Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:10 am
You're a sharp cookie, Frank... Nothing gets past you, eh?
Archaeologica.org
Your source on the web for daily archaeology news!
https://archaeologica.org/forum/
Atlatl
Page 6 of 6
Posted: 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.
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:43 am
LMAOgunny 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.
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:44 am
LMAOgunny 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.
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:58 am
That's 800 years between sackings, R/S. Not a bad record.
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:15 pm
Well surely you woudn't call someone that gathers a bunch guys to go steal a valuable natural resource a president would you?Stan wrote:Rocket, I don't understand this comment. We are talking about hunter-gatherers, aren't we?Cheaper and easier to manufacture than bows and requires far less (supervised) training to master to a practically useful level: soldiering.
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!
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.
Posted: 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?
costs
Posted: 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.
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.