Kviljos Egyptian and Akkadian composites

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Sun Nov 21, 2010 7:39 pm

I hope to be able to put together an egyptian composite this winter. I have been searching through the forum and atarn.org for information, and will be working out from Jack Farrells drawing and forum posts.

Today I made the form, which I interpreted to consist of two circles. Is this correct, Jack? Is there anything that you would have done differently from the one that is documented at atarn.org? http://www.atarn.org/islamic/egyptian_composite.htm

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Nov 22, 2010 2:29 am

Kviljo; Let me say first that there is a lot of literature on these bows; about 40 of them in museum collections, most of which are in poor enough condition to make out the general construction. This is a slightly simplified version on an actual one.

This bow failed, as I believe I posted. The cause was core failure. In that I have concluded that American ash is not so stout as other versions, at least for hornbow construction.

So, reluctantly, I went to hard maple. It can be documented that there was maple in Lebanon at the time. Strangely, all hornbow making materials had to be imported into Egypt. I also added a horn riser below the horn belly grip splice. Did you all know that horn is easy to glue to horn?

Check this attached bow form and see if it is the same as the one pictured. There are actually several variations on the angular shape and I was seeking one like the drawing in the plans. Other than the strung shape not being my most desired, the black bow was totally successful.

I have since made another angular bow, shorter and much stouter than the one in my article. It has the most desired shape but I am still afraid to draw it fully.

My perennial problem now is too much wood in my bows.

Make the bow in the plans several inches shorter for a harder hitting version.

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Nov 22, 2010 2:50 am

Make sure that the wood riser has a very thin (like paper) edge or it will create a hinging point.

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:14 pm

Brilliant. Thanks for the "re-visit"

I have reserved a copy of the book by McLeod, but I will probably finish the bow before I recieve the book.

How did the core fail? Did it split or did it fail in tension? I'm sure you used edge grain? The european ash seems to be a little softer and ductile. It might withstand more in tension than the american. I will start with maple, but it would be nice to have a go with my lokal ash as a core some time. Anyway, I am usually very sceptical of older wood species analyses because they tend to be very unreliable...

My form consists of two perfect circles. Perhaps I should straighten the tips a little and make them bend less in the bow.

I will be using water buffalo horn, and I don't think they are long enough for the 57" bow, so I will probably have to shorten it quite a bit. Would it be okay to have the horn end a few inches from the tips, while making the tips bend as little as in a wood bow? - or is it clear that the horn has gone all the way out to the tips in all the original bows?

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Nov 22, 2010 2:58 pm

McLeod is in two volumes. The other is also very good.

My bow is the Sakkara also called Saqqhara or the Brooklyn bow from its museum. McLeod, 1960.

My core suffered 5 tension shears. I soaked off the horn and reused in the current version. Happy to hear your assessment on older wood ID. Is there some reference?

Straighten the grip and give a little more curve to the tips. (Just as in the shape of an Ibex horn.)

The maker of the Sakkhara bow had a horn problem too. One belly is long with several short pieces, maybe 6" in total, carrying the horn to the tip. The other belly has one long piece about 3/5 of the length, another about 2/5 butted and two pieces, about 6" total, carrying the belly to the tip.

The belly slat was twice the thickness of the back slat at the grip and both are tapered before the horn was applied.

To my eye, many of these bows have had slats of some type added to the grip to stiffen what appears to be a design weakness in that area.

I apologize for usurping your topic. -j-

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Mon Nov 22, 2010 7:19 pm

Nothing to apologize for. This is great! Keep the keyboard going!

As far as I understood there are two books by McLeod - one on the composites and one on the selfbows? Both are heading in my direction very soon.

5 tension shears! That's a well broken bow. Clean side-to-side tension failures? If so, I would imagine that a too thin layer of sinew was the (or one of) reason(s). Ash is usually very good in tension, especially if the grain is good. It separates easily along the early growth rings though, and splits radially quite easily as well. Elm is probably far better, and perhaps quite easy to confuse with ash.

When I was working on my masters degree on the two-wood bows (which I have as my avatar), I came across many wood species IDs that later on had been rejected. Perhaps it is a special case though, because I was mainly dealing with the rather unusual pine compression-wood, which is way denser than normal pine. Quite easy to confuse with e.g. ash, if one only looks directly at it. I think one needs a microscope to do an ID properly, something that probably is more common to use today than it was in the 60s.

It is quite interesting to hear that one of Tut's bows had a belly consisting of "scrap pieces". Could this have been done because one knew that the bow was not going to be shot, or do you think it could work just as well as a bow with only two pieces of horn? - if we don't look at the dangers of string breakage. It might be a design that could tollerate this better than the later composites?

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Tue Nov 23, 2010 12:27 am

Not a King Tut bow but from the tomb of another king, as in citation. Bow making materials were in short supply and this was better than a self bow. Ibex had been exhausted from local supplies and it was demanded as tribute. Aegeans supplied Ibex as per tomb murals.

I also reported on this same splicing technique in a Mongol Empire bow.

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Tue Jan 11, 2011 1:10 am

I've read McLeods 1970 book on the composides now. Lots of good information there. How the bows were measured lengthwise is not clear to me however. The total length versus the lenght along the curves is probably not all that different, but perhaps I have missed a word or two specifying how the measurements were taken?

My first test will be 130cm long, but I was quite happy that many of the originals were closer to 110cm long, which makes it easier to find suitable horns...

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:10 pm

I figured I needed to make a wooden trial run first, to get a feel for the dimentions and shape of the bows. - so I glued up an ash/beech/cherry wooden bow. It was a good test for the form I think. Before I glued it up I messed with the form and made the tips too reflexed. The wooden bow is however 20cm longer than my horn-version will be, so the recurved tips will not be present in the next trial.

I do see how the grip section will be the hardest part to replicate in these bows. It needs to be just right to get the proper bend and shape to the bow. Here's a couple of photos of the wooden test. I later modified it in different ways untill it broke. Learned a lot from it. Using a wood that frets easily on the belly is a good help in seeing how well the stresses are distributed.

After this test, I have soaked and steamed some maple laminates. They are drying on the form now. Hoping to glue the core in a week or two.

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:56 am

There is always the question of exactly how these bows looked strung. I suspect that there was admiration for the triangular shape, however accurate that was. There are also artworks showing sub-triangular shapes with slight tendency to recurve. Confusion can also exist with wood self bows which have a similar shape but backwards.

As a side note I asked Dr. Wachsmann if there was a disconnect between artists (scribes) and militaria. He said there is even a text in which a father admonishes his son to become a scribe and how life will be better than a military man. He would have to sleep outside, walk about barefoot, deal with camp life.

Dr. W states that it is almost impossible to imagine ourselves in that time where everyone worked for a temple or the government or etc.

Daniel T. · Post by **Daniel T.** » Mon Feb 07, 2011 7:54 am

In McLeod's book grooves extending a bit from the tips towards the grip are mentioned. I don't have the book here to look it up.
If the shape was fully triangular, grooves would be useless, but they could be there to guide the string when the tips section retains a curved shape when the bow is braced.

Daniel

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:31 pm

Daniel; An excellent point.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:21 pm

The grooves would also be useful if the string lengthened in use. Sinew and gut strings can alter in length through changes in moisture content in the air. An archer would not want his bow to twist or unbrace itself in the bow case before he had a chance to tie a new string knot. Also the string does not stop moving forward at the brace height when an arrow is shot so the grooves would be useful in that circumstance. I am sure there are other advantages.

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:34 pm

According to McLeod, the grooves are not more than 1,5cm long. These must have been close to non-contact recurves.

I'm hesitating too much now

I decided to make another wooden test before I continue on the horn version.

This one has got a maple core, one layer (15g) of sinew, and a belly of some 1960s compressed resinated beech used for skiis. It is very hard and stiff, so I kept the reflex low. I think it will end up with a slightly convex pyramid-shape when strung. I'll add some 50-60g of sinew and give an update on it. The grip is probably a little too thick, mainly because I made the extra center-laminate too thick.

The laminates for the horn version is steamed and shaped and ready for glue up some time soon.

Dusan · Post by **Dusan** » Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:42 pm

You are like Bee , Kviljo . You fly from one flover to another. Dont eat much. Only litlle here , litlle there

...Very quickly for mi lazy world