09-22-2003, 05:25 PM
Dan--<br>
<br>
You've picked the wrong argument, here. The debate on this thread is not whether the Romans adopted a matte or ESG-like, mirror surface. It's whether the Romans either "blued" their loricae or left them forge-blackened.<br>
<br>
If I may take the liberty to summarize everyone's take on this...<br>
<br>
Those advocating a forge blackened or blued finish believe the Romans lacked sufficient time, technology, or wherewithal to spend a significant amount of their days scraping or scrubbing their cuirasses to give them a "bright" bare-metal finish. They believe iron beaten into plate comes off the forge with a natural protective finish (either "blue" or "black") which retards rust accumulation, and think that the Romans were unlikely to remove this layer to create a white-metal or "silvery" look. They think the historical evidence is inconclusive as to finish and believe modern experimentation may be of greater value in answering this question than attempting to interpret the primary sources.<br>
<br>
Those who advocate a "bright metal" finish believe the primary sources in art and literature uniformly depict or describe bright, reflective and silvery armor. This does not mean "mirror polished," it could just as easily (and more probably) mean a matte or "satin" finish produced by repeated scrubbing with abrasives. Absent any descriptions or artistic depictions of blued, blackened or otherwise colored armor, they believe the existing evidence is sufficient to settle the matter, and that modern tinkering with blued or blackened finishes is just a form of speculation and serves no real "experimental archaeology" purpose.<br>
<br>
No one-- repeat, NO ONE-- is suggesting that the Romans gave their armor an electric buffer-like mirror polish. Those arguing against the blued finish (I include myself in this categoy) favor a matte or satin finish like that sported by you and your comilitones of XIIII GMV in "The Roman Legions Recreated in Full Color Photographs."<br>
<br>
<<Interestingly, this argument seems to be divided along the lines of true living historian reenactors who actually fight and campaign in their armor and clean it under actual roman conditions, (opting for an authentic "pre industrial revolution" old masters oil painting armor shininess"), while on the other end of the spectrum, the "weekend in the park, non-fighting, talk alot display teams" ( I will refrain from the 'M'-word here), seem to prefer the "electric buffer look". I could be wrong, but I'm willling to bet that the majority of mirror-finish armor, electric buffer display teams tend to be the same ones who similarly believe in the equally improbable white campaign tunic.>><br>
<br>
You're wrong. To my knowledge, there are no "electric buffer" display teams in the U.S. I have spent time in three of the most prominant U.S. reenactment groups -- IX Hispana, XX Valeria Victrix, and VI Victrix Pia Fidelis (my current unit). None of them, to my knowledge, use electrix buffers on their gear or attempt to create a mirror polish a la the ESG. The "white tunic" unit is Matt Amt's XX Valeria Victrix; I seriously doubt whether an electric buffer has ever been within a Roman mile of any of their cuirasses.<br>
<br>
The rift between what you term "display teams" and "true living history reenactors" is not as apparent in the U.S. and Canada as it seems to be in Europe. Most of the North American reenactors I am aware of would welcome the opportunity to engage in mock combat; some (IX Hispana and VI Victrix [California] among them) actually do so regularly. Those that haven't are handicapped by the lack of numbers and of opportunities to interact with other Roman living history units, which are thinly spread over a very large continent. There are a few events upcoming which may provide the opportunity for some fairly large scale Roman-on-Roman or Roman-Barbarian mock combat.<br>
<br>
By the way, are we ever going to see a follow-up edition of "RLRIFCP"? Think of how much bigger it would be now!<br>
<br>
T. Flavius Crispus<br>
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis<br>
California, USA<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
<br>
You've picked the wrong argument, here. The debate on this thread is not whether the Romans adopted a matte or ESG-like, mirror surface. It's whether the Romans either "blued" their loricae or left them forge-blackened.<br>
<br>
If I may take the liberty to summarize everyone's take on this...<br>
<br>
Those advocating a forge blackened or blued finish believe the Romans lacked sufficient time, technology, or wherewithal to spend a significant amount of their days scraping or scrubbing their cuirasses to give them a "bright" bare-metal finish. They believe iron beaten into plate comes off the forge with a natural protective finish (either "blue" or "black") which retards rust accumulation, and think that the Romans were unlikely to remove this layer to create a white-metal or "silvery" look. They think the historical evidence is inconclusive as to finish and believe modern experimentation may be of greater value in answering this question than attempting to interpret the primary sources.<br>
<br>
Those who advocate a "bright metal" finish believe the primary sources in art and literature uniformly depict or describe bright, reflective and silvery armor. This does not mean "mirror polished," it could just as easily (and more probably) mean a matte or "satin" finish produced by repeated scrubbing with abrasives. Absent any descriptions or artistic depictions of blued, blackened or otherwise colored armor, they believe the existing evidence is sufficient to settle the matter, and that modern tinkering with blued or blackened finishes is just a form of speculation and serves no real "experimental archaeology" purpose.<br>
<br>
No one-- repeat, NO ONE-- is suggesting that the Romans gave their armor an electric buffer-like mirror polish. Those arguing against the blued finish (I include myself in this categoy) favor a matte or satin finish like that sported by you and your comilitones of XIIII GMV in "The Roman Legions Recreated in Full Color Photographs."<br>
<br>
<<Interestingly, this argument seems to be divided along the lines of true living historian reenactors who actually fight and campaign in their armor and clean it under actual roman conditions, (opting for an authentic "pre industrial revolution" old masters oil painting armor shininess"), while on the other end of the spectrum, the "weekend in the park, non-fighting, talk alot display teams" ( I will refrain from the 'M'-word here), seem to prefer the "electric buffer look". I could be wrong, but I'm willling to bet that the majority of mirror-finish armor, electric buffer display teams tend to be the same ones who similarly believe in the equally improbable white campaign tunic.>><br>
<br>
You're wrong. To my knowledge, there are no "electric buffer" display teams in the U.S. I have spent time in three of the most prominant U.S. reenactment groups -- IX Hispana, XX Valeria Victrix, and VI Victrix Pia Fidelis (my current unit). None of them, to my knowledge, use electrix buffers on their gear or attempt to create a mirror polish a la the ESG. The "white tunic" unit is Matt Amt's XX Valeria Victrix; I seriously doubt whether an electric buffer has ever been within a Roman mile of any of their cuirasses.<br>
<br>
The rift between what you term "display teams" and "true living history reenactors" is not as apparent in the U.S. and Canada as it seems to be in Europe. Most of the North American reenactors I am aware of would welcome the opportunity to engage in mock combat; some (IX Hispana and VI Victrix [California] among them) actually do so regularly. Those that haven't are handicapped by the lack of numbers and of opportunities to interact with other Roman living history units, which are thinly spread over a very large continent. There are a few events upcoming which may provide the opportunity for some fairly large scale Roman-on-Roman or Roman-Barbarian mock combat.<br>
<br>
By the way, are we ever going to see a follow-up edition of "RLRIFCP"? Think of how much bigger it would be now!<br>
<br>
T. Flavius Crispus<br>
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis<br>
California, USA<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
T. Flavius Crispus / David S. Michaels
Centurio Pilus Prior,
Legio VI VPF
CA, USA
"Oderint dum probent."
Tiberius
Centurio Pilus Prior,
Legio VI VPF
CA, USA
"Oderint dum probent."
Tiberius
