Scythian / Mongolian / Hungarian bows

Snufkin

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Oct 13, 2004
2,099
139
54
Norfolk
Hmm not sure I agree with the longbow draw weights your quoting, I've seen text about the long bows found on the Mary Rose and they were in the 140/160 range. Also do you really think a longbow man who was brought up drawing bows could only draw a 70/90 lb bow ! I can draw a 50 lb bow with no problem, those guys had been practicing since they were kids.

However from an engineering standpoint I fully agree the mongol bows were an amazing peice of work. If anyone would like to see a traditional horn type bow being made there are some wonderful videos on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3cjk3-AHcI

Stephen
Have to agree with you on the longbow draw weights. Early warbows were in the 90lb range but in their heyday they were well into the 150+ range. And I think a reproduction of the largest Mary Rose bow pulled 220lb.
 

HillBill

Bushcrafter through and through
Oct 1, 2008
8,162
156
W. Yorkshire
Ok fair point guys, I know longbows can be very powerful but the average one wouldn't be up in those figures.Plus they were very prone to the weather which made them a little less effective, the archers used to carry their strings under their hats or they got wet and stretched reducing the power.

At the battle of crecy the longbowmen were credited with practically winning the battle by themselves, and they did.....but only partly with their bows. It was the mud that scuppered the French. Their armour got stuck in the gelatinous mud and made moving practically impossible both for mounted and dis-mounted knights. The archers wore leather/cloth clothes and boots so the mud didn't really impede them, most of the french army died to daggers and swords as opposed to bodkins

The mongolian bows were practically weather proof in comparison and averaged higher poundage which made them better and more reliable. Its a shame really because in the UK's climate the mongol bow would have excelled.
 

Snufkin

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Oct 13, 2004
2,099
139
54
Norfolk
Ok fair point guys, I know longbows can be very powerful but the average one wouldn't be up in those figures.Plus they were very prone to the weather which made them a little less effective, the archers used to carry their strings under their hats or they got wet and stretched reducing the power.

At the battle of crecy the longbowmen were credited with practically winning the battle by themselves, and they did.....but only partly with their bows. It was the mud that scuppered the French. Their armour got stuck in the gelatinous mud and made moving practically impossible both for mounted and dis-mounted knights. The archers wore leather/cloth clothes and boots so the mud didn't really impede them, most of the french army died to daggers and swords as opposed to bodkins

The mongolian bows were practically weather proof in comparison and averaged higher poundage which made them better and more reliable. Its a shame really because in the UK's climate the mongol bow would have excelled.
Actually, mongolian bows are far more suseptable to weather variations, being a highly stressed design held together with water soluble glue. Sinew loves nothing better than to absorb water, losing power, or in extreme cases delaminating with potentially lethal effects. Turkish archers used to heat their bows in special ovens before shooting. Longbow strings were waxed but would stretch if the became saturated with a loss of performance but would still function. The two weapons aren't really comprable. The longbow was a low stress, design that was cheap and easy to produce in large numbers, sacrificing some performance for durability and simplicity. The asiatic composites were all about performance, hang the expense. Kind of like comparing a Lambourgini to a family saloon car.
 

HillBill

Bushcrafter through and through
Oct 1, 2008
8,162
156
W. Yorkshire
Actually, mongolian bows are far more suseptable to weather variations, being a highly stressed design held together with water soluble glue. Sinew loves nothing better than to absorb water, losing power, or in extreme cases delaminating with potentially lethal effects. Turkish archers used to heat their bows in special ovens before shooting. Longbow strings were waxed but would stretch if the became saturated with a loss of performance but would still function. The two weapons aren't really comprable. The longbow was a low stress, design that was cheap and easy to produce in large numbers, sacrificing some performance for durability and simplicity. The asiatic composites were all about performance, hang the expense. Kind of like comparing a Lambourgini to a family saloon car.


They were made using fish glue, made by boiling fish swim bladders down. Its very waterproof. Thats why they spent up to 5 days making the glue and applying it( the sinew was coated in this up to a couple of cm thick, along with birch bark which was also covered in the glue)). As the saying goes " nothing good ever comes easy"

To quote the article i posted

As we understand, a composite bow by definition has several layers. We have mentioned the birch frame, and the layer of horn/bone. In addition to this, there is a layer of specially prepared birch bark whose purpose is to protect against penetration of moisture. In addition to this again is a layer of sinew, which is taken from deer, moose or other game animals. The tendons of domestic animals may also be used, but Mongols feel that tendons from wild animals like deer, moose and mountain sheep are the strongest and best. Naturally, the bow has to be glued together. The preferred and traditional substance used for the impregnation of both leather as well as their bows is fish glue. As a matter of fact, fish glue has been proven through millennia to be highly capable of resisting moisture. Moreover, it is durable and lasts longer than modern epoxy resins, which are prone to molecular fatigue. Above all, fish glue is available in all the waters of Siberia where fish is living, among them the greatest of them all, Lake Bajkal.

How is fish glue made? The process that yields the highest quality is to take swim bladders from freshwater fish, soak them into hot water to extract the protein substance, and then boil the resultant soup for a prolonged period. If sufficient quantities of swim bladders cannot be obtained, it is also possible to make hide glue by boiling animal skins. This latter method however results in a glue of inferior quality, because it absorbs moisture, whereas glue made from ichthyic air bladders is highly moisture-resistant.
 

Snufkin

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Oct 13, 2004
2,099
139
54
Norfolk
Water soluble glues aren't all that water resistant, hence the birch bark backing. Although fish glue is, by all accounts, better than hide glue. Never used fish glue myself though.
 

Snufkin

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Oct 13, 2004
2,099
139
54
Norfolk
Getting a bit OT. Grozer bows are smooth and fun to shoot, and because their unstrung profile doesn't mimic the original bows they are a bit less temperamental to shoot.
 
Oct 6, 2008
495
0
Cheshire
Actually mate, that is totally on topic, exactly the sort of information I was after- though I have to say the whole thing has been fascinating.

Some diverse areas of knowledge on here no doubt about it.
 

trail2

Nomad
Nov 20, 2008
268
0
Canton S.Dakota (Ex pat)
One thing with the Grozer type bows is they are easier to string. You can get by with the step through method(horrors) With my horn bow you really need two people to string it. It can be done by yourself but the processes takes some time to learn.
Another thing is you don't need to warm and re-balance them when you want to shoot.
That and about $1500 price difference.
I used a lot of different styles of fibre glass and laminates before I felt comfortable ordering the real thing. But the wait and price were worth it.
That said I still shoot my Grozer's Early Avar when its cold(below freezing) or honking down with rain.
Belated "Happy Christmas" to you all.
Jon R.
 

wattsy

Native
Dec 10, 2009
1,111
3
Lincoln
Have to agree with you on the longbow draw weights. Early warbows were in the 90lb range but in their heyday they were well into the 150+ range. And I think a reproduction of the largest Mary Rose bow pulled 220lb.

they found skeleton's on the mary rose of archer's who's spine's were twisted and with enlarged left arms and bone spurs on shoulder, wrist and fingers because of the difficulty of drawing back a bow of that power, and at the siege of abergavenny in 1182 welsh arrows penetrated an oak door 4 inches thick. longbows also take at least 2 years to make including seasoning the wood.
 

wattsy

Native
Dec 10, 2009
1,111
3
Lincoln
Ok fair point guys, I know longbows can be very powerful but the average one wouldn't be up in those figures.Plus they were very prone to the weather which made them a little less effective, the archers used to carry their strings under their hats or they got wet and stretched reducing the power.

At the battle of crecy the longbowmen were credited with practically winning the battle by themselves, and they did.....but only partly with their bows. It was the mud that scuppered the French. Their armour got stuck in the gelatinous mud and made moving practically impossible both for mounted and dis-mounted knights. The archers wore leather/cloth clothes and boots so the mud didn't really impede them, most of the french army died to daggers and swords as opposed to bodkins

The mongolian bows were practically weather proof in comparison and averaged higher poundage which made them better and more reliable. Its a shame really because in the UK's climate the mongol bow would have excelled.

the mongol bows weren't weather proof in fact they were the exact opposite because they used animal glue which is soluble in water they had to be protected from rain and damp or they'd have fallen apart.
 

HillBill

Bushcrafter through and through
Oct 1, 2008
8,162
156
W. Yorkshire
the mongol bows weren't weather proof in fact they were the exact opposite because they used animal glue which is soluble in water they had to be protected from rain and damp or they'd have fallen apart.

They used fish glue made from the swim bladders of freshwater fish. Which is water resistant
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE