Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
Mary Rose 'Marks'
WillS:
Hasn't that already been proven a very out of date idea? I thought the modern understanding of military archery was to pick a mark, and shoot it. Wasting thousands of expensive arrows by chucking them into the air and hoping they hit something doesn't make sense, and isn't depicted in a single historical piece of artwork, whereas flat shooting at a target is shown in historical pieces time and time again.
If you just pick a bow up and get it balanced, you'll be at the middle.
WillS:
Here are some of the marks. I'd be amazed if they're bowyer's guild marks. They're too similar to be identifying completely different guilds of work.
Looks to me like a set of identifiers for those picking them up and using them. "This one's a 5, it's too heavy for me. This is a 3, that's better..." etc.
jaxenro:
--- Quote from: WillS on September 24, 2016, 06:12:41 am ---Hasn't that already been proven a very out of date idea? I thought the modern understanding of military archery was to pick a mark, and shoot it.
--- End quote ---
So you pick a mark and shoot at it. In a situation like this there must be 100 reasons why your mark isn't there when the arrow arrives including the archer next to you picking the same mark a second before, and 100 others why a different mark gets your arrow. In a small skirmish I would agree with you but when you have 2,000 men charging you I think it is volume more than individual accuracy that works. I'm not stating they shot at random I think they aimed like you state just that the practical effect of the arrow hitting three feet to the left of aim was probably nil. Three feet to the left of your mark was another mark
WillS:
Oh yeah, I agree entirely. If you pick a mark and you hit the guy next to it, or somebody hits your mark it's sort of irrelevant, because a target is down. It's about efficiency I suppose right? You don't waste thousands of arrows that way, as you're always going to hit something.
Lucasade:
--- Quote from: WillS on September 24, 2016, 06:12:41 am ---Hasn't that already been proven a very out of date idea? I thought the modern understanding of military archery was to pick a mark, and shoot it. Wasting thousands of expensive arrows by chucking them into the air and hoping they hit something doesn't make sense
--- End quote ---
Interestingly, when rifles began to replace muskets the soldiers believed that the presence of sights on the weapon meant that you were murdering your enemy as you were making a concious decision to aim at one man and shoot him, rather than just firing at the enemy mass.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version