Talk:Battle of Baritt's Tomb

From the Lyorn Records of the Dragaeran Empire

"Fornia also had units armed with weapons that Virt called "javelin shooters"; from the description, these were basic bows and arrows. "

I've always been bothered by this, and now I remember why.

From Uilliv:

"A Dragonlord of the White Sash Battalion in the early years of Tortaalik's reign. Although reputed to be a hot blade, Pel nevertheless quickly defeated him in a duel on the archery range of the Imperial Palace of Dragaera City."

I know we've discussed this before on the mailing list, but what was the consensus? Surely archery didn't disappear during the Interregnum? - Attjen

Where is the conflict? A Dragaeran "archery range" simply involves using javelin shooters at a bale of hay or some such. Never does Paarfi say "bow" or "arrow"--and never does Vlad say he has never heard the term "archery". --Majikjon 16:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Er... but why do TPG & FYA have references to arrows? (Once when discussing the 'fake' battle and once describing the length of the floating bridge in TPG) and references to "bow shots" in TPG? and why does Vlad seem 'suprised' by 'javelin shooters'? It seems Vlad should have at least gone... "Oh... where I come from we call that an 'arrow'"- Attjen

Well, yes, these examples generate a conflict. Personally, I'm of the school that it all comes down to differences in translation in the Paarfiad and the Vladiad. Paarfi didn't really call them bows or arrows--but Non-Meta Steven Brust translated them that way to make the stories more understanable to his audience. Whaddya think? --Majikjon 17:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe in a world where sorcery can constitute effective ranged attacks, archery as an art and past-time is de-emphasized.

While that's not an unreasonable hypothesis, the battles in Dragon seem to show otherwise. --Majikjon 19:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)