Thoughts on making a hungarian hornbow...

Hi Jerry, first off I'll start by saying that I am far from an expert!
I would strongly recommend getting Adam K's book it tells you everything you need to know.
I get my horn from Highland Horn - the horns I have got are good quality but don't get them pre-cut - they cut a strip that is too thick = lots of waste.
Hide glue is good but make sure you skim off all the fatty stufff when you are making it.
I don't think ash is upto the job from what I have read. Try and find some maple.
Hope this helkps

Hello Mike, and thank you for the quick answer! :)
I have been thinking a bit more of what you wrote, + my very little experience of hide glue, and came to the conclusion that I perhaps should try this kind of glue and sinew on an experimental bow first, like a simple longbow or similar, rather than run right on a horn bow.
I think that I?l get my hands in one of those books and read it carefully before I try to make a real hornbow.
But, I might be ordering some horns from Highland Horn anyway, they might become usuable in the future! ;)
Anyway, thank you!

Jerry; Spend your time before you spend your money.

jack farrell wrote:

Jerry; Spend your time before you spend your money.

Exactly my words (and my way)...

Hello everyone,

Before I would post a reply for Jerry K, please let me also introduce myself ?cause I?m a greenhorn here however, I?ve been reading ATARN forums for years.
My name is Peter Bencsik and I live in Hungary. I?m really interested in Hungarian archery and bows. I always make personally all my archery staff (bows, arrows, quivers, ect?) and it gives me the only satisfaction. After some fiber and laminated bows, roughly two years ago I finished my first horn bow. Frankly, still I do not know a lot about how to make a ?good? HUN horn bow but I?m chasing the success.

For Jerry K:
Some says that one of the easiest bow to make is the HUN bow. Additionally, the performance of HUN bows cannot be comparable with later ?invented? bows such as Turkish or Korean.
However, based on not just my pure experience but also some great authority HUN bows can have also a very high performance (regardless the heavy and long tips) if it?s made perfectly.
So please believe me, making an acceptable quality level HUN horn bow is not a snap work! The biggest challenge is how to make a high performance HUN bow keeping the authentic feature.
Unfortunately, I had to re-invent nearly every steps of bow making which was an uphill struggle! That?s why I?ve made a lot of mistakes because nobody helped or advised me!

I would also suggest like others:
? first, buy Adam?s book (I received it last week, thanks Adam!) ?cause its brilliant,
? study and read as much as you can (ATARN and other forums),
? and finally, dare to start the bow making because theory is very different from practice! Only the practice (and sometimes mistakes) educates effectively you!

Sorry for the long post!

v/r

Peter

Thank you all for you replies, especially yours Peter, it gave me a lot of thinking of.
I sure will get my hands on one of those books, and read it carefully before making any complicated bow.
I sure will spend time before spending money on buying things I really cant handle.

Sorry for my poor English, I wanted to say under the last bullet:

? do not hesitate and dare to start the bow making.....(I encourage you)

v/r

Peter

>I have been eperimenting with making glue from some dogchew
Dogchew is rawhide, thus glue made of it is hideglue.

Botond and Jerry and all; Welcome to the forum. Peter; I saw your site. This is an interesting beginning. Keep up the good work.

It seems like you have finished some hornbows. have you shot them? How do they work? I am wondering if the straight grain in the siyah has become a problem? And what are the poundages of your finished bows?

I would also like to point out to the others that satisfaction is the whole point in this type of archery. It would be difficult to be satisfied reconstructing Magyar/Hunnic archery using another style of bow.

jack farrell wrote:

Botond and Jerry and all; Welcome to the forum. Peter; I saw your site. This is an interesting beginning. Keep up the good work.

It seems like you have finished some hornbows. have you shot them? How do they work? I am wondering if the straight grain in the siyah has become a problem? And what are the poundages of your finished bows?

I would also like to point out to the others that satisfaction is the whole point in this type of archery. It would be difficult to be satisfied reconstructing Magyar/Hunnic archery using another style of bow.

Jack,

Thanks for your welcome, I really appreciate it!
So far I?ve finished six horn bows and other two are under the seasoning process.
All six bows are working, I broke only one bow during the tillering in the past.
Me and my two sons are archers and we participate on different type of competitions with my horn bows.

Honestly, the performance of my bows still a little far from my expectation however, e.g. the my birch-barked bow (68Lbs) reached 186fps with a 29g arrows and last months during my first fly-shooting competition (there is a video also available) I shot 186,9m distance with the snake-skin one (70Lbs) using 45g arrows.

I know that these results are still poor and cannot be comparable with records but it satisfies me and I?m learning a lot during my study.

Concerning the poundage:
? birch-barked HUN ? 68Lbs (28?)
? bamboo-core HUN ? 52Lbs (28?)
? painted HUN (kid) ? 34Lbs (28?)
? barren type (kid) ? 36Lbs (26?)
? short-tipped HUN ? 40Lbs (28?)
? snake-skin HUN ? 70Lbs (28?)

Frankly speaking, at the beginning I did not dare to give any reflex to the grip-limb section resulting the strange strait feature and maybe the poor performance. Now, I?m getting braver and braver and I use bigger reflex (challenging the borderlines of possibilities).

In my country, my aim is to popularize the HUN horn bows among traditional archers. In the near future I?m gonna create an English version of my site also but it needs time. Until then if you have any question I?ll answer or should you use the google (or other) translator hopefully you might also understand a little my challenging language.

v/r

Peter

Hi everybody.
Here is my Hun bow, and if interested I can give you an info how I did (not necessarily the right way....)

Hi Ponty,
I'm interested in all details (ntn size, lbs, etc?) and the construction.
Would you also show some pictures of your unbraced and braced bow.

Reply for Dusan:

Concerning your bows? show, well? I do not understand the reason of your decision but I should accept it! You may be so shy or there is something else behind it!
Personally, I do not like showing my product (and six bows during three years are not a mass product) but in my country I feel it as a mission. My mission is to build an efficient HUN bow, advertise as well as popularize it among the thousands HUN archers.
I?m basically a traditional HUN archer and possessing a non-Hungarian bow (e.g. an efficient Turkish one) is not a solution for me (does not give me a satisfaction)! That?s why I continue my study regardless It?s gonna be an uphill struggle!

I?m happy that you ?...fully know all about Hun bows?, honestly I?m quite far from this feeling!

Peter

:lol: Peter you dont read precise - i wright " I cant say , fully known about Hun bows " :D
Your motivation about Hun bows is your personaly desire and i respect this.Like others must respect mi decision.
Ponty bow is good example, whi i dont show bow like this or maybe better but not that , like i think. And your reaction is- show us more- very interesting...Only if you see in handle/or ears.../ part, you must know about this bow all. Nothing interesting.

Dusan wrote:

:lol: Peter you dont read precise - i wright " I cant say , fully known about Hun bows " :D
Your motivation about Hun bows is your personaly desire and i respect this.Like others must respect mi decision.
Ponty bow is good example, whi i dont show bow like this or maybe better but not that , like i think. And your reaction is- show us more- very interesting...Only if you see in handle/or ears.../ part, you must know about this bow all. Nothing interesting.

Dusan, mea maxima culpa I did not read carefully your post!

Hi there, Dusan what do you mean by
"Only if you see in handle/or ears.../ part, you must know about this bow all. Nothing interesting."
Thanks.

Ponty , sorry for hard words . Every part of your bow is bad... I am tired explain avery new pretendent bad criticizm. Please see clearly in museum pics, Some Atarnos bows pics and you must see all. Flat horn, big handle vith "sandwich" polyester manner glued, ears...
Well , maybe you like him...Maybe i am so traditional in mi mind.

Dusan, thank you for your info, but please keep in mind that I'm not a bowyer and I'd like to learn how to make a really good comosite bow.
Now, you're saying that every part of my bow is bad.
Could you please educate me on why, how can I improve it?
I did not use any polyester, everything is natural and glued with natural glue.
What is wrong with the flat horn, big handle and long ears? What is the reason for the long siyah's on the Hun bow?

Ponty i understand that you dont use polyester . :D This in long debate . Please read more in Atarnet sources , buy Adams book. Her is everithing what you need. If you glued vith natural glue wood plate vith horn plate an lay some sinew - its not nececery be a good hornbow. Every this genialy veapon have ovn laws and princips and you must teach sources.Atarn is the right place.

Dusan wrote:

Ponty i understand that you dont use polyester . :D This in long debate . Please read more in Atarnet sources , buy Adams book. Her is everithing what you need. If you glued vith natural glue wood plate vith horn plate an lay some sinew - its not nececery be a good hornbow. Every this genialy veapon have ovn laws and princips and you must teach sources.Atarn is the right place.

I understand, and thank you for the info, but I hope you also understand my curiosity here.
You see I as I new member ( and probably other member)thought, that this is a forum where we discuss and help each other, ask question from more experienced people, and I hope you'd understand if I honestly ask for an explanation when you state that "every part of my bow is bad".
Why, what's wrong with it?
Thanks and I highly appreciate the answers.

Ponty,

I've got Adam's brilliant book which gives a lot of help and guidance (strongly recommended); however please do not forget it's about Turkish bows. Several parts of the book can be usable for building Hun bows but the Hun construction is different!
Bear in mind that doing something is quite different than speaking about or criticizing something! Should you be able to read between the lines you?ll understand it.
You first bow is very promising and if it gives you satisfaction you?ve achieved the first stage!
Show some other pictures of your bow (braced and unbraced, not only in drawing stage) and some expert might give you useful advice!
I'm a greenhorn but I'll share my limited experience with you!

Never give up and keep going!

Ponty and Botondbow; I find Dusan a keen observer but totally lacking in diplomacy. You two are hung on his lack of diplomacy but have not gone to the sources here at ATARN.

You have not asked; "What are the various remains of Hunn era bows? And how were they constructed?" "What does the larger circle of Hunn culture contain?"

These are the questions which will answer design problems.

I would also say do not copy bows from Hungary. You will be copying copies. Instead, rediscover the original shapes for yourself. Therein will be your discoveries.

I would rather shoot a bow that I had made than any other. So whatever your level of accomplishment, you are in an elite group.

Thank you Jack :D . Mi diplomacy is very torture in mi profesional live. Here i loose- maybe more than needed :lol: /Anyway mi bad anglish i use mostly in inevitable quick information / :oops:

jack farrell wrote:

Ponty and Botondbow; I find Dusan a keen observer but totally lacking in diplomacy. You two are hung on his lack of diplomacy but have not gone to the sources here at ATARN.

You have not asked; "What are the various remains of Hunn era bows? And how were they constructed?" "What does the larger circle of Hunn culture contain?"

These are the questions which will answer design problems.

I would also say do not copy bows from Hungary. You will be copying copies. Instead, rediscover the original shapes for yourself. Therein will be your discoveries.

I would rather shoot a bow that I had made than any other. So whatever your level of accomplishment, you are in an elite group.

Hi Jack.
Thanks for the nice words, advice and understanding, but I think you'd agree with me that if I state that something that you do or did is bad and I don't give you and explanation for it, that has nothing to do with diplomacy.
I felt like a little school boy, who doesn't know 2+2, and yes this is my first bow that did not brake and shoots good, build at least 12 so far, and I did not copy any other bow.
That's why I stated on my very first posting that it might not be built the right way.
Maybe this forum isn't really for me, beginners.....Thanks anyway....
All the best.

jack farrell wrote:

Ponty and Botondbow; I find Dusan a keen observer but totally lacking in diplomacy. You two are hung on his lack of diplomacy but have not gone to the sources here at ATARN.

You have not asked; "What are the various remains of Hunn era bows? And how were they constructed?" "What does the larger circle of Hunn culture contain?"

These are the questions which will answer design problems.

I would also say do not copy bows from Hungary. You will be copying copies. Instead, rediscover the original shapes for yourself. Therein will be your discoveries.

I would rather shoot a bow that I had made than any other. So whatever your level of accomplishment, you are in an elite group.

Jack,

Thanks for also your nice and placating words! However, please let me reply for some points.
I?m pretty sure that everyone here is in possession of the knowledge that Hunn bows are (might be) different from HUN (Hungarian) bows. I would not go into details but the gap is at least 300 years.

Just to avoid any misunderstanding, the era (roughly between 9th and 11th century) and the type of bow what now I?m talking about is the HUN (Hungarian) bow based on finds (ear and grip bone plats) found in the historical part of Hungary.

That?s why your sentence is a little be confusing and I don?t know what do you mean by ??I would also say do not copy bows from Hungary?.

If it generally means that copy of any existing replicas made by any Hungarian bowyers, well?I can accept it but having know nearly all bowyers? products in my country I can prove that we all blaze different trails resulting our bows are different. Consequently you might mean (I guess) that nobody (more than ten folks in Hungary) has built original (close to authentic) and efficient replica.

On the other hand, if your statement means that it doesn?t make sense to build a HUN replica because the archeological finds (proportions) would never provide solution an efficient HUN replica; well I can argue with it!

I?m sure you did mean different please explain me.

Finally, should someone show me an efficient presently existing (no finds e.g. MB) HUN replica - made by a non-Hungarian bowyer - which is in line with the following characteristic (and accepted by ATARN community) I would appreciate!

Proportions iaw. average HUN grave finds:

Rigid ear (bone plate):
- length: between 22-25cm
- width: 1,5-2,4cm
- thickness: 2-4mm
Grip (bone plate):
- length: between 13-18cm
- width: 2-3,8cm
- thickness: 2-4mm

Grip-limb reflex: between 170-126?
Ear-limb reflex: between 30-45?
Limbs total length: between 80-95cm

I understand that you may have discussed this topic several times and you are tired to always explain which the best construction of a HUN bow is but I did not find existing reference (replica). Maybe I was not exhaustive or precise enough!

Please understand me; I?d like only to build an authentic and efficient HUN bow. Being an evaluation program head, my daily task is to compare and assess the outcome with standards (requirements) maybe I?m too pragmatic and after six horn bows I made, a general statement saying that everything is bad (no way to do) without providing (proving) a good example - is not acceptable for me! I hope my composition caused by my poor English does not hurt anyone here and you've got my points.

Peter

Peter, you probably dont understand me and Jacks repley. For miself i can say( i cant talk for both) i dont wright only about Hun /many tribes/ or tribes who creat Magyars nation, but about global world and principes static ear hornbows.
Exist some basic principes ( about horn shape, wood shape, joints stile , angels , material waight etc.) who is close to all tipe bows ! Only after understanding this facts - i think - one can start thinking about making very real replica based on (best choice) very concret archeological bow finds .
I believe , you after making some bows understand this principes. But i see some people who evan after fue bows dont understand nothing...

Now some mi thinkigs about Hun or Magyars bows. Mi opinion is- dont orientation only in archeoligical finds fromm Magayr teritory ! Open your minds, see more in teritory where Hun tribes and Magyar tribes from .(400 years history diference ...)
I think very importand for understanding is word - Tribe.

I think - every bow is more and les - original. In big civilisation exist somthing like uniformity about best disain - todays known like Tatar,Indian Crab or indopersian , bows, but in tribes army must be very big diferences armour- bows etc.
Origin Huns motherland was somwhere in Mongolia /China steps. If you intersting about oldest Hun bow - its here. But Huns (like about 600 years later Mongol army) galloping in west gluing like big snowball many other tribes , nations, skin colors, what you want ... Same vith bows. Than you must search in archeological finds in all that way -from Mongolia to Ukraina.

Same problem but in ?shorter?teritory is vith Pechenyegh, Kumans, Polovets- old turcic tribes from Chazars empire who late transmited to ?Magyars?.Your teritory for observation is from Kaukaz cros Ukraina... Not only Hungaria findings.

One must be litlle crazy from so many archeologicala findings . Too much historical selected work is before you.
What period of Huns or what ?part ? of Huns army is ?that? Huns ?
What bow from ?Magyars? you interested ? That from many tribes /Chazars empir / , or bows from about 850 when this ?Arp?d?tribes was fighting vith Bisantinian against Bulgars , or that bows , when this tribes first time come to Dunai and Tisa pusta(890 cca) ? Or later /about 1300 , when first time we know about nation name ?Magyar? ?/ , but i thing that this time Magyars very quickly forget his bows...
And dont forget still big Turcic bows inluences... ugh, seriouz portion of work. Good luck.

I think the main problem one sees in the Magyar reconstructions are the massive transitions between the ears and the bending limbs. Is there any evidence these places were so thick? The original siyah bone finds give no indication of the thickness in these places (from the article on ATARN on Magyar bows). I also understand the angle between the limb and siyah comes from the MB finds.

I am also interested why the lenght of the limbs has to be 80-95cm (as per Peter's measurements). Then the total length of bow was 160-190cm. The computer reconstructions from the ATARN article are much shorter. It seems to me the bows were no more than 120cm long - really close to the "Turkish" length.

I believe the Hun/Mongol/Magyar style of bow with non-contact recurves has the potential to be very efficient. Recently, I spliced straight wooden siyahs to a failed Turkish bow limbs and was very pleased with the result.

Adam

For an early Hunnic example, do a search for Kotan bow, there is even a replica of this bow made by Grozer. There are many more examples with measurements and reconstructive drawings such as Niya.

Adam Karpowicz wrote:

I think the main problem one sees in the Magyar reconstructions are the massive transitions between the ears and the bending limbs. Is there any evidence these places were so thick? The original siyah bone finds give no indication of the thickness in these places (from the article on ATARN on Magyar bows). I also understand the angle between the limb and siyah comes from the MB finds.

I am also interested why the lenght of the limbs has to be 80-95cm (as per Peter's measurements). Then the total length of bow was 160-190cm. The computer reconstructions from the ATARN article are much shorter. It seems to me the bows were no more than 120cm long - really close to the "Turkish" length.

I believe the Hun/Mongol/Magyar style of bow with non-contact recurves has the potential to be very efficient. Recently, I spliced straight wooden siyahs to a failed Turkish bow limbs and was very pleased with the result.

Adam

Adam,

I really appreciate your comment!

Under the proportions I wrote (might cause the misunderstanding):
?Limbs total length: between 80-95cm? means that the average HUN bow length is 124cm (80 + 2*22cm ears) but never longer than 145cm (95+ 2*25cm).

Concerning the massive transitions between the ears and the bending limbs, I?ve got to say that e.g. Sandor Paku?s HUN bows have a quite narrow and thin transition (it can not be reduced without bow damage). That?s why the general statements (HUN bows) should not be used 'case it depends on the bow.
I?ve also reduced the transitions of my bows (accepted Mr Paku?s previous advice). They are under seasoning now but I can upload some pics if requested.

Finally, I?m glad to hear your opinion that non-contact recurve bows may have the potential to be very efficient!

Respectfully,

Peter

I have to back up Adam's comment about the potential efficiency of the Magyar bows. Edward McEwen also considered that they could be very effective. He made them with much more reflex than what is done now. I also agree with Adam's comment about the massive transition. Why would it have to be greater in cross section than an equally stressed crab bow?

:)I told about this masive joint long time /this was one part of what i call " polyester sick/... I dont say that static ears bows has bad eficienci at all. I say that this bows compare vith top Turkish bows vith partly working kasan has less effective.And bows longer than 135 cm ...
From this reason i interested about old Mongol empire bows(maybe its too part of "Hun" bows :lol: )

[external image]

The Hunnic bows the Silkroad museum, Seoul, seem to be around 120 cm in total length. Did?t take any accurate measures as they were behind glass, but as a guess this should be correct.

With the aid of photoshop I could get the following measurements out of this photograph (supposing a diametre of 8- 9mm for the displayed arrows) for the upper bow:

Total length along the curves: ca. 120 cm, Siyah 1: ca. 25 cm, Limb 1: ca. 32 cm, grip: ca. 14,5 cm, limb 1: ca. 26 cm, siyah 2: ca. 21 cm.

So the siyahs are really long compared to the quite short and short-limbed bows. Do I see a relationship to early turkic bows (and of course the later crab bows, too) ;-)

Hope this helps,

JJ

Yes JJ, thats was what i mean vith " read more in Atarn sources" :D
some pics Peter ...

nice Balka bow :

[external image]

same like JJ pic- details :/see interesting sinew work /

[external image]

[external image]

Dusan wrote:

Yes JJ, thats was what i mean vith " read more in Atarn sources" :D
some pics Peter ...

nice Balka bow :

[external image]

same like JJ pic- details :/see interesting sinew work /

[external image]

[external image]

Now i really don't understand why would you then state on your respond on Nov.23'rd.2010 2:22pm that every part of my bow is bad?
Long siyah's serve a very unique purpose, namely reduce the draw weight of the bow.
For example if you have a bow that would pull 200# with a limb of X length, and you add a siyah that is the same length, then you end up to pull that bow with 100# force (more or less).
That's no new invention, that's physics (lever).
I believe that Huns during migration to west had not always the opportunity to use horn, instead maybe bone plates that is much stiffer, so ultimately needed to find a solution to a heavy bow to be pulled.
I think that might be very much true in the battle where I believe they had to shoot accurately at least 40-50 arrows, in relative short period of time.
This may explain the relatively long siyah's.

Ponty,

Maybe I misunderstood you but the bone (plate) can not replace the horn on bending limbs (section) ?cause it has a different feature!
Bone is mainly used for reinforcement of bows (grip and ears).

Earlier we discussed this topic under the title "the bow of magyarhororog".
http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t ... sc&start=0
Some of the bone plates were really thick at the base.
The transition can much thinner if you use the V splice.
S?ndor

other pic

K?sz?n?m Szőr hogy bekapcsol?dt?l!

As you can see in previous Paku's posts and pictures, not all HUN (Magyar) bows possess heavy and thick limb-to-ear transition!
In my opinion, above posted bows confute the general statement that "all HUN bows are copy of plastic (fiber) ones; moreover, copy of copyes!"

:) Yes Peter. Thats why i ask about hornbow live in Hungary . Thanks Paku .I hope , we see more 8)

Unfortunately my bows are very far from the good ones and the ear-to-limb transitions are (quite massive) also not as brave as Paku's bows yet.
However, I accepted Paku's advice - as I mentioned before - and my new comers (under seasoning) do have thiner and narrower transitions.


[external image]

[external image]

[external image]

[external image]

[external image]

[external image]

Peter

The bows look very well made. I wonder if you could post the dimensions of the bone pieces (or best the range of orig. finds)? The length, the width at the base and at the tip?

How is the length of the siyahs determined in your research? By the bone fragments? I understand all or most wood and horn are gone. How do you know the radius of the siyah/limb bends? I recall some Russian bone finds where the siyah pieces were curved to show the length and the radius.

Adam

Yes, I have the same request as Adam, could you please post some info? namely on the syahs and its angle
Thank you, interesting work.

Adam Karpowicz wrote:

The bows look very well made. I wonder if you could post the dimensions of the bone pieces (or best the range of orig. finds)? The length, the width at the base and at the tip?

How is the length of the siyahs determined in your research? By the bone fragments? I understand all or most wood and horn are gone. How do you know the radius of the siyah/limb bends? I recall some Russian bone finds where the siyah pieces were curved to show the length and the radius.

Adam

I'm sure that Paku will answer all your questions; I have only a remark that more than 500 bone plates were (syash and grip) found that?s why I wrote previously average proportions of them!

The bone plates show wide variety at the base (1,8-2,8 cm). At the tip 1,3-1,5 cm. However it is not known how wide the wood was under the bone. The length is 20-25 cm, which is the length of the siyahs as the bone plates cover the whole length of the ears. The angle of the ears is 40 degree. This seems to much to me as on my bows an angle more than 30 needs string bridges. (This is strange as the MB bow has also high angles.) This can be corrected somewhat by increasing the grip set back or by pushing the bending section toward the ear. We can not determine the curvature of the transition zone but some bone plates suggest that it could be sharp (no curvature at all).
The posted bows are 140 in length (90 cm grip + arms), 25 cm rigid section, the string nocks are at 20 cm. (may be a bit to much). The base is 2x2cm. However according to the used V splice the cross section is not rectangular closer to a triangle. I believe that on old Hungarian bows it was rectangular.
S?ndor

Thanks Sandor. I have a couple more questions:

"...the bone plates cover the whole length of the ears.." - how do you determine that? Has any wood of the ears survived?

and:

"...some bone plates suggest that it could be sharp (no curvature at all)..." - Do you have a picture to show these plates?

Adam

Adam
The wood has not survived. The statement is based on the presence of scoring at the base of the bone plates. The wrapping of the joint (which runs up on the ears) could not be longer than 3 cm. The real size of the plates could be 1-1,5 cm longer considering the erosion.
On some bone plates the base was not eroded and the plate ends in a sharp angle. On the picture (which was drawn by Sz?llősi G?bor from the originals) I put a line on the right middle ear plate to demonstrate the angle. This suggest that the transition was not rounded and also probably also determines the angle of the ear.
S?ndor

Some findings from net. Maybe ucefull :

Probably situation from grave (same plates like Paku pic ?)

[external image]

from Dr.Cs.S?besti?n K?roly book (looks like another bone disain...)

[external image]

[external image]

[external image]


[external image]

[external image]


[external image]

from Sarret udv?ri grave:

[external image]

Bow dimensions from (i dont know who?) Magyar autor :

[external image]

[external image]

[external image]

Hun grave findings from Niredhaza4 , Szeged4:

[external image]

Avar bone :

[external image]

for compar - some archeological findings from step road ( Chernigov -Ukraina -Mina2) :

[external image]

Chernigov :

[external image]

Cherson -Krym :

[external image]

Chazars findings from Vinogradnoe,Oboznoe,Krasnaya Gorka...

[external image]


Hun findings vith "naiv bow interpretation" :

[external image]

Osikinskij Burial :

[external image]

Russian bowyear reconstruction :

[external image]

Straange example Hun bow rec. from Mongol museum :


[external image]


Some Magyar hornbow reconstruction , what i find. I am apologise, but i dont know name all autors. Maybe Peter or Paku (or Fusizoli...) know more about.

[external image]

Simon Diordi bow :

[external image]


[external image]


[external image]


[external image]


[external image]

Probably Paku shooting vith his bow

:wink:

[external image]

Litle compare vith similar disain - Novotnys Yuan bow ...


[external image]

Thank you both for the pictures. I see what you mean Sandor about the bottom-angled bone pieces. It may be true, but just as well may not be. Some of the fragments do not look worn at the bottom and the bone piece, even angled, could end above the "knee" with the sinew wraps reaching further up the siyah.

On two of Dusan's pictures (from the Karoly book and the Avar bone) the recurve had to be gradual over a large radius, since the bone is so curved. This is a good indication the other bows could have such curve as well, even thogh the bone, as found, was shorter? Has anyone made a bow like that?

Perhaps some of the bows had a sharper curve, as on one of the drawings (if the drawing is indeed of a bow from the same area, since Sandor said the wood did not survive), but still, I do not detect any bone under the wraps at the location of the knee.

I realize knowledgeable people have alredy considered all options. I am interested to know how.

Adam

Adam
I think the bone plate was there not only prevent that ear bends to the side but also to support the joint. If we consider that the ears were only seated on the limbs, it is reasonable to think that the bone covered also this area. My view is that the bone went down to the level of the horn. But may be I am wrong.
Dusan
Pictures 5-8 show two of my bows, the upper three are details of an older construction about seven years back and I do not like it any more. The guy is my friend shooting one of the small Magyar constructions.
S?ndor

Dusan,

the first drawing is about the findings in the conquest-era cemetery in V?rs, Hungary (just south of lake Balaton). Andras Kosztich made a reconstruction and posted it some time ago:
http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t ... ght=v%F6rs
And that's me just above Mr. Novotny, trying Sanyi Paku's small magyar construction...

Szabi

Sandor,

I am trying to digest what you say about the siyah plates and that the plates went down level with the horn. Bone is a stiff material not easily flexed. Then the side siyah plates were not likely to conform to any roundness of the belly at the knee. Then, if they indeed were reaching to the horn, there had to be some rounding of the sharp points of the bone plates at the bellly side. Otherwise the belly side of the knee would have two sharp side corners - essentially the knee would be sharply squared at the belly. I can not imagine a bowyer making bows like that with no attempt to round the belly. On the other hand, if the wood of siyahs extended below the plates, the sharp plate corners (with the thinning of the bottom edge) make more sense. What do you think?

At this point, I tend to believe the diagonal ends in the plates have no significance and the actual transition between the limbs and ears was a few centimeters (?) below the plates. Possibly the final curvature there resembled the existing curved plates.

Now, the other issue is how far the horn extended into the siyahs. With the more gentle curvature of the knee, it could have been quite a distance up the knee. It is then possible the knee had some flex, probably (partially?) reduced by the presence of the curved bone plates, if present.

For a sharp belly corner in the knee one would have to deliberately add an additional chunk of wood there (as in Khotan bow as I recall), or the belly slat for the core would have to be made thick. This is not likely to be the case, since it is hard to bend a thick slat into a sharp corner. I understand one can laminate a pre-formed siyah onto the back side of the limb, but I do not recall such construction (other than in the modern replicas - the "seated" ear as you say). ???

Adam

Adam
This is exactly what I think. It is weird but the bone plates should cover the wood core of the limbs to reinforce the joint and they were completely straight. This explains why the cross section of the knee should be a rectangle. This is really not to explain by our standards, probably they did not care too much about efficiency (lowering weight), they just wanted a strong safe bow.

?On the other hand, if the wood of siyahs extended below the plates, the sharp plate corners (with the thinning of the bottom edge) make more sense?
Sorry but I have not understood the meaning of this sentence.

The curved bone plates were from the Avars (which interestingly preceded the Magyar?s) In this case there is no doubt that the transition was curved. They are also thinner at the base to accommodate the curvature. In contrast the width of the Magyar plates usually increases toward the base which is more in harmony with the angled transition at the knee.
I think the horn did not extended into the siyahs (I do my bows in the same way) and knee on Hungarian bows was completely rigid. On Turkish bows the horn do not extends into the tip and the transition between kasan and tip is rigid.
It looks like the on Turkish bows the siyahs was reversed compared to the Hungarian bows. Roughly the long ear (tip) of the Hungarian bow was inserted into the limb (got to be kasan) and the small piece which was used to glue the ear to the limbs became the tip. Additionally the transition between the sal and kasan became somewhat flexible, which phenomenon does not exist in Hungarian bows. It is possible that on Hungarian bows the ears (siyahs) were simply cut, this is why they needed the extra reinforcement by the bone plates beside that they were probably only seated. As far as I remember it was mentioned on ATARN that V splice did not existed that time.
Sorry for the long and probably confusing post.
S?ndor

Thank you Paku and Szaby. Its good knows who is who , and who make bows. :D

I replace Georgia bows to Russian collection. :wink:

Sandor

I think I was not too clear. The bottom line: you assume the knee joint required the reinforcment with the bone plates. I do not believe this is true - the sinew wraps are quite sufficient for that. Then, for me, the bottom ends of the plates did not have to touch the horns and their shape there is irrelevant.

Adam

Adam
It is clear now. We have different opinion, but it is right so. More experiments are needed.
I hope will you join us on the Hungarian bow project to clarify this subject. :) .
S?ndor

Paku, you have intresting theory.

I think cutting such a piece of wood is well feasible, if you have bandsaw. If you do not, It is possible, but would require a lot of more work like other methods, such as lamination from many small pieces, naturally curved wood.

I was thinking of a different, but related theory, and it is that the curve is made from multiple pieces of wood and the bone reinforces that joint. I do not belive that either...

I like this topic!

Good start to know this bow better :D

Nice to see Adam here!

Very interesting indeed

Botondbow: The 25th you post some images of a snakeskin covered bow - I was wondering what type of horn you used for it? Surely it is not waterbuffalo? - maybe something like kyloe?

dklynx wrote:

Very interesting indeed

Botondbow: The 25th you post some images of a snakeskin covered bow - I was wondering what type of horn you used for it? Surely it is not waterbuffalo? - maybe something like kyloe?

For my snakeskin bow I used Watusi Cattle (African) horn.
Sorry, let me correct myself the horn was said to be Watusi but I only know that they came from Africa! Horn is quite similar to the Hungarian Grey Cattle but more transparent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watusi_cattle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Grey_cattle

[external image]

[external image]

Thank you :-)
Whow! Watusi sure have HUGE horn :shock:

dklynx wrote:

Thank you :-)
Whow! Watusi sure have HUGE horn :shock:

Yes they are giants, sometimes I have a feeling that they are dinosaurs' horn and 1m long horn is not really rare! :D

[external image]

"World record for largest horns ? they weigh over 100 pounds each, are over 3 feet in circumference, and measure eight feet from tip to tip. I?ll bet he could use a back rub after carrying those around!"

:shock: so huge horn!
one pair of it can make a dozen of horn bow.