Author Topic: Carved bows / museum photos / some more for you guys with questions  (Read 6784 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

half eye

  • Guest
Re: Carved bows / museum photos for refference
« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2010, 12:17:23 pm »
ohma,
       No it's the backs that are carved, I'm throwing in a pic or two that shows the belly side of M435....the writing on it is from the original collector...but you can tell it is not decorated at all by the maker.....I'm willing to swear to it but I believe that Eastern Woodland NA used both horizontal and vertical grained wood for bows. #M435 is the only bow that they took a slew of pics and there are more of the belly but I didn't download 'em all.....I can get some more if it would help any.

Also, it looks to me from the photo of the plains bow that it IS carved on the belly (the saw teeth) but I could be wrong.
half eye ;)

[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline ohma

  • Member
  • Posts: 279
Re: Carved bows / museum photos for refference
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2010, 06:39:19 pm »
thanks , i just cant believe they dont blow up.i would like to give that a try.have always wanted to incorporate my carving with my bows.
if your not dead you are getting older so get out and shoot some arrows.

half eye

  • Guest
Re: Carved bows / museum photos / some more for you guys with questions
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2010, 10:38:04 pm »
Some of the guys asked about some other tribes so I looked around for examples from some of those. The museum photos came from the National Museum of the American Indian (Smithsonian).

There are 5 identified from 1880 from displaced bands in Oklahoma, the last one is from the Anishinaabe (Walpole Island, Ontario) hope these help. I'm sorry I cant remember which guys asked or what posts they were in....gettin old aint a lot of fun :(

half eye ;)

[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline Jude

  • Member
  • Posts: 286
  • Julian Benoit, Black River, NY & Kandahar, Afghan.
Re: Carved bows / museum photos / some more for you guys with questions
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2010, 09:30:07 am »
I think alot of it was choice of wood, since several seem to be flat grained.  I know hickory very commonly had the rings violated, and I suspect elm can handle it too.  Native Americans had no problem using an edge grained split, like on some Wampanoag style bows, and I recall that they would sometimes split a sapling, and use the outer growth ring as the belly, and the flat split side as the back.  They likely discovered quickly, through trial and error, which species they could get away with carving, and which they couldn't.  This would be why you don't see any carved osage bows, but find plenty of carved hickory bows.  They didn't know of any "rules" to bowmaking, aside from the ones they discovered themselves.
"Not all those that wander are lost."--Tolkien
"If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer."--Benoit