David Edge, Curator of Arms and Armour at the Wallace Collection, author of Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight
Dr. Alan Williams, The University of Redding, author of The Knight and The Blast Furnace
Pierre Terjanian, Curator of Arms and Armour at the Philadelphia Museum of Art.
Dr. Tobias Capwell, Curator of Arms and Armour for Glasgow Museums
Walter J. Karcheski, Chief Curator of Arms and Armor at the Frazier Arms Museum, Author of Medieval Armour From Rhodes

and many more.

This conference is in Chicago so it is in the largest city near the center of the Continental US. Next year's conference will be in Europe so this is the chance for the North Americans out there to meet and listen to these amazing gentlemen.

As an added bonus this year we will be having the honor of displaying swords form the famous collection of Ewart Oakeshott. The honor of this viewing is courtesy of the Oakeshott Institute Mr. Christopher Poor and Mr. Craig Johnson will be on hand to walk you through the collection and answer questions. Handling of select objects will be encouraged.

Please see our website for more details. http://www.armourresearchsociety.org/conference.html
null

--------------------

Doug Strong
doug-strong@comcast.net

http://armourresearchsociety.org

--------------------

--------------------

By the way, the journal will be out any time now. It is being printed as I write this.

--------------------

Doug Strong
doug-strong@comcast.net

http://armourresearchsociety.org

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chevalier:
Sorry, this forum frequenter will be home that weekend. No offense, Doug, but $255's a little steep for a 1 day conference.

---

Just to explain the reason for the cost is to pay to fly this amazing group here from all over the world. You can save $50.00 by spending $50.00. If you were to join at the $50.00 rate the price drops to $155.00 and you would get our journal (retail $35.00) plus the online artilces, plus access to the forums and participation in all the other smaller events .

Doug

--------------------

Doug Strong
doug-strong@comcast.net

http://armourresearchsociety.org

205 plus airfare (plus lodging in one of the most difficult-to-book cities in the country)is simply not something I can justify for one day, even if the Oakeshott Institute is gracious enough to attend.

It's not like any of the presenters are actually going to collaborate or arrange for research cooperation with any of the hoi polloito whom they will be holding court. The conference is a two-session melange lecture series (rather than an actual conference) without any coherent theme, and is of extremely marginal scholarly value to anyone not precisely specialised in 15th-century white harness.

Sorry to point out the elephant in the room, but this is coming from what should be your "cheering section." I'm registered as a patron this year, but if this and what passes for membership benefits is the best that ARS can achieve, there is little reason to throw good money after bad next year.

[ 10-06-2005: Message edited by: Russ Mitchell ]

--------------------

--------------------

Doug Strong
doug-strong@comcast.net

http://armourresearchsociety.org

I am sorry you are disgruntled. Please feel free to contact me and discuss the issues that are steering your negativity. Perhaps they can be addressed. Without knowing what the issues are we cannot fix them. This is the first I have heard of your lack of satisfaction.

Given your level of membership, you cost for the conference is $116.00. I am not sure where the $205 figure came from. We also worked to arrange hotel rooms at a significantly reduced rate. Chicago is also fairly easy to arrange lodging. If you have had a bad experience while travelling here, perhaps I could lend some assistance the next time you are in the area. Let me know, I am always up fo helping folks out.

I am somewhat baffled regarding this comment:

quote:

---

It's not like any of the presenters are actually going to collaborate or arrange for research cooperation with any of the hoi polloito whom they will be holding court. The conference is a two-session melange lecture series (rather than an actual conference) without any coherent theme, and is of extremely marginal scholarly value to anyone not precisely specialised in 15th-century white harness.

---

To my knowledge, the individuals we have invited are dedicated to helping researchers and forthcoming with their studies/findings. This appears to be an insult to the speakers or do I misunderstand you?

It was our goal to provide a wide variety of information to attract a wide audience to our first conference. The next will have a more focussed feel.

There is only one lecture on 15th century armour, given by Dr. Tobias Capwell. Therefore, the comment on white harnesses also catches me off guard. By saying that there is no scholarly value in the presentations/lectures is also quite a slight to the speakers. It appears as if you are stating that only Dr. Capwell's 15th century information is of worth/merit. We took extreme care to only bring in the most respected and active individuals in their fields. Let me know if we made an error in our judgement. We definitely do not want to make the same mistake twice and are focussed on correcting any mistakes made in the past.

The speakers I have conversed with thus far are more than happy to assist folks in their efforts. A few have helped out Bob Reed to a large degree, for example. I believe a handful have provided Doug Strong with help on research as well, if I am not mistaken. If you have information to the contrary, I would love to hear it. Again, perhaps we have made an error.

We have received a significant amount of great feedback and very little negative (hopefully constructive). Please help us make ARS a better place by contacting me and discussing your issues. If you were misled or we misrepresented ourselves, we would like to know so we can fix any existing issues. Please feel free to ontact me at any time via the following:

815.575.1060
brian@armourresearchsociety.org

I do not often check this board, so I will most likely miss any replies.

[ 10-06-2005: Message edited by: Brian W. Rainey ]

[ 10-06-2005: Message edited by: Brian W. Rainey ]

--------------------

I am pretty bare-knuckled, and Mr. Rainey was fair enough to ask some pretty pointed questions. I posted what should have been a critique, and allowed some very unfortunate prior experiences to mis-color my perception of this conference. What have been constructive criticism therefore became both (unwarranted) barrels instead.

My apologies for the unpleasantness: I will see what I can dig up in order to make up for it.

--------------------

Last time I heard, the Wallace Collection Study days cost about £20 for the opportunity to listen to a few papers, handle a few objects, ask a few questions and have lunch with museum folks. It looks like the ARS Conference is built on the same model yet costs a whole lot more. I’m open to discussion if I’m not seeing this correctly, but the disparity in cost between the ARS Conference and a Wallace Collection Study day is really a study in Free Market Capitalism, isn’t it? The Conference is a commodity that is being packaged and sold by the ARS, and they can charge whatever they want for it. If they can market it in such a way that consumers will pay 15 times what they’d pay for a Wallace Collection Study Day, then bully for them!

For me it boils down to having most of the emails for the presenters in my address book, and the ability to email them questions any time I want. Those emails are easy to acquire by anyone with a serious desire to learn, and they didn’t cost me anything. I've done research in several of the represented collections in the past (again at no cost), and expect to do more research in the future. I expect I will probably be able to get copies of the papers being given if I want them. I know it doesn't serve what the presenters do to make what they have to say "exclusive" to the ARS. I may be wrong, but I can find out with a quick email.

If you'll pardon the analogy, the ARS appears very "Catholic" to me. Catholic dogma screens God from the world, making priests the point of contact between God and the world. The ARS plays the role of priest, making the ARS the point of contact between museum people and their collections and Everyman.

I'm not a member of the ARS so I don't have a dog in the fight. As a lapsed Catholic, I admit I do have a bit of a problem with the filtering process. As a business person, I recognize that anyone with enough time, desire and gumption can set up a sandbox and invite whomever they want to to come and play, and charge whatever they please for the privilege. As a consumer, I know it's ultimately up to the individual to decide whether a product is worth the price or not.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ginevra:

For me it boils down to having most of the emails for the presenters in my address book, and the ability to email them questions any time I want. Those emails are easy to acquire by anyone with a serious desire to learn, and they didn’t cost me anything...

If you'll pardon the analogy, the ARS appears very "Catholic" to me. Catholic dogma screens God from the world, making priests the point of contact between God and the world. The ARS plays the role of priest, making the ARS the point of contact between museum people and their collections and Everyman.

---

We aim to be to opposite of the priest. While both you and I have these email addresses and phone numbers most people do not. Most people would be hesitant to just fire off an email to one of the big names in arms and armour. Our mission is to create a forum where professional armour scholars and the rest of us can talk. To say that we are trying to screen them off implies that we regulate the flow of communication and try to stop people from having access. Nothing could be more untrue. If fact, we are trying to trying to create a mechanism that opens communication and promotes the field of arms and armour.

To follow your metaphor, we are much more like the Protestant reformation. One of the major points of separation between the Catholic church of the 16th century and the early Protestants came over the notion of access to God. The Protestant belief was that you did not need a priest to pray for you or even a saint to intervene on your behalf. You could do it yourself. With that being established people did not stop going to church. Churches were central locations where people engaged in payer and God-oriented activities.

That is enough of the metaphor. These people are not God. We are not a church. We had an idea that if we could get professionals and enthusiasts together in the same place it would be good. If you don't think it is good don't participate. If you like the idea, come along and see what we are about.

--------------------

Doug Strong
doug-strong@comcast.net

http://armourresearchsociety.org

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug Strong:
Most people would be hesitant to just fire off an email to one of the big names in arms and armour

---

These guys are just normal people. I jumped on the phone and rang David Edge about 3 years ago to ask some questions about a joust harness in the Wallace Collection. Very nice guy, offered to have a good look at it for me the next time they were cleaning it.

Gwen's right, all it takes is a polite phone call.

--------------------

Cheers

So you are disseminating this contact information to any armour enthusiast who asks? How splendid! I wasn't aware of that. I thought you were facilitating access to these people only through paid membership to the ARS. I must have missed this info on your public webpages, and will have to go look again.

Making this info available to anyone, member or not, will certainly open things up and achieve your goal of promoting general interest in arms and armour.

Thanks for clarifying that for me.

--------------------

Doug Strong
doug-strong@comcast.net

http://armourresearchsociety.org

I posted information about an event that I though people wo were interested in arms and armour type things might be want to know about. It seems pretty simple to me.

Clearly the ARS bothers and offends you. I believe in the ARS. Now I feel like I have to defend it from you. We have known each other for nearly 20 years and I thought we got along pretty well. This is feeling hostile. If you don't like the ARS, fine--don't participate.

Sorry to have offended anyone by posting info about this event.

bye

--------------------

Doug Strong
doug-strong@comcast.net

http://armourresearchsociety.org

I must say however that the ARS society has not helped or advanced my research to date, although I have been told in the past that it [u]would[/u] afford me the opportunity (in no uncertain terms), and I still hope this may be the case eventually, although I dom not see any such opportunity occuring in the near future. To date, I see that the Society is advancing the research of some scholars already in the field (note the announced jousting harness examinations), and while I think that this is a good thing, it does not strike me as being the original goal of the society - which as I understood it was to allow independant scholars the opportunity to research.

The professionals have access to grants, and support from museums as they work in the field, while people like myself who wish to pursue research must put out large sums of money, and expend the effort to attempt to create the opportunity to undertake the research. I do not see any opportunities being created for me, or for any other independant scholars. Frankly, I do not see "the chance to meet X,Y,Z Professionals in person" at a one day conference, when I already know or have contact with half to two thirds of them due to my own efforts as being a particularly compelling opportunity at the price it would cost, as nice as the conference sounds. Frankly, I can't afford it, and I think the conference, while being 'centerally located' (to the United States) has merely made it equally difficult or inconvenient to attend for more people than making it easier - if having the collection in Chicago as a backdrop is the focus, the MET or the Philadelphia museum of art would make for a more logical US location, or London, Glasgow, or Leeds for the UK, or Paris for the Continent.

I support the stated goals of the ARS, and I will continue to support it, but please take this as honest advice from a supporter, member and well-wisher. As a member, I am *not* seeing any particularly solid benifit coming to members of the society, and I feel it has lost some of it's focus. More often than not, there seems to be little society activity, and little discussion or research on it's forum that cannot be found equally readily elsewhere - now that is a crying shame. Most of the ARS members who communicate on it's board already communicate with one another on other boards, and instead of having input on any sort of regular basis from the community of professional armour scholars, we merely sit and write back and forth to one another on one additional board. Why the society members who are professional scholars let the rest of the membership sit in ingorance, and as a general rule refuse to contrubute information in this fashion is a mystery to me, as I thought that would have been one of the primary benefits of the Society, had been pretty much assured that would be one of the regular benefits of the society, and yet that has been the furthest from the actual fact of the matter.

I want the society to thrive and grow, and I want it to succeed in it's mission. As a member, I feel it has lost some of that original focus and drive, and I think that is a shame.

--------------------