After spending years in school to become a trained historian I feel that my thought patterns are somewhat tainted. I often can't take things in books or movies at face value, especially if they are set in the past (or in a world with technology equivalent to Earth's past). Here's the latest thing to catch my fancy. I'll phrase it as a question.
Can you fire a bow and arrow?
At least one author I've read recently refers to characters firing their bows. Others only speak of shooting a bow, or perhaps loosing an arrow. I'll try to explain why this matters as briefly as possible.
A bow is not a firearm. There is no spark to ignite gunpowder (and no gunpowder for that matter). In no way is making fire part of shooting an ordinary arrow from a bow.
The first firearm was the matchlock, followed by flintlock and later percussion weapons. All of these operate on the same basic premise as modern guns: something ignites a bit of powder. The powder explodes and fills the weapon's barrel with gas which expands and sends the bullet down the barrel.
That's why you can "fire" a gun. Would people in a world that had never even heard of a gun "fire" bows?
I think they likely would not. It seems that you can shoot a bow or loose an arrow, but not fire one. Maybe I'm wrong. John, if you're reading this, you're the Medievalist - perhaps you could offer comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Interesting question, Derek. I looked up "fire" in the OED.
In relation to the firing of a gunpowder weapon, the word was first used in 1530: "Fyer this pece." On the other hand, there is an reference from 1400 to the word when using a flaming arrow to set something on fire: "The shippes on a shene fyre shot {th}ai belyue."
Reference to the explicit "firing" of non-flaming arrows from a bow, defined by the OED as "to propel or discharge (a missile) as from a gun" came much later. First mention was in 1708: "The Persian archers firing on them all the while." For bows, much more common was the order to "shoot" one's bow: "sceat" or "sceoton." This usage goes back to the early 900s AD.
Of course, all of the above refers to English usage--there could be entirely different understandings in other tongues. But I think that you are essentially correct, in that the verb "to fire" in relation to missile weaponry referred principally to gunpowder/flaming weapons and not standard penetrative archery.
Maybe you can't fire a bow. But if you can't fire an arrow how do you explain flaming arrows? ;)
Thanks, John, for the valuable insight. The OED is probably a resource I ought to check out more often myself. I was actually surprised to hear that the first reference to firing a bow came as early as 1708 - I had wildly guessed that it was at the earliest a nineteenth century convention.
John and Ryan both bring up a good point. Flaming arrows kind of throw a whole wrinkle in the scheme. Clearly in that case you could "fire" a bow, or at least fire an arrow.
It is clear that it's OK to say "fire" regarding shooting a bow today. I have done so before and almost certainly will again without any reason to feel guilty for incorrect usage.
Post a Comment