Archery

[Quintus Aurelius Lepidus]

A few months ago, I read the book "ancient warfare to 1600 BC" of William Hamblin. I got it from the "further reading" of the ancient warfare magazine, the issue about warfare in the ancient near east. I've read those other books mentioned in the further reading too. I could conclude that most scholars think the akkadian kings had such success because they used the composite bow. According to Hamblin, this was not the case. He thinks the composite bow appeared much later in history. I started to think about the following: if the akkadian kings used the composite bow, why did it not arrive in Egypt until around 1600 BC? Distance? I think not because the bronze age itself started in Mesopotamia during 2800 BC while it already started in Egypt around 2700 BC. That did go very rapidly.

Who has more info regarding this?

[Matthew Amt]

I can't help much, since the Near East at that time is not my strong point, nor is archery. But I'll be that someone at the Bronze Age Center may have helpful input:

http://s8.invisionfree.com/Bronze_Age_Center/index.php

All I might add is that with the shambles the chronology system is in, trying to conclude that the Bronze Age started a hundred years earlier on one place than another is a pointless exercise. All of those dates could easily be off by 300 years or more.

Oh, hey--the Akkadians used compound bows in "The Scorpion King"!! Yuk yuk yuk...

Matthew

[Alanus]

We are-- of course-- assuming the compound bow arrived with the Bronze Age. Why not the Copper Age? Or even the neolithic? There is nothing in the makeup of a compound bow that limits it to the Bronze Age, but there are limits to the readiability of its materials. I suppose that's why many argue for its steppe origin. The best glue used for making this style of bow comes from sturgeon bladders, and Africa is a long way from the habitat of any species of sturgeon. On the other hand, the Assyrians were next to sturgeon country. Just a thought.

[M. Demetrius]

Here's an observation from a person fairly ignorant of bow construction.

A self-bow left strung for too long will keep the bend. That will reduce its force and range. A bowyer could simply have revised the string notch, reversing its orientation, and strung it the other way. Instant recurve bow. That could have happened at any time in dim history, (whether the upgrade at the fish hatchery to sturgeon bladder glue had been made or not). There wouldn't necessarily be much evidence of that, either, bows being made of wood, and the animals/fish long since being eaten.

Who figured out how to refine glue from sturgeon bladders anyway? Why would anyone even think to try that?

Skrog: Look, I caught some sturgeon in my net you showed me how to tie!
Pug: Great, now give me their bladders soon as you gut them, so I can invent some glue.
Skrog: Huh?
Pug: Yeah, I'm working on an idea to improve the bows for the hunters.
Skrog: I'm a fisherman. What do I care about them?
Pug: Well, if I can make a bow that is a little stronger, I can invent the fish arrow, and you can catch fish easier.
Skrog: Right. I'll bring the bladders over in a little while.
Pug: Thanks, and don't forget a fillet for me, and I'll show you how to make a string to retrieve your arrows!
Skrog: 10-4, good buddy, I'll bring you a nice one.
Pug: And, by the way, some of those fish eggs could be handy, too. I'm working on a new recipe. Maga is bringing me some goose livers.
Skrog: Liver and fish egg omelette? Sounds just yummy.
Pug: No, you moron, caviar and pate'. I have the little unleavened crackers over there ready to go. It will be just the thing at mead parties. Just the thing to attract the ladies, you know.
Skrog: Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. Be right back with the bladders. Ladies. Yeah, gotta attract them.
Pug: AND the fillet.
Skrog: Of course, the fillet. Right or left side?
Pug: Either one. (sotto voce) Amateurs. The people I have to work with...

Some bows are glued up with simple hide glue, too. That's available everywhere there are hides, which is, well, everywhere. Adding sinew from the animal who has involuntarily donated its hide is pretty much standard fare for early bows. Want to see a Stone Age Culture? Investigate the Amerindians living in North America, as recorded by the few careful observers at the time of the colonization of this continent by Europeans. They used sinew and hide glue, along with many of the other things we see in the Neolithic elsewhere, it's just that the artifacts are more common and available.

[Quintus Aurelius Lepidus]

I have to admit that it's a very good idea. one that i did not come up to

[Quintus Aurelius Lepidus]

have read some interesting thoughts about this one.

problem will probably be that all parts are organic... (so we can't find them)... shall we ever know the answer...

P.S.: tnx matt for the link of bronze age center

[Alanus]

Hello Quintus and Demetrius,

That's what I'm getting at. The components of any bow, whatever its style, are organic and disappear in the archaeological strata. Those elder bows found in good condition today come from such places as the Takla Makan, where the salinity of the soil has preserved them uniquely. One would think the dryness of Egypt would have the same effect, although the rise of the inundation in ancient times may account for a more rapid deterioration than occurs today.

I doubt any self bow, one too worn or having a "set," could be used in the opposite direction. The dynamics of the wood will not allow it. The bow will snap. Also, a recurve bow was initially built in a design configuration for that particular purpose. It was built to certain lengths that could not be exceeded: the limits in length found in the horn inner-side. This compound construction rarely exceeds 60 inches (sorry, I'm a USAian).

Hide glue would certainly work. It still does today. But it is not as water-proof as sturgeon glue (and other fish glues). These glues were used for other applications, not just in bows. Scribes used fish glue in preference to hide glues. The Native Americans used hide glue, but we should remember that truly ancient NA compound bows have not been found. Those examples available to us were built during the period of European discovery, only a few hundred years ago. They may look "old," but they are new in the relative age of artificia.

None of this explains which is older, the Egyptian or Assyrian bow... although I would opt for the Assyrian since they were contiginous to the original steppe cultures that probably invented the first compounds, and who eventually developed the advanced bow with "ears."