Medieval Welsh Weaponry

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fearn

. Sure. If it has a reference, it gets you into secondary reference works. Since I don't currently have a university library system to draw on, and I didn't want to take more than three minutes finding out if you were probably right (which you were, according to Wikipedia), it doesn't need more.

Not good enough for writing a paper, but that's not the point here.

As for the longbow reference, I've seen pictures and reconstructions of the original meso/neolithic bows in other (primary) literature (most readily accessible in <i>The Traditional Bowyer's Bible</i> series, but the wiki link is a good start. Elm isn't yew, but it's a perfectly good bow wood if the bow is properly designed, and it was widely used in Europe.

English longbows were designed in part to maximize the number of bow staves they could get from a yew log (primary literature), as well as to maximize their weapon potential, and that is where the narrow, D-shaped cross section of the English long bow comes from.


F

Extremely well said Fearn!!! and true, Wikipedia is an excellent source to a field of other references which must be carefully considered to develop the material required in the study of a topic. It indeed saves many steps, and as I do recall the 'old days' of many months of research to find supporting evidence on subjects. Modern technology is great, and it seems standards have changed a lot......in my day, a calculator was not permissable in a math class (I think there were some invented by then, though there were some abacus' around .

All best regards,
Jim

[Hotspur]

Perhaps what frustrates me is the trend to view and reference Wikis as a
primary source, when a good many of the articles are often poorly managed.

Cheers

GC

[fearn]

Hi Hotspur,

It's a good point. Wikipedia is not perfect. Thing is, accuracy was less important than speed, and I was more concerned with figuring out if you were probably right than what the truth was, in detail.

Besides that, Wikipedia can be updated. If you have serious concerns about the accuracy of pages that are important to you, why aren't you contributing? I have, on occasion.

Best,

F

[Hotspur]

A fast food philosophy I can only agree upon when shopping for fast food

Correcting all of the bad wiki information might suit me as a paid job but as I participate unpaid on forums dealing with correct information and summations, a Wikipedia (the site) article is the last reference I would ever choose to offer another in a forum discussion. A step above Snopes perhaps.

There are a great many times I simply avoid other's inquests and research tips regarding homework and for exactly the result of these types of exchange. Hence a simple shrug. No big deal.





GC

[Bryan.H]

These articles may offer a few starting points for further research about welsh weapons and cultural influences in the early mediaevil period.

http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba47/ba47feat.html

http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba40/ba40regs.html

I find the Wesh WW1 sword, inspired by the celtic leaf shaped blades, very interesting also.

[kronckew]

some interesting links from that original wiki article posted by fearn. there is one referencing the use of the longbow in ww2 by an english commando officer who used it in an ambush of a german patrol and is the only certified longbow 'kill' of the war. he also carried a claymore into battle.

wiki articles can be starting points for research, as long as accompanied by valid and verifiable external references i see no reason that they should not be used as would any other research based on other forms of documents. some of them are pretty crappy tho