how to make a warring states wood bow
What would it take for me to make for myself a (relatively) simple Warring States era wooden recurve bow (circa 4th century BC)? The construction involves 3 pieces bound at the handle and finished with lacquer/paint. A picture of the bow in question is below. I believe the limb pieces would be 60--70 cm in length.
Unfortunately, I don't have access to a shop, so I'm content with working with hand tools. Let's assume I'm working with mulberry (or a wood that I can buy at a hardware store), but not bamboo. My main questions are follows:
(1) What kind of wood would you recommend?
(2) Do I get the wood pieces to recurve by scraping them into that shape, or do I bend them into shape?
(3) Do I need any specialized tools for shaping the wood?
If construction methods have been discussed in another thread or in a book, I'd welcome those pointers. I figure I'd start out with making light prototypes and working on heavier versions from there.
Unfortunately, I don't have access to a shop, so I'm content with working with hand tools. Let's assume I'm working with mulberry (or a wood that I can buy at a hardware store), but not bamboo. My main questions are follows:
(1) What kind of wood would you recommend?
(2) Do I get the wood pieces to recurve by scraping them into that shape, or do I bend them into shape?
(3) Do I need any specialized tools for shaping the wood?
If construction methods have been discussed in another thread or in a book, I'd welcome those pointers. I figure I'd start out with making light prototypes and working on heavier versions from there.
Enter the text to be translated, or URL, such as: I like or: http://www.zxfy.info/
My English is very bad. So I rarely replies. I am afraid my language through translation software lied. If you can understand translation software, I will share with you a wide range.
The picture you send is of a bow unearthed in Changsha, China. It is a reinforced bamboo bow. The structure is composite Bamboo layers, strengthened with silk threads and lacquered. This was the southern region of China in ancient times. The structure creates the greatest power with the minimum material. The principal structure is the two or more layers of bamboo core forming a symmetrical layered structure. The limbs were glued together and bound with silk for strength, in the form of a shallow curve. This is the ancient Chinese bamboo production and use of materials to the people the best example
[Edited by Stephen Selby]
My English is very bad. So I rarely replies. I am afraid my language through translation software lied. If you can understand translation software, I will share with you a wide range.
The picture you send is of a bow unearthed in Changsha, China. It is a reinforced bamboo bow. The structure is composite Bamboo layers, strengthened with silk threads and lacquered. This was the southern region of China in ancient times. The structure creates the greatest power with the minimum material. The principal structure is the two or more layers of bamboo core forming a symmetrical layered structure. The limbs were glued together and bound with silk for strength, in the form of a shallow curve. This is the ancient Chinese bamboo production and use of materials to the people the best example
[Edited by Stephen Selby]
I've edited Gao Xiangs response from machine translation into more technical English.
My supplement to Gao Xiang's information, with which I agree, is that you can use two layers of bamboo as the core with a wooden build-out on the belly side for the grip. The string nocks at each end will be formed of hardwood and glued to the back of the bow. Gao Xiang mentions the bow having an inbuilt curve; but I think that the bow was straight when unstrung and the curve was the result of being strung when buried. If you want to finish in the traditional way, you would bind the bow from top to bottom with one fine layer of silk soaked in lacquer, and then add a final lacquer coat for decoration.
My supplement to Gao Xiang's information, with which I agree, is that you can use two layers of bamboo as the core with a wooden build-out on the belly side for the grip. The string nocks at each end will be formed of hardwood and glued to the back of the bow. Gao Xiang mentions the bow having an inbuilt curve; but I think that the bow was straight when unstrung and the curve was the result of being strung when buried. If you want to finish in the traditional way, you would bind the bow from top to bottom with one fine layer of silk soaked in lacquer, and then add a final lacquer coat for decoration.
I would like to humbly point out that all three of these Marquis Yi bows are heavily reflexed (for a wood bow) and one limb (the upper?) more recurved than the other. I say reflexed because they bend away from the grip riser. Therefore, they do not appear to have been put in the tomb strung but retain vestiges of their original shape.
So maybe these are a variant of the other WS self bow posted by Stephen above, which is also in the archive.
I see some logic in this design if Mulberry were being used. It is difficult to find a good long mulberry branch, most of them are bent anyway. They also twist as they dry. So just let them dry, then select three good sticks and join them, wrap and paint.
The finished bow should have a slight asymmetry.
Would it make sense to join these two topics?
So maybe these are a variant of the other WS self bow posted by Stephen above, which is also in the archive.
I see some logic in this design if Mulberry were being used. It is difficult to find a good long mulberry branch, most of them are bent anyway. They also twist as they dry. So just let them dry, then select three good sticks and join them, wrap and paint.
The finished bow should have a slight asymmetry.
Would it make sense to join these two topics?
Yes, maybe... :lol: Stil is question- any sinew traces ?
Yeah, according to the report quoted in this post ( http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=17453#17453 ) the Zeng Hou Yi bows were wood (for example, Mulberry). I was under the impression the Zeng Hou Yi construction had two shorter wood pieces, with the end of one piece overlapping the end of another (see illustration [A]). This is in contrast to the construction where the pieces are stacked (see illustration ). Is it fair to say that there was more than one construction method for wooden composites during the Warring States? The construction in [A] seems simpler.jack farrell wrote:
I see some logic in this design if Mulberry were being used. It is difficult to find a good long mulberry branch, most of them are bent anyway. They also twist as they dry. So just let them dry, then select three good sticks and join them, wrap and paint.
A translation for Gao Xiang (翻译给高哥):
对，跟出土的报告来说 （ http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=17453#17453 ），曾侯乙的弓是木弓 （譬如说，桑弓）。 我以为曾侯乙的做法是 两块短的木片，木片的一端跟另一片的一端在中间重叠（看图 [A]）。 跟另外个做法（整个木片贴在整个木片）不同（看图）。 可以说战国代有不同的强化木弓做法？ 图[A]的做法看起来比较简单。
Justin
Stephen's "supplement" is for a two layer bamboo bow but also seems to include splices.
Look closely at the illustration any you might see three construction methods.
Look closely at the illustration any you might see three construction methods.
I don't have the eye for telling apart wood constructions, but would they be something like the following?...jack farrell wrote:
Look closely at the illustration any you might see three construction methods.
maybe it is a key why they hard to know the differ wood and bamboo, 112--117 cm long wood bow no sinew and horn, in korean also has sinew/wood/bamboo bow, the hornbow a few greet than it, see them form korean 交子弓, http://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/grayso ... 2-bow.shtm
諸臣, 以交子弓, 反勝於黑角弓爲言, 而臣早習弓馬, 略知弓矢之妙理, 所謂交子角, 以鄕角數三寸之長, 魚鱗間角, 以木付於其上, 若不善爲點火, 則內自生病, 終至折傷, 決不合於待變之器, 若以廣厚之角, 善造長弓, 則其爲無病, 與矢道之平遠, 豈與交子弓比而論之哉?
又所啓, 其一款, 卽火砲及佛狼機所用, 合口丸各五百介, 鳥卵丸各五千介, 令兩南兵水營?統營及黃海?平安兵營, 間年備送於本府事也。此是備禦之用, 依此分定, 似宜, 而每每定式備送, 恐不無弊端矣。右議政曰, 不必間年以爲恒式, 自備而量宜分定, 似當矣。 上曰, 不必定式, 自備局隨時分定, 可也。 又所啓, 其一款, 卽令濟州等三官, 間年精造交子弓一百張, 以送本府事也。 濟州弓制, 最善, 且多弓匠牛角, 使之造送, 固無不可, 而間年定式, 則亦似難便矣。 上曰, 間三年使之造送, 可也。
濟州弓制, 最善, 且多弓匠牛角
張鵬翼曰, 臣以都監事, 有所仰達矣。 都監每年造弓, 不下於千餘張, 故筋角, 依定式, 取用於泮隷懸房矣。 自上年, 託以凶年, 不爲備納, 一向如此, 則造弓之道, 實無其路。 故還爲取用事敢達矣。 上曰, 鄕角, 亦用之乎? 鵬翼曰, 鄕角, 用於交子弓, 而取緊者筋也
又以禁衛營言啓曰, 本營所上校子弓, 皆用間角造成, 若當陰雨, 則魚鱗處例多生病。故以長片竹間槊造弓, 矢力之遠近, 比諸角弓, 不甚相遠。 而雖當陰濕, 似無容易生病之慮。 故先造看品弓二張, 頃已封進。其後貿得片竹於南中, 間竹校子長弓一千二十張, 令敎鍊官前司果金世彧監造, 今已畢役矣。 在前造弓千數者, 例有論賞之典。 令該曹考例, 稟處, 何如? 傳曰, 允。
諸臣, 以交子弓, 反勝於黑角弓爲言, 而臣早習弓馬, 略知弓矢之妙理, 所謂交子角, 以鄕角數三寸之長, 魚鱗間角, 以木付於其上, 若不善爲點火, 則內自生病, 終至折傷, 決不合於待變之器, 若以廣厚之角, 善造長弓, 則其爲無病, 與矢道之平遠, 豈與交子弓比而論之哉?
又所啓, 其一款, 卽火砲及佛狼機所用, 合口丸各五百介, 鳥卵丸各五千介, 令兩南兵水營?統營及黃海?平安兵營, 間年備送於本府事也。此是備禦之用, 依此分定, 似宜, 而每每定式備送, 恐不無弊端矣。右議政曰, 不必間年以爲恒式, 自備而量宜分定, 似當矣。 上曰, 不必定式, 自備局隨時分定, 可也。 又所啓, 其一款, 卽令濟州等三官, 間年精造交子弓一百張, 以送本府事也。 濟州弓制, 最善, 且多弓匠牛角, 使之造送, 固無不可, 而間年定式, 則亦似難便矣。 上曰, 間三年使之造送, 可也。
濟州弓制, 最善, 且多弓匠牛角
張鵬翼曰, 臣以都監事, 有所仰達矣。 都監每年造弓, 不下於千餘張, 故筋角, 依定式, 取用於泮隷懸房矣。 自上年, 託以凶年, 不爲備納, 一向如此, 則造弓之道, 實無其路。 故還爲取用事敢達矣。 上曰, 鄕角, 亦用之乎? 鵬翼曰, 鄕角, 用於交子弓, 而取緊者筋也
又以禁衛營言啓曰, 本營所上校子弓, 皆用間角造成, 若當陰雨, 則魚鱗處例多生病。故以長片竹間槊造弓, 矢力之遠近, 比諸角弓, 不甚相遠。 而雖當陰濕, 似無容易生病之慮。 故先造看品弓二張, 頃已封進。其後貿得片竹於南中, 間竹校子長弓一千二十張, 令敎鍊官前司果金世彧監造, 今已畢役矣。 在前造弓千數者, 例有論賞之典。 令該曹考例, 稟處, 何如? 傳曰, 允。
Justin; To my eye, "D" has a longer limb splice and the grip riser overlaps that to about half the bow.
What we still have is only part of the picture. What is not known are the cross sections. Perhaps one could extrapolate from the wood bow in the archive.
If the bows are 117cm, these would be very short. I do not see how a draw of more than 22-24" would be possible.
What we still have is only part of the picture. What is not known are the cross sections. Perhaps one could extrapolate from the wood bow in the archive.
If the bows are 117cm, these would be very short. I do not see how a draw of more than 22-24" would be possible.
Jack, you make a good point about the cross section, which is something I could botch easily if I don't have a reference.
Yeah, the Zeng Hou Yi report said the arrows were 26"--28" long. I would not be surprised if there were longer-length bows that were excavated from there. To me, a 1.3m--1.5m bow length would seem reasonable to support this longer draw.
So after this discussion, it sounds like the 2-pieces-stacked bamboo construction would be the simplest for a newbie like me to pursue. Thanks everyone (谢谢大家).
Justin
Yeah, the Zeng Hou Yi report said the arrows were 26"--28" long. I would not be surprised if there were longer-length bows that were excavated from there. To me, a 1.3m--1.5m bow length would seem reasonable to support this longer draw.
So after this discussion, it sounds like the 2-pieces-stacked bamboo construction would be the simplest for a newbie like me to pursue. Thanks everyone (谢谢大家).
Justin
Comments about possible built-in recurve humbly made by Jack are humbly accepted by me. :)
One question remains: how was the recurve achieved? Dusan asks the right question: 'Any traces of sinew?' Now, to the very limited extent that I have been able to handle some originals, I can see a bow body wrapped in silk and lacquered: but absolutely no trace of either sinew or horn. That goes against what we should expect from the contemporary literature ('The Rites of Zhou'.) Bows of the WS period that I examined in Xinjiang had both horn and sinew, and bore an outward resemblance to the Zeng Yi Tomb bows; but the archaeologist's reconstruction of that bow and his technical description makes no mention of horn or sinew (notwithstanding that the archaeologist was familiar with the description in the 'Rites of Zhou'.). The only bow from that period in my own collection is a simple wood longbow that is very close in design to the Meer Heath bow.
My advice to you if you want to try a reconstruction is to base the outline on the Zeng Yi bows and the construction method on the modern bamboo yumi. That is, you can take my rough, two-piece composite outline and impose a recurve by heating and gluing.
I recall that Roman Berard did some experiments along these lines when he was in Beijing. I haven't heard from him for some time.
One question remains: how was the recurve achieved? Dusan asks the right question: 'Any traces of sinew?' Now, to the very limited extent that I have been able to handle some originals, I can see a bow body wrapped in silk and lacquered: but absolutely no trace of either sinew or horn. That goes against what we should expect from the contemporary literature ('The Rites of Zhou'.) Bows of the WS period that I examined in Xinjiang had both horn and sinew, and bore an outward resemblance to the Zeng Yi Tomb bows; but the archaeologist's reconstruction of that bow and his technical description makes no mention of horn or sinew (notwithstanding that the archaeologist was familiar with the description in the 'Rites of Zhou'.). The only bow from that period in my own collection is a simple wood longbow that is very close in design to the Meer Heath bow.
My advice to you if you want to try a reconstruction is to base the outline on the Zeng Yi bows and the construction method on the modern bamboo yumi. That is, you can take my rough, two-piece composite outline and impose a recurve by heating and gluing.
I recall that Roman Berard did some experiments along these lines when he was in Beijing. I haven't heard from him for some time.
Wooden selfbows(spindlewood, osage), 2 wood lams, bamboo/ wood lams, bamboo/bamboo lams even very short could be drawn further than many bowyers and archers are thinking of them.
Recently there was an about 45" boo/wood lam posted in the PALEOPLANET drawn to 26". I?ve done several wooden shorties, same length, about 45lbs at 25" casting 200grs- hollow hex arrows more than 200yards.
The best wood is wild rose, there are wild rose shorties at about 42" in length drawn to 28".
Efficiency is low, but cause of being so short, these bows are hard to outperform in distance and speed when shot with light arrows.
Michael
Recently there was an about 45" boo/wood lam posted in the PALEOPLANET drawn to 26". I?ve done several wooden shorties, same length, about 45lbs at 25" casting 200grs- hollow hex arrows more than 200yards.
The best wood is wild rose, there are wild rose shorties at about 42" in length drawn to 28".
Efficiency is low, but cause of being so short, these bows are hard to outperform in distance and speed when shot with light arrows.
Michael
Bringing this topic back to life after a couple years...<grin>
I'm interested in building a Warring States bow as described here. (Justin did you ever complete yours?)
I can see how the overlapped limbs and handle fit together, and how the nocks are added. I can even see how the recurve can be glued in (if the overlaps are glued.
What I'm having trouble "seeing" is how the silk covering Stephen describes is done:
"...bind the bow from top to bottom with one fine layer of silk soaked in lacquer, and then add a final lacquer coat for decoration."
Is it a spiral wrap of silk 'ribbon', or a lengthwise 'tube wrap' as if laying the bow on a rectangle of fabric? Is the entire bow wrapped out to the nocks, or just the central overlap section? Stephen implies that the wrap is full length.
I'm interested in building a Warring States bow as described here. (Justin did you ever complete yours?)
I can see how the overlapped limbs and handle fit together, and how the nocks are added. I can even see how the recurve can be glued in (if the overlaps are glued.
What I'm having trouble "seeing" is how the silk covering Stephen describes is done:
"...bind the bow from top to bottom with one fine layer of silk soaked in lacquer, and then add a final lacquer coat for decoration."
Is it a spiral wrap of silk 'ribbon', or a lengthwise 'tube wrap' as if laying the bow on a rectangle of fabric? Is the entire bow wrapped out to the nocks, or just the central overlap section? Stephen implies that the wrap is full length.