Question about very large Korean bows.(More like Qing bows)

[Sinsigel]

Both pictures I have posted are known as Dong-Gung in Korea, meaning "Red-painted bow". The only historical record I know that mentions such bow is from 15th century dynasty annal. It simply says that the dong-gung is just the bow painted in red. No other mention about size or shape is mentioned.

However, closely seeing the shape of the siyah and reminding the abnormal length(both are about 6ft long), I would like to carefully conjecture that these bows are heavily influenced by contemporary Qing bows.(Or even perhaps, these bows might be mere copied versions of Qing bows!)The only difference between these bows and Qing bows, I believe, is the presence of string brdges. And I even doubt whether the claim that these bows are dong-gung.(Although painted and decorated, even dong-gung should show some properties of Korean bows. But these two bows just don't)

However, since I'm only an amateur student in this field and very prone to many mistakes, I would be glad if I could hear valuable advice from experts, especially Mr. Duvernay.

[jack farrell]

Greetings Sinsigel; We have not heard from you in some time, I hope all is well.

I would assume these two bows are numbers 7 and 8 of the Military Museum collection in Seoul. I am not aware of any master from Korea who made bows in this tradition. They are not like other old war bows in that collection. Are there other collections of war bows in Korea?

The simplest answer is that they are import bows of the Qing dynasty. By other posts on ATARN you may be aware that there are other such bows in museums in Sweden, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan whose most likely origin is trade. It is well known that these type bows replaced the original types of the people of Mongolia, who are now unaware of their own bow types.

Please excuse my preempting Thomas. I would be interested to hear his and everyones opinion. Jack

[mechwar]

hello, Sinsigel,
I think, these bows are korea dynasty (918~1392) style.
It`s a red painted bow. Red dye is cinnabar(HgS).
It`s very rare mineral.(it has really bloody-red color)

Cinnabar is most important material in shamanism of korea.
It was used in exorcism or drawing charms, tomb, medical care, and some important sharmanism tools. (until now )
My ancestors believes that cinnabar has divine power, and used it from very ancient times.


청나라 활의 영향을 받은 모양이라기 보단 고구려-고려를 거치는 동안 사용된 활과 거의 비슷한 모양이라고 보이는데요.
고구려에서 쓰던 골궁(뼈활)이 발전해오는 과정에서 고자의 모양이 유지된채로 나무로 대체되면서 저런 모양이 됐다고 봅니다.
그리고 왕 혹은 장군들이 쓰던것으로 보아 동궁은 사냥용이나 전투용보다는 다른 용도로 쓰이지 않았을까 합니다. 경면주사를 칠했다는 것은 다분히 의식용 활로 쓰였을 가능성이 높고, 조선시대에 와서도 어느정도 고대의 모양을 유지해서 제작했겠죠. 주제넘게 답글 달아서 죄송 ㅡㅡ

[Sinsigel]

[quote="jack farrell"]Greetings Sinsigel; We have not heard from you in some time, I hope all is well.[/quote]

Thank you. I'm having a fine time these days. It's good to see someone remembering me.


[quote="jack farrell"]I would assume these two bows are numbers 7 and 8 of the Military Museum collection in Seoul. I am not aware of any master from Korea who made bows in this tradition. They are not like other old war bows in that collection. Are there other collections of war bows in Korea?[/quote]

From what I know the first bow is being exhibited in the Korean Military Museum. Since there is no valuable Korean study that focus specifically on the types of Korean bows(e.g. target bows, war bows) I can't be certain about my conjecture; However, it seems some of the large and robust wooden bows in several Korean museums might be classified as war bows.


[quote="jack farrell"]Please excuse my preempting Thomas. I would be interested to hear his and everyones opinion. Jack[/quote]

No, I don't mind it. Thanks for the comment.

[Sinsigel]

[quote="mechwar"]hello, Sinsigel, :)
I think, these bows are korea dynasty (918~1392) style.
It`s a red painted bow. Red dye is cinnabar(HgS).
It`s very rare mineral.(it has really bloody-red color)

Cinnabar is most important material in shamanism of korea.
It was used in exorcism or drawing charms, tomb, medical care, and some important sharmanism tools. (until now :D)
My ancestors believes that cinnabar has divine power, and used it from very ancient times.


청나라 활의 영향을 받은 모양이라기 보단 고구려-고려를 거치는 동안 사용된 활과 거의 비슷한 모양이라고 보이는데요.
고구려에서 쓰던 골궁(뼈활)이 발전해오는 과정에서 고자의 모양이 유지된채로 나무로 대체되면서 저런 모양이 됐다고 봅니다.
그리고 왕 혹은 장군들이 쓰던것으로 보아 동궁은 사냥용이나 전투용보다는 다른 용도로 쓰이지 않았을까 합니다. 경면주사를 칠했다는 것은 다분히 의식용 활로 쓰였을 가능성이 높고, 조선시대에 와서도 어느정도 고대의 모양을 유지해서 제작했겠죠. 주제넘게 답글 달아서 죄송 ㅡㅡ[/quote]

Greetings. Good to see another Korean member in this forum.

One of the most perplexing things about studying the history of ancient/medieval Korean bows is that there are few sources left.

While there are some remainings of bows and quite abundant mural paintings from the Three Kingdoms Era(~7th century AD), almost nothing is to be found from the Koryo dynasty(10th century~14th century).

The only sources I know is an account written by Song dynasty ambassador(Even then, he mentions very briefly), bow of the founder of Chosun dynasty(1392~1910), and the large bow from the Japanese shrine which is supposedly know as the bow of Koryo general, who led Korean forces joined by Mongolians during the invasion of Japan.(Although it seems that there should be more thorough study on this.)

That's why I'm still dubious about the origin of the bows I've posted, even though you've made some points in your argument. I might be wrong, but I can't see the similarities between the siyah of the bows in the picture and the siyah of Koguryo bone siyahs, in terms of shape, material, etc. How can we be certain that the bone siyahs of 5,6th century evolved to the wooden siyah of such type? There is a big gap between the Koguyo era and Koryo era, and we just have too few sources left to trace the history of how Korean bows have changed.

Anyway, thanks for the argument. Hope I didn't offend you much.

[mechwar]

i'm happy
plz check this Mr. farrell's post.

http://www.atarn.org/chinese/miran/Bows ... Miran.html

[jack farrell]

Sensigel; Here are some ideas which are indicated by your search.

You might go to the museum and make drawings on all aspects of these bows. Note the decorations, method of putting on bark covering, all dimensions, evidence that there was once bridges and the shape of their bases. Take pictures. You may be able to receive permission for research purposes. Make a complete plan of these bows.

Ask for the accession information and provenience.

Go see the director of the Bows and Arrows museum to investigate his Qing bows. Pick his brain on this subject.

There are many people who follow your interest in investigating the origin of the Korean bow.

When investigating the Bactrian Gold hoard archaeologists noted that for certain pieces the only comparable pieces were found in Korean burials. The connection is thought to be through Siberia. I found the article on the Silk Road Foundation site, back journals.

Please keep us informed about your progress. Jack

[yokhua]

Maybe, there is a possibility, that these bows were left by the army of Qing Empire.

The Qing's army were very active in Korea, even the father(大院君) of Korean's last Emperor ( 高宗) had been kidnapped and imprisoned into Qing Empire...

The name "red bow" (彤弓) which is how Korean call this kind of bows, mainly because these kind of bows usually covered in birch bark, then painted(in Camouflage patterns) by using Cinnabar and lacquer... It looks red and Camouflaged..

It looks Brilliantly red to Korean people, so it been called "彤弓"..."彤"means Brilliantly red...


Cause, I have a collection of about 20 antique bows of this kind. All from Chinese Qing Dynasty.... and There is impossible for a horn bow can remain such a good condition from 15th century... Unless in the desert environment..

[yokhua]

By the way, the reason why I assert that these are 100% Qing bow in stead of bows in the 13th century are as followings....

1. The bow limbs of these bows are not broad enough, bows from the 13~15 century have much broad limbs..

2. The angle of bow's long ears are not the same. It is very obvious to me that the string bridges are lost.. I build horn bows for years, it is quite clear that without string bridges, a bow ear with this angle is not functional...

I happened to have built couple horn bows from 13 century.. Take a look carefully and you will tell the difference..

[yokhua]

And this is a functional "Dong-Gung "

[Orda Khan]

The pictures do not show.

[jack farrell]

Good bows Yokhua. I enjoy them both. -j-

[Thomas Duvernay]

Sorry, guys--I don't get back here all that often, so I only now saw this thread.

I have a couple of those types of bows. I believe they are actually Chinese bows, although many Koreans are adamant that they are Korean (one I talked to is vehement that they were huge crossbow prods!). One of the bows I have has etched in the siyah insert 三品, which denotes it as a third-level strength testing bow. The other one I have was probably a shooting bow.

[jiao]

what case about korean archery and bowyer in korean 1600-1900?see my questions
http://atarn.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1565

[Peter Dekker]

I agree that they are definitely Qing styled bows that lost their bridges. There was a lot of contact between the Qing and Korea in the time, and Korea was highly influenced by the Ming and Qing. For example, traditional Korean dress is almost identical to Ming dress while some early Korean helmets are almost identical to Qing helmets. A part of the conquest-era Manchus were in fact Korean frontiersmen that joined the Manchu cause.

Today, most Asian cultures tend to assume their empires have always been islands that came up with their various cultural aspects by themselves. But in reality it was one big melting pot with a lot of cultural exchange, Tungustic shamans ruling China according to Confucian principles while having totem poles in their backyard, parts of the Ming army that were trained and lived like Turkic horsemen, the Japanese sword being a copy of a Sui dynasty gift to a Japanese prince, to name just a few politically sensitive subjects. Modern scholarship in China, Japan, and Korea all tend to focus on the idea that they are part of very distinct cultures of their own but ideas, technology, ideologies and artistic elements moved back and forth all the time.

So that Qing bows are found there is not strange at all. The Manchu / Jurchen were originally also shamans and the use of cinnabar for that purpose is not just Korean, it is more widespread in the region: Manchu archery equipment had cinnabar red details such as nocks, parts of shafts, and details on bows. These cinnabar details are among others described in 1759 and 1766 editions of the Huangchao Liqi Tushi and also in the Guangxu era Da Qing Huidian Tu, and can be seen on remaining antique bows and arrows in various museum collections. The practice largely seemed to have ended in the early 19th century, perhaps due to the high cost of cinnabar.

While most are typical Qing work, we can't rule out that at least some of these bows were made in Korea by Korean bowyers but they were made in a Qing style, probably for the Chinese / Manchu market. There are persisting rumors of Koreans making Qing bows during the time but I haven't yet been pointed to a primary source confirming this. It sure sounds possible and plausible, considering the proximity of Manchuria and Korea and the trade that went back and forth.

-Peter