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

Re: [SCA-Archery] String walking (documentation)

Expand Messages
  • Karl Sandhoff
    This is indeed my motivation for research. I love to take an argument that they didn t do that and shoot it down with solid research. Unfortunately, it is
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 20, 2000
      This is indeed my motivation for research. I love to take an argument
      that "they didn't do that" and shoot it down with solid research.
      Unfortunately, it is slow going with most necessary research works out of
      my reach. I like Marcus' "...yet.". This is the essence of historical
      research, the constantly changing level of knowledge. I'm willing to
      revise my stand if solid scholarship shows it wrong.
      In service to the dream,
      Carolus von Eulenhorst

      On Tue, 19 Dec 2000 09:53:28 -0600 "Evian Blackthorn" <theweb@...>
      writes:
      >Marcus Wrote, "The its not period rings of "I can't document that it
      >happened so it didn't" and that finality is what really bothers me."
      > The easiest solution to that "I can't document..." is to document
      >that it
      >DID happen for the person who can't. My idea (and it seems to be most
      >reasearcher's idea as well), is that if it has not been "documented",
      >it
      >must be 'assumed' not to have existed, and it we assume that it did
      >not
      >exist, we should not really include it just because it COULD have
      >existed.
      >As for finality, when it IS documented, from three independent primary
      >sources, then, and only then, is it FINAL. At least that three sources
      >seems
      >to be "industry standard" in historical research. This is based on one
      >could
      >be a fluke, or possible mis-interpretation of data, two is fairly
      >strong
      >evidence, but three is 'proof'.
      > I like Marcus' later statement, ". "Not done in period = no proof
      >found
      >...yet." If a person wants to do something that is generally thought
      >to be
      >non-period, and is ruled as not allowed because of that belief, all
      >they
      >have to do is PROVE that the belief is wrong. The person holding the
      >belief
      >(and/or making the rules) should not be required to provide proof just
      >to
      >accommodate someone else's desire to have his 'opinion' or
      >'supposition'
      >accepted as the norm.
      >Evian Blackthorn
      >of THE WEB
      >
      >ps
      >On our household website, we are trying to place online any textual
      >documentation we can find about any 'period' missile weapon, including
      >archery. The URL is www.spider-strands.com . Not much on archery
      >there, YET.
      >Any help would be greatly appreciated.
      >eb
      >
      >
      >
      >-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor
      >
      >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]
      >
      >

      ________________________________________________________________
      GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
      Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
      Join Juno today! 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.