Longbow in chinese song dynasty painting

[PatM]

The wood you show is  used in an Osage /Mulberry hybrid. It wouldn't have been around until Osage was brought to China.
http://www.cirrusimage.com/tree_Osage_Silk_Thorn.htm

this wood is a specie origin from china. and can be found in many ancient chinese bow making books, in which it is said that the best wood for bow is 柘木（this kind）, second is mulberry, the third is bamboo.

Yes, but I meant that the hybrid is also grown there now. Not surprising that they figured out which wood was best for selfbows as well.

[toomanyknots]

I never knew about this osage mulberry hybrid, cool! Very interesting! I would love to try it out! It looks just like osage to me.

[leehongyi]

The wood you show is  used in an Osage /Mulberry hybrid. It wouldn't have been around until Osage was brought to China.
http://www.cirrusimage.com/tree_Osage_Silk_Thorn.htm

this wood is a specie origin from china. and can be found in many ancient chinese bow making books, in which it is said that the best wood for bow is 柘木（this kind）, second is mulberry, the third is bamboo.

Yes, but I meant that the hybrid is also grown there now. Not surprising that they figured out which wood was best for selfbows as well.

Ah~ha, i know.

[leehongyi]

I think the only reasonable conclusion that we could make is that not only were those longbows invented by aliens, but that they were hand delivered to the Chinese by the aliens. In fact if you were to look very carefully at the painting you would see that the archers are not people at all. Ancient astronaut theorist suggest that they are actually aliens. Those barrel looking devices they are standing near are quite clearly some sort of surface to orbit pods that the aliens must have used for travel back and forth to the mother-ship. I honestly don't see any other explanation. How else would a relatively advanced civilization filled with skilled craftsmen come up with such novel ideas? And the perfect curvature of the bow limbs surely could not have been achieved without some sort of high powered space lasers since you certainly couldn't achieve that kind of precision working with sharp metal tools.

ahaha~no, maybe they are the soldiers who had some drink at restaurant and then competed their power. the room outside was part of the building which was a restaurant. some experts pointed out that desertion of soldiers was very usual at the last years of song dynasty, because of long last peace. but soon song was desdroyed by mongols and Qaγan the grandson of genghis khan built a new dynasty Yuan.

[DarkSoul]

Leehongyi, I'm sorry for going slightly off topic. I find this debate about wood species much more interesting than a vague picture that shows what appears to be a simple, straight, wooden longbow.

The tree seems to represent a species bridge between the Mulberry and Osage.

Could you elaborate on that, please? What do you mean with "seems to"? Do you have anything to back this up, or do you just compare two pictures?

Darksoul, they have actually crossed it with osage. I wonder how much of it is growing wild, The berry looks awful familiar. Probably not very popular because of the long thorns.

I've finished a university degree in plant biotechnology and I actually know a lot about this subject. That's why I like this topic I've been doing some research about the species Cudrania tricuspidata, and here's what I've come up with.

Osage orange (Maclura pomifera) and this Cudrania tricuspidata are both in the mulberry family Moraceae, but in two different genera. I used the website The Plant List to find out more about the use of these genera. The Plant List is a reliable website that deals with all known names for plant species and lists synonyms and updated names for species. Remarkably, the genus Cudrania is completely unresolved! That means that none of the species are reliable, or at least no proper research has been performed on these species in an attempt to find out about their genetic relationships. In contract, the genus Maclura is pretty much fully resolved (source). We can even see the species Maclura tricuspidata Carrière as an accepted name! That species lists four synonyms: Cudranus triloba Hance, Morus integrifolia H. Lév. & Vaniot, Vanieria tricuspidata (Carrière) Hu and Vanieria triloba (Hance) Satake. The website Tropicos (another well accepted and trusted site) lists Cudrania tricuspidata (Carrière) Bureau ex Lavalle even as a synonym for Maclura tricuspidata Carrière  (source).
The existence of an intergeneric cross Cudrania tricuspidata (Carr.)) x Maclura pomifera var. 'inermis' and even then back-crossed with Maclura pomifera var. 'inermis'
(source), fortifies the suspicion that Maclura tricuspidata Carrière is in fact the correct name for Cudrania tricuspidata. Intergeneric crosses in plants are rare, so it is likely that the genus Cudrania is part of the Maclura genus. It could even be a subgenus in the genus Maclura. If they are not in the same genus, the two genera must be really closely related. Since I cannot find any taxonomic literature about the relationship between the two genera, I cannot inconclusively say whether Cudrania tricuspidata is really Maclura tricuspidata. But for me, there are clear indications that Cudrania tricuspidata is extremely closely related to our famous Osage orange, and as such, it should be wonderful bow wood!

[PatM]

I am going by the fact that the two can be crossed successfully. There must be some degree of relatedness. Can Osage be crossed with regular Mulberry or are they too distantly related to make this happen?
 I don't see why it has to be in  "Maclura" to make this happen.
 There are many examples in the animal/bird world where species are in different genera and successfully cross.
 Is the lower incidence in the plant world due to the fact that the parent organism is not actually mobile?

[leehongyi]

Leehongyi, I'm sorry for going slightly off topic. I find this debate about wood species much more interesting than a vague picture that shows what appears to be a simple, straight, wooden longbow.

The tree seems to represent a species bridge between the Mulberry and Osage.

Could you elaborate on that, please? What do you mean with "seems to"? Do you have anything to back this up, or do you just compare two pictures?

Darksoul, they have actually crossed it with osage. I wonder how much of it is growing wild, The berry looks awful familiar. Probably not very popular because of the long thorns.

I've finished a university degree in plant biotechnology and I actually know a lot about this subject. That's why I like this topic I've been doing some research about the species Cudrania tricuspidata, and here's what I've come up with.

Osage orange (Maclura pomifera) and this Cudrania tricuspidata are both in the mulberry family Moraceae, but in two different genera. I used the website The Plant List to find out more about the use of these genera. The Plant List is a reliable website that deals with all known names for plant species and lists synonyms and updated names for species. Remarkably, the genus Cudrania is completely unresolved! That means that none of the species are reliable, or at least no proper research has been performed on these species in an attempt to find out about their genetic relationships. In contract, the genus Maclura is pretty much fully resolved (source). We can even see the species Maclura tricuspidata Carrière as an accepted name! That species lists four synonyms: Cudranus triloba Hance, Morus integrifolia H. Lév. & Vaniot, Vanieria tricuspidata (Carrière) Hu and Vanieria triloba (Hance) Satake. The website Tropicos (another well accepted and trusted site) lists Cudrania tricuspidata (Carrière) Bureau ex Lavalle even as a synonym for Maclura tricuspidata Carrière  (source).
The existence of an intergeneric cross Cudrania tricuspidata (Carr.)) x Maclura pomifera var. 'inermis' and even then back-crossed with Maclura pomifera var. 'inermis'
(source), fortifies the suspicion that Maclura tricuspidata Carrière is in fact the correct name for Cudrania tricuspidata. Intergeneric crosses in plants are rare, so it is likely that the genus Cudrania is part of the Maclura genus. It could even be a subgenus in the genus Maclura. If they are not in the same genus, the two genera must be really closely related. Since I cannot find any taxonomic literature about the relationship between the two genera, I cannot inconclusively say whether Cudrania tricuspidata is really Maclura tricuspidata. But for me, there are clear indications that Cudrania tricuspidata is extremely closely related to our famous Osage orange, and as such, it should be wonderful bow wood!

No no no, i like all your discussion, wonderful! you are a really scholar！

[dragonman]

thanks for the interesting posts Leehongyi.....was 'white wax wood' ever used to make bows in China, I know it is used for spear handles in China, and believe it is a kind of privet, meant to be tough and flexible?

[leehongyi]

thanks for the interesting posts Leehongyi.....was 'white wax wood' ever used to make bows in China, I know it is used for spear handles in China, and believe it is a kind of privet, meant to be tough and flexible?

We mainly use white wax wood as beginner bow wood for its low durability when bent too much. But it's a flexible wood good for spear handle for its mild bending not as a bow so much. In fact, white wax wood白蜡木 is the chinese name for "Ash wood" in china which has fine and smooth grain.

[Wiley]

I know there is much speculation going on here about what bow wood was likely used. I feel like a mulberry/Osage hybrid is a less likely candidate. We see similar bows among the oldest known bows of Europe and north America appearing in China. It brings me to the conclusion that they probably used a variety of woods based on whatever was available to them, we know that most hardwood fruit and nut trees will make excellent self bows, and I feel like they had probably came to the same conclusion. the simplest answer is they probably made them from whatever fruit/nut trees that would grow in that areas climate, China being a big place with a varied climate, wood selection likely varied by region just like it does here in north America.

[swamp monkey]

I couldn't agree more with Wiley.  North America's bow history and this forum here on PA demonstrate two truths.  First, people use what works and they have available.   Second, within that certain people have favorites while others experiment. 

People are people no matter where they come from or what their culture is.  We all have a lot in common when you look at the foundational attributes.  With that said it is the cultural and resource differences that make comparing and contrasting so very interesting and rewarding.  Nice thread.  I like seeing things like this.  The art work is wonderful and it gives us a glimpse into bowmaking past. 

Keep 'em coming.