Jack Farrell's Subeixi Bow Reconstruction

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 3:31 pm

Nice

Inevitably the question of why they were shaped like this comes up. I some times think it is a bad question because we will probably never know the real reasons their original makers had. Our reasoning may be much more attached to technical solutions than the original intention. Anyway, it seems you are both (Jack, Adam) suggesting that the ease of construction, with regards to the avaliable materials, led to this shape. A thought that probably would never have occured if it was not for the reconstruction of these bows. It is a good example of what I like to think of as reconstructional archaeology.

Perhaps some shooting will lead to other reasons for this "unprobable" shape?

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Thu Apr 21, 2011 12:03 am

Ivar; Some preliminary thoughts; The asymmetry is no more help than the serpentine shape. As one draws the bow, the grip rotates forward to an ever greater angle. A deeply reflexed grip would create a balance problem (and does) which is overcome somewhat by the high brace height. In my experience, a reflex grip should be negated by deflexed limbs. But the net effect is a shorter arrow is necessary.

A serpentine shape allows a longer bow to occupy a shorter space- Stephen.

Adam's and Stephen's thesis is that the shape of Ibex horns are manifest in the bow shape. I however use the horn backwards and forwards as needed except to assist with the hooks, which require the greatest cajoling to take their shape. Therefore I find the shape of Ibex horns as incidental to the bow shape. Any horns should work; for instance sheep rather than goat.

Right now I take Michael Redhawk's position that the bow is a cultural attribute of Scythians who obviously took great pride in the beautiful shape.

Soon I will take more informative pics and do some tests.

Michael; the string lay is very true, right now.

redhawk · Post by **redhawk** » Thu Apr 21, 2011 6:50 am

O.k., Jack, that?s fine, again, you did a great job and makes me thinking of giving a Subeixi Scythian bow a trial. It?s shape is such an eye- teaser.

Ivar, same question is about the split-limb bows of the Egyptians. The figure 2 was the most holy symbol for the ancient Egyptians. Maybe there is a relationship of the Angular bows to the angles within the pyramides?

Michael

Kviljo · Post by **Kviljo** » Thu Apr 21, 2011 4:35 pm

Interesting thoughts. Esthetics must be at least a part of the calculation. I like the egyptian examples. It does seem plausible. Arguing for the case of esthetics seems to be a fairly difficult task, though. A common archaeological reasoning would be that the complex shape of it gave the bow extra status-value. The simple fact that it is not just a whittled stick, would make it more desirable. I'm not convinced that that is the complete story, however, as the bow and arrow is such a "technically coded" system. Which aspects of the bow are not affected by its technical function? - and of those aspects which are technically affected, what creative margins/leeway did the bowyer have?

Decoration would be a clear example of a non-techincal attribute, but perhaps the overall shape of the bow can be said to have had a "decorative" aspect. As tradition had settled in, its shape would probably be a clear identifying symbol of the object. - but what reasons could there be for taking up or starting the tradition of making such serpentined bows?

Hm, was that clear?

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon May 30, 2011 2:23 am

Ivar, A good example of archery attributes not attributed to scientific principles were the ever more complicated shape of Mongol era points. Has there been a good study defining if these more elaborate points function better than earlier, smaller, less elaborate ones?

The protective skin on my rebuilt Subeixi Scythian is now cured and I have begun shooting it. Twice I have stopped for maintenance but looks like things are stabilizing nicely. This FD test ended when it was apparent things needed more lining up. I made a deer raw hide string, 5 strand, which works much better than anticipated. A figure 8 knot is softened and worked into the loops- timber hitch? When plucked the string resonates for 3 or 4 seconds. I do not remember a dacron string doing this.

Comments?

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon May 30, 2011 2:26 am

Adam Karpowicz · Post by **Adam Karpowicz** » Mon May 30, 2011 10:52 am

Very nice work Jack. I must try a rawhide string too some day.

I am trying to compare your bow with the replica I made to the original dimensions of these bows. Yours is a little thinner mid limb (by about 5mm - 18 vs 23mm), so the draw weight is lower. It is difficult to calculate the weights by calculation, because your grip dimensions are closer to the original than the (thinner) mid limb, but it seems the originals would be roughly twice as heavy - (23/18)^3.

Assuming the draw weight grows abut 3lb per inch, the draw weight at 28 inches would be about 67lb for yours, but some 130lb for the originals. Mine showed 120lb at 28in, a little less. This is somewhat surprising, since the ambient humidity you had was so much higher than mine, which should reduce the weight even by about 10%.

Why your bow, if made to the original dimensions, would be heavier? I think this can be explained by looking at the bending characteristics of the bows. Your bow, with the grip of original dimensions, but the limbs thinner (where bending), flexes less at the grip, but more at the limbs. My bow, made to the original dimensions, definitely flexes quite a bit at the grip (see the video). The flex at the grip reduces the draw weight and makes the bow stack less - apparently by some 10lb, probably even more, given the humidity differences. This also means the f-d curve of your bow is not the perfect representation of the f-d curve of the original bows, if that matters to people.

I know of someone making another replica and we will see what happens again.

Adam

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon May 30, 2011 12:22 pm

Adam; Thanks for the input. You may want to see the firstl numbers on the original, accurately made version. It shed the string before the 23" number was recorded. After that the bow was altered.

Adam Karpowicz · Post by **Adam Karpowicz** » Mon May 30, 2011 12:58 pm

Thanks jack. The bow could go to over 90lb at 28in, but since it stacks for the last few inches (less with the grip flexing, but still quite a bit), I'd expect around 100lb. This is very close to mine, given the differences in humidity.

Adam

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:29 am

I finally got around to finishing arrows to accompany my Scythian bow. The long holdup was getting bronze points made. More on those soon. This is also a kind of build along for those making barreled arrows with expanded nocks.

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:35 am

Most of these details were gleaned from the Silk Road Museum arrows. Cresting was incorporated from several arrows.

This is my stash of Youpon arrow sticks.

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:40 am

I chose four sticks and cut them down to 28.5 inches and straightened them with direct heat from a gas stove using a Korean type straightener. The nocks are cut from the large end so the small end must be no smaller than the desired diameter at the tip.

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:45 am

I whittle a hollow into the shaft just below the nock, here marked, with hands together bracing eachother to avoid an accident.

jack farrell · Post by **jack farrell** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:46 am

This step is done. More later.

Zarasp · Post by **Zarasp** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:54 am

this is a fantastic job! very good thread!

btw.the nocks in the thumb glove picture look exactly like Iranian arrows!

can you tell a bit more about the string?