Talk:Hungarian bow

why is this separate?
I hope someone has/had plans to expand this again, as a one-sentence article that merely restates what is said in Hun bow isn't really worthy of a separate article... Removing the copyright violation was important, but we should either have a separate article that explains things here, or a section at Hun bow and a redirect (which can be categorized, after all). -- nae'blis 15:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

There is enough on Hungarian bows that something useful could be done, all the recent reconstructions on the basis of plates found in position, see for example http://www.atarn.org/magyar/magyar_2/bow.htm. The page as it stands seems fairly useless, and as for stirrups, I'm assured that Lajos Kassai can use a Hungarian reconstruction without stirrups. I have deleted some and will have a go at the archaeology if I get time.

Should the useful bits of this page, such as they are, be merged into "composite bow"? AFAICS the Hungarian bow was simply part of the general development of the Asian composite bow.Richard Keatinge 14:42, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Is this accurate?
If it truly "required considerable skill and several years to make a single bow", it would probably be a challenge to produce enough bows to equip an army. At the very least, this needs a source and citation. 134.82.97.14 21:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)