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

Re: [SCA-Archery] Nocks

Expand Messages
  • Karl Sandhoff
    In the case of modern plastic nocks I see no compelling reason to not ban them. In fact, because of the nature of their action, design, and obvious modern
    Message 1 of 44 , Jun 5, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      In the case of modern plastic nocks I see no compelling reason to not ban
      them. In fact, because of the nature of their action, design, and
      obvious modern design I find them inappropriate to a "period" division.

      On the other hand all period bows were not pure wood and many of the
      materials used are better represented by fibregalss in terms of safety,
      availablity, and cost. We also have a tenet of the SCA that modern
      materials/ methods may be used to obtain period results. To simulate an
      English/Welsh longbow with fibreglass is inapproprite but to simulate a
      sinew or other fibre backed bow it would be appropriate. This is the
      heart of my opposition to a blanket "no fibreglass" rule.

      Perhaps what we need is not so much a "period" division as a "longbow"
      division.
      In service to the dream,
      Carolus von Eulenhorst

      ________________________________________________________________
      YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
      Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
      Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
      http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
    • Karl Sandhoff
      Excuse the late reply but I am just working my way through the 2000 posts I have received in May and June. Please see my comments below. In service to the
      Message 44 of 44 , Jun 18, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Excuse the late reply but I am just working my way through the 2000 posts
        I have received in May and June. Please see my comments below.
        In service to the dream,
        Carolus von Eulenhorst

        On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 21:40:26 -0500 "Chris Nogy" <cnogy@...>
        writes:
        >
        >
        >*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
        >
        >On 6/6/00 at 5:28 PM D Humberson wrote:
        >
        >
        >>1. We shoot a lot of Royal Rounds, we shoot wands, we shoot little
        >birds off
        >>perches(clothespins, not real), we shoot walkups and we shoot IKAC's.
        > As I
        >>understand your position, you would have me eliminate RR's and
        >IKAC's.
        >snip<
        >Both groups receive praise because they are good archers, but if you
        >consider that the path between nothing and perfection is a fixed
        >distance, then those who put more effort into being more period are a

        This requires a philosophical allowance that mortal man is capable of
        perfection; a position find impossible to justify by any philosophy I
        have come across yet. Assuming this, the path may as well be infinite in
        length and wherever a man stops along the path we do not know how far he
        has progressed. We do, however, set benchmarks along the way at which
        recognition is given. Thus, it matters not how far a man progresses as
        long as he meets the benchmarks set by other men.


        >snip<
        >I am not considering service here - service is not archery. A person
        >can be the greatest marshal, the most abundant producer of cool
        >targets, the constant autocrat of archery events, the most prolific
        >supplier of equipment for novices, but not be able to hit the broad
        >side of a barn at 10 feet. They should be amply rewarded for their
        >service to archery, but not for their archery. The A&S integrates
        >into archery in a very special way - you don't have to be a craftsman
        >to do it right, you can buy all the stuff you need, so it is not the
        >SCA A&S of archery that I refer to, it is the art of period archery,
        >the ability to do what they did with the gear they did it with in the
        >same way they did it. If you have skill at hitting the target equal
        >to another, but you do it with period gear and they do it with modern
        >gear, you should expect to receive more acclaim.

        But here you deviate from the purpose of the SCA. That is the purpose
        for which we are granted the special priveledge of our tax-exempt status.
        The SCA's purpose is education and uses re-creation (not re-enactment)
        as a means to acheive it. We are not a "skill at shooting with a
        historical type of equipment" society. One member may be an expert shot
        with an English long bow, another with a turkish recurve, another with a
        German crossbow, and another with a Viking flatbow. Various compromises
        must be taken with each of these as many of the materials used in period
        are not safe for us to use today or are simply not reasonably available
        (the may not exist now or be too expensive if they do). Other members
        could shoot with more modern equipment getting the feel for what the
        period archer did but be master craftsmen in making reproductions of that
        equipment; research the technology used to make the equipment; study the
        social place of the archer; or study the tactics of the archer in war.
        All of these gentles are worthy of recognition based on the traditions of
        the SCA and what we have recognized in the past.


        >snip<

        ________________________________________________________________
        YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
        Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
        Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
        http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.