Mongol Bow in Silk Road Museum, Seoul

This is where we discuss the bows, arrows, quivers and other hardware used in Asian archery.
Gleb
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:32 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia

Post by Gleb » Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:21 am

Andrew,

There is a kind of confusion in case of bow drawing in Khudyakov?s "Armaments of the Yenisey Kyrgyz VI-XII centuries A.D". He writes:

?Наиболее близкой в типологическом, хронологическом и территориальном отношении аналогией можно считать лук с фронтальными плечевыми накладками из Осинкинского мо?гильника на Алтае (табл. XV, 3).?
"The typological, chronological and territorial analogy (of ES? bow) might be considered the bow with frontal shoulder (limb) plates from Osinkinskiy burial in Altay (Fig. XV, 3)."

On the Fig XV, 3 depicted the bow exactly analogous to Khudyakov?s description of Es? bow (!). The bow tips separately lengthen to the limbs and fasten together with wooden rabbets (wooden nails). Among bow finds at Osinkinskiy burial not even mentioned such features.

Khudyakov?s description of Es? bow:

?Кибить лука состоит из деревянной планки ? спинки, роговых плеч ? накладок, образующих внутреннюю сторону.?
?The bow basis consists of wooden core ? back, and horn shoulders formed the inner side?.

As I understand there is a vaguely usage of terms. It should be read as: ?wooden core with horn strip on the belly side?.


As concerning item 1 in the picture why it could not be used as tip frontal (i.e. tip back) plate?

As for item 3 Savinov gives it as handle side plate.



Bede, could you please give the Omnogov bow photo here?

Regards, Gleb
Dusan
Posts: 990
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:29 pm
Location: Slovakia

Post by Dusan » Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:11 pm

Khudyakov bow , Altay, Kam Tytugem river:

Image


This Xining bow is maybe similar to this other bows. Especialy end of tip.

Image

Like this bow from Korean Taklamakan muz. (is this the same from your pics , Jack ?):

Image
jack farrell
Posts: 1864
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:40 am
Location: Texas

Post by jack farrell » Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:28 pm

Dusan; The yellow picture is the same bow, the Silk Road Mongol bow, taken in the earlier display two years ago. -j-
Dusan
Posts: 990
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:29 pm
Location: Slovakia

Post by Dusan » Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:35 pm

Thank you Jack. Have you more pics :wink: ?
User avatar
JJ
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:38 am
Location: Germany

Post by JJ » Tue Sep 29, 2009 7:20 am

Image

...a detail from the siyah of the SRM Mongol bow.

best regards, JJ
Dusan
Posts: 990
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:29 pm
Location: Slovakia

Post by Dusan » Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:55 am

Thank you JJ. Maybe other Atarn people have some too... All bow pic would be nice :D .
jack farrell
Posts: 1864
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:40 am
Location: Texas

Post by jack farrell » Sun Oct 04, 2009 5:18 pm

Gleb; I remain confused about the Siberian Mongol bow and how accurate the illustration is. It is a valuable source but more information is needed.

JJ; Thanks for the clear photo. My carera is not a professional model.

Todays post is about the arrows accompanying the bow. My photo is not great so I will describe them. Anyone with a clear photo please post.

I guesstimate the shafts to be 3/8 diameter in the middle, barreled to both ends. The wooden part is not likely to exceed 29 inches. The nocks, about 1inch long take the form of cones expanding back to the 3/8 diameter. with wide semicircular notches.

No fletchings are present but the quill remains, having been stripped from the feather rather than having been cut from the quill, form a typical Mediterranean three fletch. (which is to say that the cock feather lays at 90 degrees to the string). Quill skin remains appear to not exceed 4 1/2 inches in length and end about 2 inches from the nock end of the arrows.

A winding of some fiber, most likely sinew by the unwound coil of that material remaining on one arrow, threaded its way over the entire fletched area closely spaced to approximately 3/16 inch. A spiral "ghost" of this winding is apparant on all the arrows.

Cresting is as follows; all arrows were painted red under the fletch and white for 1" at the nock. Besides this one arrow has a thin black band immediately forward of the red area and another has one separating the white and red. -j-
User avatar
JJ
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:38 am
Location: Germany

Post by JJ » Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:30 am

Image

The arrows were difficult to photpgraph, Jack...

The nocks to me seem not usable for thumbring shooting (they look too short for taking good grip of the string).

The binding of the fletching is strange. Looks very crude seen from today. But I?ve seen the same thing on turkish arrows in Vienna. Maybe an effort to hold the feathers on the shaft during all possible weather conditions? Natural glues could get solved by heavy rain.

It comes to my mind that in Western Europe people used birch pitch for fletching at least until the Viking age, although hide- or bone glues must have been available for a long time then....

JJ
jsachers
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 7:29 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Post by jsachers » Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:17 am

Not really a better photo, but you can see the marks the binding left and what I consider to be the remains of the fletching.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
jsachers
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 7:29 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Post by jsachers » Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:25 am

And another view of the bow
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
jack farrell
Posts: 1864
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:40 am
Location: Texas

Post by jack farrell » Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:53 am

Thanks for posting guys.

JJ; someone posted about birch tar as glue years ago. I have been on the lookout for it in artifacts ever since. I suspect that Egyptians used it for applying birch bark decorations to bows. Have never seen it myself in an artifact. It is also said that Egyptians used bituminum (King's English for tar, also asphaltum). The possibility for a mistake exists. If someone were to post on Birch tar, I would enjoy.

Jan; the second of your pics are my beloved Miran-Hunnic bows, which were displayed next to the Mongol bow.

For all the recognition of the strength of Mongol bows, the one Hunn bow was stouter. Not a trend, just an observation. -j-
User avatar
JJ
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:38 am
Location: Germany

Post by JJ » Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:38 am

Yes the bow in the 2nd picture of Jan is of a hunnic period bow. By the way, Jack, one can see the bone plates very easily;-)

In a region where natural bitumen or asphalt is available, I don?t think people concern about making birch bark pitch. They will use bitumen instead. Real Birch bark tar can easily be recognised by its disinctive aromatic smell when its is warmed up a little (even on material that is thousands of years old).

I would be curious if birch pitch would have been used by american indians. I know it wasn?t used on their arrows, but somebody told me once it was used in making bark canoes in North America (?)...

JJ
Ashbow
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:17 pm
Location: Poland

Post by Ashbow » Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:21 am

I would be curious if birch pitch would have been used by american indians. I know it wasn?t used on their arrows, but somebody told me once it was used in making bark canoes in North America (?)...
That's interesting, I haven't heard of that, I only know that coniferous gum mixed up with animal fat have been used for sealing bark canoes.

Sorry, I'm going off-topic here.
User avatar
JJ
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:38 am
Location: Germany

Post by JJ » Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:31 am

Maybe Jack can find out ???
User avatar
JJ
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:38 am
Location: Germany

Post by JJ » Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:37 am

Image

fletching of turkish 17th century war arrows in Vienna. They show a similar binding like the Mongol arrows from SRM. Some of the nocks are also very, very shallow.......

JJ
Post Reply