Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

34186RE: Re: [SCA-Archery] RE: Arrow shelf

Expand Messages
  • brotherjohn66
    Sep 13, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      So why have any standards at all? You could use that argument to justify anything. I'm not saying that we can know for certain whether or not arrowrests are period. Just that the preponderance of evidence, both archaeological and pictorial, shows no sign of these presumed arrowrests. Are we, as Corpora states, "a living history group, or are we LARPers? After all, just because no hobbit skeletons have been found in England doesn't mean that there were no hobbits. 


      Current "expert" consensus is that arrow rests are not period. I will happily, and without embarassment, alter my opinion on the matter if new evidence comes to light. I believe that is how science works. 


      John Wayland



      --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, <sca-archery@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

      What I would not use is an absence of evidence to say that the object never existed in the first place.  What I would say is that the question is still open.  For those of you who don't know me, I am trained as an archaeologist though not practicing professionally at this time, I have seen many cases of supposed "experts" stating that something did not exist simply because they have not yet found it and been seriously embarrassed later when new research has come to light.  This is one of those cases where there is no definitive evidence either way, only a lack of evidence..
      Carolus
      On 9/13/2013 9:16 PM, brotherjohn66@... wrote:
       

       Let me make sure I understand this: you would not use as reliable evidence ACTUAL, surviving artifacts, but you would use one, undated, POSSIBLE arrow rest? Why is one thing reliable and DOZENS of other things unreliable?


      John Wayland



      --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, <sca-archery@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

      I've looked at a number of images of Mary Rose bows and I don't recall
      any of them having handgrips of any kind. Being submerged for so long
      it would be likely these would have been lost and thus any attached
      rests with them. As was stated absence of evidence is not evidence of
      absence and I wouldn't use this as reliable evidence in any case.
      Carolus

    • Show all 42 messages in this topic