Congratulations on the receipt of your work. Please keep us informed as to
how to obtain copies.
At 06:21 AM 5/17/2005, you wrote:
>At the Kalamazoo International Congress on Medieval
>History, last week, I gave a major paper on Payne
>Gallway and the crossbow. He got it wrong, massively,
>on the military and social history of the weapon. The
>paper was very well received by a group of historians
>that included some of the very top of the profession.
>Kelly DeVries, the editor of the Journal of Medieval
>Military History, asked me to forward him a copy of
>the paper for publication in that journal. I hope the
>article will appear by the end of the year.
>My paper pointed out that Payne Gallway published his
>work in 1903 (do not be fooled by reprint dates), and
>was a 19th century style, English, jingoist,
>antiquarian that was apologizing for discussing such
>an "un-English" weapon as the crossbow. I pointed out
>that we were well overdue for a book that did not try
>to revise the technological discussion (Alm and
>Harmuth did that), but made an attempt to set the
>military and social use of the weapon into context.
>Boydell and Brewer's representative asked me to
>present them with a book proposal for a survey history
>of the crossbow. I am aiming for something along the
>lines of Bradbury's Medieval Archer (but with
>footnotes). There is too much mythology out not to
>need more of the facts elucidated.
>--- "Scott B. Jaqua" <hagerson@...> wrote:
> > Can't say I've seen one. But it would be pretty
> > long. Don't get me
> > wrong. In it's day Payne-Gallwey's book had it's
> > place. But he suffered
> > from being very much a Victorian Scholar.
> > It was mostly the Line about Hastings being where
> > the Crossbow was
> > introduced, that set me off.
> > Payne Gallwey was in error on his history. But that
> > is in part because
> > of the work done in the field at the time.
> > He over romanticized the Greeks and Romans, but all
> > Victorian Scholars
> > did that.
> > He was wrong on the performance of the bows. From a
> > lack of real testing
> > or observation.
> > And he go the internal mechanisms wrong.
> > But the biggest problem is in the attitude. The
> > Victorians tended to
> > engage in research as an exercise in pure thought.
> > It was like they felt
> > doing actual observation would corrupt the observer.
> > Njall
> > >Yeah so Payne-Gallwey is not the best source
> > available but he was not
> > >entirely wrong and it is what is generally
> > available.
> > >
> > >The important part is that our sport gets some
> > attention, and the
> > >article is largely true.
> > >
> > >Does anyone have a concise list of all of
> > Payne-Gallwey's mistakes? (or
> > >even a partial list)
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ---8<---------------------------------------------
> > Brought to you YahooGroups Ad Free in 2003 by
> > Medieval Mart
> > Get Medieval at Mad Macsen's
> > http://www.medievalmart.com/
> > [Email to SCA-Archeryfirstname.lastname@example.org to
> > leave this list]
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > SCA-Archeryemail@example.com
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>Brought to you YahooGroups Ad Free in 2003 by Medieval Mart
>Get Medieval at Mad Macsen's http://www.medievalmart.com/
>[Email to SCA-Archeryfirstname.lastname@example.org to leave this list]
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.11 - Release Date: 5/16/2005
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.11 - Release Date: 5/16/2005