware, much lacquerware is described as "cinnabar lacquer". Do you know how to differentiate cinnabar and shellac red?

The chariot wheel sounds like an interesting find!

-Peter

I don't know how to differentiate the two. But does 'cinnabar red' red really mean that it is made by mixing cinnabar, or is it just a colour term for 'red'? Despite the early experimentations of the Daoist mystics, it has always been generally understood that cinnabar is highly toxic. I can't see how it would have got into the production chain of a major industry like lacquer ware.

I don't think we should dismiss its widespread use because it was poisonous. The use of poisonous pigments was widespread all over the world until fairly recently. (Hence the phrase "mad as a hatter")

Another highly toxic color is the arsenic "parisian green", which colors the green ray-skin we find on Chinese bows and sword scabbards. Some hilt wrapping cords were also this color. It was known in China and Europe, its use was abandoned in Europe as late as the 60's. Today it serves as rodent poison.

The tiangong kaiwu described the vermillion winning industry and mentions the use of vermillion for lacquerware. It states that when mixed with lacquer alone it will be dull red and when mixed along with tung oil it will be bright red. Ink sticks were also made for use by imperial and aristocratic painters. The emperor wrote all his communication with it as well.

From this I tend to believe that what was called vermillion 朱, was in fact vermillion and that other red colors went by the name 紅, or 髤 when speaking of the scarlet red of the lac bug.

-Peter

I will just speak from my own experiences doing finishing.

Lac is supposed to be mucilage of a bug deposited on and collected from tree branches in India. It comes in dry flakes and already prepared and is known as orange shellac after its transparent light orange color, very light color. Some folks in Qinghai recently told me that it is used as a universal finish coat in the furniture restoration business there.

Shellac is not so durable, can be easily scratched with the thumb nail and no matter how old it is, can be dissolved or reconstituted with alcohol. It crawls on the surface of furniture and successive coats bunch up in places and turn dark, even black; but can be easily reconstituted with alcohol.

Decades ago I was able to buy urushi in black and oxblood from a fish pole supplier at the sword collector show. It was supposed to also include some additives and came in tubes like toothpaste; was frighteningly expensive. It would easily combine with oil base type products like oil stain and oil base paints.

To a lesser degree it would combine with water base products. The greater the amount of additive, the less hard was the surface.

In a mostly pure form the finish coat was like the plastic surface of a counter top; which is to say almost indestructible and rejected any later attempt to dissolve.

Urushi has its own rules for application and the product is most interesting that way. It coated a prepared bamboo arrowshaft in the most marvelous way. Those who enjoy wailing about the expense of bamboo arrows will move on to a new degree of discomfort when they try urushi. -j-