Bachmann makes several complaints of the identification and the iconography:

1. Bachmann: 'A striking feature of this pen-and-ink drawing from the Utrecht Psalter is the inordinate length  - in relation to the musician - of the line which runes obliquely across the long-necked, spade-shaped, stringed instrument, and which is interpreted as a bow.'
   Agreed. The length of the so-called bow is excessive and is not seen in the corpus.
2.  Bachmann: 'Every reproduction of this piece of pictorial evidence in the books mentioned shows only part of the complete illustration, cutting the alleged bow down to a third of its total length'.
   Agreed. This a good point. This shows why full artworks/pages are included on the BSIP database - context is everything. It demonstrates how iconography can be manipulated by those presenting it to strengthen the narrative they desire.
3. Bachmann: 'It seems improbable that the instrument would be bowed in the position shown'.
   Disagree. Bachmann assumes that the position shown is a playing position. The instrument may not being played. However, walking playing positions, including unsupported playing positions are known from the very earliest of bowed string instrument iconography. The playing position of the Pontic Kemence is very similar, and thus it is not possible to reject using this reason.
4. Bachmann: 'the musician is additionally burdened with a triangular harp, which would greatly hamper his bowing action.'
   Disagree. Bachmann raises a fair point, however, it is not a valid reason for rejection. Illustrations are not photographs. If we take this is purely a depiction of reality then Bachmann has a point. However, if we take this to be allegory, then it is not necessarily suggesting reality is entirely as depicted. However, it does appear to depict a person  carrying two items whilst performing another task. This is just an example of how iconography can be difficult to work with.
5. Bachmann: 'The illustrator has drawn the 'bow' lying athwart the strings between the tailpiece and the bridge'.
   Disagree. This relies on an assumption that the instrument is being played. The bow may simply be being held and be in not in contact with the strings. It is a fair point, but is not a rejection reason. Depictions of this nature appear many times in the corpus on depictions of bowed instruments that are undisputed.
6. Bachmann: 'This same long-necked instrument appears in several other illustrations in the same manuscript, when it is invariably held across the player's body and plucked.'
   Agreed.
7. Bachmann: 'The illustration in question refers to Psalm 108  verse 8 [which refers to a psaltery and a harp]. Accordingly the man on the left-hand side of the drawing, identified as the Psalmist by his two musical instruments.'
   Agreed. The nomenclature does not indicate a bowed instrument.
8. Bachmann: '[The Psalmist] is in the process of measuring the surroundings with a long measuring pole. The interpretation of this long object as a piece of measuring apparatus is further confirmed by the presence, on the right-hand side of the same illustration, of a second man handling a similar rod, which in this instance cannot possibly be mistaken for a bow, since he carries no instrument.
   Agreed. As with point 2, this demonstrates why full context of of depictions is critical to their understanding.