06-03-2007, 01:10 AM
Most interesting, and thanks, Robert......given that my mother's family come from that part of the world, and the proclivity of boys to pass on their games to the next generation, that may explain where the tradition came from....
The launch technique is identical, though our effective "launch length" for the string was 18-20" inches. The arrows themselves, as mentioned, were modified commercial arrows, rather than the specialised, long, unflighted, tapering arrows shown.
The reason for the lead weights in our case was that the lead flashing was handily available in waste off-cuts from building sites, and it added significantly to penetration, and made a satisfying thud when hurled into the trunks of gum trees! A surprise side effect was that weighted arrows flew better and further than unweighted.......
But we digress - whilst the idea of amentum aided plumbata is attractive, it would seem that a more than adequate range could be achieved without it.
The number carried was probably significant ( why not two?why not ten? )
My guess is that the number corresponds to the number a trained soldier could get off in the time it took a charging foe to cross the 'fire zone' and I'd assume enemy infantry here and I'd futher guess that both underarm and overarm techniques were used - overarm lends itself to'point blank' deliveries, and launching over ranks in front and the impression gained from re-enactors seems to be that most achieve max range with an underarm throw.
Is this consistent with re-enactors experiences, or are my guesses way off-track ?
The launch technique is identical, though our effective "launch length" for the string was 18-20" inches. The arrows themselves, as mentioned, were modified commercial arrows, rather than the specialised, long, unflighted, tapering arrows shown.
The reason for the lead weights in our case was that the lead flashing was handily available in waste off-cuts from building sites, and it added significantly to penetration, and made a satisfying thud when hurled into the trunks of gum trees! A surprise side effect was that weighted arrows flew better and further than unweighted.......
But we digress - whilst the idea of amentum aided plumbata is attractive, it would seem that a more than adequate range could be achieved without it.
The number carried was probably significant ( why not two?why not ten? )
My guess is that the number corresponds to the number a trained soldier could get off in the time it took a charging foe to cross the 'fire zone' and I'd assume enemy infantry here and I'd futher guess that both underarm and overarm techniques were used - overarm lends itself to'point blank' deliveries, and launching over ranks in front and the impression gained from re-enactors seems to be that most achieve max range with an underarm throw.
Is this consistent with re-enactors experiences, or are my guesses way off-track ?
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
