It is incredible how people cling to later hoplite propaganda. In the early stages of Greek stories, there was nothing dishonorable or effeminate about fighting with a bow. In fact, the greatest hero of Greek mythology, Heracles, the great, wielded a bow. Many of Homer’s epics depict the bow and arrow as just another skill in which heroes could showcase their prowess. In the 5th century BC the Greeks held light troops and skirmishing in contempt viewing those who engaged in such tactics as cowards when compared to the direct bravery of muh heavy infantry and thus, this idiotic propaganda was created. The various types of troops came to be separated on the battlefield; naturally, the wealthy found themselves fighting together as hoplites or cavalry, while the poor could only afford projectile weapons. And guess who wrote the sources we have today? The wealthy, of course.
>>18766259Kek. The bow & arrow was never the Indian-Euro/Semite fags weapon and they didn't invent it though they wuz they did like everything else.
>>18766259I agree, but I believe there is another reason as well; as the Hellenic tribes became capable of fielding large infantry armies, they developed a "new warrior" ideal one distinct from those seen in the Bronze Age.The goal was to get his men to embrace his new ideal and adopt the right—more "noble"—spirit. In this vision, a man did not duel with projectiles for personal glory, like a Homeric hero of the Bronze Age; instead, he fought at close quarters, hand-to-hand, side by side with his fellow citizens for the defense and honor of the community. Naturally this idealized new warrior archetype relegated the bow and arrow to a morally inferior, "barbaric" status.
>>18766269fuck off, spammer.>>18766279Those are good points, but I don’t believe that was the primary reason. If we look at Greek military history, the first major Greek armies were militia-style war bands organized around an elite men who had the time and inclination to hone their skills with the javelin and the bow, which requires both time and effort. However, these large Greek forces were generally composed of ordinary men sometimes even peasants—who lacked the time for rigorous military training for them, relying on heavy infantry was a more effective approach. The ironic part is that a fighting style once largely restricted to the wealthy became the hallmark of the poor. the combat that relied more on courage than on skill acting like a brute came to be considered the ideal and superior way for a citizen to fight. This Greek romanticism is so hypocritical gigakek
I’d like to bring up a very interesting quote from an instance where archers completely outclassed heavy infantry:>The Aitolians gathered for the rescue and now attacked the Athenians and their allies, rushing from the hills on all sides and throwing their javelins, retreating when the Athenian army advanced and closing in when it retreated; and for a long time the battle was thus, alternating advance and retreat, and in both the Athenians had the worst of it. While their archers had arrows to spare and could use them, they held out, the lightly armed Aitolians retreating before the arrows; but after the commander of the archers was killed and his men scattered, the hoplites, exhausted from the constant repetition of the same efforts and pressed by the Aitolians with their javelins, finally turned and fled and, falling into pathless ravines and unknown places, were exterminated, the Messenian Chromon, their guide, also having been unfortunately killed. Many were overtaken in the pursuit by the swift and lightly armed Aitolians and fell under their javelins; The greater number, however, lost their way and ran into a forest, which had no exit and was soon set ablaze and burned around them by the enemy. In fact, the Athenian army fell victim to death in every form and suffered all the horrors of flight; the survivors escaped with difficulty to the sea.just one of the instances in which the hoplites’ supposed superior courage and morality counted for nothing against capable opponents armed with projectiles lol Hoplite sisters? Our answer?
>>18766309FR as Aristomenes said when he went to Gaul:>In all truth, however, we must make it clear that whenever an archer speaks, the heavy infantry must listen and remain silent.
>>18766259The bow and arrow is the weapon of the Aryans. End of story non-Aryans can seethe all they want, but...
>>18766314>>18766309Lol, no Bows were completely looked down upon among the Celts and Germanic peoples even women and gay men can be archers, so that proves absolutely nothing. I don’t know why you guys are getting so worked up over the bow; are your bodies so small and weak that you’re unable or too cowardly to engage in a fair, manly, hand-to-hand fight? The Persatroons and their gay bows stood no chance against the hoplites and their spears you’ve lost again.
>>18766323>Celts and Germanic peoplesnice try, historically illiterate larp.Why do you think archery wasn’t respected or practiced within Germanic tribes? Did you grow up watching the Netflix Vikings or playing video games? YMany Norse and English poems contain battle metaphors—such as "storms of arrows"—that carry no negative moral or honorable connotations. archery was a common and respected practice among them. Can you show me a single poem that says otherwise? We’re waiting.>Now the fire will consume / our leader in battle, / the embers will darken / around him who stood firm in the rain of steel / when the storm of arrows ( stræla storm ) shot from the bowstrings / struck the shield wall. The arrow hit its mark. / With feathers, it stuck its point in flight' ( Beowulf , ll. 3114-3119)three famous Icelandic and Norwegian poets from the late 10th century:>{O Rǫgnir <= Óðinn> {of the noise of the sword}} [(lit. 'Rǫgnir of the noise of the sword') BATTLE > WARRIOR] shook {the hail of the bows} [ARROWS] out {of the sail of Hlǫkk <valkyrie>} [SHIELD]; {the crusher of outlaws} [KING] bravely saved his life'>The arrowhead resounded against the chainmail; the sovereign shot with force; {the mighty ruler of the Egðir} [NORWEGIAN KING = Magnús] bent the elm bow; blood splattered on the helmets. {The hail from the bowstring} [ARROWS] flew into the chainmail; the company fell, and {the lord of the Hǫrðar} [NORWEGIAN KING = Magnús] caused the count's death in the fierce battle for the land' (Þorkell hamarskáld, Magnúsdrápa , St. 1).The status of archery in the ancient Nordic world was anything but dishonorable lol
>>18766259>Many of Homer’s epics depict the bow and arrow as just another skill in which heroes could showcase their prowessI wasn't aware Homer wrote many epics lol. Anyway, the Iliad does depict Paris as cowardly because he overrelies on the bow and prefers to keep his distance from fighting. I feel like Homer's attitude is that the bow and arrow are a necessary evil. It would be foolish not to employ them, but an honorable warrior needs to also get their hands dirty.
>>18766345on celts, The Gauls did not reject the bow and arrow, nor did they view such weapons as effeminate or cowardly they fielded archers on a large scale and made significant use of them during the Gallic Wars. VII, 41; VII, 81
>>18766348I think you’re either trolling or have nothing better to do than to keep bumping my thread—which, by the way, I really appreciate.>I feel like Homer's attitude is that the bow and arrow are a necessary evil.Everyone feels things, but I don’t believe that feelings should matter when discussing history. Furthermore, the notion that being an archer implies effeminacy is simply untrue. In the *Iliad*, many heroes fight as archers—Paris, for instance, kills the unstoppable Achilles with an arrow and his role as an archer does not render him effeminate. Paris is portrayed in various ways across different sources, appearing at times as a womanizer and at others as a keen warrior. Moreover, Odysseus’s superior strength and skill with a bow serve as the definitive test, proving that none of Penelope’s suitors are more worthy of her hand than he is. In fact, even in the Archaic period, the poems of the Spartan Tyrtaeus demonstrate that light-armed troops remained valued as a vital component in the defense of the community on the battlefield.>but an honorable warrior needs to also get their hands dirtyPerhaps only from the 5th century BC onwards. Moreover, it would be rather naive to rely on the propaganda of the hoplite elite; the "contempt" shown toward light troops is, ironically, almost always presented as nothing more than a feeble and effeminate attempt to bolster the morale of hoplites facing a lightly armed enemy. The notion that the bow and arrow was less "honorable"—and more "cowardly"—than hand-to-hand combat is nothing more than the frustrated grumbling
>>18766314>The injuns killing us with their damn primitive savage bow and arrows let us kill them with our manly long distance rifles(we invented firearms btw) from gazillions of miles away because we wuz Aryan Spartan fags. Kek>>18766297Keep coping timmycel
>>18766380schizo
>>18766393>We wuz Blood and Soil warriors n sheetHow that Zog defeat going faggots?
Apollo, the divine archer and lyre player, was probably the second or third most popular god in ancient Greece. He was frequently called the "far-shooting" god (Hekatos or Hekatos), reflecting the ability of an archer to hit a target from miles away. To the Greeks, this meant Apollo could affect human lives, send retribution, or inflict doom without ever being physically present. Even the other Olympian gods were said to fear him when he carried his bow, and only his parents felt at ease until his mother disarmed him.In literature like Homer’s Iliad, Apollo rains down invisible, fatal arrows filled with pestilence and fever upon the Greek camp when his priest Chryses is dishonored. He also acts as an instrument of divine wrath, such as when he and Artemis shoot down the children of Niobe for her hubris. Conversely, Apollo was the god of medicine, healing, and ritual cleansing. The Greeks believed he could turn his arrows away from destruction, a power inherited by his healing son, Asclepius.In Greek art and thought, the silver or golden bow represented Apollo's capacity for swift, terrifying judgment and awe, which stood in deliberate balance with his lyre. While the lyre proclaimed cosmic harmony, poetry, and civilized order, the bow reminded mortals of the fragile boundary between human pride and divine power.
>>18766323Same with the nomads who needed to shoot arrows on horseback from far away
>>18766259No the romans hates the persjeets who needed bows otherwise their weak semi jeey bodies would be manhandled.
>>18766502>>18766323sameflag
>>18766345very aryan
>>18766259Don't know. Can confirm I am kind of fruity and I love the idea of a bow and arrow in warfare.
>>18766863>. Can confirm I am kind of fruitso kys
>>18766904Hmmm nah. Because me giving cute guys blowjobs and bouncing on them makes you seethe.
