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

ascham

Expand Messages
  • Ian Gourdon
    ... Just a note... As far as I know, the Toxophillus is the only period source in English, for those of us also playing the A&S game, although there is one
    Message 1 of 12 , Dec 2, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      > Ashams book "Toxophillus" offers some insight, but was
      > written well after the great age of the longbow and is the writing of an
      > academics tutor, not a great military archer. It is a wonderful book and
      > a must have for any student of archery.but it is not the final word or
      > by any means the complete story. We all seem to quote from it as if it
      > is the word of God. It is just another source. -Geoffrei

      Just a note...
      As far as I know, the Toxophillus is the only period source
      in English, for those of us also playing the A&S game,
      although there is one translated 'Arab Archery' book (the
      original is from around 1500) which is worth finding. Which
      is not to say there isn't other good Medieval imput, but
      it's single pictures or accounts of battles, mostly.
      If I recall correctly, Ascham suggests going to the fletcher
      for good arrows, and doesn't get into arrow making in any
      detail. So I guess it's mostly conjecture for us - sigh.
      --
      Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe, OP
      Known as a forester of the Greenwood, Midrealm
      http://web.raex.com/~agincort
    • Ken and Jenn
      Ian, just to add a few period sources in english (after translation). Saracen Archery which is a translation of a Malamute work on archery from 1365 and
      Message 2 of 12 , Dec 2, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Ian, just to add a few period sources in english (after translation).
        "Saracen Archery" which is a translation of a Malamute work on archery
        from 1365 and "Peri Toxeas" which is a work on archery from ~7th-8th century
        covering Byzantine archery. This, according to the translator, is the
        earliest known work on archery.

        Note that "Toxophillus" is not only one of the first works on archery,
        but was the first book printed in English.

        Nicetas

        At 08:09 AM 12/2/00 -0500, you wrote:
        >> Ashams book "Toxophillus" offers some insight, but was
        >> written well after the great age of the longbow and is the writing of an
        >> academics tutor, not a great military archer. It is a wonderful book and
        >> a must have for any student of archery.but it is not the final word or
        >> by any means the complete story. We all seem to quote from it as if it
        >> is the word of God. It is just another source. -Geoffrei
        >
        >Just a note...
        >As far as I know, the Toxophillus is the only period source
        >in English, for those of us also playing the A&S game,
        >although there is one translated 'Arab Archery' book (the
        >original is from around 1500) which is worth finding. Which
        >is not to say there isn't other good Medieval imput, but
        >it's single pictures or accounts of battles, mostly.
        >If I recall correctly, Ascham suggests going to the fletcher
        >for good arrows, and doesn't get into arrow making in any
        >detail. So I guess it's mostly conjecture for us - sigh.
        >--
        >Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe, OP
        >Known as a forester of the Greenwood, Midrealm
        > http://web.raex.com/~agincort
        >
        >
        >Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
        >http://www.MedievalMart.com/
        >
        >Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
        >[Email to SCA-Archery-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Mike O'Toole
        ... From: Ken and Jenn To: Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 7:30 AM Subject: Re: [SCA-Archery] ascham ... I
        Message 3 of 12 , Dec 2, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Ken and Jenn" <woolyfsh@...>
          To: <SCA-Archery@egroups.com>
          Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 7:30 AM
          Subject: Re: [SCA-Archery] ascham


          > Ian, just to add a few period sources in english (after translation).
          > "Saracen Archery" which is a translation of a Malamute work on archery

          I am going to assume you meant Mameluke, the warrior caste from Egypt
          and dominant in the Middle East between the ninth and sixteenth
          centuries and not "malamute" a breed of Arctic sled dog. :-)

          Though I do find the mental picture of hordes of furry canines shooting
          bows appealing! :-)

          Michael O'Byrne
          Montengarde














          > from 1365 and "Peri Toxeas" which is a work on archery from ~7th-8th
          century
          > covering Byzantine archery. This, according to the translator, is the
          > earliest known work on archery.
          >
          > Note that "Toxophillus" is not only one of the first works on archery,
          > but was the first book printed in English.
          >
          > Nicetas
          >
          > At 08:09 AM 12/2/00 -0500, you wrote:
          > >> Ashams book "Toxophillus" offers some insight, but was
          > >> written well after the great age of the longbow and is the writing
          of an
          > >> academics tutor, not a great military archer. It is a wonderful
          book and
          > >> a must have for any student of archery.but it is not the final word
          or
          > >> by any means the complete story. We all seem to quote from it as if
          it
          > >> is the word of God. It is just another source. -Geoffrei
          > >
          > >Just a note...
          > >As far as I know, the Toxophillus is the only period source
          > >in English, for those of us also playing the A&S game,
          > >although there is one translated 'Arab Archery' book (the
          > >original is from around 1500) which is worth finding. Which
          > >is not to say there isn't other good Medieval imput, but
          > >it's single pictures or accounts of battles, mostly.
          > >If I recall correctly, Ascham suggests going to the fletcher
          > >for good arrows, and doesn't get into arrow making in any
          > >detail. So I guess it's mostly conjecture for us - sigh.
          > >--
          > >Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe, OP
          > >Known as a forester of the Greenwood, Midrealm
          > > http://web.raex.com/~agincort
          > >
          > >
          > >Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
          > >http://www.MedievalMart.com/
          > >
          > >Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
          > >[Email to SCA-Archery-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          > -------------------------- eGroups
          Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
          > eGroups eLerts
          > It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
          > http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/0/_/581373/_/975767441/
          > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_
          ->
          >
          > Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
          > http://www.MedievalMart.com/
          >
          > Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
          > [Email to SCA-Archery-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
          >
          >
        • jrosswebb1@webtv.net
          Michael O Byrne wrote: I am going to assume you meant Mameluke, the warrior caste from Egypt and dominant in the Middle East between the ninth and sixteenth
          Message 4 of 12 , Dec 2, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Michael O'Byrne wrote:
            I am going to assume you meant Mameluke, the warrior caste from Egypt
            and dominant in the Middle East between the ninth and sixteenth
            centuries and not "malamute" a breed of Arctic sled dog. :-)
            Though I do find the mental picture of hordes of furry canines shooting
            bows appealing! :-)
            Michael O'Byrne
            Montengarde

            Response:
            Horde? or TUCHUX?
            (no offense to my many friends in the Tuchux, but you do call each other
            "dogs")
            -Geoffrei


            http://community.webtv.net/jrosswebb1/EASTWINDStribal
          • Bob & Nancy Upson
            ... I m picturing it on black velvet -- as part of the set with dogs playing poker and dogs playing pool... ;) Macsen ... Get Medieval at Mad Macsen s
            Message 5 of 12 , Dec 2, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              > Though I do find the mental picture of hordes of furry canines
              > shooting bows appealing! :-)

              I'm picturing it on black velvet -- as part of the set with dogs playing
              poker and dogs playing pool... ;)

              Macsen

              ------------------------------------------------------------
              Get Medieval at Mad Macsen's http://www.MedievalMart.com/
              *** BUY *** SELL *** BID *** HAGGLE ***
              We all wish everyone a Safe & Happy Holiday Season!
              ------------------------------------------------------------
            • Ken and Jenn
              Woof woof --- damn spell checkers. Horse bows -- dog bows what s the difference? Nicetas
              Message 6 of 12 , Dec 2, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                Woof woof --- damn spell checkers.
                Horse bows -- dog bows what's the difference?

                Nicetas

                At 01:40 PM 12/2/00 -0500, you wrote:
                >> Though I do find the mental picture of hordes of furry canines
                >> shooting bows appealing! :-)
                >
                >I'm picturing it on black velvet -- as part of the set with dogs playing
                >poker and dogs playing pool... ;)
                >
                >Macsen
                >
                >------------------------------------------------------------
                >Get Medieval at Mad Macsen's http://www.MedievalMart.com/
                > *** BUY *** SELL *** BID *** HAGGLE ***
                > We all wish everyone a Safe & Happy Holiday Season!
                >------------------------------------------------------------
                >
                >
                >Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
                >http://www.MedievalMart.com/
                >
                >Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
                >[Email to SCA-Archery-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • James W. Pratt Jr.
                Greetind to Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe and the list. Not to change the thread to much... if Ashams book Toxophillus is a tertiary source how should an A&S
                Message 7 of 12 , Dec 3, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  Greetind to Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe and the list.

                  Not to change the thread to much... if Ashams book "Toxophillus" is a
                  tertiary source
                  how should an A&S "Judge" judge a conjecture? This is a serious question.

                  James Cunningham

                  We all seem to quote from it as if it is the word of God. It is just another
                  source. -Geoffrei

                  So I guess it's mostly conjecture for us - sigh.
                • Bruce R. Gordon
                  ... Greetings Ascham? A tertiary source? I can t see how. He wrote in period (1540 s) on a period topic. That makes him a primary source as far as I am
                  Message 8 of 12 , Dec 3, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "James W. Pratt Jr." wrote:

                    > Greetind to Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe and the list.
                    >
                    > Not to change the thread to much... if Ashams book "Toxophillus" is a
                    > tertiary source
                    > how should an A&S "Judge" judge a conjecture? This is a serious question.
                    >
                    > James Cunningham

                    Greetings
                    Ascham? A tertiary source? I can't see how. He wrote in period (1540's) on a
                    period topic. That makes him a primary source as far as I am concerned. Not only
                    that, but he wrote in an understandable language, which is pure bonus. He is
                    certainly not the end-all and be-all on the subject, and he has really annoying
                    habits of not commenting on vital topics, but he is still invaluable for archery
                    research.
                    Most research is conjecture, really. What makes it useful is that it is
                    informed conjecture; conjecture with a solid grounding in fact. That grounding
                    is itself based on source material, both primary and secondary. And tertiary
                    too, for a broad and general overview. Ascham remains one of the very best in
                    sources.

                    Regards;
                    Forester Nigel FitzMaurice (Mid)
                    --

                    Ex Tenebra, Lux

                    http://web.raex.com/~obsidian/index.html
                  • James W. Pratt Jr.
                    Thanks! James ... (1540 s) on a
                    Message 9 of 12 , Dec 3, 2000
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Thanks!

                      James
                      > Ascham? A tertiary source? I can't see how. He wrote in period
                      (1540's) on a
                      > period topic. That makes him a primary source as far as I am concerned.
                    • Scott Jaqua
                      ... From: James W. Pratt Jr. Not to change the thread to much... if Ashams book Toxophillus is a tertiary source how should an A&S Judge judge a
                      Message 10 of 12 , Dec 4, 2000
                      • 0 Attachment
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: James W. Pratt Jr.

                        Not to change the thread to much... if Ashams book "Toxophillus" is a
                        tertiary source
                        how should an A&S "Judge" judge a conjecture? (snip)


                        Njall replies;

                        I would have to consider Toxophillus to be a secondary source at worst. And
                        if I were writing a research paper that involved conjecture about the period
                        mind set, I would have to consider it a primary source. It is far better
                        then tertiary for the following reasons

                        It's written in period by an actual observer. Ascham is an actual observer,
                        because while he is an academic, he is also recorded to be an archer
                        himself. While not a military archer, he held archery as good exercise for
                        the body and spirit. He took this advice to heart and both he and his
                        students (read a young Elizabeth the1st) learned to shoot. I believe he
                        proves his first hand knowledge of the subject in how he records what takes
                        place during practice at the butts.

                        Further study of his work should revel that the book shows the two different
                        sides of Ascham life. Because it is written as a dialog between a lover of
                        archery and a lover of learning.
                        I would be hard pressed to classify Ascham as ONLY a academic.

                        Njall (who prides himself on having a literate persona)
                      • jrosswebb1@webtv.net
                        Njall replies; (heavily edited) I would have to consider Toxophillus to be a secondary source at worst. ... It is far better then tertiary for the following
                        Message 11 of 12 , Dec 4, 2000
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Njall replies;
                          (heavily edited)
                          "I would have to consider Toxophillus to be a secondary source at worst.
                          ... It is far better then tertiary for the following reasons
                          It's written in period by an actual observer. Ascham is an actual
                          observer,"

                          < This is not entirely true. Although Ascham is period to the SCA his
                          life began at the end of the great age of the British longbow.The
                          Hundred Years War was over a century before and The War of the Roses
                          which is responsible for killing off the great war archers of Britain
                          was almost half a century earlier.>

                          Njall continues:
                          ".....Further study of his work should revel that the book shows the two
                          different sides of Ascham life. Because it is written as a dialog
                          between a lover of archery and a lover of learning.
                          I would be hard pressed to classify Ascham as ONLY a academic."

                          < And what a wonderful man he must have been and what a wonderful
                          gift to archery he gave us. He wrote about this subject that is so dear
                          to all of us from a point of view that is CLOSER to the great period of
                          the longbow than we are. William Shakespeare was much closer than we
                          also. He was genius, but his account of Agincourt must be treated with
                          a very critical view of the facts as we
                          know them. As students and lovers of history, we must put it all in the
                          mix, Ascham, Shakespeare, the records from the Tower of London, the
                          manuscript illustrations,the poets, the period accounts of battle, the
                          recent finds, and see if we can make an educated GUESS. Because there
                          are contradictions up the WAZOO.
                          I love Ascham's book as I've stated before and use it to refer to
                          regularly. But, it is not THE GOSPEL of medieval archery, though it's
                          one of the better sources we have. We are all speculating here, with a
                          handful of facts that are universally accepted, the rest of the answers
                          to our questions are still out there somewhere. Maybe some day more
                          light will be shed on the subject of medieval archery. Look at how the
                          facts changed within the last forty years due to the efforts of the Mary
                          Rose Trust.
                          -Geoffrei
                        • Bruce R. Gordon
                          ... Greetings Ok, maybe a little digression on research catagories is in order here... Sources come in three flavours; primary, secondary, tertiary. A primary
                          Message 12 of 12 , Dec 4, 2000
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Scott Jaqua wrote:

                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: James W. Pratt Jr.
                            >
                            > Not to change the thread to much... if Ashams book "Toxophillus" is a
                            > tertiary source
                            > how should an A&S "Judge" judge a conjecture? (snip)

                            Greetings
                            Ok, maybe a little digression on research catagories is in order here...
                            Sources come in three flavours; primary, secondary, tertiary. A primary
                            source is a text (normally untranslated) that was written in period, or an
                            artifact of the period under study. A secondary source is an edited and/or
                            translated primary, or a text which uses primary sources to make it's point or
                            describe it's field of study. A tertiary source is a general overview of a
                            topic, one which uses secondary sources to base it's conclusions or
                            descriptions.
                            An encyclopedia article on the history of archery is tertiary. Robert
                            Hardy's book "Longbow" is secondary, as would be Payne-Gallwey's work "The
                            Crossbow". Ascham is definitely primary, as would be actual bows, quarrels, etc.
                            sitting in museums.
                            This is all a simplification, but that's it basically. What needs to be
                            recognized next, though, is that the distinction between primary and secondary
                            is somewhat blurry, and prone to interpretation to a degree. Ascham is written
                            in early modern English. Does it become secondary if I translate it into modern
                            20th century English? Most would say yes. Is Gervase Markham's work "The Art of
                            Archerie", published in 1614, secondary? Markham was about 46 years old then,
                            and was writing in the light of experience garnered in his twenties and
                            thirties, ie. in period (just barely).
                            A further problem is this: how accurate is Ascham (written in the 1540's)
                            regarding early archery of, say, the time of Agincourt (130 years before)? That
                            is a real can of worms because on the one hand you have to assume that some
                            changes took place over the span of two centuries between the golden age and
                            Aschams age of encroaching decadence. But on the other hand we know that tackle
                            from 1350 was pretty close to identical to tackle of 1550: bowyers in Aschams
                            day practiced about the same as their great great great grandfathers.
                            The fact is, is that primary sources need to be examined and evaluated just
                            as much as any other source; in some ways more so. Just because it's primary
                            doesn't mean it's infallible.
                            Ascham is primary, but to understand period archery you need to look a lot
                            further than just his book.

                            Forester Nigel FitzMaurice (Mid)
                            --

                            Ex Tenebra, Lux

                            http://web.raex.com/~obsidian/index.html
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.