Bows and Arrows

Forums: History
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Hello this BigJim:

The other day I was watching this western movie, and the indians were
using bows and arrows, here is my question. Did you ever think how
the bows and arrows were taught to these people originally. Just think
it seems that every race of people down through man`s history used
the bow and arrow, makes no difference where you came from every
contenent has used them.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 4,649 • Replies: 98

No top replies

The bow and arrows were invented very early and migrated with the humans to the ends of the earth. I believe only the Australian and Tasmanian aboriginals did not use bows and arrows (but finds of arrowheads on the mainland makes it probable that they did have them at one point in their history).

0 Replies

Could those arrow heads have been used with some sort of atlatl, or woomera, as they say in Australia. Those atlatls seem to have been everywhere, and are easily underestimated till you've seen them in use, or tossed a couple of darts.

0 Replies

There is evidence that the bows and arrows have been around for @40,000 years, that's certainly time for it to spread around the world.

0 Replies

Indeed and even apart from that there is always the possibility that they were invented in different places at different times.

I believe the points found in Australia were a lot smaller than the ones used for woomera darts. Hence the assumption they were arrow heads.

0 Replies

Paaskynen wrote:

Indeed and even apart from that there is always the possibility that they were invented in different places at different times.

That's certainly true of the cross bow. It was invented separately in China and Europe in the same century.

0 Replies

Green Witch wrote:

That's certainly true of the cross bow. It was invented separately in China and Europe in the same century.

Historians say that "the time was ripe" for the invention. It is easy to see where Rupert Sheldrake came up with his idea of morphogenetic fields.

On the other hands there were also inventions maded that were lost for a long while and then re-invented, like many things from the ancient era (think about concrete, automatic sliding doors and coin operated devices, etc.)

0 Replies

Paaskynen wrote:

The bow and arrows were invented very early and migrated with the humans to the ends of the earth. I believe only the Australian and Tasmanian aboriginals did not use bows and arrows (but finds of arrowheads on the mainland makes it probable that they did have them at one point in their history).

Well , you believe wrong . Archery was never present here in NZ , nor in some other parts of Polynesia .
So , not to the ends of the earth then eh .

blows your theory out of the water huh. Smile

Sorry .

0 Replies

Until a few hundred years ago, there were no humans in New Zealand. Until a few hundred years ago, there were no mammals in New Zealand. Kind of makes your "point" ridiculous.

Not all cultures have adopted the bow and arrow, nor the throwing spear. The Anglo-Saxon never used missile weapons--one of the reasons we know that the Robin Hood story is pure horseshit. Other cultures opted for the sling. The slingers of the island of Rhodes were so good, they hired out as mercenaries. They used oval-shaped ceramic or lead "bullets," and they could be quite lethal.

There is a device used for starting fires which resembles an archer's bow, and many cultures have used spear-throwers. There is no good reason to assume that a single individual invented the archery bow, and that it spread from that single point of origin to everyone who eventually used it. That would not, for example, account for why the Amerindians used bows and arrows before Europeans arrived.

The Chinese have been using the crossbow for literally thousands of years. That doesn't mean that Europeans who developed and used a crossbow could only have gotten it from the Chinese. In fact, there is absolutely no evidence of that.

0 Replies

Quote:

The Anglo-Saxon never used missile weapons--one of the reasons we know that the Robin Hood story is pure horseshit.

Eh? What on earth are you on, Set?

Firstly, the Anglo-Saxons certainly did use missile weapons; bows and arrows are common both in Anglo-Saxon archaeological contexts and in Anglo-Saxon art.

Secondly, Robin Hood is not a character from Anglo-Saxon culture: the first allusions to him are from the 13th century. And while he is certainly a legendary character (that is, even if there was once a real Robin Hood, he didn't do the things told in the stories that have grown up around the name), that doesn't make "the Robin Hood story" horseshit. Is the Odyssey horseshit? Is "Brer Fox" horseshit?

0 Replies

Yes, i consider both The Odyssey and The Song of the South (the latter being the origin of "Br'er Fox") to be horseshit--if presented as literal truth. Militarily, the Anglo-Saxons did not use missile weapons. They only used the bow for hunting, and they most certainly did not use the long bow, which was introduced into England from South Wales--in particular, it was widely used, militarily, in Powys. Edward I, who conquered Wales, introduced its use, and mandated that free English commoners would practice its use, even to the exclusion of playing football on Sundays--there is an edict to that effect preserved. The Robin Hood story as it is known today was created by Walter Scott in the novel Ivanhoe. There was indeed a Robin Hood, and his tombstone can be seen to this day. However, he died in 1251--which is more than fifty years after Richard Lionheart died, pointing again to the implausibility of the story. Whether Robin Hood, or The Odyssey, or The Song of the South, it is horseshit to present such tales as historical truth.

A similar situation obtains with the use of the sling in the ancient Mediterranean civilizations. It was commonly used as a missile weapon for hunting small game--the Rhodians are the only people of whom i have read who commonly used it militarily. Among the tribes of Latium, the farm boys of the Latins and Hernicans routinely used the sling to hunt small game, or to eliminate noxious animals--but it was not commonly used militarily.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Until a few hundred years ago, there were no humans in New Zealand. Until a few hundred years ago, there were no mammals in New Zealand. Kind of makes your "point" ridiculous.

Wrong .
First learn about this country , that way you will not make a fool of yourself in front of the world .

And my point still stands . The post about Australia being the only place not to have bows and arrows is wrong .

0 Replies

Certainly, and not only in reference to New Zealand. But your claim about bows and arrows in New Zealand in reference to Paasky's comments ignores that New Zealand was a unique situation with regard to the concept of "cultural diffusion."

First, with reference to mammals:

The New Zealand Department of Conservation wrote:

Many of New Zealand's native animals are found nowhere else in the world. Apart from bats and marine mammals (such as seals), New Zealand has no native mammals! We do have lots of unique native fish, insects, birds, lizards and frogs. (emphasis added)

Source for the above quote.

With regard to human habitation in New Zealand:

New Zealand in History, referring to circa 1300 in their historical timeline wrote:

The start of the continuous Polynesian settlement. These people, and subsequent arrivals, were the ancestors of present-day Māori.

Source for the above quote.

You may know more about New Zealand than i, but that does not mean i am ignorant. Your attempt to make a comment on cultural diffusion with regard to New Zealand was pointless because New Zealand was settled very recently, relative to the human colonization of other islands of the Pacific. Your point about the Polynesians was better founded, and is the intelligent reference to bows and arrows in New Zealand.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

With regard to human habitation in New Zealand:

New Zealand in History, referring to circa 1300 in their historical timeline wrote:
The start of the continuous Polynesian settlement. These people, and subsequent arrivals, were the ancestors of present-day Māori.

Source for the above quote.

You may know more about New Zealand than i, but that does not mean i am ignorant. Your attempt to make a comment on cultural diffusion with regard to New Zealand was pointless because New Zealand was settled very recently, relative to the human colonization of other islands of the Pacific. Your point about the Polynesians was better founded, and is the intelligent reference to bows and arrows in New Zealand.

Research the NZ Rat

0 Replies

Tell that to the New Zealand Department of Conservation.

0 Replies

The New Zealand Department of Conservation wrote:

There are three types of rat in New Zealand. The Pacific rat or kiore (Rattus exulans), the Norway or brown rat (Rattus norvegicus) and the ship or common rat (Rattus rattus).

And:

The New Zealand Department of Conservation wrote:

Kiore are now found only in Fiordland, Stewart Island and some off-shore islands. They were introduced to New Zealand by Maori settlers and have cultural and spiritual values to some Maori. (emphasis added)

The New Zealand Department of Conservation seems to agree with me that mammals were introduced (other than bats, which could fly there, and seals, which could swim there). I'll take their word over yours.

Source for the above quoted material.

0 Replies

Do not smart mouth me , about things pertaining to my land , things that you know bugga all about .
The source you quoted was wrong , it matters not that it is a govt. dept.
Research means searching again , with no limit .
The site you glanced at is crap. Crap because it relies on the biased recording of one George Gray ,who put into the record the 'history that he and the british empire considered best to sanction , by precedent , their own claims to rightful conquest .

The NZ Rat cannot lie .

AS to this ...

Setanta wrote:

You may know more about New Zealand than i, but that does not mean i am ignorant. Your attempt to make a comment on cultural diffusion with regard to New Zealand was pointless because New Zealand was settled very recently, relative to the human colonization of other islands of the Pacific. Your point about the Polynesians was better founded, and is the intelligent reference to bows and arrows in New Zealand.

You are ignorant . You have been told by a person , something about their birth right , and you ignore it . That alone makes you ignorant.
And you pitiful attempt to condescend to me , with that crap about my "attempt to make a comment on cultural diffusion with regard to New Zealand ".

What attempt ? . I told a smart mouthed ignoramus that it was wrong .
No attempt there . It was a success.

Keep your nose out of My lands history , We will tell the world about us .

0 Replies

Well, Jock, he cites sources. What do you cite - your own inate knowledge? What sounds good?

0 Replies

Charming new member . . . have we welcomed him yet?

0 Replies

By the by, "WE will tell the world about us."

So, you're Maori?

Or do you just speak for everyone in New Zealand by appointment?

0 Replies

Bows and Arrows

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know