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

Re: Quivers etc

Expand Messages
  • BLOODSNG@xxx.xxx
    oK HERE IT GOES , In the book A glossery of the construction decoration and use of arms and aror in all countries and in all times, ( no kiding that is the
    Message 1 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
      oK HERE IT GOES , In the book A glossery of the construction decoration and
      use of arms and aror in all countries and in all times, ( no kiding that is
      the tidel). it has quite a few quivers in it hip, hourse, chariot, and
      back................also look at soe of the early statues an art og the greco
      roan times there are saples there also , for soe reason I reber a painting of
      heries with a back quiver but I do not have it here .............Blood
    • Deann E. Allen
      ... [snip] ... Which in no way invalidates whatever other documentation was found by Mistress Kendra. Nor is Macsen s statement in any way faulty, his
      Message 2 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
        BlkKnightI@... wrote:
        >
        > From: BlkKnightI@...
        [snip]
        > >2. I comment that I know of extensive documentation gathered by
        > Mistress Kendra. Off the top of my head the one particular item I
        > recall involved the Bayeux Tapestry.<
        >
        > Your statement was shown faulty in that the archer (only one) in
        > the Tapestry, indeed has a quiver on a belt around his shoulders,
        > is using a back quiver. I and several others viewed the tapestry
        > and that its a back quiver is questionable-Hardly documentation.

        Which in no way invalidates whatever other documentation was found
        by Mistress Kendra. Nor is Macsen's "statement" in any way "faulty,"
        his memory is merely incomplete.

        > We have yet to see the documentation mentioned over and over again.
        > I too am interested in it.

        As am I. Unfortunately, the only way to see the documentation would
        be to find Mistress Kendra, which no one, apparently, now knows how
        to do.

        > >3. Tracy chimes in with a sarcastic, "If we want to believe that
        > "back quivers"are period we will. And if you choose to emulate
        > Errol Flynn movies, that too is a matter of choice. I prefer to
        > research what they did do first and emulate that-not find
        > justification for preference. "<
        >
        > Tracy was not being sarcastic at all. She had offered her scholarly
        > observations and offered a conclusion. She stated the obvious, and
        > I think her approach in attempting to be period should be commended.

        It was sarcastic, completely uncalled-for, and a rather sorry example
        of both ad hominum and straw man arguments.

        Saying that anyone would start from a desire to believe in something
        and then set out to find documentation to prove it is perhaps the
        worst insult that can be offered anyone who does research. It would
        be just as easy -- and uncalled-for -- to claim that your wife set
        out to prove a belief that back quivers did not exist in period.

        The reference to Errol Flynn movies came from a gentle who offered
        the pattern for that back quiver to any who were interested. There
        was no claim whatsoever of it being either period or documentable.

        > She also did not insult Kendras intelligence (Kendra never said a
        > thing on this list) but asked for documentation for your statements
        > which you have failed to provide. I now question your intelligence.
        > Her "notions" are not preconceived but based on scholarly study. So
        > far...so Far mind you, noone else has found and offered sources or
        > documentation on the "back quiver" either.

        So far, as you say. That one person has not duplicated another's
        research often means only that A. it is not something that has come
        up as an item of interest, or B. access to the same sources is not
        available. To question that person's intelligence based on a third
        person's apparently *incomplete* scholarly research merely makes you
        appear biased.

        D.
        --
        100% pure, Grade A, American Mutt caffeine!
        ------------------------------------------
      • Elfwine
        I am astonishished that a society based on chivalry, and especially those on this list who are Peers, have remained silent when a Lord calls a Lady an
        Message 3 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
          I am astonishished that a society based on chivalry, and especially those on
          this list who are Peers, have remained silent when a Lord calls a Lady an
          "Asshole", and more. Had this conversation taken place anywhere else in the
          society, that Lord would surely have been called before a Court of Chivalry to
          answer for his breach in behavior. I thank those who came to BlkKnightI's Lady
          (Tracy) and offered encouragement, though I am disheartened that they did so
          privately.

          Tracy's statements, right or wrong, is NOT the issue here. It's the rude,
          vulgar language used toward a Lady, and Macsen's tantrum, which has landed us
          here without so much as a "peep" from the peers on this list-service. Whatever
          happened to morality? Let those who are here have the decency to stand up and be
          counted among those who will not tolerate this behavior.

          Now there may have been "private" e-mailing with Macsen reguarding this matter
          to which I am unaware. However, Tracy has a RIGHT to ask for, and recieve, a
          public apology. And that has not been forthcoming. In fact, Macsen was rather
          rude about that too.

          I'm done with this list if those remaining shrug the whole thing off with a
          "Well now... what were we talking about?"

          >>--Elfwine-->
        • Deann E. Allen
          ... [snip] Thank you. Filed for reference. :) D. -- 100% pure, Grade A, American Mutt caffeine!
          Message 4 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
            BLOODSNG@... wrote:
            >
            > From: BLOODSNG@...
            >
            > oK HERE IT GOES , In the book A glossery of the construction
            > decoration and use of arms and aror in all countries and in all
            > times, ( no kiding that is the tidel). it has quite a few quivers
            > in it hip, hourse, chariot, and back....
            [snip]

            Thank you. Filed for reference. :)

            D.
            --
            100% pure, Grade A, American Mutt caffeine!
            ------------------------------------------
          • Deann E. Allen
            Elfwine wrote: [snip] ... I must disagree, Elfwine. Tracy s comments ARE part of the issue. She made accusations of fabricating documentation to justify
            Message 5 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
              Elfwine wrote:
              [snip]
              > Tracy's statements, right or wrong, is NOT the issue here. It's the
              > rude, vulgar language used toward a Lady, and Macsen's tantrum, which
              > has landed us here without so much as a "peep" from the peers on this
              > list-service. Whatever happened to morality? Let those who are here
              > have the decency to stand up and be counted among those who will not
              > tolerate this behavior.
              >
              > Now there may have been "private" e-mailing with Macsen reguarding
              > this matter to which I am unaware. However, Tracy has a RIGHT to ask
              > for, and recieve, a public apology. And that has not been forthcoming.
              > In fact, Macsen was rather rude about that too.

              I must disagree, Elfwine. Tracy's comments ARE part of the issue.
              She made accusations of fabricating documentation to justify
              preconceived beliefs, and of emulating Errol Flynn movies instead of
              doing proper research. These remarks were uncalled-for and rude in
              themselves. That she made these remarks while -- knowingly or not --
              virtually standing in Macsen's house makes it even more inexcusable.

              When two people are publicly rude to each other, you cannot in justice
              call for only one to publicly tender an apology. Gentle is as gentle
              does, Lord and Lady are titles of *courtesy,* and the strictures of
              courtesy apply equally to all.

              D.
            • Robert L Brunnemer
              I am sorry I was not going to speak on this thread anymore, because it has turned into a heated argument instead of being a helpful debate, but I think that I
              Message 6 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
                I am sorry I was not going to speak on this thread anymore, because it
                has turned into a heated argument instead of being a helpful debate, but
                I think that I must reply as a 3rd party here.

                BlkKnightI@... wrote:
                >>> I and several others viewed the tapestry
                > and that its a back quiver is questionable-Hardly documentation.>>>

                Then Dean wrote in response:
                >>>Which in no way invalidates whatever other documentation was found
                by Mistress Kendra. Nor is Macsen's "statement" in any way "faulty,"
                his memory is merely incomplete.>>>

                I read the original post that stated that their was "proof" on the
                bayeau(sp?) tapestry of back quivers. If I remember (I may not be
                totally correct, but I don't think that my mind is failing me that much)
                that someone wrote that in a article, I don't think that it was Macsen,
                without mentioning Mistress Kendra's documentation. The lady in question
                (sorry I forget her name) then stated that the only thing that she could
                find on the Bayeau(sp?) tapestry was a belt quiver around the shoulders.
                (Which I would think would be a back quiver because it is on the back by
                the way.) Then some people (if not many) took this as a personal attack,
                because of some other things that she wrote in jest about Errol Fllynn
                movies (which I didn't get) and about horses standing on their heads. (I
                too thought that to be VERY funny. :-))

                Really I think that all of this was just a GIGANTIC mis-understanding,
                and could have been avoided, but really it seems that people had a bad
                week, and thus all of a sudden here we are on One List. Remember thought
                that a single straw can not break the camel's back. So as Macsen stated
                "The straw that broke the camel's back" means that there had to have been
                MANY other moments that Macsen was unhappy with all of the things that
                had been going on.

                <<<Saying that anyone would start from a desire to believe in something
                and then set out to find documentation to prove it is perhaps the
                worst insult that can be offered anyone who does research. It would
                be just as easy -- and uncalled-for -- to claim that your wife set
                out to prove a belief that back quivers did not exist in period.>>>

                If this is really an attack than I am really messed up here. How are
                things proved by documentation. I always thought that someone would want
                to find something out, (whether something did or didn't happen, or was
                used) look in a lot of books, and then prove or disprove something. From
                the way I read this it sounds like to you as a researcher would have to
                stumble onto things blindly and then say "Hey that is interesting I will
                have to do it that way." Am I way off base or just reading this wrong.
                (By the way I am not being sarcastic, I am truly curious about this.)

                I am not trying to upset or insult anyone here, I am just stating my
                opinion as a person who really has nothing to do with the conversation,
                and is therefore an unconcerned third party.

                Also a bit of advice from a 17 year old that you could take or tell me to
                go to hell with. I have always thought that when people start to argue
                with no real purpose (that is not debating, but name calling arguing) it
                is best to step back a minute think about it from the other point of
                view, and then try to resolve the issue. Again read the upset insult
                part above.

                Have a nice day!!!
                Robert
                Hugewheels@...
                Tha mi a'fluich mi kilt!!!

                ___________________________________________________________________
                Get the Internet just the way you want it.
                Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
                Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
              • lester
                As a new member of this list, enough is enough. If Macen is not going to apologize for his rudeness, so be it. but lets get on with something constructive. I
                Message 7 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
                  As a new member of this list, enough is enough. If Macen is not going to
                  apologize for his rudeness, so be it. but lets get on with something
                  constructive.

                  I wish to learn the correct way to make arrows for war, such as where do I
                  get the tips - can they be made - are wooden arrows allowed, if not what
                  type are allowed. Where on the web (SCA) can I find this information

                  Thanks

                  Ifer de Leycester

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Deann E. Allen <dallen@...>
                  To: <SCA-Archery@onelist.com>
                  Sent: Saturday, July 31, 1999 12:08 AM
                  Subject: Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: Quivers etc


                  > From: "Deann E. Allen" <dallen@...>
                  >
                  > Elfwine wrote:
                  > [snip]
                  > > Tracy's statements, right or wrong, is NOT the issue here. It's the
                  > > rude, vulgar language used toward a Lady, and Macsen's tantrum, which
                  > > has landed us here without so much as a "peep" from the peers on this
                  > > list-service. Whatever happened to morality? Let those who are here
                  > > have the decency to stand up and be counted among those who will not
                  > > tolerate this behavior.
                  > >
                  > > Now there may have been "private" e-mailing with Macsen reguarding
                  > > this matter to which I am unaware. However, Tracy has a RIGHT to ask
                  > > for, and recieve, a public apology. And that has not been forthcoming.
                  > > In fact, Macsen was rather rude about that too.
                  >
                  > I must disagree, Elfwine. Tracy's comments ARE part of the issue.
                  > She made accusations of fabricating documentation to justify
                  > preconceived beliefs, and of emulating Errol Flynn movies instead of
                  > doing proper research. These remarks were uncalled-for and rude in
                  > themselves. That she made these remarks while -- knowingly or not --
                  > virtually standing in Macsen's house makes it even more inexcusable.
                  >
                  > When two people are publicly rude to each other, you cannot in justice
                  > call for only one to publicly tender an apology. Gentle is as gentle
                  > does, Lord and Lady are titles of *courtesy,* and the strictures of
                  > courtesy apply equally to all.
                  >
                  > D.
                  >
                  > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
                  >
                  > ONElist: your connection to like-minds and kindred spirits.
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  > This list sponsored by House Wyvern Hall
                  > of Barony Beyond the Mountain, East Kingdom
                • Deann E. Allen
                  ... [snip] ... Someone once said that the best way to lie is to tell only part of the truth. Starting from a preconceived belief and setting out to prove it
                  Message 8 of 16 , Jul 30, 1999
                    Robert L Brunnemer wrote:
                    >
                    > From: Robert L Brunnemer <hugewheels@...>
                    [snip]
                    > <<<Saying that anyone would start from a desire to believe in
                    > something and then set out to find documentation to prove it is
                    > perhaps the worst insult that can be offered anyone who does
                    > research. It would be just as easy -- and uncalled-for -- to
                    > claim that your wife set out to prove a belief that back quivers
                    > did not exist in period.>>>
                    >
                    > If this is really an attack than I am really messed up here. How
                    > are things proved by documentation. I always thought that someone
                    > would want to find something out, (whether something did or didn't
                    > happen, or was used) look in a lot of books, and then prove or
                    > disprove something. From the way I read this it sounds like to
                    > you as a researcher would have to stumble onto things blindly and
                    > then say "Hey that is interesting I will have to do it that way."
                    > Am I way off base or just reading this wrong. (By the way I am not
                    > being sarcastic, I am truly curious about this.)
                    >
                    > I am not trying to upset or insult anyone here, I am just stating
                    > my opinion as a person who really has nothing to do with the
                    > conversation, and is therefore an unconcerned third party.

                    Someone once said that the best way to lie is to tell only part of
                    the truth. Starting from a preconceived belief and setting out to
                    prove it entails ignoring any evidence you find that contradicts
                    the point you are trying to prove. In effect, if you did conduct
                    research in this manner, your results would be lies, because they
                    would not tell all the truth about what you found. That is why such
                    an accusation is an insult to anyone who conducts research.

                    As to whether Tracy's comments were meant in jest and were taken as
                    serious.... Well, that's why someone invented emoticons. When you
                    say something that is not to be taken seriously, adding a smile :)
                    or a wink ;) will make that clear to the reader. When such are
                    absent, it is usual to take the comment as being serious. Some
                    people eschew emoticons as being uncouth. I have found they mostly
                    enhance understanding, if used in moderation.

                    D.
                    --
                    100% pure, Grade A, American Mutt caffeine!
                    ------------------------------------------
                  • BlkKnightI@xxx.xxx
                    ... She made no accusations at all. Please re read the original post. ... She said that this all is OK with her. ... The list is not Macsens house . Ifso he
                    Message 9 of 16 , Jul 31, 1999
                      In a message dated 7/31/99 1:01:24 AM, dallen@... writes:

                      >I must disagree, Elfwine. Tracy's comments ARE part of the issue.
                      >She made accusations of fabricating documentation to justify
                      >preconceived beliefs,

                      She made no accusations at all. Please re read the original post.

                      >and of emulating Errol Flynn movies instead of
                      >doing proper research.

                      She said that this all is OK with her.

                      >These remarks were uncalled-for and rude in
                      >themselves. That she made these remarks while -- knowingly or not --
                      >virtually standing in Macsen's house makes it even more inexcusable.

                      The list is not Macsens "house". Ifso he is certainly a rude host.
                      You have no idea what she meant and do you are presumptious to state anything
                      of the sort.
                      I was there when she wrote it. You are wrong in your presumptions of her
                      intent.
                      Richard
                    • Robert L Brunnemer
                      Hallo!!! Dean wrote:
                      Message 10 of 16 , Jul 31, 1999
                        Hallo!!!

                        Dean wrote:
                        <<< Starting from a preconceived belief and setting out to
                        prove it entails ignoring any evidence you find that contradicts
                        the point you are trying to prove. In effect, if you did conduct
                        research in this manner, your results would be lies, because they
                        would not tell all the truth about what you found.>>>

                        I am sorry, but this too does not sit well with me. There is something
                        about it that I find "fishy." It seems to me that the driving factor to
                        want to document something would be because someone would want to know if
                        it actually happened. I think that if someone was trying to gain a
                        monetary value from the said documentation then they would lie. But I
                        think that if the documentation was just on a knowledge gaining "journey"
                        than the documentation would be truthful, and all avenues would be
                        followed. So maybe you should look more into the motives of why someone
                        decided to prove so and so more than what they thought before hand? I
                        know that is confusing, but it is 1 am, and I am not completely thinking
                        straight. I think that is clear enough, but I am writing it, if you
                        don't understand please tell me and in the morning I will re-word it or
                        whatever. Again there is no offense intended by any of this, please
                        don't take it personally. And...

                        Have a nice day!!!
                        Robert
                        Hugewheels@...
                        Tha mi a'fluich mi kilt!!!

                        ___________________________________________________________________
                        Get the Internet just the way you want it.
                        Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
                        Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
                      • Ramos & Aaminah
                        Please remove me from the your list
                        Message 11 of 16 , Jul 31, 1999
                          Please remove me from the your list
                        • M&L Romanowski
                          Another reference is the History Museum in Chicago. They have a back quiver on display that I remember as being period. I recall being bummed that they had
                          Message 12 of 16 , Jul 31, 1999
                            Another reference is the History Museum in Chicago. They have a back quiver
                            on display that I remember as being period. I recall being bummed that they
                            had the arrows in the quiver as opposed to having them displayed. (being
                            that I am a fletcher) my interest was more in the arrows, but I am really
                            sure that it was a back quiver and it was period. Had some really nifty
                            crossbows on display too.

                            A reference you can actually see!

                            Marcus Caruana.

                            "Deann E. Allen" wrote:

                            > From: "Deann E. Allen" <dallen@...>
                            >
                            > BLOODSNG@... wrote:
                            > >
                            > > From: BLOODSNG@...
                            > >
                            > > oK HERE IT GOES , In the book A glossery of the construction
                            > > decoration and use of arms and aror in all countries and in all
                            > > times, ( no kiding that is the tidel). it has quite a few quivers
                            > > in it hip, hourse, chariot, and back....
                            > [snip]
                            >
                            > Thank you. Filed for reference. :)
                            >
                            > D.
                            > --
                            > 100% pure, Grade A, American Mutt caffeine!
                            > ------------------------------------------
                            >
                            > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
                            >
                            > Congratulations DALMATIANRESCUE. Our latest ONElist of the week.
                            > To see full story and submit YOUR ONElist story, go to
                            > http://www.onelist.com/info/ootw_19.html
                            >
                            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            > This list sponsored by House Wyvern Hall
                            > of Barony Beyond the Mountain, East Kingdom
                          • Karl Sandhoff
                            Monetary gain or not Dean has a valid point here. If someone starts out with a preconcieved position and wishes to prove the correctness of that position
                            Message 13 of 16 , Jul 31, 1999
                              Monetary gain or not Dean has a valid point here. If someone starts out
                              with a preconcieved position and wishes to prove the "correctness" of
                              that position and searches out references to prove it he is not
                              documenting the fact. The matter still stands that other documentation
                              which refutes that presented will often be ignored, conciously or
                              unconciously. This means that a blatently false position is being
                              present as true. If, on the other hand, a hypothesis is being tested,
                              all evidence positive or negative is presented thus proving the fact.
                              The difference here is that in the first case a position was taken and
                              then proved, in the second a question asked and then a position taken.
                              The second is the path of a true scholar and researcher. I've had to
                              learn this one the hard way in my training as an archaeologist. Thank
                              you to all on this list for the opportunity to have some very fine
                              academic debates.
                              Carolus von Eulenhorst

                              On Sat, 31 Jul 1999 01:14:12 -0700 Robert L Brunnemer
                              <hugewheels@...> writes:
                              >From: Robert L Brunnemer <hugewheels@...>
                              >
                              >Hallo!!!
                              >
                              >Dean wrote:
                              ><<< Starting from a preconceived belief and setting out to
                              >prove it entails ignoring any evidence you find that contradicts
                              >the point you are trying to prove. In effect, if you did conduct
                              >research in this manner, your results would be lies, because they
                              >would not tell all the truth about what you found.>>> I am sorry, but
                              >this too does not sit well with me. There is something about it that
                              >I find "fishy." It seems to me that the driving factor to want to
                              >document something would be because someone would want to know if it
                              >actually happened. I think that if someone was trying to gain a
                              >monetary value from the said documentation then they would lie. But I
                              >think that if the documentation was just on a knowledge gaining
                              >"journey" than the documentation would be truthful, and all avenues
                              >would be followed. So maybe you should look more into the motives of
                              >why someone decided to prove so and so more than what they thought
                              >before hand? I know that is confusing, but it is 1 am, and I am not
                              >completely thinking straight. I think that is clear enough, but I am
                              >writing it, if you don't understand please tell me and in the morning
                              >I will re-word it or
                              >whatever. Again there is no offense intended by any of this, please
                              >don't take it personally. And...
                              >
                              >Have a nice day!!!
                              >Robert
                              >Hugewheels@... Tha mi a'fluich mi kilt!!!
                              >___________________________________________________________________
                              >Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail,
                              >and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web:
                              >http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. ---------------------------
                              >ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- ONElist members are
                              >using Shared Files in great ways! http://www.onelist.com Are you? If
                              >not, see our homepage for details.
                              >------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              >This list sponsored by House Wyvern Hall of Barony Beyond the
                              >Mountain, East Kingdom

                              ___________________________________________________________________
                              Get the Internet just the way you want it.
                              Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
                              Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
                            • Ian Gourdon
                              Marcus, Oooh! I m all a-quiver . I may have shot my bolt . Etc. Any chance of getting the specifics sometime? It would be very nice to know exactly what
                              Message 14 of 16 , Jul 31, 1999
                                Marcus,
                                Oooh! I'm 'all a-quiver'. I may have 'shot my bolt'. Etc.
                                Any chance of getting the specifics sometime? It would be very nice to
                                know exactly what they've got, eh? And the arrows; sure you don't need
                                to beg a look at the artifact? Since you're part of 'the Greenwood
                                Group, a Medieval research organization'...
                                Ian Gourdon

                                M&L Romanowski wrote:
                                >
                                > From: M&L Romanowski <leanner@...>
                                >
                                > Another reference is the History Museum in Chicago. They have a back quiver
                                > on display that I remember as being period. I recall being bummed that they
                                > had the arrows in the quiver as opposed to having them displayed. (being
                                > that I am a fletcher) my interest was more in the arrows, but I am really
                                > sure that it was a back quiver and it was period. Had some really nifty
                                > crossbows on display too.
                                >
                                > A reference you can actually see!
                                >
                                > Marcus Caruana.
                                >
                                > "Deann E. Allen" wrote:
                                >
                                > > From: "Deann E. Allen" <dallen@...>
                                > >
                                > > BLOODSNG@... wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > From: BLOODSNG@...
                                > > >
                                > > > oK HERE IT GOES , In the book A glossery of the construction
                                > > > decoration and use of arms and aror in all countries and in all
                                > > > times, ( no kiding that is the tidel). it has quite a few quivers
                                > > > in it hip, hourse, chariot, and back....
                                > > [snip]
                                > >
                                > > Thank you. Filed for reference. :)
                                > >
                                > > D.
                                > > --
                                > > 100% pure, Grade A, American Mutt caffeine!
                                > > ------------------------------------------
                                > >
                                > > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
                                > >
                                > > Congratulations DALMATIANRESCUE. Our latest ONElist of the week.
                                > > To see full story and submit YOUR ONElist story, go to
                                > > http://www.onelist.com/info/ootw_19.html
                                > >
                                > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                > > This list sponsored by House Wyvern Hall
                                > > of Barony Beyond the Mountain, East Kingdom
                                >
                                > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
                                >
                                > ONElist now has T-SHIRTS!
                                > For details and to order, go to:
                                > http://www.onelist.com/store/tshirts.html
                                >
                                > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                > This list sponsored by House Wyvern Hall
                                > of Barony Beyond the Mountain, East Kingdom

                                --
                                Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe
                                - Companion of the order of the Greenwood Company
                                http://web.raex.com/~agincort
                              • BlkKnightI@xxx.xxx
                                ... Thanks. I am wondering if you could be more specfic as to which museum you ve seen this in. I would like to persue your find but there are numerous history
                                Message 15 of 16 , Jul 31, 1999
                                  In a message dated 7/31/99 4:46:45 PM, leanner@... writes:

                                  >
                                  >Another reference is the History Museum in Chicago. They have a back quiver
                                  >on display that I remember as being period. I recall being bummed that they
                                  >had the arrows in the quiver as opposed to having them displayed. (being
                                  >that I am a fletcher) my interest was more in the arrows, but I am really
                                  >sure that it was a back quiver and it was period. Had some really nifty
                                  >crossbows on display too.

                                  >A reference you can actually see!>

                                  Thanks. I am wondering if you could be more specfic as to which museum you've
                                  seen this in. I would like to persue your find but there are numerous history
                                  museums in Chicago.
                                  Do you remember what time period this artifact was from and where?

                                  Richard
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.