Sayas, who invented them?

Tapio Manner · Post by **Tapio Manner** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:29 pm

Still I wonder:

Those measurements were on the original drawing and were used to relate it to the archaeological object it was based on.

Those measurements are set out to 1/100 mm accuracy, that is not practically possible to measure. So I still have assume they are calculated values. From what?

It is 26cm long (less than a foot) so the original must be a model or toy.

It does show the ends well though.

TLM

redhawk · Post by **redhawk** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:48 am

These measurements makes wonder: this has to be a grave good!

How is this bow related to the Subeixi-bow?

I?ve made some bow- limbs in the dimensions of the Subeixi- bow: absolutely no bend!!

I really would like to know, if the reconstruction of David Betterridge is done with the measurements of the Subeixi- bow- findings and if it is a shootable bow.

Michael

TZH · Post by **TZH** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 9:06 am

Thanks, Andrew!
But I think it is a bit developed than the avar bows of the 6-7th Centuries.
(f.e. C shape, no curved lower siyah ends)

TZH

Andrew Hall · Post by **Andrew Hall** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:46 pm

TZH

The reasons for my 6-7th century date for the Gogops bow: It appears to be one of the numerous Ancient Turk derivations of the Hunnic bow (short grip, overall length shorter than Hunnic, the large distance between tip and nock is late feature). In the number of bone plates, it is most similar to Khudyakov's Ancient Turk type 3 bow, a few examples of which were found in the Altai, dating from 6th to 10th century ("Armaments the Medieval Nomads of South Siberia and Central Asia". Novosibirsk, 1986). According to "Armament and Military Science of the Khazar Khanate", A.V. Komar, O.V. Sukhobokov, the Magyar form of siyah plate was introduced in the 8th C, replacing the earlier form in the northern Caucasus.

The Magyar bows were probably developed in the 8th C in Khazar empire and surrounding territories (Northern Caucasus and Russia west of the Urals), and carried into Hungary by the Magyars the following century. I suspect the Avar bow may have had a similar origin, so the Avar design may be older than the Hungarian finds. Anyone have any find information to support or refute this?

Andrew

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:51 am

Andrew,
Do you think the Avars picked up bows on their way through the steppe between the Urals and the Caucasus rather than brought their own from Central Asia?

The Avars seem to have moved through several centuries ahead of the Hungarians and brought their complete military apparatus including stirrups and armoured cavalry. I noted in one Hungarian book that at the time of the appearance of the Avars west of the Carpathians that the size and weight of arrowheads in the graves increased.

Rigel · Post by **Rigel** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 9:25 am

Was it the Avars who invented the stirrups?

Andrew Hall · Post by **Andrew Hall** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:10 pm

Bede

Perhaps my use of "suspect" was a little strong. I assume that the Avars started out with a variant of the Hunnic bow, which evolved as they travelled. It may have started out as one of the symmetrical Hunnic variants such as the model bows from Kokel. (Some of they siyah plates from Kokel are the closest in shape to the Avar ones, straight with a bent end, but lack the deep section at the nock and the four-plate boxed-in design). I do not know of any finds of Avar plates east of the Urals, so assume the bow to have developed to the west.

I don't know much about the travels of the Avars. If, like the Magyars, they spent some time in southern Russia before entering Hungary, the bow could have evolved during this time. It could also have developed once they had formed their empire in Hungary, in which case there should hopefully be some intermediate type finds.

Any information on Avar bone plate finds would be gratefully received.

Andrew

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:49 pm

Andrew,
Judging by the histories, the Avars arrived with two tumens still organised as they would have been in their original homeland. If they moved quickly, they may not have left intermediate remains. Finding an Avar tomb in Mongolia would answer these questions. It's a shame we can't just find these things when we need them.
The Avars are believed to have brought stirrups to Europe.

Andrew Hall · Post by **Andrew Hall** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:04 pm

Bede, I have had a look at Sebastyen Karoly's work on the Avar finds (the German summary), and there are a range of shapes of siyah side plates shown. I have done a quick drawing showing (from the left), two general Hunnic siyah plates, one of the more angled Kokel variants of the Hunnic bow (some of the Kokel siyahs were completely straight), and four shapes of Avar siyah on the right. (Hunnic siyahs from Khudyakov, Avar from Karoly - not to scale). If the Avar forms developed so that the ones of the right are the later, then there is some evidence of evolution taking place in Hungary (so ignore my previous thoughts).

It appears that the four-plate boxed-in siyah was not found in all the graves. Many had the belly and back siyah plates missing. Karoly has an example illustration showing the siyah construction with belly and back plates which is of the right-hand form. There is not enough information to determine if these extra plates were a late addition.

With the left-hand siyah form and without the siyah back and belly plates, the Avar bow remains do not differ that much from some of the Hunnic bows.

Andrew

TZH · Post by **TZH** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:55 am

Thanks, Andrew!

I've found some pics of early and late avar bownplates, I'll post them soon (and severals of hunnic bp-s).

Most of the hunic bp-s in the west (Europe) are a little bit angled.

And there is a very good work from G?bor Szőllősy, compearing the avar and hungarian bows. I'll write a short summary.

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 4:21 pm

Am enjoying this thread comparing Avar and Hunnic bow siyah bone plates.

As to the evidence for other recurved bows I draw attention to the book "The Anzaf Fortress and the Gods of Urartu", by Oktay Delli, 1999. A ninth century BC bronze shield fragment was found on the border of Turkey and Iran showing the dieties of Urartu with their armaments. The main god, Haldi holds an angular composite bow with recurved tips. This is noted in the drawn artwork as well as the text. The bow would be shoulder heigth, held in the left hand with the thumb pressing against the upper limb.

There are many other such representations from the bronze age. I am thinking that there are such as early as the 15th c BC. These not only appear on angular bows but on D-shaped bows contemporary to angular bows.

These would precede both Hunnic finds of Central Asia and Scythian bows. both east and west.

The search for the PLACE of the invention of the recurve on a bow may be just as nebulous as the search for the first bows themselves. -j-

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:18 am

Jack makes a good point. I think that recurves have probably been invented more than once in more than one place.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:25 am

Andrew,
As you display them there appears a development in siyah plate form. The fact that the proximal tip of curves more in the Avar bows suggests that the curvature between the siyah and the limb is more acute than the Hunnic bows or that the joint needed more support. The latter could mean that the bows were stronger or simply under mores stress at a greater curve.

Andrew Hall · Post by **Andrew Hall** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:10 pm

TZH, I look forward to your information.

Jack, the earliest recurve I know about is a bronze age yew self-bow from Lake Ledro in Italy. It is surprisingly similar in general form to a modern target bow. I would not be surprised if recurves were developed independently several times.

Bede, unfortunately I do not know if the dating of the Avar plates is the same as the order they are drawn in (though it does seem to match the early/middle/late Avar bow types that Grozer makes).
I am not sure why the Avar bows needed the extra back/belly siyah plates. The siyahs are shorter than the Hunnic bows, so I would have thought that they were under less stress. The Hunnic bows (or at least some of them) seem to have had the horn strip running partially up the siyahs. Perhaps the bone belly strip was an alternative reinforcement to allow for shorter horn strips. This does not explain the bone back strips though. Perhaps their limb/siyah core construction was as scary as the grip joint in the River Gogops bow and needed lots of reinforcement.

Does anyone know anything about using bone under tension on the back of a siyah? It seems a strange material choice to me.

Andrew

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 1:02 am

Tapio,
I missed your questions related to my drawing. The measurements relate to a photograph and drawings taken by Stephen of an original bow. He supplied me with the real length and I used a drawing program to create the sketch. The program provided the dimensions by a perimeter measuring function. Once I had the measurements of the drawing, I could calculate a ratio from the measurements so that I could calculate the draw length and other variables.
In a way, this is an unfortunate drawing to use. However, it was not designed to be used for a reconstruction of the bow, only to work out the cross sections.
I will check back through the original drawings and see if I can upload a more useful set.

Sayas, who invented them?

siyahs....who invented them.....