Bows, Arrows in the "H?fische Jagd- und R?stkammer"

[Bede]

Adam,
I am interested in your opinion of Persian bows. What struck me about the crab bows when I saw crab bows dissected was that the splice was in the sal section rather than in the kasan. Turkish bows (when they have a splice between the kasan and the sal) and as far as I can tell Persian bows have the splice in the kasan, as do Manchu bows.

The concept that we are looking at bows that have never been shot worries me. With bows that have painted bellies, refurbishment could easily conceal use. Composite bows in general can be manipulated to return to high levels of reflex with heat and pressure. In the case of a bow with no nocks cut, I would assume it has never been used, but even in that case if there was other evidence I would assume that the tips were replacements. On the other hand, use can be deduced from set in the shape of the bow or ripples and discolouration in the horn of the belly if it is visible. My conclusion is that it is easy to identify a bow that has been used but not to tell if a bow was never used.

A bow that Adam made that I now have recovers a great deal of its reflex after a few days when it is unstrung. On unstringing, it immediately starts to reflex with a jerky motion that can be seen by laying it flat on a table.

[Adam Karpowicz]

Bede,

I have not seen the splices in a Persian bow (the type I wrote having the flexible transition between the sal and kasan), but I assume the tips could be spliced into the kasans, as in some Turkish bows. The splices I saw in crab bows had splices in the (rigid) transition betw, the sal and kasan, plus betw. kasans and tips (maybe not all here). I suppose the situation with the Persian bow could vary, but in the case of crab bows one needs the splices within the sharp bend there to keep the shape.

I wonder if the crab bow is not a later modification. These bows seem to come mostly from the 17-18th c. Are there any older ones with good provenance?

Adam

[Bede]

Adam,
I believe that the crab bows I have seen show some unusual characteristics. I have yet to see a dissection with much wood in the kasan area. It appears that the wood of the kasan was roughly rectangular and bent by heat where the later ridged section would join the sal. Ninety percent of the ridge of the kasan was built up out of sinew and all of the rounding of the belly of the kasan was likewise sinew. The was a very thin ridge apparent on the wooden core in one bow it was 3 mm high and about 2 mm wide.

I think at least this construction is a later development as you suggest. I have seen no crab bows securely dated before the 17th century and few represented in art before the 18th. When you contrast this type of crab bow construction with the Chahar-Kham bow (Sind bow), it is obvious that the Indian bowyers knew about more traditional composite construction. As well there are the cross sections from the bow illustrated in The Grey Goose Wing which appears to be a crab bow with a fully sculpted kasan core which looks 80% wood and much less sinew. This might be the original form before the excessive use of sinew took over. The lighter tips must have been an advantage.

[Zarasp]

the 4th picture, name krabbe, shows a very similar picture to my grandfathers hunt bows, this is in vienna? very interesting similarties between 2 cultures.

[Uli]

Bede, this information of the ridge made of sinew is interesting.
Isn't that the only possiblity to make the limb of one piece of wood ?
Probably the maximum thickness of wood for this sharp bend is 1cm or less - however then it has to be reinforced with sinew to keep stable at brace.

the 4th picture, name krabbe, shows a very similar picture to my grandfathers hunt bows, this is in vienna? very interesting similarties between 2 cultures.

Hey Zarasp can you post a picture of these bows ? Would be very interesting.

[Bede]

The limb was spliced into the sal or bending area. Often the tip was separately spliced into the kasan or ridged area. In the dissected bow, the core was about 1 cm at the bend. However, other bows were made differently with more wood in the ears.

If you ever wonder how thick a piece of wood could be bent, look at an ordinary old fashioned walking stick. A 360 degree bend in slightly more the width of the hand was regularly made. Most walking sticks of this type were more than 20 mm in diameter. It was done with hot sand and unseasoned wood.

[Dusan]

Many thanks ! Thats what i call Bow! Maybe we all missunderstand and this bows was about 60-80 lb , like many people means in still live discusion about power of war bows ... Again thanks. I dreeam about better and detailed pics...