04-19-2006, 10:11 AM
Hello,
Dont want to be picky, but these diagrams could have been made by later authors who were familiar with the composite bow and just assumed thats what Heron is talking about. Similar to the anachronism in Part 2 of the Book of Chronicles (Chapter 26, verses 14 & 15) in the old testament of the Bible where a scribesman of the 2nd century BC replaced the original "battering ram" of the 6th century BC orginal with "ballista".
But werent torsion springs even more vulnerable to dampness, and even more difficult to maintain? Take a look here how the ancient Chinese worked around the size problem: see here
Quote: The surviving copies of the ancient diagrams consistently show double curvature bows, which can only be composite.
Dont want to be picky, but these diagrams could have been made by later authors who were familiar with the composite bow and just assumed thats what Heron is talking about. Similar to the anachronism in Part 2 of the Book of Chronicles (Chapter 26, verses 14 & 15) in the old testament of the Bible where a scribesman of the 2nd century BC replaced the original "battering ram" of the 6th century BC orginal with "ballista".
Quote:As Bernard has duly pointed out, composite bows for heavy catapults were unwieldy, took a long time to be made and were very vulnerable to damp environments. Probably, there were also limits ito the size which ancient bow-makers could reach.
But werent torsion springs even more vulnerable to dampness, and even more difficult to maintain? Take a look here how the ancient Chinese worked around the size problem: see here
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
