Full blown combat or display only?

[Hodekin]

Indeed John, the training you speak of is a genuine alternative, but I have to say it looks exactly that…training! I am also intrigued by your continuing ‘Cavorting Ninny’ description :lol: !

You wouldn’t by any chance have a history of 17th century combat would you? :wink: I certainly have, and if you have also, then both you and I will be fully aware of the theatrical dying swan routines that are often portrayed in such battles. Not everyone I hasten to add, but by and large I have found that dark age re enactors ‘go down’ a lot more realistically than 17th century ones, but that’s just my observation and not a general widespread opinion you understand.

Dark Age/medieval battles are by definition generally smaller than 17th century battles. And as such I would have thought that the ‘Cavorting Ninny’ element could and should be easy enough to spot and rectify.

But please tell me what exatcly you mean by 'Cavorting Ninnys'!


Ken.


Ken.

[Opifex]

I was one of the barbarians having a go at the Romans at York John spoke of. We were all contact steel re-enactors, mostly Regia etc, and armed as such and they, the XX and XIIII Legions, were mostly not and bore sharps (I was told at the time that the XX was more about the civic displays in Chester than traditional re-enactment - I suspect they have changed a lot since then).

http://pics.livejournal.com/salvianus/gallery/0000fwbp
...
...

Ave!

I dont know if any of you remember when some of us joined to the legios once in 2006. I think there were around 8 additional gladiators armed with scutum and gladius(dulled) against all the barbarians. On our side we had a few original legionary.
:twisted:

It was fun.

[Crispvs]

I don't know much about the "dying swan routines" but when I was an 11th century re-enactor, along with controlled slashes and spearpoint accuracy we also used to practice dying or being wounded convincingly. After finding ourselves unsatisfied by some of our attempts we took a trip to the local casualty unit and got some advice from the triage nurses on what reactions people actually have when wounded on particular parts of the body. After that it tended to be a lot more realistic. The dark age groups you have seen may have done exactly the same as we did.

Crispvs

[Hodekin]

I don't know much about the "dying swan routines" but when I was an 11th century re-enactor, along with controlled slashes and spearpoint accuracy we also used to practice dying or being wounded convincingly. After finding ourselves unsatisfied by some of our attempts we took a trip to the local casualty unit and got some advice from the triage nurses on what reactions people actually have when wounded on particular parts of the body. After that it tended to be a lot more realistic. The dark age groups you have seen may have done exactly the same as we did.

Crispvs

Now that sounds like a good idea!

Hodekin

[John Conyard]

Sorry I have little time over the next few days for long posts. But here goes.

The term "cavorting ninnies" comes from a thread last year regarding the value of Roman re-enactment, and the views held by "academics" on the subject. From memory a three fold classification was established. In no particular order, groups that try and get their equipment as accurate as possible, but for whatever reasons seldom share or publish their experiences and knowledge. Secondly, groups that try to be as accurate as possible and publish hard data to share with a wider audience. And thirdly "cavorting ninnies", a term suggested by Mike Bishop. It's probably not a good idea to publicly start classifying groups we come across! There is nothing intrinsically wrong with falling into any of these classifications, but the second may have a wider usefulness.

I've tried out combat in most periods and with lots of societies. I think other re-enactment periods have a great deal to teach us in terms of presentation etc. I'm sure some groups display real combat better than others. Gladiators will place much more emphasis on individual combat that the black powder societies.

I've never seen real life close up combat thank God. I suspect all recreated combat seems very tame in comparison. Very much like training, with nobody aiming for the eyes or throat, not enough blood, bone and intestine, little screaming and not enough human agony.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I don't know much about the "dying swan routines" but when I was an 11th century re-enactor, along with controlled slashes and spearpoint accuracy we also used to practice dying or being wounded convincingly. After finding ourselves unsatisfied by some of our attempts we took a trip to the local casualty unit and got some advice from the triage nurses on what reactions people actually have when wounded on particular parts of the body. After that it tended to be a lot more realistic. The dark age groups you have seen may have done exactly the same as we did.

Crispvs

I have to admit, there was one big dude who had his helmet knocked of at York this year, who I was pretty sure was not feigning, looked a bit pissed off...but then again, that would be what would happen in reality too!
Could have been good role play!

[Salvianus]

Ave!

I dont know if any of you remember when some of us joined to the legios once in 2006. I think there were around 8 additional gladiators armed with scutum and gladius(dulled) against all the barbarians. On our side we had a few original legionary.

salvianus frater salutem

I must have missed that (Comitatus were in town at Barley Hall, but were not able to participate officially). It sounds terrific: it reminds me of the game Rome Total War - send in the gladiators!

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Well, during the Civil war, they did use Gladiators to bolster the numbers...I think it was one of Othos men had a group at a bridge and tried a boat crossing...they got their asses whipped tho'.

[Hodekin]

I've never seen real life close up combat thank God. I suspect all recreated combat seems very tame in comparison. Very much like training, with nobody aiming for the eyes or throat, not enough blood, bone and intestine, little screaming and not enough human agony.

Unfortunately I have!

And imho, if anything, re enactment seems the more realistic of the two, except for as you rightly say the blood, bone, intestine and of course the human agony.

But oddly enough, I don't think that it what joe public wants on their bank holiday outing...they do want excitement however, and combat (if done well) does provide that....amongst other things of course!


Hodekin

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

But oddly enough, I don't think that it what joe public wants on their bank holiday outing...they do want excitement however, and combat (if done well) does provide that....amongst other things of course!


Hodekin

Yes, unfortunately there are very few scantily clad female re-enactors
to draw in the public......Rome had a few tho'!! lol:

Sorry, I am ashamed of myself..... :roll:

[Hodekin]

Yes, unfortunately there are very few scantily clad female re-enactors
to draw in the public......Rome had a few tho'!! lol:

Sorry, I am ashamed of myself..... :roll:

Gaius! A goodly dose of bromide for you I think :wink:

Cavorting Ninnys to cavorting cuties....the mind boggles! :roll:


Hodekin

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

:lol:

[Gaius_Calvus]

This has been a very interesting discussion, but the one critical element that seems to be missing from it has been any mention of morale.

Very few battles -- ever -- have been decided by one side killing the other to a man. Instead, the vast majority of battles were (and still are) decided when one side perceives it is losing, and then breaks. Adrian Goldsworthy provides some great discussion of this in his "Roman Army at War," as does John Keegan in "Face of Battle." As a serving Soldier, I can tell you that fear is a factor in combat, real fear that is not present in a re-enactment but is dominant in combat.

My main objection to actual "steel-on-steel" or other forms of hand-to-hand combat by re-enactors has therefore been that either a) the combat has to be scripted to the extent that one side will "lose" (with a very good chance of injury nonetheless) or b) that guys will tend to pound on each other long after one side would have broken because there is no (perceived) chance of sustaining a debilitating or fatal wound.

Thus, for me (and me alone, this is my opinion only) I tend to shy away from "combat" re-enactment since it does not accurately portray the effects that morale would exercise on the combatants.

Regards,

Edge

[Hibernicus]

Great subject!

But by way of further explaining caviorting ninnies I offer this:



Hibernicus

[Hodekin]

This has been a very interesting discussion, but the one critical element that seems to be missing from it has been any mention of morale.

Very few battles -- ever -- have been decided by one side killing the other to a man. Instead, the vast majority of battles were (and still are) decided when one side perceives it is losing, and then breaks. Adrian Goldsworthy provides some great discussion of this in his "Roman Army at War," as does John Keegan in "Face of Battle." As a serving Soldier, I can tell you that fear is a factor in combat, real fear that is not present in a re-enactment but is dominant in combat.

You are absolutely correct, my serving days are long behind me, but I remember fearing only too well the one shot that I would never hear or see, but would be for me anyway!

My main objection to actual "steel-on-steel" or other forms of hand-to-hand combat by re-enactors has therefore been that either a) the combat has to be scripted to the extent that one side will "lose" (with a very good chance of injury nonetheless) or b) that guys will tend to pound on each other long after one side would have broken because there is no (perceived) chance of sustaining a debilitating or fatal wound.

Combat by re enactors would have to be scripted, there is no other way, even to make it seem real, it would need to be scripted.

Thus, for me (and me alone, this is my opinion only) I tend to shy away from "combat" re-enactment since it does not accurately portray the effects that morale would exercise on the combatants.

Regards,

Edge

I entirely understand you point of view Edge, I do however advocate combat, but as this interesting thread has shown, there is room enough for both disciplins I think!


Hodekin