Are we all speaking the same language? I say "no".

What do we mean when we say "living history"?
What does it mean?
Do we re-enact or re-create? I have seen this term used interchangably, yet I say they mean two different things.

What is our game?
What is their game?
What are the rules by which we define ourselves?

Everyone has a different bar by which they set their own personal standards. Do we all agree on what that bar is; most likely not.

To give you an idea of what I am driving at, what follows is my response (March 2000) to one Thomas Powers on the AA regarding his accusation that our living history groups we "lying" to the public via misrepresentation.

quote:

---

As many have already said, the road to discovery and education, is a road well traveled and we do not journey alone.

I am not an armourer nor have I worked with metal, yet. However, I can appreciate the talent and discipline to rediscover the techniques of yesteryear, but this thread is not addressing authentic creation of belt buckles or the science of metallurgy, but rather "authentic" appearance.

I think the operative word in the title of this thread is Historic "IMPRESSION" and the Chef de Chambre was offering his thoughts on what made for a top notch authentic impression. I do not believe that all parties present have agreed upon the language used in this forum. So we are starting to split hairs and go on the defensive or offensive.

For example: Re-enactor and recreation are used almost interchangably and I don't think this is the case. To me re-enactment means just that, you "re-enact", in many cases, a battle that took place in whatever period you
happen to fancy as close to the way it was recorded in historical accounts.

Recreationist on the other hand means that, with my research in the 15th century in hand, I decide to "recreate" the Battle of Bosworth in August 1485 in which the last Yorkist King fell and the "accursed" Tudor dynasty began. As Richard III, sitting atop my horse on that hill, I survey the battle raging below, and I ask myself how would I execute my battle plan differently from Richard? Would I charge? Would I have reigned in Stanley to prevent him from betraying me on the field? Would I have won? It is a "What If" scenario. But, recreation is like playing a wargame on a table with figures and "changing the course" of history rather than playing it "the way it
happened".

As a member of a living history group, we try to be as "authentic" as our research and talents will allow us to be. We reproduce medieval history with reproduction items that exist in museums or appear in contemporary artwork. Just because I have a wool gown that does not have the "thread count" of its medieval counterpart, does not make my impression any less authentic. What WOULD be a misrepresentation would be if I said with authority that the wool my gown is made of is EXACTLY what medieval folks wore. By making a statement that my gown is made of wool, does not give inaccurate information to the public and misrepresents nothing.

The armour our men at arms wear is based on existing pieces in museum collections and has been reproduced faithfully. It does not misrepresent what a man at arms of the time looked like.

We use a copy of an authentic fight manual to show authentic fight technique. Historic Weight, balance, and style of the blades used are our main concern.

But I digress...

As my grand daddy used to say in regard to misrepresentation..."That dawg don't hunt."

---

So we all need to be very clear that we are speaking the same lanugage.

Any thoughts?

I've wondered about this alot, especially on the Unnamed List™. They use the term "kit" for their poly-cotton tee tunics and kydex greaves, and say what they do is "living history". I think not!

I had a gal call me yesterday and tell me that she was upset that I had sent her a linen chemise with black edging, as it was "incorrect for historical reenactment"-- as I'm talking to her I'm gazing at the wall of my shop that holds about 12 images of renaissance women, half of whose chemises have a black edge. The girl plays a washerwoman at Southern Faire. Does she know what she's talking about? I think not!

In general terms, I agree with the party you cite:

"re-enactment means just that, you "re-enact"... whatever period you
happen to fancy as close to the way it was recorded in historical accounts"

"recreation is like playing a wargame on a table with figures and "changing the course" of history rather than playing it "the way it
happened"."

I'll be happy to stipulate that groups such as ours "selectively re-enact", meaning we don't allow people to die in our camps, and we don't eat cabbage soup and brown bread for weeks on end.

Conversely, I'm willing to venture that "selectively re-enacting" does not wander off course into allowing Richard to live through Bosworth just because we're Yorkists, or serving chocolate chip cookies for dinner just because we like it.

Jen, my comment to your statement "Do we all agree on what that bar is; most likely not."is the bar set for each of our groups are all within a few notches of each other, they don't swing across the whole spectrum from KMart Halloween costumes to museum reproductions. I think we understand that the Red Company's bar does not allow women fighters, but COWA's does; that doesn't mean either of our groups allow Kydex armour or chocolate chip cookies.

We're in the same ballpark, we're just standing on different bases.

Gwen

quote:

---

I think we understand that the Red Company's bar does not allow women fighters, but COWA's does; that doesn't mean either of our groups allow Kydex armour or chocolate chip cookies.

We're in the same ballpark, we're just standing on different bases.

---

Well you won't see hosts of women fighters in CoWA. I mean if someone would rather play the part, I will gladly switch with them, but there won't be more than one at a time no matter how big we get.

~J

Didn't know one existed- care to share the URL?

raising the bar

That's a term you're going to hear quite a bit from AM and Jeff and I because it's how La Maisie and RedCo. operate- we keep looking around and improving. As we get new information, as our skills improve, etc., we keep replacing stuff, and asking for more from our people.

For example, Nikki gave me some info from one of the health handbooks about linen clothing. Now that I have a contemporary source that advocates the use of linen clothes in summer, I'll be rethinking allowing our guys to have linen doublets. They used to be allowed to have them because we *assumed* they were OK. Then we couldn't prove it, so we told them no, you can't wear linen. Now that we have a source, we'll let them go back to wearing linen in summer.

Let's hear it for research!!

I mean if someone would rather play the part, I will gladly switch with them, but there won't be more than one at a time no matter how big we get.

So Jenn, what I understand you to say is that there is a standing role in your group for 1 woman who fights- as that correct?

I'd be interested to know why you folks have this role, and why you feel it's important to have it.