Just Read...

hudders · **Posted:** Mon Dec 07, 2009 5:50 pm

iguanapunk wrote:

Can you go into more depth?

Pfft.

strange1 · **Posted:** Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:58 am

fugue wrote:

this book fails to integrate the data with existing knowledge of the periods under discussion is probably going to go over the heads of most people on the forum

try us! :P

fugue · **Posted:** Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:35 am

strange1 wrote:

fugue wrote:

this book fails to integrate the data with existing knowledge of the periods under discussion is probably going to go over the heads of most people on the forum

try us! :P

Rather than 'go over the heads' perhaps i should say 'would bore the ass off'

lanzaned · **Posted:** Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:47 pm

And would going in depth mean needing the use of a shovel and/or trowel?

fugue · **Posted:** Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:26 pm

Julian Heath wrote:

Evidence for the mounting of bracers on material of some kind has in fact been found on bracers from Britain, with examples from beaker burials at Driffield, Borrowstone, and Culduthel Mains featuring bronze rivets still in thier holes (Smith 2006). In some cases it appears that bracers were held in place with organic bindings, such as the fine example from hemp knoll in wiltshire which still clearly shows the staining left by these bindings (ibid.)

This is featured next to a nice picture of an archer wearing a bracer. Although I in fact argued that the ones we find archaeologically are not peices of archery equipment. Still, at least he read my stuff.

Told you it was boring. But no trowels required.

iguanapunk · **Posted:** Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:26 pm

REVOL · **Posted:** Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:59 am

hudders · **Posted:** Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:49 am

fugue wrote:

Although I in fact argued that the ones we find archaeologically are not peices of archery equipment. Still, at least he read my stuff.

Well... clearly he didn't read it very well if he came to the opposite conclusion!

fugue · **Posted:** Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:40 pm

hudders wrote:

fugue wrote:

Although I in fact argued that the ones we find archaeologically are not peices of archery equipment. Still, at least he read my stuff.

Well... clearly he didn't read it very well if he came to the opposite conclusion!

He read the bit about the evidence I had gathered, he just didn't agree with my conclusions. Possibly this is beacuse he stuck under a sleep polarbear at the time.

hudders · **Posted:** Sun May 30, 2010 9:07 pm

Just Read...

Who is online