06-04-2014, 03:27 AM
Hello, Folkert
I would think that by the period you're considering-- 1st century of the Common Era (as opposed to the Uncommon Era)-- the old Scythian-type bow had gone into distant memory. The siyah parts found at Caerleon must date to the 2nd century when the Roman fort was abandoned. The bone laths were found in 2 lengths, which (to me) indicates the bows were asymmetrical. The 1st century BC to 1st century AD bows found in the Bosphorus Kingdom are considered Sarmatian and some of them are also asymmetrical, just like the bows we see on the Orlat Plaque.
There is a practical reason asymmetrical bows were made that way. They are longer than Scythian bows; and to compensate for this extra length, the lower arm was made shorter. This was handy during warfare, and the bow could be swung to either side of the horse.
Newer information points to the Sarmats as the originators of this style of bow in the late 3rd to 2nd century BC (Before Crackers), a culture living just north of the Massagetae and almost 1,000 kilometers from the Xiong nu (often considered the proto-culture of the Huns). Sarmat bows were 1.5 meters long and powerful.
The Sarmatians extended from the Massagetae and Saka, just south of the Sarmats yet western neighbors of the Huns. Only a blind and deaf man wouldn't know about the new bow. The steppe was a super-highway, carrying new information, new inventions, new techniques, across its entire breadth. I particularly dislike the term "Hunnic bow," simply because the wrong culture is credited with its development, plus the obvious fact that the Sarmats and Sarmatian/Alans were using bows with siyahs contemporaneously.
When we consider that by the time Caerleon was abandoned, the Romans were also using the siyahed bow and it probably was nothing new to them. The idea that the Huns-- and only the Huns-- were the users of this new bow seems a product of antiquated research or constipated thinking. When anything new and worthwhile comes along, it's adopted rapidly and spreads like wildfire.
Evan,
My Sarmatian bow is an asymmetrical bow with 2 laths on each siyah and 4 plates at the grip. It was made to historical accuracy by Czaba Grozer, perhaps the finest bowyer in Europe and the only one I know of who still uses sturgeon bladder glue. He can make an asymmetrical with "zero tiller," giving it amazing accuracy. I wouldn't get too caught up on the EXACT number of plates used on the grips of these bows. It really depended on the maker. We know that every culture, including Sarmatians, Huns, Sarmats, Scythians, etc., had Professional bowyers just like later cultures had gunmakers. Each maker had his own style and there were variations... just like English muskets and Pennsylvania rifles.
Well, anyway, I hope some of this might be helpful. Nothing is carved in stone.
mile:
I would think that by the period you're considering-- 1st century of the Common Era (as opposed to the Uncommon Era)-- the old Scythian-type bow had gone into distant memory. The siyah parts found at Caerleon must date to the 2nd century when the Roman fort was abandoned. The bone laths were found in 2 lengths, which (to me) indicates the bows were asymmetrical. The 1st century BC to 1st century AD bows found in the Bosphorus Kingdom are considered Sarmatian and some of them are also asymmetrical, just like the bows we see on the Orlat Plaque.
There is a practical reason asymmetrical bows were made that way. They are longer than Scythian bows; and to compensate for this extra length, the lower arm was made shorter. This was handy during warfare, and the bow could be swung to either side of the horse.
Newer information points to the Sarmats as the originators of this style of bow in the late 3rd to 2nd century BC (Before Crackers), a culture living just north of the Massagetae and almost 1,000 kilometers from the Xiong nu (often considered the proto-culture of the Huns). Sarmat bows were 1.5 meters long and powerful.
The Sarmatians extended from the Massagetae and Saka, just south of the Sarmats yet western neighbors of the Huns. Only a blind and deaf man wouldn't know about the new bow. The steppe was a super-highway, carrying new information, new inventions, new techniques, across its entire breadth. I particularly dislike the term "Hunnic bow," simply because the wrong culture is credited with its development, plus the obvious fact that the Sarmats and Sarmatian/Alans were using bows with siyahs contemporaneously.
When we consider that by the time Caerleon was abandoned, the Romans were also using the siyahed bow and it probably was nothing new to them. The idea that the Huns-- and only the Huns-- were the users of this new bow seems a product of antiquated research or constipated thinking. When anything new and worthwhile comes along, it's adopted rapidly and spreads like wildfire.
Evan,
My Sarmatian bow is an asymmetrical bow with 2 laths on each siyah and 4 plates at the grip. It was made to historical accuracy by Czaba Grozer, perhaps the finest bowyer in Europe and the only one I know of who still uses sturgeon bladder glue. He can make an asymmetrical with "zero tiller," giving it amazing accuracy. I wouldn't get too caught up on the EXACT number of plates used on the grips of these bows. It really depended on the maker. We know that every culture, including Sarmatians, Huns, Sarmats, Scythians, etc., had Professional bowyers just like later cultures had gunmakers. Each maker had his own style and there were variations... just like English muskets and Pennsylvania rifles.
Well, anyway, I hope some of this might be helpful. Nothing is carved in stone.
mile:
Alan J. Campbell
member of Legio III Cyrenaica and the Uncouth Barbarians
Author of:
The Demon's Door Bolt (2011)
Forging the Blade (2012)
"It's good to be king. Even when you're dead!"
Old Yuezhi/Pazyrk proverb
member of Legio III Cyrenaica and the Uncouth Barbarians
Author of:
The Demon's Door Bolt (2011)
Forging the Blade (2012)
"It's good to be king. Even when you're dead!"
Old Yuezhi/Pazyrk proverb
