"Beaker Days on Danube 2014" Conference (Bratislava & Vienna)

Dvořák & Matějíčková gave a Power Point presentation on the Moravian (Czech R.) Beaker excavations at last week's "Beaker Days" conference.

"Bell Beaker Culture in Moravia: 30 questions, 30 answers, 30 pieces of evidence"

Slide 22, Dvořák & Matějíčková et al, 2014

Hoštice-I is the largest Bell Beaker cemetery in Europe, or at least, has the most excavated individual graves at around 157 (from the paper).  As you click through the Q&A slideshow, the presenters make it known that there is clear and detailed cultural continuity/contact with Beaker groups throughout the Atlantic.

I'll keep comments brief...

The most common Beaker graves at Hostice-I are the cist graves and mini-ditched enclosures.

Slide 11, Dvořák & Matějíčková et al, 2014

These mini-enclosures in Hoštice-I were built around the graves of some men, kind of like little chapels or mausoleums.

Slide 13, Dvořák & Matějíčková et al, 2014

Here's what Dvorak and Matejickova think the burial enclosures likely looked like:

Excerpt from Slide 14 (modified), Dvořák & Matějíčková et al, 2014

There was also a presentation on boar's tusk.  I'm very interested in what the presenter had to say, and I'll share as soon as I get it.

Calculating the draw weight of a Beaker bow (Part 2)

This is the second part of several pieces I'll do on the Beaker bow.

In the first part, I tyrannically cast away all doubt with regards to Beaker wrist-guard functionality.

But we still are not done with wrist-guards...


Broadly speaking, there have been proposed three rough shape classes of wrist-guards associated with Beakers (most recently by Folkens et al, 2008)

This is important because this could yield three major bow-classes used by Beaker archers.  We may be able to infer the size of the bow and the weight of the bow depending on how the bracer was worn.  So I will modify some of the previous classifications from papers dealing with the subject to how I view wear of the wrist-guard and with which bow size & weight is most appropriate.

Radial bone guard #1

This bracer was worn to protect the radial bone on the inside of the weak forearm.  One end is widened to allow for wrist movement, the other end for the increase in forearm. 

2200 - 2000 BC, Kellythorpe Barrow, British Museum

It may suggests that the wearer of the guard fired his bow vertically with a locked wrist, as in the picture below, and not like a longbow.

 The depth of the bow would be a mid-size, vertically-held bow because the right arm draws the string across the upper body and the left radial bone is exposed due to the required midcarpal supination locking required from a heavy bow.  Locking the wrist allows us to project great force with our hands, such as when using tools like a hammer.  Modern compound bows alleviate the force on the locked wrist because the breaking weight in draw is reduced but with the benefit of substantial acceleration on release.  

Fig. 19 (Van der Vaart, 2009)

You can see how the archer draws the bow with his right arm and the left arm and wrist are locked.  The bow used in the picture is probably between 30-40 lbs and may inflict a painful lash, but not a dangerous one for the occasional sport shooter.  

 Modified Fig. 19 (Van der Vaart, 2009)

I added a red circle to the second picture where the radial bone is located and where the radial bracer would need to be placed for a substantially more powerful bow.  A combination of the stone core and the leather outer cuff may have also provided rigidity for higher tension forces on the forearm.

Large Longbow guard #2

By "Longbow" I'm referring bows generally taller than the archer and much more powerful.  (The definition seems to vary)  Given the width of this bracer and where it would need to be placed, I'd suggest that the wearer of this bracer fired his bow in a canted manner, such as many of the larger longbows.

2280 - 2030 BC, from Barnack, British Museum

Simple wrist guard #3

I would guess without knowing actual numbers, that the very vast majority of Beaker bracers fall into this simple group with varying size and quality.  Unlike the two cuffed versions above, this one was probably worn exactly like Jayne's wonderful illustration of the Amesbury Archer below:

"Amesbury Archer" thanks to Jane Brayne

The coloration of these Class #3 wrist-guards seems to have had some special significance.  Some natural red or greens were sought out and transported widely (1) and some were colored red with ocher in slate Dutch examples (3).

Conclusion!

The Bracer's tell us very broadly about three major types of Beaker bows.  We can tell from the bracer how each bow was held and with the robustness of the bracer, have a general idea of the size of the bow it supported.



Refs.

(Fokkens, Achterkamp, Kuijpers, 2008) "Bracers or Bracelets? About the Functionality and Meaning of Bell Beaker Wrist-guard"

Smith, Jonathan (2006) "Early Bronze Age Stone Wrist-Guards in Britain: archer's bracer or social symbol?"

Van der Vaart, Saaja (May 2009)  "Bell Beaker Wrist Guards Reconsidered:  A Research into their Functionality and Possible Uses"

*When yew is cut right, it makes a natural composite with inner heart and outer sapwood forming the 'perfect bow'.  So its hard to imagine any kind of composite laminating being required at any point in European bow history.

**Google 'Mary Rose archers' and you'll find reference to an on-going study on the skeletal adaptations and large forearms of heavy medieval archers.

Calculating the draw weight of a Beaker bow (Part 1)

This is the first part of several pieces I'll do on the Beaker bow.  New and exciting information is coming out (just this morning with a find of hemp thread on an arrowhead)  We'll start with wrist-guards.

I've been reading several pieces on the functionality of the Beaker wrist guard.  It seems that modern scientific opinion has long questioned their functionality.  While I think a good argument has been made (Fokkens et al & others) that they had some social significance beyond simple function, I am surprised that their actual function in everyday life has been underplayed.

Of course, ordinarily the wrist-guard is used by archers to protect the arm from bow slap.  Wrist-guards are found with Beaker men and typically on the lower left arm as demonstrated in burial.  They were typically made of slate or finer stones, but as Fokkens pointed out, they often appear on the outside of the forearm.

"Amesbury Archer" Special thanks to artist, Jane Brayne

Back in 2008, Fokkens, Achterkamp & Kuijpers surveyed the distribution, placement and construction of the common Beaker bracers in Beaker burials throughout Western Europe.  What they found was that a majority of the wrist-guards were actually discovered on the outside of the arm, not the inside.  Also, the functionality of the wrist-guards was questioned as some wrist-guards were highly ornamented, embossed, riveted or only had two holes.  A few guards were too wide, which may have affected their functionality.  Some examples below:

(Fig. 1) H. Fokkens et al., 2008

After having looked at several illustrated papers (Smith, 2006 & Van der Vaart, 2009) focusing on some of the major bracer outliers, I've come to the conclusion that the wrist-guards were simply wrist-guards. 

My logic is fairly simple:

[archers do not inhibit archery]:

(Beaker men were archers)   >   (archers do not inhibit archery)   >   (archers need bracers) THEN (wrist-guards found with Beakers could not inhibit archery or aided archery)

Conversely:

(If Beaker bracers inhibited archery)   THEN   (those who wore them were not archers)


Unconvinced by non-functional arguments

Placement

Personally, the wearing of the wrist-guard on the outside of the arm makes sense to me.  Sorry, not trying to be snarky here.  But, the wrist guard may have been rotated when needed and kept on the outside of the arm while not in use.


We shouldn't expect wrist guards to appear on the inside of the arm in a burial any more than the position of other effects.  If you did a survey of men buried between 1850 and 1950, you'd find that the placement of the pocket watch varied or was absent.

Actually one of the three bracer types appears to have been worn on the radial bone rather than the wrist interior. A figure of a man shooting in Van der Vaart's paper illustrates why this would be the case. This could be confusing the understanding of placement during excavation.

Material

The choice of slate for a bracer also makes sense.  River slate is cool to the touch and usually soft or soapified.  It's easier to shape lengthwise, easy for drilling holes and its water properties for wearing against the body (sweat, rain) make it ideal.  The greenstone and redstone of the isles is more elaborate but likely similar in comfort properties. 

Size

The size and shape of Beaker wrist-guards probably varied because Beaker bows varied.  The kind of wrist guard used for a long bow is different from a short bow.  It's placement would vary because bending the bow is different in both cases.

(continue to part 2)

Refs.

(Fokkens, Achterkamp, Kuijpers, 2008) "Bracers or Bracelets? About the Functionality and Meaning of Bell Beaker Wrist-guard"

Smith, Jonathan (2006) "Early Bronze Age Stone Wrist-Guards in Britain: archer's bracer or social symbol?"

Van der Vaart, Saaja (May 2009)  "Bell Beaker Wrist Guards Reconsidered:  A Research into their Functionality and Possible Uses"