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

35347bow /gun Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: defining Archery

Expand Messages
  • JDS
    Mar 22, 2014
      IIRC the bow was the mainstay until the flintlock & possibly the rifle
      (I  include the cross bow in that )
      Dependability, safety ,accuracy & rate of fire & all that
      I think We had a paper or link posted here a year or so ago
      perhaps European archers & antiquity?
      an tir

      ---------- Original Message ----------
      From: Carolus <eulenhorst@...>
      To: SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: defining Archery
      Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 14:12:03 -0700


      I would agree with the definition of being a martial but not combat activity.  As for needing an active opponent, Tai-chi is considered a martial activity and yet has no active opponent. 

      I agree with Gladius that only England mandated practice with the bow in order to maintain a skilled population from which to call a levy, however France mandated that nobles (who were subject to military service) maintain archery tackle and both Belgium and Italy maintained companies of crossbowman who, while seldom called to service, kept in practice for military use. 

      i disagree with Gladius that "by the middle ages was primarily a hunting weapon, occasionally a weapon of war".  The Hundred Years War was clearly within the middle ages and I don't think the use of the bow at Crecy or Agincourt could be characterized as "occasional use".  To say this was the case by the time the renaissance had spread throughout the Western World might be more accurate.

      On 3/22/2014 11:28 AM, Karl W. Evoy wrote:


      I would define target archery as neither a combat nor martial activity. IMO, a martial activity needs an active opponent.

      This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.