- Ditto: Maybe for the Files?Ancel----- Original Message -----From: John EdgertonSent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 2:39 PMSubject: Re: [SCA-Archery]After you teach the class, if there is a copy of the paper, I would love to read it. I agree with your thesis. :-)Jon
From: J. Hughes <jphughessr@...>
To: "SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com" <SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wed, August 29, 2012 11:07:28 AM
Subject: Re: [SCA-Archery]
I strongly agree with Sir Jon. I also take offense with your comments.I shoot a crossbow. I have age related reasons, but primarly because it better fits my persona. I would go so far as to say the crossbows were more popular in all countries for warfare after the 10th century with the exception of England and the Turks. I am refering to weapons of war not peasant hunting. It is not easier to get good with a crossbow. I have trained both crossbow and hand bow users. While the improvement slope is a little different, they both get good with about the same effort. Very few try to shoot a great war bow (longbow of 125lb + draw weight) in the Society. That takes a lot to work up to which is why the English yeoman trained from youth to get good at it. But time spent at strength building is not the same as skill building.The laws applied to hunting do not cover target archery. I have repeatedly brought my crossbow onto military reservations (where I work) which tend to be real tight on firearms.Charles O'ConnorPS: I am teaching a class on the Battle of Crecy in a month and a half. The story is different than the English propagandists paint it. On a level field with the crossboman's full weapon system, it would have been very different. The battle is a study in Great leadership vs extremly poor leadership, not Longbow vs Crossbow.