Re-enacting but not in fields

Historic questions, thoughts and other interesting stuff

Moderator: Moderators

Tom H
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 2:16 pm
Location: Cheshire
Contact:

Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Tom H » Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:29 pm

Most of the living history events I'm involved with are based in historic buildings, not the usual tents in fields situation. I'm wondering who else does this regularly and in what settings?

I think the approach does bring a building to life, but am looking to improve how we do it. For instance, in 2009, I did medieval events in a 15th century house, a cathedral chapter house, a watermill, a guard tower on city walls and a church; for each I took different kit and related what I was saying to the story of the building, but I still get the feeling that it looks like a stall of objects to show in a building, rather than truly becoming part of it. I'm aware that some places such as Kentwell are regularly or permanently used for interpretation but most of the time re-enactment events are for a special weekend once a year. What I'm asking I suppose is this, is there a way of presenting living history in buildings for that event weekend but so that it really looks like it belongs there?

As always, any ideas or suggestions gratefully received!
Tom



Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:11 pm

Last year at Avoncroft, some of the Beaufort Companye slept and ate inside a few of the buildings which gave them a "lived in" quality (because they were being lived in.)
I have never been to Kentwell, nor do I feel any urge to attend or participate, but the fact that the bulidings are being used may be why so many re-enactors think its the box dulux.
My own thoughts are that at the end of the day you are still a 21st century person dressing in funny clothes and playing at make believe so there is a very real limit to what you can do.
You have probably got it right if your employers are asking you to go back again.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

guthrie
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2349
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 8:54 pm
Location: Polmont-Edinburgh

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby guthrie » Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:50 pm

Ideally, off the top of my head, you need to fit in, with your stuff, into the building, but there also has to be more stuff going on. For example, if you're on your own in a medieval mill talking about how it works, thats not the same as actually grinding corn in it and moving stuff about and knowing that your father replaced the floor there and the sound of the gears tells you what speed everything is running at.

Also if there's things going on that helps. The better thing about Kentwell is that we are doing halfway authentic things in surroundings which help add an air of authenticity, (Yes I am very aware of whats good and bad about the buildings) but each person there, speaking in first person, therefore has to cultivate a greater feel of belonging. Moreover having people come and go helps with the vivacity of life. I'm sure being a guard on top of a wall was very dull, but don't tell me that 600 years ago your mate didn't drop by for a chat or you couldn't have some banter with people walking by bellow, or send someone to buy you some bread or ale.
It helps if what you have is appropriate for the location. At Tewkesbury last year I was chatting to someone who was set up as a scribe in one of the medieval houses. Perfect location, I'm sure I have seen someone with lots of cloth in there before.

The best way of becoming part of it would be to build a brand new village, that would be fun, but a little expensive. If we could get a hundred people to commit a few thousand pounds each...



Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:52 pm

There is another problem in that, as now, a lot of the daily activities done in the past ere as boring as all Hell (just more physically demanding).
Take for instance Guthries suggestion of a soldier doing stag, as someone who has stood stag its actaully dull as dishwater (even on a frontline) unless something happens in which case it switches from dull to terrifying in nano seconds.

Would you pay to see someone who was just sitting/standing/getting on with their job and doing not much else?

It is still a contrived and unrealistic situation. A sentry is not paid to chat to passers by, he's paid to watch the gate, check for unwanted riff-raff and eject the latter before they get in.

The one time I was invloved in the latter being done well was at a ACW event, the guards spent time checking the crowd as they waited to go in, they asked where people had come from and their purpose of travel. They tried chatting up girls, checking that women knew the man they were with (damn Reb spies or deserters everywhere). I took one man out of line and held him at gunpoint until the duty officer came and confirmed he wasn't one of the men we had been told to look out for.

The response to this though ranged form being mildly amused and willing to play along to some individuals being visably frightened and we chose not to repeat it again.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

Langley
Post Centurion
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:36 pm
Location: West Midlands

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Langley » Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:01 pm

We do a lot of events in places other than fields. We ahve multiple personalities. We research the location and come up with a reson for us being there as a group. For example, we can be a gun crew on our way to where we have been hired so we do things like gunnery practice, archery practice, a bit of drill, repair of arms and armour, cleaning swords etec all of which allow for sitting around and chatting to the punters. Cooking is big of course. When we do Lower Brockhampton at Christmas we play the household staff who have just heard the family is coming to spend Christmas in this particuar one of their properties so we rush around hunting (we had a falconer with us last Christmas), dragging in Yule logs, decorating the hall, practising music and a mumming play. All mistakes can be hammed up and explained by the rush job nature of the preparations. Cooking and laying out a banquet again play a big part. We have become tradespeople at Tintern abbey - we do not like bringing weapons apart from standard side arms so do not bring the guns, may possibly do a bit or archery practise - after all this was generally done next the church on a Sunday. Just talking about mediaeval life to visitors there is great. I have played a comissioner of array sent to discuss the levy on the Abbey income (and the Abbot is keeping me waiting) but gives me a chance to don the posh frock. Melles (of Scriptoriuj fame) generally joins us there as heloives up the road and acts as my clerk wanrering around looking for things to tax and writing them down. It is a matter of fitting what you do into the normal life of the location. Have a look - www.wythe-retinue.org.uk for some of our events and the different spin we put on them. Sleeping in the turret rooms at Pembroke was wonderful!



Tom H
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 2:16 pm
Location: Cheshire
Contact:

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Tom H » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:03 pm

Thanks to all for replies so far - interesting to see what else is going on.

Marcus & Guthrie, I agree with the points you both make about thinking it through in terms of the visiting public and what will engage them or capture their interest rather than a depiction of what would be typical for most of the time, i.e. routine work.

I think I may be fairly close to some of your suggestions, and perhaps some of my concerns are just self doubt. When I've been at the Water Tower, which is one of the defensive towers on the city walls at Chester overlooking the site of the medieval port (silted up by late 16th century) there have been a number of us, someone representing the role of the guards but also explaining why use certain defences and weapons, whilst others depicting merchants arriving at the port or just local people from the date of construction talking about life in the city at the time. This admittedly means that there are people there who wouldn't necessarily have been in the tower, but gives a chance to better explain the buildings role in the city as a whole.

Something else that occurs to me as I'm writing this, and kind of connected is that whenever in a building rather than a field, questions from the public are also as much about the earlier/later history of the building as the period we're trying to present. I don't like the approach where people pretend they can't answer this as they are from 1381 or whatever, so have to remember to do some reading up on the broader history in advance.



guthrie
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2349
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 8:54 pm
Location: Polmont-Edinburgh

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby guthrie » Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:07 pm

There's nothing wrong with routine work, the problem is that you either need someone to explain it to the audience, which therefore may mean not using first person, or you need to be able to do and talk at the same time. Of course stopping and explaining thigns to the public might get you into trouble for not meeting your quota of work for the day...



Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:45 am

If you're getting paid to do this stuff (and I hope/guess that you are) and they are still paying you to go back and do your stuff again then my suggestion is to stop worrying. You are either doing a good enough job, they don't care or are secretly looking for someone better than you and there is nothing you can do about it anyway.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

Tom H
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 2:16 pm
Location: Cheshire
Contact:

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Tom H » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:51 pm

Brilliant! Thanks again for replies & comments. Yes, I/we do get paid for these events and yes, we are doing them again in future, so you're right - although I won't get complacent! That said, there are one or two venues that I do events at in a voluntary capacity to support with their fundraising/profile which I feel strongly about and just to get the opportunity to be part of it all.

Thanks again.



User avatar
Hellequin
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:44 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Hellequin » Sat Feb 20, 2010 7:16 pm

Marcus Woodhouse wrote:I have never been to Kentwell, nor do I feel any urge to attend or participate, but the fact that the bulidings are being used may be why so many re-enactors think its the box dulux.
My own thoughts are that at the end of the day you are still a 21st century person dressing in funny clothes and playing at make believe so there is a very real limit to what you can do.

If you haven't been how on earth can you feel qualified to comment on it?
FWIW because it is attached to a permanent site of sorts, they get to use equipment and perform activities which are simply not possible in fields. Also, they actually have standards of kit and appear to know what they are talking about in a good amount of depth - there are only two or three Fed groups who compare, and they're not close really.



Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:23 pm

What an utterly stupid comment.
I've never raped anyone or murdered anyone but that doesn't mean that I don't have any opinons about rape and murder.
Just because I have never taken part in the frolics at kentwell does not mean that I am unaware of the work that goes on there or of first person role play.
At no point have I said that anyone should not stage any LH displays at Kentwell or not attempt 1st person presentations so get off your high horse, its actually people like you with a mightier than thou attitude that really makes me want to give Kentwell and kentwellians a miss.
So you have high kit standards, big deal, at the end of the day you are still a 21st century person making out you're living in the past and if you really think otherwise you are in need of psychatric help.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
glyndwr 50
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:16 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby glyndwr 50 » Sun Feb 21, 2010 10:31 pm

I find this thread quite interesting ,as everyone has there own point of view .the main reason that people do reenactment is because it is something that is interesting to them .The reenactment world brings many people together with many ideas they have of how something should be done ,or how they should be dressed .As has already been stated ," We are 20th century people trying to portray a certain period in history .".And as reenactors we are acting out history as best we can. But to get the best out of anything we do is down to each and every one to play there part well .You can pay for the best armour money can buy ,but if you can't fight well in it it does not do go down too well with the reenactors that can.What I am trying to say is to be a good reenactor you have to be able to act ,and act well .I do events at Cosmeston Village through the year and try to give the paying public a taste of 14th century life .All my companions are very scruffy unshaven and generaly unkept .I myself never wash my outer garments ,I let the wear a tear come on gradually ,If I happen to tear my garments then I will sow them up by hand and its not done very expertly .My weapons are not shiny or polished to the point they are like mirrors ,they are clean but give the effect of well worn with time and age .Belts and shoes are well worn in and show signs of normal wear .I do not portray a high born person so there for would not have the money or advantage to dress well.I make and repair things to my status .The biggest problem with some reenactors is that they look to clean in clothes and apperance .Don't for one minute think I am saying that this is wrong ,on the contrary ,if you are a member of a household or lordship then that is fine but if you are playing the part of a low status soldier or worker/ peasant then you would not have such refinements.I am a run of the mill archer ,nothing flash about my dress .I have been told many times my clothes looked lived in .I would not stand out in a crowd ,and thats my main point . If you want to give the impression to visitors of what ever house or building you are trying to portray in a period time .Then acting and how you look are most important .I even know some lads that have removed the odd false tooth to give a bit more realisim to the part they are trying to get over to the public .And as we all know teeth were not as good in the early times as they are to day .Acting thats the key to a good reenactor ,play to the crowd and play your part well .And always remember it a hobby and should be enjoyed .


Death is just Nature's way of telling you to slow down.

User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby gregory23b » Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:48 pm

Glyndower I think you are labouring under and perpetuating stereotypical views on the past, dare I say romanticising the 'rustic' end.

Hellequin.

"Also, they actually have standards of kit and appear to know what they are talking about in a good amount of depth - there are only two or three Fed groups who compare, and they're not close really."

Has it occurred to you that many Kentwellies are or were reenactors beyond the confines of Long Melford?

As for standards of kit, you and I know (hey, maybe you don't) that it is very variable as is the knowledge base, considering that every year there are complete newbies to it who do not either have the background knowledge for the kit or the spiel, so let us not over sell it just because it has a long pedigree.

Marcus's point and it is a valid one is that it is not just Kentwell that can offer an immersive experience for the reenactors and public, which is exactly what he meant and that is something I can support, you may not see beyond the red brick walls of the Hall boundary, but high quality, excellently kitted out events have been happening for a long time, decades in fact, with and without members of Kentwell. Do all groups do the thing in depth? no, but then neither do all KW participants, that is not a secret nor a myth, but a general truth that is applicable to all reenactment, ie there is a cadre of those who really push the envelope and then there are those that simply bimble along for the ride.

How do I know? I reenacted with a shed load of Kentwellies, who also did 15thc, some inspirational, some good, some indifferent, many still do it. I have attended Kentwell as a visitor and can see for myself what is a high or otherwise standard. It is a great project, but it is not anything like perfect nor ideal, at the end of the day we all dress up and have a great laugh with our mates in a contrived setting with a contrived context, it is not a pissing contest and just because not all of us do 1st person Desperanto or Tudorese does immediately invalidate what we do as immersive, absorbing and believable.

"and they're not close really"
Really? as a member of a Fed group that takes what it does seriously and to great detail and to depths that many KW would struggle with, I suggest that the comparison is maybe a preconception if not a misconception and we do not want that now do we?


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf

User avatar
Sophia
Post Centurion
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:46 pm
Location: Camberwell, London
Contact:

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Sophia » Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:06 am

Thank you Jorge - as a Kentwellie who also does C15th I was reluctant to jump in. My personal opinion is the best of both are wonderful and the worst - well let's not go there :D


aka Thomasin Chedzoy, Tailor at Kentwell Hall

User avatar
glyndwr 50
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:16 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby glyndwr 50 » Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:08 am

gregory23b wrote:Glyndower I think you are labouring under and perpetuating stereotypical views on the past, dare I say romanticising the 'rustic' end.


I try to help any reenactors who wish to get the best out of any event that they do .I use the word encorage as a lot of new reenactors find it hard to get started .I don't run down the efforts of others .I was not around at the time so I can't really judge what is right or wrong .And what evidence that is at hand is subject to question.There are many reenactors that try really hard to achive what they think is near perfect in dress and portraying a set period in time .You will always get the odd ball person who will never agree on something ,but that is there problem.I am in no position to judge someone on what is right or what is wrong .But I will say this .As reenactors we can only go by the evidence that we have on how things might have been .You can read many books on the same subject and find many diffrences .Its sometime a big problem to get it right .Take for instance the Battle Field of Bosworth ,for years its been recorded as being in one place ,Now its been revealed to be somewhere else .So evidence comes up to disproove what was thought to be correct only to be prooved wrong .I feel that its only fair to cut a bit of slack with the reenactors who are trying to recreate a period in time .Don't be too judgemental ,if you find that there are mistakes ,then try to improove the siduation and make an effort to help .Its very easy to criticize but that does not help the siduation .I may well be labouring under a perpetuating stereotypical views on the past ,and romanticising the 'rustic' end of things .Whats wrong with that ? .the public like it and they are the people who matter .If they come away from an event having enjoyed themselves is that wrong .As had been already stated we are 21st people trying to recreate a period in time .And to try and put oneself in that period of time is by only going on what information we have that has survived and been passed down to us .The person who originally posted this thread was only asking for ways to improove the period of what he was trying to recreate .He does not need to hear negative replies ,If someone feels that there is something more that can be done to give it a much more beliveable feel then help them out .If there is a person who has a good knowledge on a set period then let them step forward ,and give others the benifit of his or hers knowledge so that they can aid them in getting it correct .If you see a mistake tell them ..There was historically only one person who was supposed to be perfect and he had nail holes in this wrist and feet . We all make mistakes ,but I'm sure a freindly bit of advice would not go unheeded..


Death is just Nature's way of telling you to slow down.

Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:20 pm

I think Jorge aimed at your comments about missing teeth, shoddy clothes and so on omae.
Most wills paint a different picture of all but the very poorest individuals being scarecrows, that might have clothes saved for "Sunday best" while their work clothes got worn out but there was a lot of keeping up with the Jonses and that sometimes meant that Lords dressed out their followers so they would not embarress them with looking down at heel.
And while there are individuals who have been studied showing all the signs of classic Monty Python medievalism many more have been examined with worn but otherwise healthy teeth (as might be expected in an age that knew of sugar as a spice and not an additive to everything.)
There is a wonderful book a read that actually discusses in depth the many "versions of the middle ages" that exist-for some its blood and thunder, for others chivalry and courtly romance and so on. The thing is the middle ages, as is the case now, was a time when all of those versions were true, sometimes in the same place and at the same time.
So while not a total falsehood, your portrayal of it being a time of down trodden serfs and silk clad nobles is not conventional regarded as being exactly truthful by historians either. But if it works for you, your employers still pay you and the public have some fun (and just maybe learn something, not that I'm convinced re-enactment does very much of that or that it's important it should) then so what.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby gregory23b » Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:44 pm

Glyndowr. it is really quite a challenge to decipher what you have written, I get the gist of it, but the absence of paragraphs strains my eyes, am not being facetious, but my eyesight is not as it once was. But I will try and comment or query or answer your rebuttal.

"But I will say this .As reenactors we can only go by the evidence that we have on how things might have been .You can read many books on the same subject and find many diffrences .Its sometime a big problem to get it right ."

Agreed, but we also know if things are romanticised and therefore presenting a skewed perception of the past, ie romanticism is not a recreation but a fantasy.

"Take for instance the Battle Field of Bosworth ,for years its been recorded as being in one place ,Now its been revealed to be somewhere else .So evidence comes up to disproove what was thought to be correct only to be prooved wrong ."

But the location of Bosworth was always conjectured and with reasonable justification, it was not presented as some sort of oasis, or other fantastical place, simply a location, the actual battle is often romanticised, but that is not the same thing.

"I feel that its only fair to cut a bit of slack with the reenactors who are trying to recreate a period in time ."

Not sure I get this, you have reenacted for the last 20 odd years and somehow are not prepared to either challenge your own perception or entertain a challenge to you, if so then why champion the new research into Bosworth, as that was mainly a historical challenge to a perceived and believed truth, ie you either agree to a review of ideas or you do not. Not sure how you fall in that one. Besides, it was you that I challenged, not the OP.

"Don't be too judgemental ,Don't be too judgemental ,if you find that there are mistakes ,then try to improove the siduation and make an effort to help .Its very easy to criticize but that does not help the siduation ."

I again refer to the Bosworth example, there are plenty of people with a vested interest in keeping the presumed location as is, that is not unique to Bossy but all kinds of heritage places where the local myth (belief and romanticism) is big business etc.

"I may well be labouring under a perpetuating stereotypical views on the past ,and romanticising the 'rustic' end of things .Whats wrong with that ?"

But then this contradicts this
"As reenactors we can only go by the evidence that we have on how things might have been ."

You used the word evidence, romanticising is rarely reliant on evidence.

"the public like it and they are the people who matter .If they come away from an event having enjoyed themselves is that wrong ."

They are not the object but the recipient, I would ask, what is wrong with more accurate presentation of 'evidence' that is also entertaining? I am in the business, so I do know what I am on about, just come back from a Royal Palace with exactly that happening, we regularly answer commonly held beliefs and by and large the public are actually happy and enjoy the discourse.

"As had been already stated we are 21st people trying to recreate a period in time .And to try and put oneself in that period of time is by only going on what information we have that has survived and been passed down to us ."
Again, this contradicts your romanticism ideal, you either want to present evidence or you want to present an 'idea', a choice issue really.

"The person who originally posted this thread was only asking for ways to improove the period of what he was trying to recreate .He does not need to hear negative replies"

A) I challenged you NOT the OP.

B) Who are you to presume what should or should not be presented in a given manner? I also know the OP as it happens, he is a professional in the industry and is more than up for challenges and I know he is someone who revises his knowledge base on a regular basis, how often do you Owen?


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf

Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:48 am

I wasn't sure that Tom had been given any negative replies.
He's clearly in demand for his sevices and that is more than proof of his historical skills and knowledge.
He did ask for advice on what else to he might do and has concluded, after being given suggestions that, he is already doing those things and may have reached the limits of what he can "authentically" portray.
I meself would quite like to see him doing his stuff as he sounds pretty clued up in wanting to do something Edutaining to the pubelicks.
I am well aware that dispite my own efforts I am far from being authentic. My kit measures up to my own groups and Fed standards, surpasses them in some places and falls short in others.
I don't camp in an authentic tent, but I don't tell people that the authentic camps are the way they were in the olden days because my own research tells me that they are not. My kit is quite clean and tidy because I am quite clean and tidy and human nature being what it is I expect that there were people in the past whose only contact with clean water was on their baptisim day and people like me who are quite fussy about such things. (I even took time to shave using water from puddle once while on push.)
Most punters who come along to the events I go to don't want educating they want a romantic image of the past.
We might get p*ssed off at the ratio of knights in shinning armour to archers in jacks being the wrong way around but I do suspect that if the situation was reversed there would be unhappy MOPs. That said it doesn't stop me from pointing out to people who express an interest that there are too many shinny men-at-arms and not enough archers (not that I believe it would be that easy to tell them apart-I myself think that the notion of archers being dressed in shabby jacks is a bit of a myth as well), that there are too many tents, women, children, not enough (or any) horses, carts, bulls, priests.
I've been around Cosmeston and attended as a re-enactor and while it is a great little place it does pander very much to a distorted image of the past (to some one that is charmingly rustic and romantic to others confirming that life was short, brutish and cheap), it also plays on Welsh patriotism, even down to the Welsh always winning the fight at the May Day event (something they only manage to do because we lend you all our archers fro the weekend :D )
I'm not going to rob the event of that, its what the paying public want to see and without their cash the village would not be able to fund real historical work (unlike Warwick Castle). It does distort the historical truth of the period by suggesting that all the welsh were involved in the revolt of Owen Glendower (I apoligise for using the Anglican spelling). Like the wars fought by the Irish and the Scots (again and again!), though it was one that had Welshmen not only serving, but sometimes willingly offering their services to the English, especially if it was an opportunity to settle old scores.
Life could be dirty and harsh, but it could also be fun and carefree. Children and adults played a wide variety of games and there are vast records of music and other past times which suggests that even the peasentry (which in middle ages terms was anyone not a aristocrat or in the clergy regardless of the money they might have) had spare time to enjoy it.
Over emphasising the grubby shittyness of it all is as inaccurate as making out it was all tournaments and masked balls (they had them in Florence, Paris and Venice). And that is true however realistically the dirt on your kit has been earned.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
glyndwr 50
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:16 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby glyndwr 50 » Mon Mar 01, 2010 9:47 pm

Fair play to you Marcus .I fully agree with all that you said .You put it over in a non degrading manner ,thankyou for your well written and true view of how it is .I was only talking about the hardships which were imposed during the rebellion wars of Glyndwr .When to whole of wales was in a really bad state . I am not very well educated and may not write down things in the best queens english ,but many reenactors replying to threads don't bring someones inability to write gramma as it should be done.I thankyou for that .I will in future reply in very few words as not to be confusing to readers .Once again I do agree with all that you have said and thankyou for your view of modern reenacting ..


Death is just Nature's way of telling you to slow down.

Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Mon Mar 01, 2010 11:25 pm

Well that's no good.
It's back to being an a***hole for me now.
You don't get to be as big a one as I am without practise.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
Gandi
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: Sussex by the Sea

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Gandi » Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:33 am

I am not very well educated and may not write down things in the best queens english ,but many reenactors replying to threads don't bring someones inability to write gramma as it should be done


it was, I believe, your constant failure to use the carriage return/enter key that was being questioned by G23b not your grammar.


Now there's two kinds of wet in my pants!

User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby gregory23b » Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:12 pm

"I am not very well educated and may not write down things in the best queens english ,but many reenactors replying to threads don't bring someones inability to write gramma as it should be done."

I am no grammar paragon mate, I simply said that I found the huge paragraphs hard to read, I have only recently been prescribed glasses to read and to be frank it is hard for me to make out what you are saying. I do not have an opinion on your grammar or your use of the language, that would be rude and unnecessary. So you can include me in the ranks of "many reenactors replying to threads don't bring someones inability to write gramma as it should be done"

"I will in future reply in very few words as not to be confusing to readers ."

Now you are being rude and unnecessary, by all means write as much as you like, but if you hope for it to be understood at least break the lines up a bit. You might note that I took the time to read your entry, so I paid it the respect it warranted, I was not agreeing with much but I was not merely having a pop. If you do not want to actually chat about stuff then fine but do not go to the bother of playing a victim, as for 'degrading', sorry mate, but that is your problem of interpretation, not mine.

I would only add that I felt I was being fair when it came to the KW assessment from my own perspective, I did not run it down, just because I do not agree with someone's view does not meant it is not valid, otherwise it would not be worth answering. I treated you in the same way, you were not attacked or brought down, I wanted to know how you came to the conclusions you did because they seemed to conflict with each other, of course you do not actually have to answer me directly but can keep referring to me or what I said in hurt tones to someone else, which tbh is quite rude.

---

Woodhouse you are a lickarse and are banished.


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf

Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Wed Mar 03, 2010 8:54 pm

Kiss my hairy *rse porky boy.

(Just spreading a little lurvvvve.)


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

Friesian
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:16 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Friesian » Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:33 am

gregory23b wrote:" I have only recently been prescribed glasses to read and to be frank it is hard for me to make out what you are saying.


Same as mate , Get some lens's fitted to the bottom of a Hoegarden glass .Makes reading all the more enjoyable



Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:40 am

(He's only making out he can read anyway.)


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

Jack the dodgy builder
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:59 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Jack the dodgy builder » Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:54 pm

As a long standing Kentwell bloke I would agree whole heartily with Mr 23bs comments about Kentwell.
I personally like renacting not in fields, in fact I cant understand why anyone would want to stand in a field and hit another person .
but that aside, I like the close interaction with the public be it first , second ,third or fourth person. For me it may be a little easier as I generally play a carpenter or builder type which is what I do in real life so I have interesting real tools and can and have actually done the tasks. Last week I really was hand hewing timbers for a repair on a 1420 ish building.
So it doesnt really matter what clothes I am wearing. and anyway I like talking
I have also found that people appreciate the close conversation and the chance to learn something. I have often been told that its made their day.
But its all horses for courses as long as we are enjoying ourselves all will be well.
Last edited by Jack the dodgy builder on Fri Mar 12, 2010 11:21 am, edited 1 time in total.



User avatar
The Methley Archer
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: Methley, Leeds, West Riding of Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby The Methley Archer » Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:09 am

Can't resist Jack, show me a builder who doesn't like talking :D


Daughters are a fathers punishment for being a man

Jack the dodgy builder
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:59 pm

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby Jack the dodgy builder » Fri Mar 12, 2010 11:20 am

Actually what with the talking, tea drinking and shovel leaning its amazing that any work gets done!



User avatar
The Methley Archer
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: Methley, Leeds, West Riding of Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby The Methley Archer » Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:49 pm

I know :D :D


Daughters are a fathers punishment for being a man

User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Re: Re-enacting but not in fields

Postby gregory23b » Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:51 pm

MA you have obviously met Jack then ;-)

Muhahahah

kisses Jack


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf


Return to “General History”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests