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

Article. Nobles would never ...

Expand Messages
  • John edgerton
    Can anyone point me toward a source for a noble, from any country and any period, saying anything to the effect that True nobles would never use archery in
    Message 1 of 13 , Aug 13, 2010
      Can anyone point me toward a source for a noble, from any country and
      any period, saying anything to the effect that "True nobles would
      never use archery in battle."? I would like to include that in the
      article.

      Thanks

      Jon
    • Hobbe
      http://www.armourarchive.org/ I suggest you stop dredging up crap from people who hate being shot on the battlefield. You will only feed the trolls.
      Message 2 of 13 , Aug 14, 2010
        http://www.armourarchive.org/

        I suggest you stop dredging up crap from people who hate being shot on the battlefield. You will only feed the trolls.


        --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, John edgerton <sirjon1@...> wrote:
        >
        > Can anyone point me toward a source for a noble, from any country and
        > any period, saying anything to the effect that "True nobles would
        > never use archery in battle."? I would like to include that in the
        > article.
        >
        > Thanks
        >
        > Jon
        >
      • John edgerton
        Well, you are entitled your opinion. However, I think that the article would be better if it had some period quotes from some nobles that felt that way. So, I
        Message 3 of 13 , Aug 14, 2010
          Well, you are entitled your opinion.  However, I think that the article would be better if it had some period quotes from some nobles that felt that way.  

          So, I again ask, if anyone has any sources for that, please let me know. 

          Thanks

          Jon

          On Aug 14, 2010, at 8:32 PM, Hobbe wrote:

           

          http://www.armourarchive.org/

          I suggest you stop dredging up crap from people who hate being shot on the battlefield. You will only feed the trolls.

          --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, John edgerton <sirjon1@...> wrote:
          >
          > Can anyone point me toward a source for a noble, from any country and
          > any period, saying anything to the effect that "True nobles would
          > never use archery in battle."? I would like to include that in the
          > article.
          >
          > Thanks
          >
          > Jon
          >


        • Carolus
          Then again, there may not be any. The French knights were opposed to the English archers because they felt they were commoners. They also were afraid of
          Message 4 of 13 , Aug 14, 2010
            Then again, there may not be any. The French knights were opposed to
            the English archers because they felt they were commoners. They also
            were afraid of arming their own commoners. Yet the French king passed
            laws requiring bows of the upper classes. The English never seemed to
            have such antipathy to archers (probably because they had the most and
            the best). The statements of the Lateran Council only decried the use
            archery against Christian targets, not the use of archery itself nor did
            it address those using archery if it were not against Christians. So
            far I have seen nothing condemning the use of archery itself, only that
            no one seemed to like it used against them. Seems to argue for the
            effectiveness of archery and I have never seen a warrior shy away from
            the use of an effective weapon (the US even used shotguns in Viet Nam
            even though they are banned by the Geneva Convention).
            Carolus

            John edgerton wrote:
            >
            >
            > Well, you are entitled your opinion. However, I think that the
            > article would be better if it had some period quotes from some nobles
            > that felt that way.
            >
            > So, I again ask, if anyone has any sources for that, please let me know.
            >
            > Thanks
            >
            > Jon
            >
            > On Aug 14, 2010, at 8:32 PM, Hobbe wrote:
            >
            >>
            >>
            >> http://www.armourarchive.org/
            >>
            >> I suggest you stop dredging up crap from people who hate being shot
            >> on the battlefield. You will only feed the trolls.
            >>
            >> --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com
            >> <mailto:SCA-Archery%40yahoogroups.com>, John edgerton <sirjon1@...>
            >> wrote:
            >> >
            >> > Can anyone point me toward a source for a noble, from any country and
            >> > any period, saying anything to the effect that "True nobles would
            >> > never use archery in battle."? I would like to include that in the
            >> > article.
            >> >
            >> > Thanks
            >> >
            >> > Jon
            >> >
            >>
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            >
            >
            > No virus found in this incoming message.
            > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
            > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3072 - Release Date: 08/14/10 11:34:00
            >
            >
          • John edgerton
            So far, I have the following ... Jon It is true that in some times and places; particularly in Northern France and in Germany, the European nobility would
            Message 5 of 13 , Aug 14, 2010
              So far, I have the following ...

              Jon

              It is true that in some times and places; particularly in Northern France and in Germany, the European nobility would disdain the use of archery in battle.  Nevertheless, by no means did the members of the nobility never make use of it. 

               

              For javelins and arrows the gentlemanly warrior has a natural contempt, but, it was reserved for the European knight in his peculiar historic situation to set a  thorough-going taboo upon them.  Girard de Viane told us the bow was fit for varlets to hunt with, Wolfram that the javelin was no weapon for a knight.  Others, in strict accordance with the Waffenrecht, will relegate them to the lowest rabble. 

               

              A social distinction had thus crept in between those who threw and those who did not, a distinction which can be adequately explained as the result of the knight’s specialization as a heavy lancer and the technical development of his weapon, in combination with his consciousness of his social status. After some time, what must at first have been lofty contempt, and occasional annoyance when a horse was galled became a caste prejudice and finally the fixed idea of a diehard.  [i]



              [i] A T Hatto. Archery and Chivalry: A Noble Prejudice. Pub. Modern Humanities Research Association.  http://jstor.org/stable/3717406. Accessed June 5, 2010
              On Aug 14, 2010, at 11:29 PM, Carolus wrote:

               

              Then again, there may not be any. The French knights were opposed to
              the English archers because they felt they were commoners. They also
              were afraid of arming their own commoners. Yet the French king passed
              laws requiring bows of the upper classes. The English never seemed to
              have such antipathy to archers (probably because they had the most and
              the best). The statements of the Lateran Council only decried the use
              archery against Christian targets, not the use of archery itself nor did
              it address those using archery if it were not against Christians. So
              far I have seen nothing condemning the use of archery itself, only that
              no one seemed to like it used against them. Seems to argue for the
              effectiveness of archery and I have never seen a warrior shy away from
              the use of an effective weapon (the US even used shotguns in Viet Nam
              even though they are banned by the Geneva Convention).
              Carolus

            • Carolus
              Looking at what I can see of the source it appears to be from the poem Parzival, a fictional minstrel s tale and thus subject to the same questions and
              Message 6 of 13 , Aug 15, 2010
                Looking at what I can see of the source it appears to be from the poem
                Parzival, a fictional minstrel's tale and thus subject to the same
                questions and suggestions as the accounts of Blind Harry. Correct?
                Carolus
                Just trying to look at all the sources with the same filters.

                John edgerton wrote:
                >
                >
                > So far, I have the following ...
                >
                > Jon
                >
                > It is true that in some times and places; particularly in Northern
                > France and in Germany, the European nobility would disdain the use of
                > archery in battle. Nevertheless, by no means did the members of the
                > nobility never make use of it.
                >
                > For javelins and arrows the gentlemanly warrior has a natural
                > contempt, but, it was reserved for the European knight in his peculiar
                > historic situation to set a thorough-going taboo upon them. Girard de
                > Viane told us the bow was fit for varlets to hunt with, Wolfram that
                > the javelin was no weapon for a knight. Others, in strict accordance
                > with the Waffenrecht, will relegate them to the lowest rabble.
                >
                > A social distinction had thus crept in between those who threw and
                > those who did not, a distinction which can be adequately explained as
                > the result of the knight’s specialization as a heavy lancer and the
                > technical development of his weapon, in combination with his
                > consciousness of his social status. After some time, what must at
                > first have been lofty contempt, and occasional annoyance when a horse
                > was galled became a caste prejudice and finally the fixed idea of a
                > diehard. [i] <#_edn1>
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                > [i] <#_ednref1> A T Hatto. _Archery and Chivalry: A Noble Prejudice_.
                > Pub. Modern Humanities Research Association.
                > http://jstor.org/stable/3717406. Accessed June 5, 2010
                > On Aug 14, 2010, at 11:29 PM, Carolus wrote:
                >
                >> Then again, there may not be any. The French knights were opposed to
                >> the English archers because they felt they were commoners. They also
                >> were afraid of arming their own commoners. Yet the French king passed
                >> laws requiring bows of the upper classes. The English never seemed to
                >> have such antipathy to archers (probably because they had the most and
                >> the best). The statements of the Lateran Council only decried the use
                >> archery against Christian targets, not the use of archery itself nor did
                >> it address those using archery if it were not against Christians. So
                >> far I have seen nothing condemning the use of archery itself, only that
                >> no one seemed to like it used against them. Seems to argue for the
                >> effectiveness of archery and I have never seen a warrior shy away from
                >> the use of an effective weapon (the US even used shotguns in Viet Nam
                >> http://jstor.org/stable/3717406
                >> even though they are banned by the Geneva Convention).
                >> Carolus
                >>
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                >
                >
                > No virus found in this incoming message.
                > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3072 - Release Date: 08/14/10 11:34:00
                >
                >
              • obsidian@raex.com
                There also seems to be a cultural tradition effect in play as well. If you look closely, you can see that in general, the contempt-for-archery attitude follows
                Message 7 of 13 , Aug 15, 2010
                  There also seems to be a cultural tradition effect in play as well. If you look closely, you can see that in general, the contempt-for-archery attitude follows fairly well the boundaries of the old Roman Empire. The Romans had little use for archers, relegating such units to foederate auxiliaries. Their successors in Europe, the emerging states in Italy, Gaul, Spain, and the Balkans, retained this attitude. North Africa and the Levant were seized by a culture who found archery acceptable, but which lacked ready access to large quantities of materials for producing weapons. The Teutons outside the Empire, in Germany itself and in Scandinavia, used archery extensively. Germanic peoples seemed to shift their attitudes as they drifted south into old Imperial lands, and when Germany proper was civilized in the 8th century, the Franks who assumed control over the area had absorbed the Imperial attitudes found within Gaul. Britain provides the interesting case - originally an Imperial province, it was swamped by archery-using Saxons, and then swamped again by archery-using Scandinavians. By the time the Norman-French arrived, on-the-ground attitudes about archery had congealed to such a degree that it was the Normans who adapted, rather than the other way around.

                  Nigel

                  On Sun, August 15, 2010 2:29 am, Carolus wrote:
                  > Then again, there may not be any. The French knights were opposed to
                  > the English archers because they felt they were commoners. They also
                  > were afraid of arming their own commoners. Yet the French king passed
                  > laws requiring bows of the upper classes. The English never seemed to
                  > have such antipathy to archers (probably because they had the most and
                  > the best). The statements of the Lateran Council only decried the use
                  > archery against Christian targets, not the use of archery itself nor did
                  > it address those using archery if it were not against Christians. So
                  > far I have seen nothing condemning the use of archery itself, only that
                  > no one seemed to like it used against them. Seems to argue for the
                  > effectiveness of archery and I have never seen a warrior shy away from
                  > the use of an effective weapon (the US even used shotguns in Viet Nam
                  > even though they are banned by the Geneva Convention).
                  > Carolus
                  >
                  > John edgerton wrote:
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> Well, you are entitled your opinion. However, I think that the
                  >> article would be better if it had some period quotes from some nobles
                  >> that felt that way.
                  >>
                  >> So, I again ask, if anyone has any sources for that, please let me know.
                  >>
                  >> Thanks
                  >>
                  >> Jon
                  >>
                  >> On Aug 14, 2010, at 8:32 PM, Hobbe wrote:
                  >>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>> http://www.armourarchive.org/
                  >>>
                  >>> I suggest you stop dredging up crap from people who hate being shot
                  >>> on the battlefield. You will only feed the trolls.
                  >>>
                  >>> --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com
                  >>> <mailto:SCA-Archery%40yahoogroups.com>, John edgerton <sirjon1@...>
                  >>> wrote:
                  >>> >
                  >>> > Can anyone point me toward a source for a noble, from any country and
                  >>> > any period, saying anything to the effect that "True nobles would
                  >>> > never use archery in battle."? I would like to include that in the
                  >>> > article.
                  >>> >
                  >>> > Thanks
                  >>> >
                  >>> > Jon
                  >>>
                  >
                  >>>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  />>>
                  >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> No virus found in this incoming message.
                  >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                  >> Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3072 - Release Date: 08/14/10
                  >> 11:34:00
                  >>
                  >>
                  >


                  --
                  "Ausculta, feminae novae in lacunis recumbens gladii dispensans non fundamentum pro formula administrationis est."
                  -
                  http://web.raex.com/~obsidian/regindex.html
                • Carolus
                  Note also the Normans still had their Scandinavian archery bias as they had archers at the conquest and even attributed the victory to an archer. Carolus
                  Message 8 of 13 , Aug 15, 2010
                    Note also the Normans still had their Scandinavian archery bias as they
                    had archers at the conquest and even attributed the victory to an archer.
                    Carolus

                    obsidian@... wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > There also seems to be a cultural tradition effect in play as well. If
                    > you look closely, you can see that in general, the
                    > contempt-for-archery attitude follows fairly well the boundaries of
                    > the old Roman Empire. The Romans had little use for archers,
                    > relegating such units to foederate auxiliaries. Their successors in
                    > Europe, the emerging states in Italy, Gaul, Spain, and the Balkans,
                    > retained this attitude. North Africa and the Levant were seized by a
                    > culture who found archery acceptable, but which lacked ready access to
                    > large quantities of materials for producing weapons. The Teutons
                    > outside the Empire, in Germany itself and in Scandinavia, used archery
                    > extensively. Germanic peoples seemed to shift their attitudes as they
                    > drifted south into old Imperial lands, and when Germany proper was
                    > civilized in the 8th century, the Franks who assumed control over the
                    > area had absorbed the Imperial attitudes found within Gaul. Britain
                    > provides the interesting case - originally an Imperial province, it
                    > was swamped by archery-using Saxons, and then swamped again by
                    > archery-using Scandinavians. By the time the Norman-French arrived,
                    > on-the-ground attitudes about archery had congealed to such a degree
                    > that it was the Normans who adapted, rather than the other way around.
                    >
                    > Nigel
                    >
                    > On Sun, August 15, 2010 2:29 am, Carolus wrote:
                    > > Then again, there may not be any. The French knights were opposed to
                    > > the English archers because they felt they were commoners. They also
                    > > were afraid of arming their own commoners. Yet the French king passed
                    > > laws requiring bows of the upper classes. The English never seemed to
                    > > have such antipathy to archers (probably because they had the most and
                    > > the best). The statements of the Lateran Council only decried the use
                    > > archery against Christian targets, not the use of archery itself nor did
                    > > it address those using archery if it were not against Christians. So
                    > > far I have seen nothing condemning the use of archery itself, only that
                    > > no one seemed to like it used against them. Seems to argue for the
                    > > effectiveness of archery and I have never seen a warrior shy away from
                    > > the use of an effective weapon (the US even used shotguns in Viet Nam
                    > > even though they are banned by the Geneva Convention).
                    > > Carolus
                    > >
                    > > John edgerton wrote:
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >> Well, you are entitled your opinion. However, I think that the
                    > >> article would be better if it had some period quotes from some nobles
                    > >> that felt that way.
                    > >>
                    > >> So, I again ask, if anyone has any sources for that, please let me
                    > know.
                    > >>
                    > >> Thanks
                    > >>
                    > >> Jon
                    > >>
                    > >> On Aug 14, 2010, at 8:32 PM, Hobbe wrote:
                    > >>
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>> http://www.armourarchive.org/
                    > >>>
                    > >>> I suggest you stop dredging up crap from people who hate being shot
                    > >>> on the battlefield. You will only feed the trolls.
                    > >>>
                    > >>> --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com
                    > >>> <mailto:SCA-Archery%40yahoogroups.com>, John edgerton <sirjon1@...>
                    > >>> wrote:
                    > >>> >
                    > >>> > Can anyone point me toward a source for a noble, from any
                    > country and
                    > >>> > any period, saying anything to the effect that "True nobles would
                    > >>> > never use archery in battle."? I would like to include that in the
                    > >>> > article.
                    > >>> >
                    > >>> > Thanks
                    > >>> >
                    > >>> > Jon
                    > >>> >
                    > >>>
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >> No virus found in this incoming message.
                    > >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                    > >> Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3072 - Release Date:
                    > 08/14/10
                    > >> 11:34:00
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    > --
                    > "Ausculta, feminae novae in lacunis recumbens gladii dispensans non
                    > fundamentum pro formula administrationis est."
                    > -
                    > http://web.raex.com/~obsidian/regindex.html
                    >
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    >
                    >
                    > No virus found in this incoming message.
                    > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                    > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3072 - Release Date: 08/14/10 11:34:00
                    >
                    >
                  • bluecat@neo.rr.com
                    Nobles never used archery in battle. It was only used by peasants and serfs. Having searched multiple paper and search engine resources, I can not find any
                    Message 9 of 13 , Aug 19, 2010
                      "Nobles never used archery in battle. It was only used by peasants and serfs."

                      Having searched multiple paper and search engine resources, I can not find any direct reference word match to
                      this phrase as written here. Nor can I find any close variants to match.

                      What I have found is abundant resources that support Nobles not only using archery in battle, but some Kings
                      and Princes and on down through the ranks of nobles were using archery as their primary weapon form. There is
                      no indication of wholesale rejection of archery used in battle. It was far too effective to reject it's use.

                      Dirk Edward of Frisia
                    • drosen105
                      Sorry I didnt see this sooner, but I was just reading the Medieval Archer by Jim Bradbury. In his chapter called The archer in society he writes, Archery
                      Message 10 of 13 , Aug 30, 2010
                        Sorry I didnt see this sooner, but I was just reading "the Medieval Archer" by Jim Bradbury. In his chapter called The archer in society he writes, "Archery is generally associated with the lower ranks of society, and properly so. The ordinary bow was the weapon of the ordinary man, in civilian life and in military life." He goes on to say that "even when military archery was at its height, the aristocrat despised the bow and never adopted it as his own..."
                        Hope that helps
                        Rupert the Unbalanced

                        --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, "bluecat@..." <bluecat@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > "Nobles never used archery in battle. It was only used by peasants and serfs."
                        >
                        > Having searched multiple paper and search engine resources, I can not find any direct reference word match to
                        > this phrase as written here. Nor can I find any close variants to match.
                        >
                        > What I have found is abundant resources that support Nobles not only using archery in battle, but some Kings
                        > and Princes and on down through the ranks of nobles were using archery as their primary weapon form. There is
                        > no indication of wholesale rejection of archery used in battle. It was far too effective to reject it's use.
                        >
                        > Dirk Edward of Frisia
                        >
                      • Hobbe
                        http://books.google.com/books?id=USbo1S80sIAC&lpg=PP1&ots=vgBWcwIn4A&dq=Jim%20Bradbury&pg=PP1#v=twopage&q&f=false
                        Message 11 of 13 , Aug 30, 2010
                          http://books.google.com/books?id=USbo1S80sIAC&lpg=PP1&ots=vgBWcwIn4A&dq=Jim%20Bradbury&pg=PP1#v=twopage&q&f=false

                          --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, "drosen105" <drosen105@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Sorry I didnt see this sooner, but I was just reading "the Medieval
                          > Archer" by Jim Bradbury.
                          > Rupert the Unbalanced
                          >
                        • John edgerton
                          Note that he said .... generally associated with the lower ranks of society, .... and The ordinary bow was the weapon of the ordinary man, ... the
                          Message 12 of 13 , Aug 30, 2010
                            Note that he said " .... generally associated with the lower ranks of
                            society, ...." and "The ordinary bow was the weapon of the ordinary
                            man, ..." the crossbow was an exception to this. And there are
                            plenty of examples of nobles using both the handbow and the crossbow
                            in battle. And the Eastern European nobles did adopt it as their own.

                            My paper is in a final draft form and is just waiting for some
                            further translation from the old French about the Arriere-Ban and the
                            nobles that were summoned to attend and the weapons they used. When
                            it is complete I will load it to the files section of this group.

                            Jon
                            On Aug 30, 2010, at 7:24 PM, drosen105 wrote:

                            > Sorry I didnt see this sooner, but I was just reading "the Medieval
                            > Archer" by Jim Bradbury. In his chapter called The archer in
                            > society he writes, "Archery is generally associated with the lower
                            > ranks of society, and properly so. The ordinary bow was the weapon
                            > of the ordinary man, in civilian life and in military life." He
                            > goes on to say that "even when military archery was at its height,
                            > the aristocrat despised the bow and never adopted it as his own..."
                            > Hope that helps
                            > Rupert the Unbalanced
                          • Edward deWitt
                            My Lords and Ladies, For those old enough to remember and those young enough for the adventure, the 1950 s TV series  The Adventures of Robin Hood is now
                            Message 13 of 13 , Aug 31, 2010
                              My Lords and Ladies,
                              For those old enough to remember and those young enough for the adventure, the 1950's TV series  "The Adventures of Robin Hood" is now available on HULU.  They look like they have been cleaned up and are fairly easy to watch.
                              Enjoy

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