Just a question to pose (and to get this forum started). As Living History groups, just what sort of tentage should we be showing to the public? Do we do a good job at showing the public and ourselves the face of a Medieval camp?

Our company is in the process of getting it's first company owned tent, and I have been doing some "research" which primarily consists so far of looking at all the pretty 15th & 14th c. pictures I can find of sieges and encampments. Always prominently shown (of course) are the pavillions of the nobility, and very few examples of lesser tents seem to be shown. There are some double bell wedges seen in some later 15th c. pictures, and this happens to be what we are opting for for the 1st lance of the chambres tent - theoreticaly what the three mounted archers or footsoldiers would be stuffed into. It is for those who join the company and don't have their own tent to stay in.

Of course, most people want their own tent in our era which prizes privacy. I don't necessarily consider this to be a bad thing, as it gives the illusion of a larger body encamped than actually is. I think however that it gives the wrong impression to see the common soldiery depicted as living in pavillions. This is obviously a necessity for comfort - especially for re-enactors with families, and I certainly don't knock the practise, but I think that we can with a little effort also have in camp representations of the common soldiers shelter - so elusive in Medieval pictures.

For those of us portraying Burgundians, we do have the advantage of knowing that tentage was supplied to the army - shelter up to and encluding portable houses. I suspect however, even with the hundreds upon hundreds of tents made for the companies every year, that they would only provide shelter for a fraction of the forces on campaign. I also suspect that the main users of these would have been the Men at arms, and the "better" sort of soldiers.

I have seen an Italian illumination from the mid 15th c. that seems to show the more common shelter for the more common soldier. It appears to consist of a roof made up of two fences of wattle construction set against a ridgepole made up of a spear set in the crooks of two sticks. the fencing then covered with straw to keep the rain out. No doubt most "shelters" woould have consisted of a piece of blanket material set up with a couple of sticks in the fashion of a ACW "shebang".

I suspect that in Northern European armies, little thought was given to the plight of the common soldier seeking shelter, if some commentary by de Commyens (commenting on the Italian campaign of 1495), or of a Welsh soldier in Henry VIII's campaign in France in 1513 is anything to go by. De Commeyns made the commentary of "...The French being superior in matters relating to artillery, the Italians being as children in comparison in such matters. The Italians being as superior in the ecampment of an army to the French, who were like children in such matters...".

The Welsh soldier making commentary on the lack of provision for shelter incidentaly - he complained of the improvidence of the soldiers of Henrys army "who could for little effort have gathered sticks and straws, and soon had them a snug shelter - instead for their seeming inability suffering in the foul weather..." (both of these are paraphrased rather than direct quotes, as I don't have the respective books in front of me).

My contention is that it would equally require "little effort" on our parts to put up some examples of the common soldiers shelter at our encampments. The illusion could be furthered by having some willing volunteers pretend that these are indeed their "homes", and put some basic kit in them to further the illusion while the public is present. I think that the very presence of these poor little shelters could enrich our experience by adding to the visual enjoyment of the scene for us.

I would welcome commentary!

As a sometimes SCA member, the question is somewhat problematic. I and my wife strive to make our tentage and kit resemble that of a 12th century knight as much as possible. Most of what we don't own is limited by knowledge and pocketbook. But we come closer to the mark than most people.

We purchased the canvas for an 18-foot diameter round pavilion, and I did the pole assembly, stakes and ropes and ground cloth myself. We already own a trestle-table with
matching benches, a clothes chest, a rope-bed, and a clothes rack. We are in the process of getting a pair of "X" chairs built, a weapons stand and our own ironware.

But...all of this does cost money and time.

We all know the limitations of the workaday world, and how they can curtail one's attempts. My wife looks at the dear expense of what we need for a more accurate kit and shudders. She cringes at the thought of hand sewing woolen cottes and hose, (even though we're good at bargain-shopping), and wonders if my motivation will drive us into the poorhouse. Yet still we persist.

One of the things Jeff and I often discuss is that the SCA and other like groups shoot themself in the foot by asuming that everyone who plays is a noble. Given that most of us are average working folks who are limited in what we can spend on our hobby, this assumption leaves a lot of "nobles" wallowing about in large nylon tents, wearing a new gaudily decorated outfit made of inexpensive fabric for every event (so they have something new) and wearing plastic armour. If participants would set their sights on the class of person they are in real life, I emphatically believe they could do a more realistic portrayal. This is the point I was trying to make on the AA about Dylan's clothing- he's a working guy but he does a dynamite impression by staying within his means.

In your case, it sounds like you're on the right track. Jeff and I tell everyone in our group not to rush it and not to be impatient - buy the appropriate things as you can afford them, and collect what you need over a period of time. "Rome wasn't built in a day" applies here!

In your impression of a 12th-13th c knight, the round pavillion is quite correct for you. No doubt you would have at least one servant (not represented, of course) sleeping in the tent with you.

The type of common shelter I'm suggesting would be appropriate for the couple of retainers (probably not represented, but could be) you would have in your lance. It could add to your impression to have a piece of blanket wool over a couple of sticks as a shelter for one of these people, and if your really ambitious, you could throw a bedroll into it.

Heaven forfend you have a small village of tents! the shelter types I'm reffering to would be cheap to represent - you probably have the makings around your house and backyard.

Well...I actually do have retainers. We were thinking something on the order of the Anglo-Saxon style "geteld" type of wedge tents for them, say, 10' x 14' or maybe smaller with an 8' peak to the ridge-pole. Also, we were considering getting thick, fairly straight young saplings for the uprights and ridgepole for a better look.

Comments?

Robert Coleman, Jr.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Templar Bob:
Well...I actually do have retainers. We were thinking something on the order of the Anglo-Saxon style "geteld" type of wedge tents for them,

do you have any evidence that Romans would have used Anglo Saxon tents? my reading on the period (not much, granted...it was from my Romano-British phase, but I grew out of it ....) suggests that where the ROmans went, they went to great lengths to stay "Roman", ie they didnt tend to adopt peoples customs. rather the provinces went to a lot of trouble to impress the Romans with how roman THEY could be, with thier villas, mosaic floors, baths, etc?

If your retainers are locals pressed into service, wouldnt they have been put up as Romans, rather than using the technology of another people? and if they're Romans, would they have used the technology of the provinces? (not to mention isnt Anglo Saxon about 900AD? what period are you doing?)

And why buy expensive tents to keep peasants dry, when they can knock one together from found materials in a half hour? I've seen the lean-to structures Bob's talking about used for archer's hovels & it looks very period. A couple of sticks, some woven twigs and a bundle of reeds make a fairly weather- resistant roof. The fellows who made them did put their belongings inside & lived in them during the rainy encampment.

I'd also think you'd put more than three mounted archers or footsoldiers in a double-bell. (Is it a real small one, Bob?) If you do supply tents to commoners, you'd stuff them wall-to-wall with people. Gives you more bang for the buck & helps them stay warm on the cold nights.

The problem with doing this at reenactments is that reenactors have a lesser version of the same problem that the acronym society has. Not many of us really want to be common, sleep with 20 people in a tent or in the mud. "It's good to be the king!"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anne-Marie:
Hey all from Anne-Marie
do you have any evidence that Romans would have used Anglo Saxon tents?
--AM

---

Where do the Romans figure in this?

and Robert, you go ahead and be an Anglo-Saxon
Do you have pictures of a geteld?

I'll keep digging.

Robert Coleman, Jr.

Those who beat their swords into plowshares end up plowing for those who don't.

I receive the digest for Medieval Encampments, and saw a wonderful picture of an Anglo-Saxon geteld:
http://www.cs.vassar.edu/~capriest/image/getelds.jpg

Now I just have to find the plans for it!

Robert Coleman, Jr.