[Jean Thibodeau]

[Dan Howard]

I'm a left hander and have been trained to fight right handed. If I try to fight left handed these days I feel most uncomfortable. I wish I had learned to fight both ways.

[Dustin R. Reagan]

[Jeff A. Arbogast]

Well, here's just one of many-it took me about 20 seconds to find it. Good enough? www.dpjs.co.uk/lefthandpath.html#Origins

[Jared Smith]

I can't vouch as to the accuracy, or exactly which emperors, but; some fairly impressive historical figures are claimed to have been left handed.

Tiberius , Roman emperor
Alexander the Great
Charlemagne, Holy Roman emperor
Julius Caesar, Roman general
Napoléon Bonaparte
King Louis XVI of France
Queen Victoria of England
King George II of England
King George VI of England
Prince Charles of England
Prince William of England

King Edward III of England suffered a stroke, and was not previously left handed. (I did not include him in the above list.) Joan of Arc was depicted left handed, possibly to further incriminate her.

[Jeff A. Arbogast]

True not that long ago as my father was probably naturally left handed but trained out of it and forced into being a right hander when he was a kid.

Even in the early 1950s teachers still tried to force little kids into being right handers as I remember my Mom telling me she had to have a serious talk with my first grade teacher to get her to stop doing it ! ( Thanks Mom. ).

You too, huh? I remember being "corrected" (knuckles smacked with a ruler) by my Elementary school teacher in Baltimore back in the 50's for being left-handed. I got so confused I was actually writing backwards! As your Mom did, my Mom (God bless her) stormed into the school with me in tow and gave the teacher (and anyone else unfortunate enough to be in her path) a verbal thrashing that they probably STILL remember. I was left alone after that, but I always had noticed that my paper was angled differently than everyone else's. But at least I didn't feel like a freak, thanks to my own dear departed Mom's Grizzly Bear fury. It's true what they say-nobody loves you like your Mom.

[Dean Whitlock]

[Glennan Carnie]

[Jeff A. Arbogast]

I just remembered-The Saxon Housecarls of King Harold's army were trained to use their Danish axes left-handed. In other words, swinging them from left to right. The reason for this was so they would be bringing their terror weapon in on the unshielded side of an advancing enemy unless some of THEM were lucky enough to be left-handed (See, it's not always a disadvantage to be a lefty).
Some illustrations in the Bayeaux Tapestry show the Housecarls using their axes in a left-handed manner (or at least so it appears). At Hastings there are many accounts of the horrors inflicted on the Normans by these left-handed professional warriors. Horses with their heads lopped off while their knights still rode them, both men and horses sheared clean through with a single blow, mail being ripped through as though it were silk, arms and legs lopped off etc. etc. Even allowing for some exaggeration, I don't doubt that this sort of thing did indeed happen all up and down the line. And woe betide any poor soldier less well-protected than the iron knights of Duke William's cavalry, who suffered heavily as it was. I personally would not trust ANY mail suit against a heavy blow by these axe-men, who were well skilled at the art of killing. So give left-handedness it's due-if not for the Housecarl losses Harold suffered at Stamford Bridge (possibly as much as two-thirds of his household troops), Hastings could very well have ended differently. They were two savage battles fought very close together with Herculean forced marches first up to one and then down to another-I feel it was almost a forgone conclusion that the Duke should prevail. And William goaded Harold by ravaging the countryside all around to bring him to battle sooner. Even so it was a very close thing. I feel sorry for Harold-everything was against him and he STILL almost won despite it all. A better and nobler man than the Duke by all accounts, but without William's ruthless ambition.

[Tom King]

Mr. whitlock, I believe that you would notice a significant difference in accuracy at 200 yards And to you and Mr.Carnie, you can't pull back a 120 pound bow with your thumb and pinkie. Besides, they would also take your eyes and castrate you after lopping off a good part of your hand. Oh, and then the french would kill you. The "finger" meant I can still pluck my bow (ergo kill you like a dog)

[Glennan Carnie]

[Dan Howard]

Glennan is right. It is complete bollocks. It will remain bollocks until someone produces a primary source stating that it was done.

[Dean Whitlock]

Tom King is absolutely right about my shooting abilities - at 200 yards I'd have been lucky to even reach the target, let alone hit it! But I was shooting with absolutely no training or experience. I could have tried shooting left-handed to match my eye, but I know I would have failed completely. I learned to fence left-handed shortly after losing my two finger tips, in an attempt to strengthen my left-hand coordination - didn't work all that well, I am decidedly right-handed. But I am also very strongly left-eyed, and I think that, with practice and training, I could shoot a bow well. Master level? Probably not, but well enough to enjoy it. The problem for me has always been finding the time. Too many jobs, too many hobbies...

As for "the finger" - I enjoy the discussion but have to apologize for getting us off-topic. I side with the "myth" school and was glad to see the history of its arrival on the scene. Moving on...

I'm still interested in whether more evidence will turn up about left-handed archers in the medieval days. Was the left-hand ban/superstition/fear established by 1066? Apparently not, if Harold's housecarls wielded their axes left-handed. I wonder when it did become part of the culture? Was it purely due to Christianity and the firmer hold it established as time passed, or was it also part of the earlier pagan religions. There's undoubtedly a PhD thesis about this somewhere out there, if only we could find it.

Dean

[Rick M.]

I've come to the conclusion that there were indeed left handed archers. Superstitions not withstanding, there is the written evidence of left handed swordsmanship being taught as mentioned earlier in this thread. In addition, I found a reference to a treatise written by an anonymous Frenchman in which he states " The foot of the side on which he holds the bow should be in front of the other". This indicates that the bow was held in either hand depending on the preference of the archer. The treatise is from 1515, a little later than the period under discussion, but only by a few years.

Rick

[Douglas S]

Personally I know that a longbow can be used in either hand, and it doesn't take much to adapt a bow for a lefty. Archers in ranks would be disturbed little by a lefty joining them. It does help to use the left eye in aiming, however; using the right eye in aiming a bow held in the right hand results in the string grazing the bracer too often.

When we wrote with pens with nibs, cursive writing required a right-hand grip. Certainly a shield wall would not fit together right if a lefty tried to fight on their side. But I think that archery may be a separate matter in this regard.

Biologically, left-handedness is fairly rare; we don't need to invent punishments and superstitions to justify this. There is certainly evidence of anti-left sentiment in history, but it doesn't necessarily tell how widespread it was in "those" days.

[Tom King]

Mr. Carnie, you raised the point why not just kill them. The answer is because its terrible painful. It was a matter of torture as revenge for Crecy, agincourt, the siege of Caen, etc. The french would chop of the archers fingers, castration, blind them, and then mutilate them. Why? Because the french are sore losers, and they lost a lot

[Lafayette C Curtis]