Crim Tatar Bow: Appropriate Gripping Technique....

I have a Crimean Bow, with a historical draw length (but without the string bridges, which are only useful at higher draw weights and are superfluous at lower weights).

The deflex handle does in my opinion feel more natural in the hand than other "straight" handles, and I use an "intermediate grasp", as put into the terms used by Adam Swoboda in his "Short Reflex bow" book.

The grasp is optimal for the medium draw lengths of the Crimean bow which go to around the ear lobe, jaw hinge, or--in my case because of my long arms--to the end of your cheek bone. The grasp protects you from grazing your forearm with the string, and the grasp is also generally more comfortable, unless you have very long or very short fingers; in that case, you would use the square or oblique grasps respectively.

I have some videos on youtube with me shooting my Saluki Crimean bow, and experimenting with numerous draw lengths, releases, and grips. I will post a more definitive video with my ideal form soon.

ah, though I'm not sure if our grips are exactly the same. Mine's more 'bulbous' or rounded like this:

[external image]

Look under my topic for "New Crimean Tatar Bow" in "How can I get..."

I show my bow there, and it has a grip similar to yours, so my advice stays the same.

The grip on the bow in the photo is actually closer to a Korean grip without the padding than to the type of grip found on historical Crimean Tatar bows. I have handle two and seen photographs of several others and the belly side of the grip is straight. Because the limbs are reflexed close to the grip, the eye is sometimes fooled into seeing a curve there that does not exist. Another problem is that the grips are short and some modern reconstructors misinterpret where the grip extends since they are used to long risers.

However, despite that, the grip on the bow in the photograph can be used with the three standard grips mentioned in Saracen Archery. When using the changal baz grip, you can put the web between the base of the thumb and index finger against the highest part of the grip bulge on the belly side. When the wrist is turned down, the pressure is transmitted to the centre of the bow. This works well with bows balanced so that they normally have some vibration in the hand. Most modern reconstruction Crimean Tatar bows I have used don't have a problem and seem to be very well balanced. A horn/wood/sinew reconstruction I used was exceptionally smooth to draw and extremely accurate.

The grip Bede mentioned is similar to the "square grip" as mentioned in Adam Swoboda's book. Personally, the intermediate grip is better for longer draws in my opinion, especially for horse archery wherein the draw length varies sometimes.

hmmm...

I actually have a Korean horn bow and have owned several of the modern synthetics. The grips seem rather unlike my Tatar's or even some of the more 'true' horn composite museum Crim. Tatars. I know though from reading Thomas' book on Korean archery, a rather specific procedure for gripping the bow and grasp is spelled out.

Regardless, I do own Saracen Archery and am rather long armed and long fingered. The grip for longer fingers seems more appropriate for me. I'll give it a try once the weather clears up.

Btw, geoarcher,
What make is your Crimean Bow?

Saluki, like yours. Mine has a little more 'meat' on it though since it pulls 65 at 30 inches.

When you see a Korean horn bow being made you cans see how similar the shape of the bow in your photograph. If you strip off the padding on a modern materials Korean traditional bow, you will find a similar shape too.

I made a mistake in my wording using "grip" where I meant "grasp". There is such a thing as a "square grip" which refers to the shape of the bow handle. There is also a "square grasp" which refers to how the fingers are positioned. This is the grasp that Taybugha refers to as used by people with long fingers. The principle is to put the matn in the middle creases of the three lower fingers. When using this grasp it is important to remember to build the grip up to the right size for your hand. The grip must not be so small so that the above three finger tips touch the hand. The distance they should be is about the width of a fingernail from the palm of the hand when the grip is firmly held. You should let the grip become too wide where the thumb is when building it up. If you do, the thumb cannot be held straight and it may be cut by the fletching if it is tensed because the grip is too bulky.

A round grip is a different thing altogether. In the Persian manuscripts, two different words are used for "round" and it is hard to work out what is meant by context. It appears that a round grip has a less pronounced ridge (matn above). The Arabic texts are not much clearer. It is almost certain that some of the descriptions quoted by mediaeval authors are referring to bows with grips more like Magyar bows with no ridge at all.

The changal-baz grasp is not very suitable for sport horse archery. Its major advantages are felt in long distance target and flight shooting. Using a square or intermediate grasp would be good for most people. The Korean grasp works well too and allows you to hold odd shaped grips more securely.

I agree with Bede, and yes, sorry for saying "grip" instead of the more precise term "grasp".

sorry but origial crimean tatar bows dont have grips like that

Crimean Tatar bows it seems often featured grips like this:

[external image]

However, some had grips more like this:



Apparently, modern horn composite translations come out like this:

[external image]

or even this:

[external image]

Question then for those who care about details: how certain are we that such bows only had one certain type of design for parts like say the grip? I've seen many different museum specimens of Tatar bows and it does not appear that one type of grip was exclusive to the particular type of bow. What is the complete range of grip types for the Crimean Tatar then?

For the (first) shown bow, i'd give a 30 and 99 a try.
The shown handle seems much to bulbous on the belly of the grip for me, while it is nearly flat on the back. Its like the handle is made to shoot the bow with its belly as back. Maybe it is made for archers shooting "English" and force them to shoot with a stretched wrist (as I would try with a Crimean Tartar bow). I haven't seen such a handle on the old bows, making an old technique fitting for this bowtype possibly worthless, because it doesn't have to work with such a handle.

Good luck!
Amarutu

I said mine was more like that one. Not exactly. Its protrudes out more from the back rather then the belly.

But thanks anyway. :roll:

A square grasp works just fine. :P

I didn't get brazed by the arrow and it felt pretty comfortable. Lovely weather today too. 8)

You guys should make videos and post them on youtube showing your form. It would be interesting.