Mississippian mound builder - bow speculation

[uwe]

I flew over this thread. I`ll read it completely next!
Very interesting what I saw for the moment!
Thanks
Uwe

[swamp monkey]

Has anyone worked with a Sudbury design?  I made one that I eventually traded for a bow gig (same investment of time so it was an equal trade).  The tips bent on it more than the mid limbs.  Look at those Spiro engravings and tell me what you think about those being Sudbury.  Keep in mind the art style is very representational and proportions are not exact.  I am trying to reconcile the bow profile with deflexed tips.  There was no need to do that with the woods available to OK region natives.  Speculation can creep in here but the bottom line is either they did it or it is just artistic license.  The "canvas" was a whelk shell and space was important. An idea for a bow was all you needed.  I have actually seen the artifact with the warrior and there was a mirror image warrior on the flip side so space was an issue. 

Also I have been pondering that round cross section from the Mississippian bow from LA.  Why would a D bow have a rounded cross section on the mid limb?  Could some rot have set in on that limb obscuring the real shape? Any thoughts?

[turtle]

 I dont claim to be an expert, but those pictures look an awfull lot like some whip tillered bows ive seen.

[swamp monkey]

I've had some time in the woods over the past week and that gives a man time to think.  I believe I am going to go out on a limb and make a bow inspired loosely by the Spiro shell engravings.  That way when more information comes to light on some other areas I will look into those.   Likely the artists who drew the bows did not make the bows.  So the amount of information will be limited.  Here is what I feel comfortable with.  The bow is clearly a long bow so I will make the bow roughly 5 feet long (63" ENE).  The image shows a bow with pointed limbs, so the bow tapered as it moved away from the grip.  The taper in both shell images is gentle so flare outs are graceful and perhaps not worth documenting with further detail.  I may make the handle thicker so it barely bends if any.  If you look at a Sudbury design it really could be interpreted in its simplest form like these drawings depict.  That is my interpretation in light of little other evidence. I cannot see accomplished artisans making a sapling bow.  It does not fit considering the effort Woodland and Mississippian era natives put into their crafts.  Not trying to read too much into it - I simply want to make a bow inspired by the mound builders.  I also see bands around the limb which could either be sinew bands or paint.  I will go with sinew for no other reason than preference.  I intend fully to use my artistic license when decorating the bow with appropriate mound builder images.     If anyone has reason to make other suggestions I am open to them.  I am trying to make a bow that loosely fits those images.

This will not be a replica, rather it will be a mound building people inspired bow.  If other information comes to light from other history minded bowyers I will gladly take that into consideration and make another bow using that information.     I appreciate the input. 

[okiecountryboy]

Well put Swamp monkey...
Keep that fire burning inside.
What ever you come up with replica or not, I'm sure it will be something you will, and us as well, be proud of!

God Bless
Ron

[richpierce]

Are you going to use ash, osage orange, hickory or black locust?

[Hrothgar]

Swamp Monkey, I don't know if it would be any help, but the anthropology/history dept. on the M.U. campus is supposed to have a very good collection of many older native bows. I've only seen a few pics and read about them--would love to stop in view them myself sometime if possible.

[swamp monkey]

I have been pondering wood choice as well.  

An Osage D bow like the one referenced in LA sounds appropriate.  I just don't know what to do with that report of a round cross section.  That does not make sense to me unless he was saying the back was rounded.  That would make sense with Bois'Darc. D bows can be round in cross section but a bow that size out of hedge is more like an English long bow not a Aboriginal flat bow -wrong mechanics unless they were still working out the "rules of bowyering" so to speak. I kind of doubt that considering how well Mississippians made so many other items found in the archeological record.  These people were artisans capable of great function and appearance.  Using the wrong design for North American woods does not feel right or seem logical.  I like a challenge but hate to waste a good piece of hedge on misinterpreting someone else's observations.  

For the Spiro inspired bow I was thinking about a white wood even though Osage was clearly on the menu for that area at that time.  Perhaps Hickory - I do have  stave begging to be brought into service.  I like the idea of white wood bow that has Mississippian drawings on the back - kind of like a canvas.  

Other woods can be used if other designs crop up.

BTW.  Allely and Hamm's Encyclopedia of NA Bows, Arrows and Quivers has a Pre-columbian D bow from somewhere in Texas. Nearly 76 inches long (wow!). It was found in a cave near Packsaddle Mountain.  Gotta Google map that one.  It would be really cool if that turned out to be near the Oklahoma area and thus was a mound building culture that made it.    

I plan to keep digging.  

[swamp monkey]

Swamp Monkey, I don't know if it would be any help, but the anthropology/history dept. on the M.U. campus is supposed to have a very good collection of many older native bows. I've only seen a few pics and read about them--would love to stop in view them myself sometime if possible.

If you could find anything Pre-Columbian that is in the Mound builder territory I would appreciate ANY information that you can glean.  That would be like being handed an immaculate stave of Bois D'arc!  However, I suspect reports on badly decomposed bows to be the best source of info. Call me a reluctant enthusiast.   Regardless,  I really appreciate your interest and any help you can dig up.  Thanks in advance.  I look forward to what you uncover. 

[swamp monkey]

BTW.  Allely and Hamm's Encyclopedia of NA Bows, Arrows and Quivers has a Pre-columbian D bow from somewhere in Texas. Nearly 76 inches long (wow!). It was found in a cave near Packsaddle Mountain.  Gotta Google map that one.  It would be really cool if that turned out to be near the Oklahoma area and thus was a mound building culture that made it.

Google map shows this to be near the Big Bend NP and the closer to the Rio Grande than Oklahoma.  Not exactly mound builder stomping ground, but it is still a cool bow!  Another great project and I love the idea of using Pecan (see the reference).  So many bows - so little time!

[stickbender]

     Good luck with the project.  Keep us updated on it.  The bows look like the bows of the Mojave indians.  They had that "backwards" style.

                                                                 Wayne

[swamp monkey]

Swamp Monkey, I don't know if it would be any help, but the anthropology/history dept. on the M.U. campus is supposed to have a very good collection of many older native bows. I've only seen a few pics and read about them--would love to stop in view them myself sometime if possible.

Last summer I visited the Grayson Collection at MU.  It is a marvelous collection.  I saw and measured a wide variety of North American Indian bows, arrows and quivers.  Unfortunately pre-Columbian/ mound builder bows are nonexistent. 

Since that time I found another whelk incised image of an archer.  This one came form the Spiro area too.  I know some time has passed since I last posted on this, but I was reading through Jackcrafty's double curve bow thread ( http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,9076.0.html ) in the how to and build along section.  In there he had images of his bows and some historic bows.  Some were Blackfeet and one was Apache.  I am not saying the mound builders passed their knowledge along to the Blackfeet and Apache but the bows look like what was inscribed on the whelk shells. 

Each one looks deflexed on the tips, and that still puzzles me as to why do that to a bow.  Was that their way of reducing mass?

I am also reluctant to read too much into those shell engravings.  Perspective and size relationships were not something the artists were overly burdened with.  That said, I see a pattern and it is what I have to operate with.  More food for thought.  Gimme your thoughts. 

Well it just so happens I have a piece of Osage that is BEGGING me pick this notion back up.  SO . . .  I will.  I am going to think about an Osage double curve with sinew bands.  No promises on when I can post more but hey, I waited three years to get back on this . . .    

cheers.

[hedgeapple]

Swamp Monkey, I've been pondering what would be the practical reason to have deflexed tip?  From the stored energy aspect I see none.  But, what of the practical, value I wondered.  This is what I came up with:  The bow would never have to be unstrung because there would be little to no pressure on the wood.  If you were attacked in the middle of the night, you wouldn't have to string your bow before you could engage the enemy.

I know next to nothing of this culture.  It just my ponderings.

[autologus]

Maybe its not deflexed but rather whip tillered.

Grady

[swamp monkey]

Hedge, someone suggested that on Jackcrafty's thread.  It might have been you, I don't recall.  Any how it makes sense to me.  I attended an archeology conference recently (nerdy hobby type thing to do) and they mentioned that the lightning whelk shell cups were associated with warriors drinking the black drink before and after war.  now if the cups are associated with war rituals, then maybe those are warriors with their "ever ready" bows on the cup, and your suggestion would be plausible. 

Autologus,  Good thought!  Let's say that is the case; so what would be the benefit to whip tillering?  I am asking because I don't know.