[MR] Re: Follow up report on the combat arrow that hit IstvanToth

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 10:04:17AM -0700, Richard Mowbray wrote:
> I, too, have read the commentary on the CA-list. Obviously, these folks
> are Gods of the battlefield that both historically and in the SCA have
> never done anything but justly uphold their right to reign supreme in
> war.

You wear your attitude too proudly. It makes it difficult to take your
complaint seriously.
> 
> Now, let's put that aside for a moment and return to reality.

Welcome back.
> 
> Does anyone but me find it odd that this arrow missed everyone in a
> body of troops to find the eye of the man without a helm? Dumb luck, I
> guess. But since he took off the helm to see better, why didn't he see
> it coming? Was the arrow fired from head-on, or from the flank?

M. Toth stated that he was watching someone with a great axe pulling
deaders off the bridge. His attention was clearly, by his own words,
focused on something other than the particular archer whose arrow
hit him. Or are you expecting him to be omniscient? 
> 
> No one with an ounce of sense is going to say that M. Toth bears no
> responsibility in this matter. But what about the archer?

No one with more direct access to the events has suggested that the
archer did anything wrong. I don't even think M. Toth made that implication.
The archer was firing into an ongoing melee -- an utterly unremarkable
thing. His target apparently dodged the shot. 

Why do you keep displaying this animus toward combat archery? 
> 
> To you, Herveus, I am not veiling anything. I am expecting some direct

You, by your tone and words, appear to bear animus against combat
archery as an activity. You use rhetoric that attempts to dismiss as
unworthy those who feel differently. You assert directly and indirectly
that the archer *must* have been somehow culpable for the accident and
therefore must be held up for public humiliation and excoriation.

You give no sign that you have special knowledge that is not available to
the rest of us to inform your apparent conclusion. That, sir, is premature
judgement -- prejudice. 

If you mean, deliberately, to give the insult, pray admit that, or amend
your words. If your insult was inadvertent, admit its existence and ask
for forgiveness. 

> answers from the other person directly involved in this incident. It
> takes two to tango. The archer fired the arrow and the fighter was
> struck.
> And you never have my permission to change, modify, or ameliorate to
> your taste, my words.

Where did I alter the words you wrote? Every quote of your writing is
unaltered. Why do you imply that I did otherwise?
> 
> Sir Richard de Montbrai

yours,
Herveus
-- 
Michael and MJ Houghton   | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
herveus at radix.net         | White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA            | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
                          | http://www.radix.net/~herveus/