If you actually consider that chivalry did exist. You must accept it in its twisted, hierarchical ways of applying it.
Forget the childish spats between the latte-day academia and so-called experts who question the authenticity of the accounts of both sides it and they matter, not a jot.
There are only a few points that truly matter.
However, you cannot disregard the fact that this battle spawned a ferocity and brutality unfounded even for these barbaric times, nonetheless even that matters not.
Forget the different assertions about the numbers involved and the state of the pitch so to speak. The terrain was the same for both sides; this too should not mean a thing.
However what should never be overlooked is why this battle has actually gone down in history as the day chivalry died, but why?
During the preceding ages of mortal combat, the written and heroic folklore was earmarked for the well to do, the nobility; the high and mighty.
Basically the self-professed aristocracy! The Bully boys!
Little stock was taken of the waifs and strays; the basic cannon fodder of the day, if you will.
On the eve before this St Chrispens day, matters changed somewhat, which I believe was instigated by Henry V and obviously prior to battle commencing.
Let us give a little time for reflection.
During all the preceding conflicts, the fatality rate for the nobleman was unexplainably very light. Nobleman, (knight) would fight their opposite counterpart until one or other would cry quarter then he would be carted off to the opposing lines and ransomed at a later time, why kill a golden goose, very gentlemanly!
At a later time, post ransom they would re-join their lines all refreshed and ready for the coming battle/festivities and the whole charade would start again. “Oh what a jolly wheeze”.
If by any chance no dignified adversary was at hand they could always amuse themselves by slicing up lightly protected peasants/men at arms who were in abundance. If they couldn’t slice off a limb or deliver a coup de gras, for more fun you could always trample the offending object under the heavy hooves of your charger.
There was no danger to yourself as “even” in the thick of battle striking a person of higher rank in hand to hand combat was strictly taboo, even striking a horse was punishable by death and would probably be administered by your own side.
Oh, happy days!
This all changed at Agincourt basically the hierarchy got their comeuppance.
Those that hadn’t been taken out by the accurate fusillade of arrows were butchered where they fell in the mud if they hadn’t already drowned in that filthy gooey mess were crushed into it by the weight of their horses.
Archers and foot soldiers were given leave the night before, that the killing of the opposing hierarchy would be one hundred per cent permissible. All because of the untenable situation Henry V found himself in, every man at arms was given free rein without any fear of retribution. He must have uttered, the not so well known and not unattributed to him, adage, No Prisoners! I think T E Lawrence of Arabia Fame, was attributed this accolade.
This was payback time but, big time!
There is a broad spectrum of belief that there were a large number of Welsh archers at Agincourt, at this I will not quibble as there undoubtedly were. And they were used as with the English archers in their secondary but equally effective and vital way, by despatching the fallen aristocracy. Would the welsh please not take umbridge this is history it is past and gone I suppose that there may even be a few Welsh people that actually believe the claptrap that Rorkes Drift Mission in the Zulu Brit war was defended by a Welsh regiment and not an English regiment which is actually the case!
So be it, but in the course of this book I will prove to you all, that what I am saying is true
Archery and Darts
Everyone believes that darts was born because English archers were bored between battles and decided to shorten their arrows and throw at the bottoms of wine casks (Butts) or log ends.
Utter Piffle! Arrows were an extremely expensive commodity.
In war, there were basically two types of arrow. Target and Volley!
Target Arrows
These arrows were extremely personal items. They are spined specifically for that individual archer and his bow by a fletcher. This was a specialised art, very few archers were sufficiently adept to fashion and spine their own target arrows. These arrows were very expensive.
Volley Arrows
There was a differing more abundant type of arrow that were not solely designed specifically for one archer, in particular, These were Volleying arrows the type used at sieges, large battles and occasionally onboard warships. These were made in immense quantities. Unlike the targeting arrows these could be and were fletched by the archers as well as fletchers, they were a mass-produced commodity. Made in their hundreds of thousands and adapted by the archer from batches of arrows. It could probably have been the first cottage industry. The abundance of the many cords of arrows that have been discovered in various castles and in particular on The Mary Rose, I believe bear witness to this.
A good part of the day after a battle (as long as your side was victorious) was taken up solely by recovering your arrows loosed during the day or days previously. Especially the personal Target arrows, however, an archer was loathed to losing even a volleying arrow let alone the more valuable target arrows. Even the volley arrows were not cheap assets even when bought in a sheave of twelve or twenty-four!
The chances that one archer could loose another archers target arrow accurately, were extremely remote.
Fletchers were/are specialised craftsmen, fashioning each and every target arrow to an individual archer and that individual archer’s bow. Different thickness of shaft, splining and individualising these arrows to a particular combination of bow and archer! With adornment of the arrows, each archer fundamentally had his own coat of arms, initiated by feather type, painting, fletching feathers shapes and markings etc.
In regard to the bored archer theory, many people think that archers only carried a bow and a quiver of arrows.
They carried a lot more! We have already discussed the arm guard or strap, they also obviously carried a leather finger protectors to prevent the skin getting ripped off their fingers and rendering the archer useless. In addition they had a dagger and a maul, not the heavy mallet, but a short-handled, heavy-headed pointed hammer, somewhat like a shorter but heavier headed mountaineers piton, used to smash through the helmets of the fallen enemy, the dagger was used for stabbing through the visor slit into the eyes and beyond or cutting the throat beneath the helmet of the unhorsed nobility.
Archers also carried extra strings in their goose greased pouch as the strings on a bow are rendered useless if they get wet. Replacements also need to be goose greased and protected in a leather goose greased pouch. This is not a groundbreaking piece of info, but what may surprise you is that amongst the normal length strings there were also shorter strings in the pouch and possibly shorter and longer *arrows (*especially at Agincourt) in the quiver amongst the arsenal of normal arrows.
Why did the pouch contain shorter as well as the normal length replacement bowstrings? They had to be used for something you certainly couldn’t string the bow with them!
This is chronicled somewhere! However I’ve mislaid my notes on this section, but it is a fact!
The strength, (plus the knack) required for stringing the normal length string to the bow was quite phenomenal; although the knack is to step inside the bow. To hitch a much shorter string would have been impossible!
In my opinion, it is obvious; these shorter strings were for throwing the shorter arrow (The Swiss or Bung Arrow) an originally subsequently devised way a dart or arrow was thrown, a string or thong was utilised before that of a throwing stick (Woomera/Atlatl) to deliver the arrow, a shortened chord sinew or bit of string was utilised,
It does exactly the same thing in exactly the same way and by using exactly the same action as the Woomera/Atlatl. The action or the impetus applied to the missile is the same, but because of the different areas that used this type of projecting apparatus, each was assigned differing names. When and where I grew up in Devonshire we called these Bung Arrows.
The Unbelievable Dart
From 2,000,000 years ago?
The use of darts is easily 1,000,000 years old. It is a lost and alternative way of throwing. It isn’t a lost art, but the action used is misunderstood, the forgotten aspect, a far different and better way of looking at and attaining your goal. A neglected action of the present day as in days long gone don’t and didn’t actually know how they managed to achieve it.
It’s for this reason plus peoples bloody-mindedness together with a distorted memory that Dartitis people mistakenly hold to recapture an action that they accomplished before and futilely trying to recreate it. Pointless, it’s not even an action.
They are hunting a feeling, a sensation emanating from their ancestral past.
They actually don’t know what that feeling is, or where it originates from but they will know it when they experience it again. The feeling does briefly desert Dartitis sufferers on some occasions and we are happy as pigs in the proverbial for these fleeting minutes!
However, the return is ephemeral as our understanding is invariably wrong in what we sense. We are drawn to a certain portion of the apparatus that appeared to initiate the action we had just achieved. It will not incorporate the unnoticed but correct areas utilising the correct actions. It cannot be pinpointed, as we are lulled into an erroneous mind set!
One of the overlooked actions is the real reason for our Dartitis but because we are concentrating on the defined area or action we completely overlook the real culprit. Sometimes the wrongly identified reason can sustain a good throw for a long period of time because it utilises part of the mystery, but because it is wrong it will eventually re-desert us again and the depression will be crushing.
It seems incredible that pre-historic man could have achieved this special way of throwing at will, but we “the so called superior relative” either can no longer do it and have Dartitis, or can do it but misconstrue the action entirely.
Why am I so confident that darts is at least 1,000,000 years and could possibly be as old as 2,0000,000 years old? Well it all stems from the discovery of an Atlatl. The experts have looked at this discovery in entirely the reverse appraisal. You do not develop a device and then develop a missile to throw.
The weapon to be thrown had to be there in the first place. So the dart had to be first!
Is that not common sense?
The action you are seeking is a feeling shrouded in the mists of time, never known or even considered by our so called experts; a sensation lost in the non-existent annals of prehistory. Even when you were performing the action correctly you do not know how you did it, or in fact that you were performing this ancient action. The sensation was so natural and second nature because it’s part of your history.
However you certainly know when it deserts you!
Other people don’t actually know what that feeling is, but they will know it when they experience it. This feeling does visit Dartitis sufferers on rare occasions. Entirely out of the blue and is like Will O Wisp. A very poor option does exist, by attempting to thrust the dart forward as a corps’ of archers would, in volleying a distance. This is not the way that a dart is thrown. The hierarchy or so called experts say that this is the classic way that a dart is thrown. Claptrap, they are describing the parabola arc. It is an absolutely pathetic way of attaining a target and is used only and I do mean only as a last resort.
Archery from the art of Darts
Via the Throwing board and sling
The unbelievable action
One of the really astounding things about throwing a dart is most if not all people actually never understand how they achieve the action. The ones that really do implement the full range of this extremely difficult, bizarre, but natural process are the superior thraggers.
The enormous drawback with having the ability of effecting this action is the far greater inability of not understanding what they are doing and in almost every case completely miss-diagnosing it.
Please notice I said almost every case. For instance if you compare the throw of say John Lowe as opposed to the throw of Eric Bristow you cannot equate them as in any way similar. The looks are completely different and appear to adopt different stances, attitudes fingerings and actions, but they are in fact almost identical. The only difference there is, is solely the greater emphasis two sportsmen impose on different actions.
The other massive difference is the mind sets employed. John Lowes style of throwing has been described by the so called experts, as the true classic style. To these I have this point to put forward; Experts? Who or what makes you an expert. I think it is about time that you all kept quiet. That’s my game Huckleberry; Play for blood!
There were a few who doubted the wisdom of the deluded much vaunted doctrine of a push, handed down to them over the years. It is due to these and other characters of my persuasion that I never abandoned my quest.
They were my light in the distance and one of the reasons for my resilience, I believe every Dartitis sufferer will be truly grateful to these somebodies. If the ridicule dished out to yours truly was completely across the board, this book would never have been written and darts as the true sport would have certainly died! Only a minuscule minority showed any interest or inferred any doubt into the ideology that a dart is pushed. My correct assertion is completely contradictory to almost everyone’s unfounded prescribed doctrine of pushing a dart. This dart is the only pointed missile despatched in this way. Other sports utilise the same action/actions, there is no difference. There are slight incongruities. These are down to whether the participants are throwers or strikers.
The apex dart thraggers, have scaled a height other players can only dream about. They have reached the peak whilst the rank and file remain in base camp, a few more have made a faltering climb to the next level, and a much reduced minority make it to the final camp before their capabilities are exhausted. A really tiny minority make it to the pinnacle.
These were/are the celebrated local stars that were unstoppable, earning deserved acclaim, no one troubled them. If they were fortunate enough to live in the desired area they got national recognition, a few went on and won world titles. Saying that though; there has been a glut of truly horrendously mediocre players that have attained that station, in both stables of the game and these should be glaringly evident to all.
Darts and Archery
As I have iterated in another section of this book. Darts and archery are one and the same, but darts is far superior and does by design and common sense out-dates archery by a vast epoch. Surely prehistoric man must have sharpened a stick for stabbing and at some time thrown it in panic. A long time before some troglodyte bent a branch and stretched some animal sinew or gut connecting both ends of a bough (bow) by nocking.
It’s not just that though; what makes the sports akin is that the actions are identical. I know as with numerous observations throughout this book you must regard that my statements smack of the ridiculous. They and this are not; they are absolute provable facts, these are not the bleating’s of a worldwide gullible flock!
We shall concentrate our efforts on the English longbow and the Japanese Yumi.
The English Longbow
Foremost of all the bows
I suppose if you asked most people, what type of force powers an arrow from a bow, most would say that they see the arrow pushed forward by the bow-string. It is a reasonable response based fundamentally on the positioning of the tensed bow-string to the arrow. As the bow string is notched into the rear of the arrow the inference is that the string pushes the arrow forward. Highly logical and just as equally incorrect, If deeply examined it becomes entirely illogical!
The bow (bough)
As I see it the bow is self-explanatory, a simple bough pliable enough to bend and able to withstand the great pressure applied upon it from various areas or directions. The ends are nocked to accommodate the string. The bow is tapered from both ends reaching its widest girth in the centre which accommodates the hand on which to rest the arrow. Archers regard the bow as two extensions, one emerging from above the bracing hand and one below. I totally agree with this assessment.
The string
The string is a different kettle of fish. It is connected to the bow at both ends by the nock at each end. The flight end of the arrow is positioned onto the string with the aid of a notch, I was not impressed with the use of this notch as it must cause some drag. Until I realised it is not actually the notch as such, but its position. The string does not contact the actual base of the arrow, the string is let into the arrow. Another point is, if archers recognise that the bow has two elements, upper and lower, why do they not recognise the string has a left and right or a first and second string.
The Draw or cock
On drawing the string or pulling the arrow back a very strange occurrence happens the bow and string are pulled but they are pulled away from each other to an extent governed by the power supplied, “the archer’s strength” and the length of the arrow. We have a set-up of direct pressure applied on the back of the arrow by the bow string and indirect pressure applied onto the rear of arrow via the string but generating from the bow. The notched stringing on the arrow is positioned to the rear of the flight but behind the arrow point. The nocking on the ends of the bow is always situated ahead of the flight and behind the point. When the arrow is loosed the bow and string work in the exact opposite at the cock or drawback, equal force is applied by both string and bow. The string pulls forward away from the bow and the bow pulls back away from the string. Clear as mud, eh?
We forgot to mention one very important piece of equipment which is essential when loosing a longbow, that being; the arm strap! It has no intrinsic value to the accuracy or distance of the shot; however it does save Toxophilite’s a great deal of agony, because of how the longbow is drawn. It also leads nicely on to Japanese Kyudo, after a little input from Mr Eric Roth.
Mediaeval Longbow Technique
By Erik Roth
The hold is the pause upon completing the draw. It must be so lytle that it may be perceyued better in a man‘s mynd when it is done, than seene with a man‘s eyes when it is in doing. Saracens held for not longer than the count of three. However brief, this pause is essential for good shooting, but the longer the hold, the greater the strain for the bowman, and the greater the difficulty of taking steady aim and loosing cleanly, in addition to the disturbance of shooting rhythm. Also, the bow is placed in jeopardy by an overlong hold and loses power for the cast. This loss is greatest in the first three seconds and continues more slowly, bringing the bow closer to its breaking point. For these reasons it is important that the hold be not only brief, but of equal duration at each shot.
The above description of what is termed the hold. Completely misses the point of what is really occurring the hold is not actually the action or in this case the non –action that is the boon to good archery. It is the second pull just before release; this is where the secret lies. This and how the archer is manipulating the whole mechanism. The arrow is not pushed from the bow. The point is not directed at the target the flight this is the answer to the Archers Paradox!
Also if use the bow and string and arrow to pull the arrow back, the bow and string must pull the arrow forward, there is no refuting this.
The Yumi
This is the Japanese equivalent to the English longbow and a very fine bow indeed. There are several versions and I apologise for lumping them under one category. No disrespect was, or is intended. Apart from the positioning of the hand grip which is at about a third of the way up the bow as opposed to the longbows central positioning, the basic difference other than its composition is in the way it is drawn.
The English longbow is drawn with the aid of an extended leading arm used as a strut and forces the inside of the wrist towards the centre of the bow. Hence the use of an arm straps. The Yumi differs in the way it is drawn. Incidentally I note that now, the Yumi does not appear to be drawn nowadays as I remember it. I shall recount the way I recall it.
I remember the archer stood tall the arrow notched on the slack bow held low in front of him at arm’s length. To cock the bow the archer raised both his arms elevating the arrow line to above eye level; simultaneously drawing the two arms apart by the two arms working against each other a bit like using chest expanders. The wrists are bent away from the bow and string. The rear hand is drawn well beyond the ear, sometimes to the full extent of the arms. This requires immense strength and dexterity. As I see it this is the fundamental difference between using the Yumi and the Longbow. That and also that the long-bowman sights down the length of the arrow whilst the Yumi archer sights across it from about halfway along the shaft. In fact the Yumi archer as long as he has sighted correctly, can if required look back at his flight and release the arrow the outcome will be the same. Where the Yumi archer notches his arrow is also another give away as to how the arrow is loosed from the bow!
Here lies another massive clue to the Archer’s paradox and Dartitis!
A paradox in archery & darts
Archery’s Paradox.
Firstly an understanding of what a paradox is, would be advantageous. There are supposedly only four types, “I believe this is open to discussion”, they are listed below,
- An apparent contradictory statement that could just be true: Such as walking is less tiring than standing.
- One exhibiting in unexplainable or contradictory aspects: “The silence of midnight, to speak truly,
- An assertion that is essentially self-contradictory, though based on a valid deduction from acceptable premises.
- A statement contrary to received opinion.
I must admit that the Archery paradox did bewilder me somewhat for a time as archers are adamant that the paradox is something to do with the spining of the shaft, i.e. the rigidity or flexibility of the arrow.
“An arrow must be spined correctly to oscillate at just the right frequency to “bend around the bow” for this is exactly what it does; “bend round the bow”! Here in its self I believe that the Archer has answered part of his own paradox, “Bend around the bow” if the arrow has to bend around the bow, as it undoubtedly does, why do people fail to notice that the Target the bow and the string (flight end) cannot be in line? The string must be to the inside of the bow. However this is not their paradox and so therefore not the answer to it, I am more inclined to believe that the action concerning the final pull, administered by the real archer with a real bow just before the arrow release is where the answer lies. Actually I know it is! It is more likely that the bow and arrow recognises that the flight is the head of the arrow not the point, because it is certain that the archer does not, even though he does the double tap.
A spined arrow
If it is too flexible it will strike to the right of the target centre. If it is too stiff it will strike to the left of the target centre”. This is all dependent on the two main factors, the bow and the archer. As in darts no two archers are the same, but their propelling mental make-up i.e. system is. I find these statements self-explanatory and hold no mystery to me. It is self-evident. The paradox lies in the belief of the majority, who; just see an arrow ejected from a bow that appears to travel without too much lateral deviation directly to the target. I see the real paradox in the wording used in the document that I borrowed this Paradox from, in which the author states the arrow is pushed from the bow.
No the paradox is the oscillation of the arrow which is caused by the several simultaneous power applications exerted on the arrow by both string and bow, basically the attempted compression of the arrow. What the arrow does when it leaves the bow is a mirror image of what a good dart player does, but the Dartist executes the oscillation of the arrow/dart with his fingers/hand/wrist and fingers to a lesser degree, but before it exits the hand. Also my above explanation of how a bow and a string work against and for each other is somewhat simplified. It is far more complex!
The ideology of the pull versus push
Pushed from the bow; surely not? As both extremities of the string are notched at either end of the bow, which is always ahead of the rear of the arrow. . Here the tension is applied to the arrow by the string, it is the direct tension applied directly at the notching at the base of the arrow from the nocking at both extremities of the bow, whilst indirect tension is applied to the arrow via the string, from the bow, and this also applies indirect tension to the arrow base. Together with the fact that the nocked ends of the string are ahead of the base, rear fletched end of the arrow the type of force applied must be a pull. The pressure exerted on the arrow is exerted from and in front of the flight but from the rear of the point. Thus the point is not being pushed forward rather the flight is being pulled forward. What I am in fact saying is that if the arm/wrist was not there the whole operation would induce a follow through in fact the bow and string would undoubtedly exchange places. Not only would the string and the bow exchange places, but also the top of the apparatus would become the bottom of the apparatus and visa versa. I do not and will not accept that the apparatus pushes the point forward but in fact pulls the flight forward.
I also believe that the tension applied by the back of the bow string is greater than the tension exerted by the front of the said string. I therefore believe that on release the rear of the string moves forward faster than the front of the string causing the string to spin in the notch instilling some grip, onto and rifling the arrow forward. I believe the oscillation that occurs all results from the initial gripping of the string in the nock and the arrows attempt to straighten itself, but also because of the two pulling forces installed upon it, it overcompensates but the overcompensation or oscillation reduces markedly through flight until equilibrium is reached and the arrow flies straight.
As I said above, even this explanation is an oversimplification of the true action. To understand this in darts we have to take stock of the arrow, hand and forearm. The
The Dart & the Atlatl
The Dart
All well and good you may say, however what on earth has archery and its paradox got to do with darts. In fact it is as important and just as justifiable a question as “how can you pull a dart? Where in fact the more pertinent enquiry should in fact read, how can you push a dart! The emphasis should be on the hierarchical status of the dart as opposed to Archery; the dart is the superior and more senior of the two sports. Well the answer is, quite simply they are the same sport but in the order that darts is the Daddy and Toxophily is a distant great, great, grandchild many times removed.
This may appear surprising to you but it shouldn’t be. We as dart throwers may appear to be deficient of a few essentials but we are not. We nearly always carry our arrows; we have no need of an arm strap as we are capable of utilising a follow (lead through) through. As the longbow does not have a follow through the archer is forced into wearing an arm strap. The strings and bow are our fingers and forearm.
The Atlatl
A throwing device usually consisting of a stick fitted with a tong or a socket to steady the stock of a dart, arrow or javelin and extend the length it travels whilst imparting extra velocity. The Dart can also be powered forward by the use of a thong or string, there is absolutely no difference between using thong or the stick except the use of a cord, string or thong it is far superior and probably more ancient.
Pre-history, early humanoids from across the globe developed differing weapons for preying on game. Among all the technologies invented the combination of the Dart and the Atlatl is quoted as probably the first weapons system, comprising of a missile; the Dart and a launcher, the Atlatl, Basically a small spear thrower. The system was probably developed in Europe circa 30,000 years ago, and about 13,000 to 12,000 years ago in North America. Inuit and aboriginals developed these, but the dating can only be guessed at. However seeing that the operative word in this case is “system” it proves that the Dart out dates the Atlatl. It is extremely unlikely that our forebears developed a launching device and then looked around for something to launch from it. The dart had to be first! The Atlatl was developed to extend the throwing distance, velocity and penetrating power of the thrown dart. I believe there were two types of Atlatl one fitted with a socket to overlap the end of the dart, the other fitted with a tang which was inserted into a nock located near the rear of the dart shaft.
If someone had thought about the Atlatl’s design just a little more,. There would have been a third type The Atlatl was about a third the length of the dart the stock of which supported the Dart shaft. The Atlatl pulled the Dart forward from the rear, but the correct angle of delivery I should imagine as critical as it is in Darts. Wooden Darts were known at least since the Middle Palaeolithic era. While the Atlatl is well capable of casting a dart over 100 meters, it is most accurately used backwards and upside down at distances of 20 meters or thereabouts.
This gives the Arrow/Javelin an almost horizontal trajectory of lethal velocity, it matters very little if you were wearing armour (it was very inferior at this time),as only the curvature of the plate would have saved you. The Atlatl however is only believed to have been in use by Homo sapiens since the Upper Palaeolithic circa 15,500 BC. The earliest recorded Atlatl find is fashioned from reindeer antler, was discovered in France and is estimated c. 27,000 years old.
Along with improved ease-of-use, the bow offered the advantage that the bulk of elastic energy is stored in the throwing device, rather than the projectile; arrow shafts can therefore be much smaller, and have looser tolerances for spring (spline) “the archers Paradox” is constant and weight distribution than the Atlatl darts tolerance. Allowing for the use of differing weighting for different applications and archers. By the Iron Age, a strap called the amentum, was attached to the shaft, this was the standard European mechanism for throwing lighter javelins. It not only gave greater range but also instilled rifling to the projectile.
Early American Indians also used the Atlatl after the migration across the frozen (what is now) the Bering Sea.
Although, at the time of the conquistadors. The bow and arrow was still widely used worldwide although the matchlock musket and small crude cannon were making their debuts. The conquistadors of South America were undoubtedly confronted by the Atlatl throwing indigenous peoples of South America.
Although the use of the Atlatl had long ceased to be used in European areas by then; so was undoubtedly not even a distant memory. The Atlatl was still in widespread use in the Americas and the tribes were masters at it, Europeans such as Hermann Cortex, Cameron Diaz and Francisco Pizarro must have had a big shock when these funny little feathered fellows with a couple of sticks in their hands arrived and proceeded to stick one of these darts through your plate armour. When I say through, I do mean right through Front, back and the sandwich filling in between.
The peoples of New Guinea and Australasia still use the Atlatl, the Aboriginal name for it is a Woomera. I believe the Inuit call it a Nuqaq although I may possibly in error on the area covered. Now surely if you have a hunting weapon that requires constant practice to retain your prowess, is it not feasible that some type of competition would arise making it into a social event.
I said earlier the dart must pre-date the Atlatl by an immense amount of time, The finding of the Atlatl although an astounding discovery in its own right. It pales into insignificance when you realise that our ancestors knew more than we do now on how to correctly throw a dart with accuracy, tremendous force and utilising the smallest amount of effort.
You see they must have fashioned the Atlatl much later to simulate what they were already doing with their own hand to extend the distance if not necessarily the accuracy
The action applied by the Atlatl is only a simulation of their own hand, arm and body movement and Dart’s sports people have been doing it for ages.
It must have been, because man was, is and always will be a competitive animal no matter what the field! Darts are the superior sport, do not forget it Darts people! All the other so called superior sports that have looked down upon darts as a drunken revellers pastime should pay homage to the most intricate sophisticated sport ever to evolve.
You could, no actually; should presume that if it wasn’t for Darts, maybe the human race would not have survived. We could look down on all other sports as they did us, taking great glee in reviling our glorious sport for it is they who are secondary. But we are above that. Another thing that sets it above all others is. We cannot and would not seek an unfair advantage.
Play up and play the game Ug!
Below is a very simple time scale to enlighten ourselves on the likely age of darts.
The lower Palaeolithic Age
Also called the early stone age, could have spanned an age from 2,500,000 (two and a half million) to 200,000 years ago. That is when our first ancestors (Hominid) apparently roamed the earth.
Homos erectus, Australopithecus, Homo Ergaster and Homo Habilis are according to archaeological sources, starting to fashion stone tools throwing implements”. My tuppence worth!
Middle Palaeolithic
The Middle Stone Age ranged between circa 200,000 to 45,000 years ago time of the Neanderthal and Homo sapiens (Sapiens) better stone tools and hunting and gathering.
Upper Palaeolithic
The Late Stone Age. From about 45, 000 to 10,000 years ago. By about 30,000 years Neanderthal had vanished. Sophisticated tools are being made from other materials including antler and bone and mankind has adapted and spread to every corner of the planet. Leaving the Cradle of mankind (Africa), millennia before, good description really, because when we returned to our so called original domicile, the natives were still asleep they had not discovered or adapted at all
Circa 8,000 -4,000 years ago they devised the bow and arrow, Yuk! Or should that read Ug?
The Bung Arrow
I thought that I would add this little bit of personal social history, Perhaps if I had recalled it earlier I could have resolved the problem of Dartitis a lot sooner.
When I was a youngster I recall that we used to have (in a nearby church yard) a clump of cane that we used to make arrows for our home made bows because they grew really straight and were easy to shave down at their knuckles. To cut a long story short we also used to make bung arrows, bung being a local colloquialism for throw. We would cut a cane about 8” to 2ft long and cross split the thinnest end to accept a folded cardboard flight. A playing card was best for this operation. After whipping some twine extremely tightly on both sides of the flight, one to stop the cane splitting at the leading edge of the flight the other at the rear of the flight to retain the flight on its travel. The front of the cane was weighted with wire usually soldering wire (if we could purloin some from the old man’s tool box). We would then lightly notch the shaft of the arrow just ahead of the leading whipping as close to the flight as possible. A piece of string was cut and a knot tied in one of the ends (usually one knot on top of another) this was optional as some myself include could produce the required action without the knot, then the string was laid in the notch over and around the circumference of the shaft and brought down and across itself so as the string trapped the knot. Tension was applied to the string as we measured the string length required. This had to also have enough length to facilitate at least four circumferences of the hand required for tension. We were able to kill Rabbit, hare, rooks pigeons most small animals in fact. Rats and badger were particularly sought as the local farmers would pay a bounty, especially handsome on badgers.
The action is that of an Atlatl although the Atlatl is a copy of what we have always done. These arrows were absolutely lethal and extremely accurate with a small run up we could easily out fly a long bow arrow. I remember that on one occasion at the playing fields (the Corn Fields) in Torquay we encountered a man who was about to begin firing his longbow at a straw circular target, I recall that he wasn’t a big man and although we were fairly big for our age he was still a developed adult, We helped him to carry his target to a distance of 100 yards the equivalent to about just over 92 meters. We returned back to the bow and arrows and he began to fire, he did reach the target but had very little accuracy. He let us try our bung arrows and was absolutely astounded when we all easily reached the target and 4 out of five of us hit the target, and three of these penetrated the straw target, one penetrating very deeply. He wouldn’t let us throw again, in fact he must have reported us to the police as in the next couple of days the local bobby intercepted us at the same field and snapped our arrows and gave us all a clip round the ear. It didn’t deter us, as we soon made more and better, the next was always better than its predecessor. We found out much later that they were illegal and gradually the fad died out. It is in fact a poachers tool and so therefore illegal. Isn’t it strange that the things that the so called hierarchy can’t do, are invariably made illegal, just like the original way of fishing is frowned upon? You know tickling!
Mediaeval Longbow Technique
By Erik Roth
The hold is the pause upon completing the draw. It must be so lytle that it may be perceyued better in a man‘s mynd when it is done, than seene with a man‘s eyes when it is in doing. Saracens held for not longer than the count of three. However brief, this pause is essential for good shooting, but the longer the hold, the greater the strain for the bowman, and the greater the difficulty of taking steady aim and loosing cleanly, in addition to the disturbance of shooting rhythm. Also, the bow is placed in jeopardy by an overlong hold and loses power for the cast. This loss is greatest in the first three seconds and continues more slowly, bringing the bow closer to its breaking point. For these reasons it is important that the hold be not only brief, but of equal duration at each shot.
The above description of what is termed the hold. Completely misses the point of what is really occurring the hold is not actually the action or in this case the non –action that is the boon to good archery. It is the second pull just before release; this is where the secret lies. This and how the archer is manipulating the whole mechanism. The arrow is not pushed from the bow it is pulled. The point is not directed at the target the flight is.
A partial but an enlightening answer to the Archers Paradox!
When you have eliminated the impossible?
Whatever remains, no matter how improbable?
Must be the answer!
The Mormons input
A Differing Picture
The dart throwing board is a Bow (bough) a Bow is a dart throwing board.
An adapted passage from the book of Mormons
When they arrived in the middle Americas, they adapted the Hebrew word for bow, to designate a new Mesoamerican weapon, the atlatl, here, does no one see the similarity of Nahuatl one of the languages of the indigenous peoples to the much heralded accepted word for the throwing stick Atlatl, I don’t accept the word Atlatl as they never had a word for it. The atlatl was a curved notched stick onto which the javelin or dart nestled, this powered the javelin with a greater increased force and range, than the hand thrown dart or Javelin could attain. This weapon was unknown in the Middle East of c.600 B.C., therefore neither, the Egyptian or the Hebrew language had a term for such a weapon, so they applied the word bow. Here in fact, the weapons propulsion system was well known to them in its other guise as the sling, which was very prevalent in the Middle East.
When Lehi’s party arrived in America, they possessed rudimentary skills in bow and arrow making. The bows they manufactured were ineffective and discarded for the local atlatl; however, they used the Hebrew word for bow to describe the new Mesoamerican missile weapon. The word for bow served for both the bow and the Atlatl!
It is not rare for weapons that were apparently new to one society to adopt a more familiar moniker of another. This was demonstrated so well by the Spanish Conquistadores, when they described the weapon used by the Aztec as “spears or darts which they throw with crossbows. This conjures up mental aspect of an actual crossbow however it was a straight piece of wood with one or two spurs projecting from the wood that would notch into an aperture on the dart. Most dart throwing sticks had one protruding barb; a second barb would indicate a superior thrower. Most sites state that it was used as an extension to the arm to lever the spear with more thrust. THIS MINUTE STATEMENT IS WRONG ON THREE COUNTS.
Firstly it was not a spear it was a dart and you don’t throw spears. You spear or stab with a spear!
Secondly, the word thrust intimates a push not a pull. You cannot push!
Thirdly you do not lever the dart with the dart thrower, you cantilever the dart. As with the Bow and arrow and the Trebuchet, just to site two alternatives! This actually resolved a perplexing issue to me, as to why Atlatl Bob cannot correctly throw his spear, as portrayed on Weapons Masters. So I had a quick dabble on a site depicting an Aboriginal using the Woomera, the less said about this the better.
What I am trying to point out to you all is that because an object or as in this case the weapon or weapons propulsion system uses a known description, it does not follow that the thing described as such is anywhere near to what we discern as stated, the Chinese, called the earliest form of firearms “fire lances and their Chinese arrows were actually rockets, the Harquebus was known as, the thunder bow and the Arabs, nickname for the bunduq weapon was the pellet crossbow.
The muscle that thinks it’s a joint
Firstly and foremost, let us locate the point accurately. The actual anatomic description of location reads as follows, “On the dorsum of the hand, between the first and second metacarpal bones, approximately in the middle of the second metacarpal bone on the radial side.”
In layperson speak; the best way to find the “actual” point location is to find where your thumb and pointer finger meet, just above your wrist. Once you’ve located that area, slide your finger along the bone of your pointer finger about a half an inch towards the tip and then come out off of that bone towards your thumb. (Another easy way to find the exact location of is to squeeze your thumb into your index finger and the top of the “lump” created by the webbing is your spot.)
Weird Fact #10: For decades, a peculiar mental tic has been ruining the careers of top athletes and no one quite knows why.
A dart thrower is depicted in Colombian rock art. There was a whole range of names for these dart throwing devices, names such as Propulsores, Tiraderas, or Estolicas, by the conquistadors. The same contrivances were called Queskes, Quisques, or Ckechkes, by the Muisca Indians of the Colombian highlands. Why the name Atlatl has been singled out astounds and perplexes me. From the tips of South America and Australasia to the Arctic Circle the same apparatuses have been used for at least a half million years and they all have different names. This list appears endless. Maybe this is all down to those who want to change history via the computer. Thank god for books and intelligence!
Throwing boards, Dart or Spear throwers have been used worldwide since Palaeolithic times to throw sharpened wooden darts to kill game animals and later enemies. This wooden, bone or Antler honed weapon launcher basically increases the length of the thrower’s arm and apparently gives greater propulsion to the dart. It was said that warriors using thin shields offered defence from the darts. I dispute this as the darts would easily penetrate Spanish armour, maybe they mean that the dart was deflected by the shield but usually into an adjacent neighbour.
It has lately been put forward by the so called experts that, early humans discovered to throw around two millions years ago. This is actually more like it. They cite Anatomical changes, what mind blowing news? Research relates that throwing helped early hunters. The ability to throw at very high speeds is unique to humans, actually it isn’t. They recorded the throwing movements of college baseball players I believe it is more probable that they singled out the pitcher, using motion capture cameras and observed that the shoulder acts like a (a sling not a) slingshot as they see the arm as rotating backwards. Backwards is one of the keys as we are a backward species! But believe me they have overlooked the obvious. With all their education and multi-million dollar technology. I suggest everyone studies the original successful hunting method by watching a dart player!.
It has at last been added that it was important to remember, “That what we think about hunting and behaviour is still a hypothesis” and further studies were needed. (Scientists are actually starting to use their brains now. However, they are still going the wrong way with the spear (actually a javelin) whereas in fact they should be going with the dart, as the original successful hunting technique!
A certain Daniel Lieberman from Harvard University, US, said the most fascinating finding for him was that half the power that humans generate from throwing comes from elastic energy stored in the shoulder. (Rubbish) The reason so many athletes have shoulder surgery is because the area that is the problem is virtually impossible to detect, but habitually appears to pinpoint the shoulder. A bit like a leak in the ceiling, the actual place the pipe or roof is leaking, could be and usually is yards away from the noticed seepage. He goes on to say that there were shifts in our anatomy that enabled us to throw accurately, so we want to understand better just what those early hunting challenges were. (Correct and the right road to go).
Speaking to BBC News from Kenya he explained how, compared to the wildlife he was surrounded by – cheetahs, lions and leopards – humans had no natural weapons such as claws. “Human hunting is such a fascinating problem and the fact that these features all appear by the time Homo erectus evolved, suggests that hunting may have been a selective force for the ability for throwing.”
Prof Lieberman added that the next step was to discover what exactly early humans were using to hunt, as no weapons have been found from this time in the archaeological record. (They will never find an original Dart)
No qualifications are needed, only common sense
Below is a very interesting, but massively abridged list of sufferers from differing sports. You will note that the affliction does not differentiate or favour a sportsperson who throws or strikes.
The defining point for all those honest enough to admit to a problem is that they all erroneously cite a mental aspect. Then the vultures descend and make an absolute killing out of all.
Baseball
Mackey Sasser *
Chuck Knoblauch *
Steve Sax *
Rick Ankiel *
GOLF
Bernhard Langer *
Ben Hogan *
Harry Vardon *
Sam Snead *
Keegan Bradley *
I will add
Nick Faldo ^
Tiger Woods ^
Cricket
Keith Medlycott *
Gavin Hamilton *
Dr Mark Bawden *
I will add
Peter Willey
And soon to be
Kevin Pietersen ^
Dale Stein ^
Basketball
Chuck Hayes *
Tennis
Guillermo Coria *
Elena Dementieva *
Andrew Murray ^
Snooker
Stephen Hendry *
Darts
Eric Bristow * I could add about thirty names here, who would all be ^
* People who have been honest and admitted they have a problem.
^ Comprised of people who are carrying on regardless hoping for a miracle cure.
Those who cannot admit to their selves they have a problem.
Most who would deny it?
Finally, those claiming ignorance.
The much maligned dart
Why, oh, why has the dart been so maligned over the centuries? It has been the butt (butts) end of many jokes and sketches. Ridiculed, laughed at. its progenies proscribed even to the extent of mutilation and death. I believe the disparagement on the ability to throw darts correctly and many other supposedly humble qualities that were only afforded to certain individuals. Those qualities that ensured mans sustained survival on this lump of rock we call a planet, as it would be a pretty good odds on bet that the human race would not have survived as our long lost relatives the Neanderthals bear testament to. I am pretty sure that the reason for its maligning can be put down to that age old malignancy; jealousy!
Combine this resentment with the fear from self-proclaimed hierarchies, losing pre-eminence and domination over the serf hood and we hit the nail well and truly on the head. This minority, the now integrated self-styled dominants, decried the dart and its many progenies, right up to Agincourt. Mainly because they never had the capacity to accomplish any of these arts which began in the hunting grounds of early man and later, on the battlefields of the world, over the centuries and into the modern Olympic games. I honestly believe that dart throwing, as with most factors, far too complicated for the less adroit, are ardently branded ostensibly as insignificant and were a clear indication of the first power struggles. It must have been a massive kick in the teeth to the higher/upper classes. The nobility and if you like royalty originally came into being because they couldn’t keep their penies in their trousers. Self-appointed hypocrites, who sired larger families, beat up on the smaller families and extracted a surety of some sort and enforcing their will upon all. This is the basis of all authority no matter what label you wish to attach to it. Forming regimes and passing laws to prevent the underlings from utilising the same tactics that were first employed by these law makers in the first place. To pay for this privilege of being trodden on, yet another levy, presently a band of private regulators to oversee this escapade arrive on the scene. They imposed duty after duty that gradually gets heftier and heftier and they called it a tax, and the regulators are called a police force. The introduction of Income tax in 1799 was levied, as a means of paying for the war against the Napoleon. Don’t you think that little fracas has finished now and it beggars the question who actually won the battle of Waterloo.
Sticks and stones will break my bones.
This is not a reference to all the wonderful darts playing public; that have maligned me on Dart sites over the years, or indeed neither the administrators of such said sites.
It denotes man’s first reaction to a threat, way back into the dark days of evolution. It is still our first reaction even now in a perilous situation. The first weapons man ever utilised were sticks and stones. They were not at first used for hunting and certainly not warfare, but in self-defence against superior hunters, animals! If we felt threatened we looked around for something to defend ourselves with and, as it is better to defend from a distance the first thought was to throw the said object.
However they could be retained and used as clubs. Here arrived the first test of man’s defensive intelligence. The more astute hominoid; “whatever the flavour of the day was? Would, pick up two objects, one to throw and one to retain! At this time, probably self-consciously again, we realised that we could hunt or be hunted; self-preservation had just taken its next step!
After this, the two weapon options parted company, but not by much, as they would re-emerge with the same identical response! Stone man would look for a heavier stone and or a piece of slate to which he fashioned an edge, (shot-put &discus) and Stick man would also look for a heavier stick and sharpen the end of the lighter one at, (club and dart). In addition, if you retained a pointy stick you had a spear, a stabbing weapon! Apparently fire was utilised about half a million years ago and man soon discovered that if you put a pointy stick in a flame it would harden the points that were situated at both ends of the stick, (the original Dart)! Also that if you heated a stone and then dropped it in cold water it would split, an alternative discus!
Then armed with the utensils, they both went hunting, also because of fire we found out that cooked meat was preferable to raw meat.
No more tearing out lumps of raw flesh with our teeth!
The more successful hunter was the pointy stick man because he looked into the sky and saw birds, he or she eventually surmised that the birds flew because of feathers. So they decided to discard one of the points and add the feathers from a hunted bird, to the blunt end of the pointy stick. Hence the dart as we basically recognise it today was born.
Additionally, because feathers (Flights) were added at this later stage, it became the first hunting system and therefore by default the first weapons system.
Later down the road a sling (Woomera, *Atlatl* bow & arrow, Trebuchet together with the sling) were developed for both projectiles. However, the action, of the above-mentioned descendants, projected the projectile by exactly the same means and more importantly the identical applied action derived from the irreplaceable method of the dart thrower. Not the stone thrower.
They are mechanisms that formulate carbon copies of the unique accomplishment of the dart throwers unaided action.
When you have eliminated the impossible,
Whatever remains, however improbable,
Must be the truth.
You do not create a delivery system until after you have something to deliver!
This ancient pursuit
From where did this beer swillers game come from, from whence does it originate, what glamorous sport has it been torn from. Was it archery? Was it derived from the Woomera or one of its relatives that utilises a throwing board)? Was it some mysterious lost antediluvian genteel pastime? Or was it wrenched kicking and screaming from the womb of some refined sporting occupation? Maybe David’s despatching of goliath had a hand in it?
Fraid not boys and girls, this is the granddaddy of them all. This discipline of hunting using a pointed throwing weapon is paramount. This is the first successful hunting technique using a hand thrown pointed weapon, in order to penetrate flesh. It is not a game. The game that we know and love today is the direct resultant to emerge through the necessity of practice!
It did not emerge by the means of archers shortening arrows.
Not a snowballs chance in hell, no matter what you have read!
It’s time to tell you a story. Part one