The Armour Archive

Hello Bob,

We have 1 guy in our group who protrays a noble class in each of the time frames that we do... that way we do have a Noble somebody aboot the camp.


Depending on the time frame we are his warriors, soldiers, or mid- rankers for the Highland charge... (the noble class was the front rank in the Highland charge... )

It is hard to do what we do... I am envious of our European Cousins who can do Living History or Reenactments on historic sites with proper buildings and surroundings... I hope to be able to do something over there someday before I grow too old...

On the other hand, nothing is more ridiculous than a 'company' composed of a captain, a lieutenant, a full compliment of sergeants and corporals, and three privates - I've seen that as well.

I belonged to a group like that 30 years ago... that's one of the reasons I feel so strongly today about a proper mix of people in any time frame. (We did reform into a group with only 1 sergeant)

Cheers,

DT

My humble opinion is that for us here in Oz, "living history" and "re-enactment" are so misused as descriptive terms as to be close to useless. A group consisting of "knights" and "ladies" (exclusively) but doing the menial work around the camp in their high-class gear will call what they're doing "living history". Dark-age warriors in army boots call what they're doing "living history". Groups presenting a completely fictional tournament call it "re-enactment".

Sweeping assertion here: for a very large proportion of "re-enactors" here, what they are doing is little more than playing "fancy dress", to a greater or lesser extent.

I don't know *what* the scene should be referred to here.

Quite. And I'm sure I don't know any of the groups you might be talking about here

On re-reading, the Nordhere definition can work quite well:

What is living history?- Living history is an educational activity where a group portrays for self education and/or the education of the viewing public, a small slice of life from a point in history. This can be as simple as a single person doing a craft display or as elaborate as a fully-authentic village on a historic site. For many small-scale hobby groups, living history takes the form of small camp displays with authentic tentage, food preparation, clothing and crafts.

I seemed to recall issue being taken on this list previously (some time ago) about whether "living history" necessarily requires an element of educating the public, ie. non-participants, and hence the confusion. I may well have been mistaken.

Cheers
Michael B

Ok, I likely have no clue what I am talking about but it seems that...

In order to get a good re-enactment that is not Military centered, we need a constructed town/village.
Constructed villages cannot be transported to events.

Why not get a group together from people across the area, for example, the entire midwest, and find a central location with available land(preferably closer to a well populated area, for attendance purposes).
Now, if everyone chips in, purchases land, materials, etc. We get together and build our town. Now we hold our own events at our own venue.

I really wish I could describe my idea better, but basically, why not try and get a large group, decide on a common period, build a site, then host events. We could set up a regular schedule for people to be there, and have the place open on weekends. The general public could be welcome to admittance(possibly a small fee) and they could tour the site, learn history, crafts, etc. They could even purchase things made by the group. Basically they can come in and follow a guide for the day(or as long as they like). We could have a multiple sets of garb for the mundanes who wish to join in the fun. We could set up special events where we could have feasts, festivals, weddings(we could host weddings and they're receptions). Even get the warrior types to come together for sieges and battles. We could also hold Faires on the grounds, for example in a field next to the main site/town. It's a big idea and it'd be a bigger project, but it would be truly amazing and doesn't seem totally impossible.

I know I'd be willing to drive a few hours away to live medievally on weekends.

I hope I made sense, it's kind of late and I've been on the short side of sleep lately.

Howzer wrote:Ok, I likely have no clue what I am talking about but it seems that...

In order to get a good re-enactment that is not Military centered, we need a constructed town/village.
Constructed villages cannot be transported to events.

As I understand it, this type of thing is beginning to happen in various forms around the world. See, for example, Crossroads Medieval Village Cooperative in Australia (website at http://www.crossroads.org.au/index.html)

C de C
"In the US, we are at a disadvantage, the old White Company, or the Company of St. George get to move into and bring to life old castles and the like, the soldiers taking the part of a normal castle garrison, and the surroundings being a non-military impressions dream, by giving them a logical context to be in instead of an artificial, fanciful medieval camping scene. Perhaps the ideal venue is those lucky people in the Low Countries today who get to play in that little bit of a recreated medieval town. "

speaking as a former member of one of the aforementioned groups well yes and no.

Yes because the places are lovely and atmospheric, but invariably ruins and people did not live in ruins. I spent some of my best times playing in some of those places but in terms of accuracy they fall rather short.

My favourite observation was what would Lord so and so think to waking up and looking out of his window and seeing a bunch of itinerants setting up camp in his dry moat or verge etc? Not much I should guess.
Ok where a castle is in good condition it is a much nicer affair, but in reality they are mostly either ruins or over built over the eras.

And with a blank canvas you can do more, ie an outdoor wilds thing can legitimately be a camp, it can be near a village for people to make use of the services etc. So in some ways being forced to have those events at least in terms of accuracy and plausibility you guys are less compromised. But building fake castles is another subject.

Well, there's a 60 acre lot potentially going up for sale across the new street from us. We were hoping that would stay county land for our own, personal, playground, but if somebody wants to get together and build a medieval village on it...

...We'll let you use our shower.

I'm fortunate enough to have 40 acres to do with as I please. However, the prevalence of good old Australian gum trees (eucalypts) detracts from the mood somewhat.

I'm growing some oak seedlings, so perhaps it'll be getting somewhere in 50 years or so.

Most northern European trees do not do very well in sub-tropical south-east Queensland.

Michael B wrote:Most northern European trees do not do very well in sub-tropical south-east Queensland.

SubTropical Australia. Re-enactors / living history freaks / larpers / insert-acronym here doing various versions of Northern European dress-ups, often in armour. Who says we're crazy?

Yay, three Aussies in a row.... well, I'm the "exiled one" and not really an Aussie as such anyway... can't wait to get back, though....

Anyway, since I have been playing around in my hobby (I won't even start calling it anything) in three different countries now (Germany, Australia, UK), I have realised that it is pretty much called whatever you like by the people involved. I have seen (and actually been a part of) the high class society cooking dinner over a camp fire. I have tried to be as authentic as possible with the conscience in the back of my head telling me: but this is wrong, that is not right etc etc etc. I have started (no, not with the crushed velvet dress, thank God), but with a leather belt studded with swedish coins (as a Viking woman).... shudder... I guess our own perception of what "Livign History" or "Reenactment" actually comprises changes over time as well.

However, there is always and forever the problem that we are people living in the 21st century. There will always be (if you are attached to a group) the odd member who couldn't give a damn about accuracy, cause the sword he just bought on ebay is very shiny and he wants to hit people with it. There will always be people who want to use silk brocade dresses, but don't want to spend the $200+/meter that the fabric costs and go with the cheap rayon alternative. For many people it is and probably always will be a "dress up game".

I would love nothing better than actually spend my time/money creating things for my hobby which will in return enable me to be ever more accurate with my portrayal. I have come to the point where I will go without a certain item, even if I have longed for it forever, until I can get it done as accurately as possible, not just a cheap imitation.

I am also disappointed by the fact that it seems easier (from today's point of view) to do living history as a man, than as a woman. Even a hunting party sounds great, but the hunting lady with the beautiful dress riding side-saddle is the same lady who will later tend the horse and groom it, we just don't have the same social structure any more to have it otherwise.

Or should we restrict the term "Living History" or "Reenactment" to the "public" activities? Does Living History end when the sun goes down, or the public goes home? Am I still "in character" when I take the saddle off my horse or start chopping the veggies for dinner in my best clothes? Or is that were it ends? I guess for many people it does end there...

More (tangent?) thoughts.....?

Caithlinn

I was thinking of plausible ways to work civilians, including women and children, into encampment scenarios. For example, suppose Lord A's forces had had to surrender the city of B to the enemy and were now encamped some distance away after withdrawing. Families of humble civilian refugees displaced by the fighting might be following the army looking for work as servants or laborers. Merchants might be looking to collect debts, especially if their businesses had been ruined by the fighting in the city. Prominent city officials who had supported Lord A might have decided to flee with his forces to avoid being punished by the new rulers of the city. They might have their families with them. The widow of one of Lord A's loyal officers killed in the fighting might be seeking a pension and might have her children with her to emphasize her plight. Plus Lord A would have his secretaries, clerks, physicians, etc.

Based on my very limited knowledge, it seems that any great lord of the medieval period and his senior servants would have had a swarm of petitioners seeking jobs, patronage, pensions, protection, compensation, etc.

This sort of thing would work well for a public demonstration. The interaction between Lord A and the various petitioners would allow the reenactors to present information about the political, economic, and social situation of their period. Portraying civilians who suffer from the effects of war might also be a good way to counter members of the public who might feel that military reenactors are romanticizing medieval warfare.

I'm sure other people have had these ideas. What does it take to make them successful in practice?

Glen K wrote:Ok, a recent thread (and the previous several hundred just like it ) have caused me to pause and wonder what I can actually do to help and encourage proper living history interpretation on several different levels.

To that end, I hereby pledge to gather sources and put to paper (er, electronic medium) a brief what-is-it/how-to on interpretive methods and standards. While I work on it, please post here any questions, comments, or things you'd like to see included and I'll do my best to keep up and add them in.

And I promise not to make it an academic paper w/ footnotes, but something everyone can use.

Thanks!

How is the paper coming?

Just looking for an update

Or should we restrict the term "Living History" or "Reenactment" to the "public" activities? Does Living History end when the sun goes down, or the public goes home? Am I still "in character" when I take the saddle off my horse or start chopping the veggies for dinner in my best clothes? Or is that were it ends? I guess for many people it does end there...

Good questions. Unfortunately, I've learned too late that sometimes it's best to just enjoy it and not obsess over it.

I've spent the last 12 years learning and studying and improving and obsessing over the objects and the scenario and the history and the people involved and the setting ad infinitum, being driven by the prevailing idea that everything must be perfect or you're doing a tremendous disservice to "Living Historyâ„¢" as well as committing the unpardonable sin of deluding yourself and the public. I've bought in to the idea that perfection is an unreachable goal with all my heart and soul. At this point I know so much my brain feels like it's going to explode, I have great kit and accoutrements...and absolutely no desire to use it because it's not "good enough". It's like an anorexic never being skinny enough even though they weigh 14 pounds. Intellectually I know I've lost sight of the "fun" in this, but when I'm involved I can't focus on what's right, I can only obsess about what's wrong. I can't see the reproduction pottery and glassware, the horse chosen specifically because he was of the appropriate body type and colouring, the hand braided silk points, the natural dyed fabrics, the hand forged utensils-- it's the type of vegetables I'm chopping (are they genetically the same as medieval?), the weather (it's too nice for April! Would we be out in this kind of weather?), the material the table is made of (did they use pine furniture or only hardwoods?), the machine stitching on my sheets (ack! there's machine stitching on my sheets!), there's always *something* wrong that I focus on.

Now I'm not advocating a olicy of telling the public you're recreating history while you're wearing a poly tunic and trainers. However, I think people should be aware that this "pursuit of perfection" can have a sinister side that can - if one is a perfectionist by nature, like me- suck out all the joy in the activity.

Just a Caveat from one of the fallen.

Gwen

Going along with that, I like to go ahead and just tell the public whats wrong with our camp if they hang around long enough to talk. It doesn't hurt really and its being 100% true to our goal of public eduaction even when our meterials can't be 100%. Honestly, we're all about authenticity, we really are. But we're poor. Not one of us is above the poverty line, for real. So we use cotton fabrics in some of our stuff. We have lanterns with glass panes. Our blankets are just medieval-oid really. Machine stiches be-plague us. We're leaps and bounds ahead of where we started, and to be blunt, leaps and bounds ahead of most sca houses. Its never period enough for me either though. So I focus on the fact that at least we use correct garment and armor forms, and no more butted maille, and so on. Our food is as period as we can manage, no ice chests and so on. We use blankets and cloaks, not sleeping bags and airbeds, and our personas come from a medieval country, not a made up one. We've got (low end) swords, not rattan or plastic. There are only four of us and its been hell keeping the crew together. I just started compared to lots of you guys it seems, but we do all we can, and I just have to be happy with it.

Hello All,

Well, from the ren faire wantabe to the finest living historians... at the end of the day we must face the simple fact that we all are just playing "dress up."

We all have to make compromises to do what we do, from hidden machine stitching, modern tanned leather goods, better selection of food in the field, contact lens, eye surgery, better dental health, less lice, the list is endless...

Just strive to do better "next" time, always be willing to learn, and have fun with this stuff...

Cheers,

DT

David Teague wrote:We all have to make compromises to do what we do, from hidden machine stitching, modern tanned leather goods, better selection of food in the field, contact lens, eye surgery, better dental health, less, lice, the list is endless...

But Jeff J forgot to wear deodarant for our last event... Just trying to be accurate, I guess!

Well, thats ONE way we're authentic! We do go all of every event, including Pennsic, without deodorant, toothpaste, etc. It really makes you appreciate things like that more.

J. Morgan Kuberry wrote:Well, thats ONE way we're authentic! We do go all of every event, including Pennsic, without deodorant, toothpaste, etc. It really makes you appreciate things like that more.

Well... try walking/marching from where you live to the next event and forage for food along the way if you really want to "appreciate things"...

Cheers,

DT

Black Swan Designs wrote: Good questions. Unfortunately, I've learned too late that sometimes it's best to just enjoy it and not obsess over it.

I've spent the last 12 years learning and studying and improving and obsessing over the objects and the scenario and the history and the people involved and the setting ad infinitum, being driven by the prevailing idea that everything must be perfect or you're doing a tremendous disservice to "Living Historyâ„¢" as well as committing the unpardonable sin of deluding yourself and the public. I've bought in to the idea that perfection is an unreachable goal with all my heart and soul. At this point I know so much my brain feels like it's going to explode, I have great kit and accoutrements...and absolutely no desire to use it because it's not "good enough". It's like an anorexic never being skinny enough even though they weigh 14 pounds. Intellectually I know I've lost sight of the "fun" in this, but when I'm involved I can't focus on what's right, I can only obsess about what's wrong. I can't see the reproduction pottery and glassware, the horse chosen specifically because he was of the appropriate body type and colouring, the hand braided silk points, the natural dyed fabrics, the hand forged utensils-- it's the type of vegetables I'm chopping (are they genetically the same as medieval?), the weather (it's too nice for April! Would we be out in this kind of weather?), the material the table is made of (did they use pine furniture or only hardwoods?), the machine stitching on my sheets (ack! there's machine stitching on my sheets!), there's always *something* wrong that I focus on.

Now I'm not advocating a olicy of telling the public you're recreating history while you're wearing a poly tunic and trainers. However, I think people should be aware that this "pursuit of perfection" can have a sinister side that can - if one is a perfectionist by nature, like me- suck out all the joy in the activity.

Just a Caveat from one of the fallen.

Gwen

Gwen,

Thanks for that - it's all too true. I can enjoy some aspects - particularly creating replicas with the associated crafts (there are so many things I want to make!), and some socializing with people with similar interests. But if I get too wrapped up in my own details - or those of other people who's kit is poorer but who purport to be doing things "properly" - I will just get frustrated with everything. There is an ideal out there, but I'm not getting too carried away. This is probably easier for me to take as I'm not too interested in the public display aspects now, and I'm fairly resigned to the fact that those who are so interested often make a total hash of it.

[edit: ie. I make a fairly good effort to avoid farbiness, from top to toe, camp accessories etc, but am less emotionally obsessed with it than I was a few years ago, and try not to get stressed about things I can't change - particularly other people.]

Michael B

Yes,

I often feel the same.... and then I talk to someone at an event, without even being part of the event (happened this weekend, while talking to a potential new group) and they look at me and say: "wow, I never knew that, that's really interesting and I thank you for telling me". And then I remember that it's not just about the machine stitching or the commercially dyed wool or the genetic code of carrots.... it's what you make of it.

Yes, it's playing dress up. It can't be done "right", since there are too many gaps in our knowledge and our mindset is completely different as well. But there is the joy to find you've made someone elses day (more or less....) just by telling them what you have tried to find out about something particular. Or that you've shared some knowledge with someone else, learned something new, found a new source or simply just created something yourself, with your own two hands in a way not too different from how people might have done it centuries ago. And that's why it is and always will be fascinating for me. That's why the fact that carrots weren't orange 1000 years ago doesn't matter that much. As long as we don't deny certain facts, there is hope that in the end, more people will strive to "get it right".... I know that I am trying to get it "as right as I can" even if there is a genetically engineered carrot in the bunch (and I can't find it)....

Cheers,

Caithlinn

Yes, I know I'm supposed to be working on this... I'm slow!

Every time I think I've got everything covered adequately, I a) realize I don't and start re-writing it, b) someone brings up another interesting point on this thread. At this rate, you're all going to have to end up settling for ordering it from Amazon...

Caithlinn wrote: That's why the fact that carrots weren't orange 1000 years ago doesn't matter that much.

Sure it does! Well...

That is to say, when interpreting for the public, I think there's certain things that will stick in people's minds. I'm hoping to find some sources for white and purple carrots (I have a few links buried around here somewhere) to grow some for this purpose. I think that children and adults alike will remember that little tidbit of information, after the demo's over.

I saw RED ones in the grocery store a few years back...no it wans't just me, the sign said RED. I think there were white ones too but I may just be projecting that backwards due to the current discussion.

White carrots = Parnsnips

Aehm,

Sorry, but that's not quite true. Parsnip is still a different plant, even if it is confused with carrots since the Roman time. Before the 13th century all references to carota or pastinaca are used for both plants, Dioskurides actually uses the name pastinaca but describes the plant as a mixture of carrot and parsnip (since they are of the same family that's easily understandable, but carrots have white flowers with a tiny dark red central flower inside, parsnip has bright yellow flowers. Dioskurides describes a plant "with a dark red central flower, almost saffron yellow"). Daucus as definitively in connection with carrot is first used by Albertus Magnus in the 13th century (he describes the plant and root including the white flower with red central bit, which is distinctive to the carrot). Daucus carota carota has a small, white spindly root, which doesn't taste very good. It is belived that cross breeding with subspecies maximus (Southern European) and/or possibly afghanicus (oriental) has created our modern orange carrot (with further enhancement) Daucus carota sativa. However, Hieronymus Bock already mentiones in 1542 a "tame" variety of carrot as well as a wild "white" carrot, which makes it possible that enhancement of the wild carrot started even earlier then the 19th century....

I didn't mean to say that it's correct to have orange carrots, what I was aiming at was that while I know they are not right and after everyone else has been told, I can still enjoy the event _even though_ I know that they are not right. (If that makes any sense at all......)

Cheers,

Caithlinn

Caithlinn wrote:Aehm,

Sorry, but that's not quite true. Parsnip is still a different plant, even if it is confused with carrots since the Roman time.

- snip -

Gawd, I love being part of a community where many people know this same sort of minutae!

I think I'd let the orange carrots slide, just no corn or potatoes.

Just bumping this to the top.

How comes the paper?

From, Le Menagier de Paris

Item, on All Saints, take carrots as many as you wish, and when they are well cleaned and chopped in pieces, cook them like the turnips. (Carrots are red roots which are sold at the Halles in baskets, and each basket costs one blanc.)

Charlotte J wrote:

Jeff J wrote:How about the "Reenactor's Manifesto"?

It's lovely, for an all guy military-only group.

how about "The Reenactor's All-Girl Review'?