Images of broken north Indian bow for study
The bow is badly damaged (not by myself) and it does give an insight into the level of work that went into building a bow of this type.
The previous owner (an old friend sadly now gone) had took the bow apart after it failed in use, and rather than repair it he left it like this for study.
The core resembles either mulberry or elm, but with age it's difficult sometimes to tell for sure.
The tips are made of a tropical type wood resembling mahogany, but again hard to tell, it also resembles the timber from my Indian 1902 universal pattern saddle, so who knows.
The exsposed horn is heavily scored,with random broad grooves which do not run parallel to the sides, and therefore would not match up with any coresponding grooves that might be in the wood.
The single fishtail joints are well cut, fit well, and appear to be glued with what looks like hide glue.
I can now see that you can only put three images on at a time, so be patient, and I will post more images as I sort them for size etc.
Chris Boyton.
It is very pleasent to see how it "conforms" to what previous discussions here have concluded about these bows. I like the way the horn at the grip and the edges by the grip splices on the back have been filled out by some kind of darker sinew/glue-mixture. Also, it seems like the same have been done to fill out a gap along the edges of the horn strips in the limbs? Any idea what this substance consists of? It seems quite different from the sinew layer.
Two more questions:
* the glue line between the core and horn is flat?
* on one picture of the back of the "kasan"/tip it seems like there is some kind of fabric covering? - or maybe it is simply varnish that is misleading my eyes?
Cem
Same questions as Kviljo.
+ I might have seen a similar dark "gap filling" substance on a contemporary mongolian bow, will make a pic. However no idea what it is.
:wink: Uli
The excess glue appears to be hide glue, although I can't discount the possibility that the previous owner might have tried to do repairs on it using hide glue.Kviljo wrote:
Wow! :D I love it. Thanks a lot for sharing!
It is very pleasent to see how it "conforms" to what previous discussions here have concluded about these bows. I like the way the horn at the grip and the edges by the grip splices on the back have been filled out by some kind of darker sinew/glue-mixture. Also, it seems like the same have been done to fill out a gap along the edges of the horn strips in the limbs? Any idea what this substance consists of? It seems quite different from the sinew layer.
Two more questions:
* the glue line between the core and horn is flat?
* on one picture of the back of the "kasan"/tip it seems like there is some kind of fabric covering? - or maybe it is simply varnish that is misleading my eyes?
The glue line between the horn and core is indeed flat, although with the deep rough scoring of the horn, the two surfaces don't appear to have a great amount of contact, relying on plenty of glue to keep them together.
I have seen a broken Turkish bow where the glue was so thick it formed into crystalised lumps.
I can't say what the surface covering is but it does not appear to be fabric. I will take the bow into the workshop next week and have a look under a lense and see if I can work out how the bow is covered under what is left of the decoration.
Chris Boyton.
It seems to be quite covered with sinew still, but maybe it is possible to see if the "kasan" wooden piece has some ridge on the back. - or maybe it all seems to be built up with sinew? Also, what is your impression of the wood in that bent section; is it taken from a naturally grown piece or a straight piece that has been bent?
I hope not to be boring you with too many questions, but it is hard to hold them back, hehe. Thanks again!
KviljoKviljo wrote:
Fantastic stuff :) I'll be looking forward to a report on what you find!
It seems to be quite covered with sinew still, but maybe it is possible to see if the "kasan" wooden piece has some ridge on the back. - or maybe it all seems to be built up with sinew? Also, what is your impression of the wood in that bent section; is it taken from a naturally grown piece or a straight piece that has been bent?
I hope not to be boring you with too many questions, but it is hard to hold them back, hehe. Thanks again!
I know it's not very professional, but I was tempted to carefully remove some of the sinew from the kasan to study the ridge, but I am still undecided about that.
The tip and the exposed joint at the kasan appear to be the same type of tropical hardwood, and knowing how some tropical woods resist steam or heat bending, I wonder whether it is a naturally curved piece or built up using another joint.
Chris.
so we have evidence of thick glue lines with nonmatching grooves in
contemporary korean, ottoman and mughal bows.
however it seems this method is not employed by many of us ?
I took a close look today at the surface of the bow, and it's hard to tell quite how it is finished, as the surface is almost petrified, and the paint or laquer is crazed all over. It looks like very very thin leather as one might expect, there is no sign of birch bark, or any sign of a lead base coat.
Here are some more images, although they are not that clear.
Sorry about the sizing of the images, I'm still struggling a bit with all the techy stuff.
Chris Boyton
The quality of the joints is obvious and made even more visible by the contrasting colours of the woods used. It is interesting that the strong bends are concentrated in the ears where the wood is heavily reinforced with sinew on all sides. I think that this form of construction could be important for several composite bows of the Middle Ages.
the cover might have been thin leather
although its tempting to make the kasan ridge from sinew,
its amazing to see that at least the splice region must have had a sinew ridge.
.. and note how knots in the wooden core of the limb were put to the splice regions of grip and siyah.
I faintly remember a conversation with a friend many years ago about broken or disected bows he had studied, and in some cases the ridge was part of a splice which was left in the square, with the corners and ridge filled in with sinew to get the shape needed. I personally think there is some timber in the ridge, but it's only a guess.
Uli, you mentioned knots, but there is only one small pin knot, which as you say is near the grip. I can tell from the feather of the grain that the timber in the limb is taken from a small diameter stem or branch, where one might expect to find a few small pin knots.
Chris Boyton.
I was also wondering of the joinery hidden under the last of the sinew but would also be reluctant to finish off the old work.
do you have an idea where to spread the horn in kasan?
thank you
PAZUZU
The sinew covers the kasan right up to the shoulder, so it's hard to see where the horn terminates.PAZUZU wrote:
Chris
do you have an idea where to spread the horn in kasan?
thank you
PAZUZU
Chris.
Measured next to the end of the grip splice, the horn is 5mm and the wood core is 4mm. These measurements were taken with a tape measure, not a vernier caliper or micrometer, but I was very careful, so they are resonably accurate.Kviljo wrote:
At the broken point of the "sal", where the grip V-splice ends, what would you say the thickness of the horn and the core is? On the overview-picture of the bow, the horn seems to be quite thick. I bet there are large differences from bow to bow regarding this, but it would be nice to adjust the horn/wood-ratio to something authentic (for my/our to-be crab bows). Most bows does not seem to give off this information easily, but this one seems to be quite willing to tell... :)
Chris.
I think it should be possible to poke into the sinew on the ridge with a needle to follow the existing damage. This way the depth of sinew could be estimated. I saw a sawn section of a crab bow at the ridge where the ridge was mostly moulded in sinew. The horn went up the kasans about one third of the way and was very thin there.
The "leather" may actually be an undercoat or a priming coat. I do not see the "leather" to form a distinct layer, which should be retained as such and separate from paint. The fibrous texture of leather could be seen under a magnifying glass. These bows were usually only painted.
Great pictures, thanks Chris
Adam
Adam,Adam Karpowicz wrote:
I do see shallow, parallel grooving on the horn/wood surfaces, which were put on after the random (or diagonal) marks left by rasping the surfaces. And the surfaces of both horn and wood were rasped/filed under sinew on the back and the belly.
I think it should be possible to poke into the sinew on the ridge with a needle to follow the existing damage. This way the depth of sinew could be estimated. I saw a sawn section of a crab bow at the ridge where the ridge was mostly moulded in sinew. The horn went up the kasans about one third of the way and was very thin there.
The "leather" may actually be an undercoat or a priming coat. I do not see the "leather" to form a distinct layer, which should be retained as such and separate from paint. The fibrous texture of leather could be seen under a magnifying glass. These bows were usually only painted.
Great pictures, thanks Chris
Adam
I did try with a needle, but the sinew is very hard, and the needle started to bend under the pressure, so no result there. Jack's idea of cutting half way with a scalpel sounds good, but I will have to be completlely relaxed and in my workshop to do a decent job of that, but I will give that one some thought, and post back pictures if I do.
Regarding the finish you might be right about not being leather, although it is hard even with a lens to tell, as the surface looks frazzled as if the bow was exposed to heat or steam at some time in the past.
I re-measured the thickness of the horn next to the end of the grip splice using a micrometer, and it is 5.7mm, and a total of 9.6mm with the core.
Chris.
But it seems that your bow has more horn than I used, a little contrary to what I have gotten the impression of before with these bows, although it is not surprising that there was some variation to these bows too. Thanks for the effort again!
Glad to be of help.Kviljo wrote:
Hehe, what a coincidence! I just checked, and my bow actually has the same core+horn thickness at that point - 9,6mm!
But it seems that your bow has more horn than I used, a little contrary to what I have gotten the impression of before with these bows, although it is not surprising that there was some variation to these bows too. Thanks for the effort again!
Chris.