Atlatl

Rokcet Scientist · Post by **Rokcet Scientist** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:10 am

You're a sharp cookie, Frank... Nothing gets past you, eh?

gunny · Post by **gunny** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:14 am

Speaking of fierce warriors------latest news is the French have a new main battle tank with a 7 speed transmission-----one forward, and 6 reverse.

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:43 am

gunny wrote:Speaking of fierce warriors------latest news is the French have a new main battle tank with a 7 speed transmission-----one forward, and 6 reverse.

LMAO

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:44 am

gunny wrote:Speaking of fierce warriors------latest news is the French have a new main battle tank with a 7 speed transmission-----one forward, and 6 reverse.

LMAO

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:58 am

That's 800 years between sackings, R/S. Not a bad record.

Chuck A. Walla · Post by **Chuck A. Walla** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:15 pm

Stan wrote:
Cheaper and easier to manufacture than bows and requires far less (supervised) training to master to a practically useful level: soldiering.
Rocket, I don't understand this comment. We are talking about hunter-gatherers, aren't we?

In that context, what do you mean by soldiering, and why is a bow
more expensive than an atlatlatl?

I know you have an answer!

Well surely you woudn't call someone that gathers a bunch guys to go steal a valuable natural resource a president would you?

Also, while I've never tried, I bet it would be easier to make a handle with a notch for an atlatl then it would be to make a bow. The projectile part would be about the same I expect. And imagine the time it would take to make the string.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:11 pm

Well surely you woudn't call someone that gathers a bunch guys to go steal a valuable natural resource a president would you?

Is that a trick question, Chuck?

stan · Post by **stan** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:12 pm

Chuck:
The difference in making the two implements doesn't seem significant to me.

One might be harder to make than the other, granted, but I imagine our forebears had a few spare hours to work on them and make a few extras.
Anyway, the expense of bows and arrows did not stop people from developing and using them...

As remember, "eons ago"

when this came up, somebody was asserting that the two weapons were used together, and that only certain specialists used the B&A, while the average guy used the atl atl.
Sounds plausible to me.

Archaeologica.org

Atlatl

costs