I, and most of us, DO NOT shoot Mary Rose bows and equipments. In fact, I think most of us do not aspire to Mary Rose's general standards. Most period archers chose one of the many, many other styles of bows, not sunk on the Mary Rose. It ain't even the most interesting period for bows.
---- Sean Powell <sean14powell@...
> I'm not likely to build it. I'm likely to buy it. Where does this leave me?
> I'd like to buy it in period but I'd like to buy the documentation with it
> and 'Everyone knows' is an invitation for someone to know the wrong thing.
> I see 2 general objectives in encouraging more period archery:
> 1) To encourage more people to shoot period archery, even for the lowest
> common denominator of period (I.e. open category that doesn't include
> compounds and aluminum shafts.) We do this by keeping the entry bar low,
> the shooting fun and the education optional but easily available.
> 2) To encourage people to shoot more period archery, even if the more
> period is more expensive then the open category. We do this by having a
> limited or restricted category and making it prestigious but not overly
> burdensome to play at that level.
> Ideally if you combine 1 and 2 you will get 3) more people shooting more
> period archery.
> The thing that has worked well recently for heavy weapons is a high
> visibility limited access tourney (Combat of the 30) where the armor
> standards are much tighter then standard: English or French, mid/late 14th
> century, a man of means to provide a ransom if captured and with more
> historically accurate rules (counted blows, exposed faces are a detriment
> etc.) The attention is making fighting cool again. This has renewed an
> interest in armor as more then SCA safety gear and new fighters are looking
> emulate the authentic kits rather then the sport kits. Experienced fighters
> are looking for more authentic gear as current equipment wears out or money
> permits. The good fighters may keep a sport kit but keep one or more period
> kits for period specific tourneys and demos. Additionally each year as
> attendance grows and kits become better the standards can be tightened.
> A possible way to emulate this in Archery might be a "Mary Rose" tourney or
> and Agincort/Crece/Poitiers tourney. Equipment would be limited to
> English/French as appropriate to the hundreds year way. (Not trying to be
> disrespectful to the horsebows and Yumi, but we can establish other
> tourneys for those as well). Then we pick a time frame (Example: Jan 1st
> 2014 to Dec 31 2014) and a period scoring method. Scores are collected
> through the year and the winner is publicly congratulated by his
> co-competitors after the scores are collected. Ideally this would also have
> a public aspect to it for a given day at Pennsic/Gulf/Estrella/etc. for all
> the archers competing in the shoot to gather on the line and shoot a
> modified scoring method (Yes this has to be coordinated with the archery
> field coordinator.) Do not be surprised if People suddenly start coming to
> watch the English Bowmen vs the French/Swiss Crossbows.
> As an advantage, if the entry bar is reasonable (a few hundred dollars not
> a few thousand) you may get good archers competing with ELB on one day and
> Horsebow the next and Cross-bow on a third just as we have fighters who
> wear authentic 14th cent on one day and 11th cent the next. (Please note:
> I'm buying another $1500 helm because it is the right social class for a
> squire rather then wear my current $1500 helm which should be reserved for
> a Knight or Lord which is separate from my other current $1200 stainless
> general purpose helm from the wrong time period so my sense of finances
> dedicated to a game are a bit skewed. If you set the bar there WILL be
> people who attain it.)
> Thank you,
> Sean Powell
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Jim Pickette <pickette@...>wrote:
> > **
> > If you build it period you may shoot it Period. If you build it
> > less-than-period than shoot it in the less-than-period category.
> > JoO