thats the obvious
but I dont want to sound stupid
my father was saying that there might be a great difference between a reall battle and your besides the obvious
he says that when you are actually fighting between life and death that you r entire attitude demeanor, face expressions, totally change and you are becoming really fierce
and also wearing armor that you have been wearing all your life would be a tad bit worn, as was the primitive cleaning methods, as well as your shield getting battered by gaulish long swords
I had bought a shiled from crusader era, and fought with it with my borther using sticks, and after a 10 miute mock battle my shield had dents, and stains all over it
so is anything what I am saying right???
would everything be different in a real battle?
more people?
and how damage (blood spilling everywhere) can a gladius really do??
IRATUS MAXIMUS
as to the answer to your questions
I am asking questions not answering them
I am clearly not this smartest person on this site
you are much older than me, and you should do reasearch or ask other reenactors or experts
Posts: 15,116
Threads: 415
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation:
78
he says that when you are actually fighting between life and death that you r entire attitude demeanor, face expressions, totally change and you are becoming really fierce
Very well thought, and I can assure you that we keep the non-trained re-enactors out of a battle, because you tend to get 'sucked in' when a fight starts. Since they're non-trained that might lead to injuries.
and also wearing armor that you have been wearing all your life would be a tad bit worn, as was the primitive cleaning methods, as well as your shield getting battered by gaulish long swords
Armour is not worn all our lives, that did not happen originally either. If it's damaged you get it fixed, if it's too damaged you get a new one. Same as in the old days!
Why would the original cleaning manners have been primitive?????
Shields get battered, sure. Same as today. If too damaged, take off the shield boss and make a new shield. same there, too.
I had bought a shield from crusader era, and fought with it with my borther using sticks, and after a 10 miute mock battle my shield had dents, and stains all over it
so is anything what I am saying right???
Yes, it would show dents allright!
That's what still happens today. Those with a clean shield don't fight. Like me. 
would everything be different in a real battle?
more people?
More people in a real battle, sure!
and how damage (blood spilling everywhere) can a gladius really do??
As much blood as you got!! :twisted:
IRATUS MAXIMUS
as to the answer to your questions
I am asking questions not answering them
I am clearly not this smartest person on this site
you are much older than me, and you should do reasearch or ask other reenactors or experts[/quote]
im talking about wearing armor all your life , as in say ceasars campaign in gaul- 12 years
thats a long time, and if there armor got a LITTLE battered an ordinary soldier could just get a new one?
as to the cleaning methods,let me ask first how do YOU keep your armor clean?
aaaahhhhhhh so many questions
ijust dont want to get kicked off
Posts: 922
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2005
Reputation:
0
Quote:as to the cleaning methods,let me ask first how do YOU keep your armor clean?
I see!, you thinking too fast when you are posting, & what you think,that is what you post.
Many times I do the same, you must do what your friend told you, before post, go to preview, examinate your questions, if they maight not be off topic, if you arent there....
some times I lived them there, but when I notice what I did, I delet it or edite what I'm trying to say, for the best convenience...
Well when you go through searsh, just type the word must convenient to your question...
In this case I type cleanning alone, if it doesnt work, think in other word and type it.
I did, & I found this thread, from a friend that had your same question before at page 2:
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... t=cleaning
Remarks by Philip on the Athenian Leaders:
Philip said that the Athenians were like the bust of Hermes: all mouth and dick.
so reading that post even though they cleaned there armor they did not have the methods modern reenactos use, so therefore both armor would look different right?
ok lets just start naming all ALL the differences between a REAL roman soldier and a reenactor
then i will stop making posts, at least realy really stupid ones
1. Being an actual roman
Posts: 2,045
Threads: 116
Joined: Apr 2003
Reputation:
0
Quote:so reading that post even though they cleaned there armor they did not have the methods modern reenactos use, so therefore both armor would look different right?
Just what 'modern methods' are you referring to Francis? An abrasive is an abrasive is an abrasive- the result isn't going to look hugely different whatever one is used. If you're referring to machine buffing, whcih I don't think anyone uses to keep armor clean of rust, then yes, that would look different, but if it's just hand polishing, what we do now with steel wool or light sandpaper or whatever probably doesn't look all that different than what the Romans could achieve with whatever methods they used. If you're referring to brass cleaning compounds like Brasso, then yes, right away it will look a lot shinier than the Romans probably could have gotten it, but after a short time, as I mentioned in your thread about helmets, brass dulls and again probably doesn't look a lot different than it did back then (judging from the appearance of well-preserved artifacts). If you actually read the thread about Roman cleaning methods, you'll have noticed that the primary thing people said is that we really don't know just how they did it- there's a lot of postulation, but no real evidence so once again we simply can't say how much different real armor would have looked vs. modern replicas when it came to cleaning. The couple of intact segmentata plates I've seen don't look too different from the way modern armor (not the mirror polished stuff of course) looks, so maybe it wasn't that different at all...
See FABRICA ROMANORVM Recreations in the Marketplace for custom helmets, armour, swords and more!
Posts: 2,045
Threads: 116
Joined: Apr 2003
Reputation:
0
Quote:ok lets just start naming all ALL the differences between a REAL roman soldier and a reenactor
then i will stop making posts, at least realy really stupid ones
1. Being an actual roman
This is exactly the kind of thing I mentioned you should avoid doing- asking for EVERYTHING... :lol:
See FABRICA ROMANORVM Recreations in the Marketplace for custom helmets, armour, swords and more!
Posts: 2,045
Threads: 116
Joined: Apr 2003
Reputation:
0
Quote:im talking about wearing armor all your life , as in say ceasars campaign in gaul- 12 years
thats a long time, and if there armor got a LITTLE battered an ordinary soldier could just get a new one?
Well of course armor and other equipment would show signs of wear during the course of a 12 year campaign- that's obvious. However just how much would be purely speculation since we have little direct evidence. After a major battle, lots of stuff would be in bad shape, but over periods of relative calm, probably very little would be. Then again since soldiers are supposed to have trained constantly, perhaps their equipment showed that rather more than we might think.
And since soldiers actually paid for their own arms and armor from their pay, it wasn't like today where one would just trade in a damaged or worn piece of equipment for a new one. Just how repairs were handled and what the practice was for obtaining new equipment I'm not sure if we have even the faintest idea. Did soldiers pay for repairs or was that something the army took care of? Certainly if a soldier needed something replaced, he'd pay for it just as he did when it was first issued, but did he get any kind of discout for turning in the old, damaged one? I would think there'd be some kind of 'trade-in' value, but that's just a reasonable guess.
Quote:as to the cleaning methods,let me ask first how do YOU keep your armor clean?
Steel wool, or another minor abrasive keeps rust at bay. Brass just dulls so doesn't really need much cleaning although because rust often forms around brass fittings, it usually gets polished somewhat in the process of fighting rust.
See FABRICA ROMANORVM Recreations in the Marketplace for custom helmets, armour, swords and more!
Posts: 800
Threads: 30
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation:
0
Quote:ok lets just start naming all ALL the differences between a REAL roman soldier and a reenactor
1. Being an actual roman
Ave Francis,
I’ll try some more:
2. Different body size. Most modern re-enactors are no really looking ‚Italian’.
3. Different muscles and different shade of skin. People working most time outdoor by hand and marching many miles, carrying a lot of equipment will have a their own appearance. Compare the calves / leg muscles of a professional soccer player to a clerk. So for WW II-movies, some directors are searching for actors with face impressions similar to the 1940’s.
4. Different behaviour. Someone who does his job for years will ‘perform’ all the hundreds of big and small motions ‘by the way’ without thinking. And especially ‘typical’ motions’ of his profession. Movie actors try to copy that, with the advantage of performing for just one filmed scene and to retry it if it wasn’t performed well. Re-enactors won’t have this permanent ‘second chance to make a first impression’. :wink:
Who adds no 5 ?
Greetings from germania incognita
Heiko (Cornelius Quintus)
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Posts: 15,116
Threads: 415
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation:
78
5. general attitude.
I mean, a general look at life? Life is considered much more precious today in our parts than it was back then. Children died earlier and sooner, sickness could take you every time of year, etc. So if people died that would be less hurtful because you kinda expected it? Death was more normal?
6. Religiousness.
That would also reflect on a religious feeling (if you have more things that threaten you, you'll pay much more attention to gods & godesses!), but I also expect people to have been ,ore superstitious.
7. Survival capabilities.
I could not make a fire with my ancient tools if my life depended on it (yet). I can learn (I hope I will), but that ans other 'simple things' would have been normal back then. We spoiled rich people do not always have to wonder where we'll sleep, when we'll eat and how we'll get it.
Posts: 8,090
Threads: 505
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
8. More scars visible, simply by being exposed to more injury from blades and construction accidents. The injuries should preferably be on the front of his body :wink:
9. Worse teeth, however some natural substances including mastic had oral antiseptic properties. They may have also been using someone else's teeth, instead of modern style dentures.
10. Rougher hands and soles of the feet. Think construction worker (which they technically were) and bear in mind much of their childhood would have been without wearing shoes.
10a. A tatoo on their hand - the military mark - although that may be contested by some or restricted to later Roman practice, so I gave it an 'a' after the number :?
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
wow very interesting thank you for the replies everyone
11. i guess ill bring up worn armor
i saw a picture of a renacot close up of him in a battle position with his scutum held forward, and gladius poised, i think his name was titus, i dont know where that picture is , but i think that the armor he wears is in the condition (i think ) of what an actual romans armor would have looked like.
does anybody know what im talking bout?
that titus person is a memeber of this board
12.
Being a disciplined trained fighter
13. Actually killing someone?
please tell me if my points make sense
|
