THE EASE OF RESEARCH

It is far easier to be farby in early medieval impressions than it is to be farby in later-period—better documented—eras. I’m not talking about wearing spex, sneakers and wristwatches. The folk who willingly include these anachronisms are not trying for historical integrity in the first place. What I am talking about is the multiplicity of interpretations—many of which are probably incorrect and farby but cannot be determined one way or the other—as well as matters of safety and expense of availability.

When I visited Gettysburg last year, I ran cross a book of the way to manage the horse during the American Civil War. It wasn’t cobbled together from archaeological discovers, fleeting references in period texts and modern interpretations. It was what was written during that time and which the cavalryman was expected to follow in the military. I noted it to a friend, a horsewoman who does much earlier, and she lamented, “They have it so easy in the later periods…”

They do. Higher levels of literacy, a tendency to describe everyday life, a tendency to tell people exactly how they should do things: All can help guide any modern literate person away from farbiness (if they’re willing to read and to research). But more than any of this, are photographs of what was going on, and later moving film and video.

What a cornucopia of information exists for someone doing the Crimean War and later! Even illustrations—paintings and line illos and sketches—pale before photography, because the illustrator does his own interpretation, deciding what to include and what to ignore, probably deciding what is most dramatic (undoubtedly shared with photography and moving pictures, but there is more a chance that it was actually done!).. The photography often includes the everyday ephemera that is so easy to exclude because it clutters the scene!

What brings to mind today is a site of photographs from the American Ci8vil War, a three-part series of photos from the time and gathered by the Atlantic. Looking at these, I became distracted by the minutiae, by the sheer everyday portrayal by—oh my mother would hate this—by the clutter. And I was extremely sad that such are not available for my time! People portraying that era can still be farby; after all, therse photographs do not tell all the time about how often such scenes were seen, and many reenactors have a tendency to want to do the most romantic portrayal possible. But at least they have the possibilities presented them to discuss and to interpret. Reeavtorts recreating the era will hopefully not be spending days arguing, “Well, it’s logical that it would be done even if we have no provenance because I would do it!”

Of course, it is with chagrin that I feel the same sensation when looking at these photographs, going—from what I know and what I feel—”That looks very logical. I’ll be they did something similar in the Viking Age…”

Even if you’re not interested in other periods and cultures, taking a look at the photographs canm be fun and illuminating. Take a look a t the site!

March 26, 2012 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Just back from Military History Fest (nee ReenactorFest) 8 near Chicago. Wonderful time, but we need more people doing early middle ages! Make a note to show up next year!

For a few shots, see http://www.flickr.com/photos/folo/sets/72157629201772865/ (sorry that there are none of the Regia setup. An error on my part )

February 6, 2012 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Rules & Measurements

Norse measurements and units are non-standardized and ambiguous, and as Christie Ward notes, seem to be oriented more toward larger measures. For more on this, see Gary Anderson’s interpretation or Christie’s own. We know more of Anglo-Saxon measurements.

These give you an idea of how the folk in the Viking Age divided lengths. Keep in mind that there was no zero at the time.

In Britain, at some point, the ell was standardized, possibly by Edward I in the thirteenth century. He commanded that each English town should have an ell-stick, which were all cut to the same length. This indicates to me that such straight-edges were used during the time before measurements were standardized. The ellstick (also known as an ell-wand, a mete-wand or merely as a Stikke) is a bar of wood or metal that is about an ell in length.

References to rules, squares and compasses for woodworkers are not found, but it would appear that such items were known in the Viking Age. These were instruments used by masons in the construction of buildings, although it takes little imagination to know that at least the better educated woodworker knew about them as well.

Such instruments were known to have existed in Roman times, and some from that era are still extant. They were made out of bronze, since the Mediterranean world was fairly iron-poor; by the middle ages in northern Europe, where, iron was more plentiful, the instruments were generally made out of iron. In the sixth century, Isidore of Seville refers “to a compass as a pair of dividers, perhaps not unlike those already noted in Roman times. Theophilus, twelfth-century author of the Schedula diversarum artium, mentions the use of a compass in making a small silver cup.” He also remarks about iron dividers and calipers, which is a big difference from the bronze ones used by the Romans.

Both squares and straight-edges are described by Isidore of Sevile: “It is constructed out of three rules, of which two are two feet long, and the third is two feet and ten inches long. They are…joined together at the ends of each to form a triangle.” This description indicates that medieval folk knew about the square, and the casual use of “rule” probably indicates that straight edges were well known as well.

This blog entry is theoretical and highly speculative. We have a strong suspicion that woodworkers of the time used items similar to these to measure their projects, so we wouldn’t object to woodworkers of today using such devices on the line. The fact that neither a wand nor a square was included in the Mästermyr chest certainly indicates that not all woodworkers of the era would have used them, though I suspect that a few might and certainly encourage modern woodworkers to use one. I would suggest that if you want to use a stick to take a piece of hard wood or metal that is about two feet or an ell in length. Divide it into lengths that fit your purposes: inches, millimeters, finger widths or anything else that is useful. Mark these with scratches, with knife notches or with pyrographic marks. If legends are needed, they can be given those like that you see on later runesticks

The resulting stick can be used in your efforts and may be displayed at events with no problem.

For a note on later medieval rules and squares used by woodworkers, see the Saint Thomas Guild of Woodworkers.

January 9, 2012 | Categories: Uncategorized | 8 Comments »

Woods of the Viking Age

This is an excerpt from a forthcoming book I am writing, dealing with woodworking during the Viking Age. When published in the book, the list will also have alternate names and notes. The countries in which the woods were found are listed, and the final column—Unknown—refers to artifacts that have been uncovered made from some species of the wood.

Speaking of the native trees of the British Isles, the British Woodland Trust  notes that “native trees are usually defined as trees that arrived and grew here naturally after the last Ice Age, and were not introduced by humans.” Since we are here concerned with native trees and, most especially, trees that were available for use in the Viking Age, we like this definition and wish that other countries—and especially those who class as “native,” trees that have a North American or Asian origin—adhered to this definition as well. The following list was assembled from a variety of mainly botanical sources, checked against Wikipedia and may therefore be incorrect. Since we know about as much about botany as most botanists seem to know about history, any corrections will be gratefully received!

Neil Peterson has compiled a very useful listing of woods used in artefacts at http://www.darkcompany.ca/articles/wood.php

December 12, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 4 Comments »

CROSS-TIMING

I think that one of the things I hate most about living history is the tendency to compartmentalize eras. I am certainly not speaking in favor of anachronisms; I am referring to cross-pollination.

If I had a nickel for every time the reenactor of one period—ironically, usually one who decries that no one else is up to his standards—I could probably afford Starbucks for the rest of my life! There seems sometimes to be a prejudice against other eras. I was told that so,meone thought Micel Folcland was beneath contempt because it was not American Civil War. Several AWI reenactors regularly refer to Civil War reenactors as Silly War reenactors and announce that articles on the French and Indian war is beneath their dignity. Reenactors of one era note they will not buy a magazine which features articles on eras that they do not recreate. Reenactors of American living history want nothing to do with medieval—”we had a war to get rid of that crap”—and medieval reenactors note they want nothing to do with American “because it’s not old enough to be real history.” And so on. You’ve probably encountered similar statements and perhaps—I hope not—said them yourself!

The fact is, as I noted while in Norse drag to a cowboy and a Colonial American reenactor at Reenactorfest a few years ago, we reenactors have much more in common than our different eras show how different we are. After a moment of thought, they agreed. After all:

• We both do the same kind of research for our impressions (though as an Anglo-Saxon reenactor noted, it’s far easier for the ACW reenactors!)

• We both wear funny costume

• We usually both adopt pseudonyms for our impressions

• We both use obsolete or “old-time” technology (even persons doing more recent eras in many instances)

• We even often employ the same tools, kit and instruments in many instances (a friend who did several eras called this “cross-timing,” a term that I have adopted; however, reserch things befoe using them!)

And again, so on. The differences are, in the end, rather trivial, sometimes more akin to different cultures from the same era than to segregating influences. There is also the matter that much of earlier culture did not change as fast as today’s OSs and Ipods do, and there was a tendency to not throw away things even if they were “out of fashion.” There are samples of Norse and Anglo-Saxons at the turn of the millennium who used materials from the Roman Empire; there is every indication that the famous Sutton Hoo helmet was at least a century old and even repaired for further use before being placed in the grave! Knowing what went on in the past is often as important as knowing what is going on in the era that you recreate!

A quarter century ago, Donlyn Myers of Smoke and Fire News  (a multi-era newspaper) noted that she and I were two of the few people who were really interested in more than one era. While that has changed, I think, there is still tendency among many to remain oblivious or even antagonistic to reenactors from other eras. That is indeed, unfortunate, because the people who are wear such blinders continually are forced to reinvent the wheel, not to take advantage of what another era has learned and can offer (both intellectual and physical). What can you learn from another era:

• What to avoid without trying it yourself (or changing it for better results)

• What to do (without reinventing the wheel; the number of times groupsw from different eras have virtually the same threads going at the same time—and refuse to listen to anyone who says that “in such-and-such a century they…”—would be amusing if it weren’t so tragic)

• Where to send someone who is interested in another era (instead of trying to pound a square peg into around hole)

• Everyday details of another era (entertaining and educational even if they are not practically useful for your impression; plus, if you are doing a third person, you can use these details to better explain details in your own era)

• As mentioned before, what is offered by sutlers and other vendors of another era that you might use in your own era

• Examples of how to better research and to determine the truth of your era

• Examples for recruiting, kit spex and other ways that your group runs things

The list goes on. These reenactors of other eras can be instructors, students, sometimes even mentors and always fellow travelers.

I have always liked talking to folks from other eras. I like being able to share things, especially with people who regard anachronisms the same way I do. I really like timelines, and I try to go to reenactments from other eras to schmooze and enjoy the ambiance.

What brings this up is that we were recently in Gettysburg and, quite unwittingly, wandered into its second largest reenacting event of the year, Remembrance Day. We stayed an extra day to see the parade, to visit sutlers, to talk with fellow travelers, to trade ways of doing things and to watch thousands of very good reenactors. We had a great time, and we picked up a number of items—tent stakes, bees’ wax candles and lye soap for example—for use in our camp, as well as a few items that were just neat. It was fun and instructive, and if I go back, it’s going to be during an event like this. I heartily urge others from this and other eras to go to such a reenactment, to see, to learn and hopefully to improve!

I also urge folk to go to timeline and other multi-era events. My favorite of the year is ReenactorFest (now Military Odessey Fest, but it will always be ReenactorFest to me!) in Chicagoland in February. And to mix and to mingle with the folks that do another era but who have a Clew!

December 5, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 5 Comments »

A recommendation

Micel Folcland focuses on civilian, everyday life, and I assume that this has dissuaded many “swordjocks” from joining or participating after they find they can’t play war games with us. But as I often note, after all most “Vikings” were farmers for most of the year. Dan Crowther has put a good article on civilian living history up on his blog at http://www.celticclans.org/re-livinghistory/?p=460

December 2, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

LOST GOLD OF THE NatGeo EXHIBIT

We just got back from a multi-era trip to the East Coast, including the National Geographic Museum in Washington, DC. The exhibit has a hundred pieces of the Staffordshire Hoard, along with videos and modern reproductions provided by Regia in the UK. It will be there until March.

The Staffordshire Hoard is a collection of gold and silver pieces from the seventh or eighth century that is redefining our idea of the so-called “Dark Ages.”  It was discovered in 2009 by a metal detectorist working with the owner’s permission in a field near the village of Hammerwich, near Lichfield, in Staffordshire, England. The Hoard, consisting of some 3,500 items, has been valued at over five million dollars, which will be shared between the finder and the owner of the land. It is not only an example of finding a picture window into the past but of everyone concerned doing the Right Thing! Authorities and archaeologists were alerted by the founders, and a subterfuge was used to keep the discovery secret and safe until authorities had a hand on it. There are many sites available that speak more about the discovery, including this site.

The Lost Gold of the Saxons display was incredible and highly recommended. The artifacts are overwhelming, and after a while you just concentrate on the videos, taken from the two documentaries put out by NatGeo and including a sequence on how the inlying, etc. was done (that may be on the second doc, which I haven’t seen). The things sent by Regia in the UK were wonderful and well arranged. it was fun guessing who sent what (and who various persons in the videos were, since the nasal helms were very confusing. They did a marvelous display where a rebated sword was in a cage, so kids could pick it up and feel how heavy it was but couldn’t swing it around!

The NatGeo folk apparently drastically underestimated the appeal of the exhibit. They had no exhibition catalog, had sold out of the DVD of the first program two weeks ago and didn’t expect new copies for another week or two, had only one facsimile of jewelry for sale, no CDs of music (archaeological or otherwise) except for a DVD of Beowulf recited to lyre music) and only two books on Anglo-Saxon life in the bookstore. They did have an umbrella with a sword hilt handle They still have until March to put in new stuff, so I will be watching it!

The first documentary on the Hoard is available on DVD; a DVD of the second documentary will, I was told, be available in two months (apparently, they were overwhelmed by requests and questions and are rushing it into production).

The food in the cafe was good as well

Information on the exhibit may be reached on the National Geographic site. To get the book and DVD published by National Geographic without going to Washington, you can go to their shop online.

November 22, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 7 Comments »

EVERYDAY MIRACLES

“The most instructive experiences are those of everyday life”—Friedrich Nietzsche

From its start, there have been four main goals for Micel Folcland:

1. Of course, for participants to have fun. That does not mean, as it does with some societies, to let members do anything they want. As a folc once wisely said, “History is fun.” Research is fun. Learning things is fun. Quite simply, those folk who call research and accuracy anal and restrictive are doing something that, to me, is not fun!

2. That leads into the second, that is almost as important as the first. We want everyone to be accurate. No sneakers. No spectacles. No cinematic versions of reality. Sometimes this involves research, and it is certainly being anal, including a willingness to change the portrayal as new information becomes available.

3. Micel Folcland was, from the beginning, educational. That certainly distinguished us from the various fantasy LARPs that say they are reenactment groups and which use claims of accuracy only to not do things they object to. As many visitors have said, “You taught me something new today.” That’s what we are trying to do and, sometimes, we succeed in educating ourselves as well, when we research something that has eluded us!

4. And the fourth is that we attempt to portray everyday life.

With these goals in mind, once again, we see that Micel Folcland was never that much different from any other group that does serious living history. A member of one of the farbier societies noted to me that he wants to recreate the unique and the extraordinary, but as Kenneth Hudson, speaking of living history interpretation in museums but relevant for other efforts, notes, participants “dress in period costume and conduct period crafts and everyday work.” At our first board meeting, we adapted the motto: “The common Anglo-Saxon on the cow-path.” (As we refined our focus, we changed that to the average Anglo-Scandianian, but the idea never changed) After watching the inaccurate but hysterical British situation comedy, “Dark Ages,” we added another motto: “Common as Otter Plop.” And hopefully, though we have strayed a bit—for example, most people of he time would have slept on the ground but we, owing to our venerable and wizened old age, use a reproduction of one of the Oseberg beds—we have remained true to the ideal.

The reactions have been varied. A lot of people respect you for making this choice. Some think that you’re a prat because no one cares. A few don’t understand (not merely why you made the choice but what the choice could possibly be). A few ask the pertinent question: How do you determine what is everyday culture?

Obviously, that can be difficult. We know that folk of the kind engaged in textiles; they’d be running around naked otherwise. We know that there was kind of military training; it was, in the words of Robert Lacey and Danny Danziger in The Year 1000, an age of thugs. We know what was eaten and when (if they had a successful harvest in many instances). But how many communities had moneyers? How many pieces of furniture did a household have (and what kind was found)? Did the culture have artifacts from another time or from another culture, and if they did have any, how many did they have?

Obviously, that must be found out with research, and then the answer must be compromised a bit to suit modern laws, health statutes, etc., as well as how educational its practice might be for the MoPs. The existence of artifacts and practices must be found in period as well. For the most part, most serious living history societies follow a simple rule: If you find two (independent) instances of the existence of an artifact or practice, then it is fair use (some groups use three instances, but that is up to and your group). Concentrating our era, let’s take a few examples:

• Scissors have been found in the Viking Age, so their use is permitted (if they resemble those found from the period).

• Books were well known so their use would be permitted, but their ownership restricted to certain classes and should not be widely used (unless reenacting a monastery or the such and if, as before, they resemble those found in the period).

• Some items from other cultures have been found in trading centers (such as silk), their use and possession are permitted would generally have been restricted to the wealthy.

• They have found a single jade Buddha in Northern Europe, so its use would be restricted.

• Although the Norse knew about cotton no doubt, they would have also realized how useless it would have been in their homelands, so there is no evidence it was used in Northern Europe at this time, so its use in recreating our era would be forbidden.

• The use of horned helmets has never been proven for the time, and their invention and assignation to the Vikings has been documented, so their use is not only stereotypical but not timely in the least.

Decisions have to be made by each group as to how many unique and expensive artifacts may permitted in an exhibition. Some might depend on the integrity of the individual and not make a ruling, allowing members to use and own artifacts that have little or no provenance. Others might limit each person to a single (and different) artifact that is uncommon. A few might just forbid any artifact tht is restricted in any way.

In the case of Micel Folcland, the use of a unique or expensive artifact has to be okayed in each instance by the AO. In most cases, it depends on how many folc are involved or, in some instance, the intention of the show (for example, hangerocs are rare in the period we recreate and are limited to a single person at a show, but in shows for Scandinavian-American organizations, we are more lax). We are trying for the common impression and feel that the abundance of uncommon items, especially in a small group of participants, would lerad to incorrect interpretation of the era by MoPs.

Such decisions must be made by the group involved, and hopefully this something that has already been considered. And when a decision has been made, the group should hold to them and enforce them!

Keep all of these rules of thumb in mind when determining what would or would not be commonly used in the era and culture you recreate. If you do, and apply it fairly, you will find out that you are being educational, accurate and, more than anything else, having fun!

For a useful book concentrating on common life in England around the First Millennium, see

Robert Lacey and Danny Danziger’s The Year 1000: What Life Was Like at the Turn of the First Millennium, An Englishman’s World. I have three copies and even today, a decade after its publication, often read parts!

November 14, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Take Your Medicine 3

When the jars and bowl were finished, I transferred the salve I purchased from Jas. Townsend & Sons, an old friend and purveyor of eighteenth-century merchandise. It was composed of wheat, honey, bees wax, and lavender oil (all accurate for my period even if it does not duplicate any known recipes of the time). Townsend adds, “And it’s guaranteed not to contain lead, mercury, or arsenic as did so many of the original salves.” Sin e the jar it came in was an eighteenth-century style, I gave to my wife, who is a lover of fine ceramics.

Then I designed a new box large enough to contain them. I did not make the ends sloping like so many boxes of the time had, simply for reasons of space. I have grown accustomed to pegging all my boxes, but for this one—I figured that a physician would have the money for metal—I used cut nails to hold it together (cut nails resembled forged nails, but they are much more affordable; Tremont Nails are great to work with and offer several appropriate styles!). I briefly considered studding it with a huge bunch of nails, à la the Oseberg chest, but decided not to do so. The chest was made of poplar, a hard wood that is far lighter than oak. No provenance; that was just for convenience in carrying it.

After sanding the poplar, I stained it a dark color. Though I do not distress items I make—everything is new once, and I like the patina that age and use gives an item!—this resulted in what both I and others have seen as a distressed product. Still looks good.

Afterwards, I needed hinges, of course, and then it occurred to me: the ingredients of the chest are valuable and would have been protected by a lock. Turning again to Daegrad, I bought a pair of hinges and a lock. The hinges are applied. And I’ll apply the lock as soon as I can regularly unlock it!

There are still a few things that I need to acquire before next season. One, of course, is crosswort. I have an empty jar reading to receive some of it. I’ll bring halms of various types as they became available, but they will not be parts of the regular kit. And I intend to make a mereswine whip.

And there is the rub. Mereswine is Old English for porpoise. Finding porpoise skin is, to say, the least, difficult and possibly illegal. Mereswine whips were used for flogging the madness out of patients, so I had to have one. Using the style of whip owned by the Museum of London ), I made a prototype reproduction that looks a lot like the original. Consulting with a local leather expert, we decided that lambskin would be the best readily available, legal alternative; and I will be making another whip just to be certain of construction details and then makng my own faux-mereswine whip!

A local organic food store had a sale, but unfortunately they did not have rue, lily berries, crosswort and other ingredients I needed. I got ingredients for some more jars:

• Salve (from Jas. Townsend, already mentioned)

• Wormwood (actually a brewing supply)

• Honey

• wheat

• fennel

• berries (dried blueberries because they did not have ivy, and these look good…and can be eaten on the line as well)

• Hempseeds (in addition to the more recognizable plastic)

• willow leaves

I’m looking forward to trotting it all out next season and healing a few MoPs!

For copies of translations of Bald’s Leechbook and other leechbooks of the period, see the three volumes of Thomas Oswald Cockayne’s Leechdoms, Wortcunning, and Starcraft of Early England: Volume One , Volume Two  and Volume Three.

October 31, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Take Your Medicine 2

When I decided to do an Anglo-Scandinavian leech impression on the line, a few things occurred to me. The first was how to display the leeches. There were plenty of canisters and jars from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, but there was very little evidence for what was done in earlier days. A few people suggested that leeches were just kept in the pond out back. But as I read further, it become increasingly evident that the worms were not used inAnglo-Scandinavian  England of this period (nor undoubtedly in the rest of England nor in Scandinavia). After reading treatises of the time on bleeding, I became certain not only that bleeding was done by piercing parts of the body but that the laeces knew that bleeding could be much more harmful than it could be theoretically beneficial. Times were listed when bleeding was warned against, and there are warnings that a patient should not be overbled. This rather sagacious commentary was forgotten later, when nearly a third of George Washington’s blood may have been removed to cure him (right before he died, possibly from blood loss). The leeches were tossed out (well, most of them. One named Læknir the Leech was kept because one of the mmbers of the group was smitten with the name).

I found a source for medical instruments of the time, Daegrad tools. Three were offered: a scalpel, a bone saw and, to my delight and while not terms as such, a fleam. I made a leather container for them; I have no documentation for such an item, but I needed someplace to kep them!

This meant that I needed a bleeding bowl. The styles available were all from later periods, and there was no evidence that they were used in our time. I found an illustration showing a bowl being held beneath a dripping wound and, having seen nothing else, decided that was the shape that I needed. I had too few ceramic jars that could hold the herbs and other ingredients. I had an idea of what I wanted. I contacted old friends, Mike and Sarah Wisdom of Hearthstone Arts. They love doing accurate reproductions, and I was able to show them period illustrations of what I needed, and they agreed to make a number, as well as the bleeding bowl.

I already have three leechbooks that I had assembled, two leechbooks from he tme and one a compilation selected from these and other sources. Since only one book of this period and place that I know of—the Stonyhurst or Cuthbert gospel—has not been rebound, I looked to it for the method of binding the book. It was bound in a style similar to Coptic binding, and I have done several variations, all experimental, trying to find a reasonable alternative. (I have one that I like now, so I may be reproducing these leechbooks again using that style!)

Because two ingredients in very many recipes was hemp and dung—and for legal and other reasons I hesitated to include the actual raw materials—I found a source for plastic cannabis leaves and, at a local novelty store, dog poop. Granted, many recipes called for boar or sheep dung, while others just mentioned dung, but finding plastic versions were impossible, and I’m certain my wife would divorce me if I carried around real dung of any type even if I had wanted to! These formed the basics of my pharmacy, and it is amazing how easily they engender conversations with MoPs!

Using red linen, I hand stitched a band that could be wrapped around the head to cure headaches. It was to contain crosswort.

Using a period illustration of a man mixing ingredients for a potion in a mortar and pestle, I actually found a jar that looked like the mortar and then added a pestle, which I carved from wood to look like that in the illustration. At least one person said that it should not be wood, but she does a later-period impression and was selling ceramic mortar and pestles, What I have is considerably smaller than that showed in the illustration.

A short and informative text from he turn of the last century on Anglo-Saxon leechcraft is available at http://www.archive.org/details/anglosaxonleechc00welliala.

October 24, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Take Your Medicine 1

You might say that I’m obsessed with getting well in the Viking Age. Or at least in knowing how folk of the time supposedly got well.

My obsessions start with little things. A desire to learn about agriculture during the early middle ages and to build tools started when my wife bought me an old sickle at an antiques store for a buck, and I noticed how similar it was to sickle used in the Julius Work Calendar. Avalanche! I discovered an accurate rubber leech and thought it would be fun to buy a few to display on the line (I didn’t want the responsibility of live leeches). And then a year ago, I saw Dennis Riley of Daegrad was offering some surgical tools from the time. Guess what? Avalanche!

Let me digress at this point and speak for a moment about laeces, leeches (physicians)  and leeches (worms). It is certainly a byproduct of the avalanche, and like the detritus after an avalanche, does not easily fit in anywhere. Forgive me!

The Old English word for a physician/surgeon was laece, from the Old English for “healer.”. This was pronounced leech, and it is by that spelling that we know it today. The process of bleeding as a medical remedy had been known since ancient times, but there is no indication that the worm leech was used in medical practices during the early middle ages in Britain and Northern Europe; the Anglo-Saxons seemed to prefer to make a cut from which their patients could bleed. In fact, it appears that the term “leech” was not applied to the worm until the seventeenth century, when it was associated intimately with physicians and with bleeding! And with this fondation laid, let’s get back to my obsession and learning.

The first thing was to find out what was done and known during the time. Oh, I knew the basics like everyone, that the ignorant, superstitious savages of the time knew nothing and used a lot of superstition, no experimentation and revered what the ancients had told them. That was the first surprise. In saga, there was a reference to using odorous soup to tell if a person’s guts had been pierced by a wound, bandaging wounds and extracting metal objects causing wounds. I found translations of Bald’s Leechbook (a standard set of recipes surviving from the time), and that led to other books. I found out that they knew quite a bit. They could do plastic surgery, and there was a logical foundation for some of their medicines. They said prayers and charms, but that has been over-stressed, I came to believe, and there seemed to be an evolution of the concept of using prayer—toward using it instead of medicine—over the years. They experimented, and they wrote down their experiences, ideas and advice. The leechbooks they had were translations, and the strict adherence to what the ancients said only seemed to start when the original versions were brought back to Europe.

I bought Steve Pollington’s book on Leechcraft of the era, and it had some useful material but concentrated on subjects that I was less interested in, and it raised as many questions for me as it solved. I created and bound several leechbooks, including Bald’s, an herbarium and a special edition that I edited myself from various sources. And I began to develop a leech impression for doing on the line.

And there was the rub that was not massage.

There is relatively little that is known about medicine of the time, at least about the physical side. Did the Norse and the English share any medical knowledge (probbly, since what the English wrote down were often associated with folk practices which the Norse might already know). Where the doctors all ecclesiastics or were there laymen? (Answer: we think there were lay doctors as well, but schools that taught medical practices were probably all ecclesiastical). Were there signs for practitioners (the Caduceus was apparently not used in northern Europe, and the barber pole—representing the bandages and blood—was a later development, when ecclesiasticals were no longer allowed to do surgery, and the whole class of barber-surgeons was created). Were there medicine cases (probably, but certainly not the leather doctor cases we are used to, though there is one ambiguous reference to such a case during the time covered with rawhide). Were all physicians of the time male (probably predominantly, though there were of course female midwives, wise women and, if you read between the lines, probably female physicians).

I decided to set up a medical shop on the line, and the MoPs loved it, asking questions and being genuinely interested. I made a preliminary medical case (an altered wooden trunk from Michael’s) and filled it with books, bowls, a couple examples of the herbs and other ingredients that would have been used and, of course, the surgical tools. It was quite preliminary, and from its beginning, I was looking for ways to make a better presentation. The next installment deals with this evolution toward that better presentation!

Besides Pollington’s book, there are a few other worthwhile sources. A fine article on Norse medical practices is available from Christie Ward’s “Viking Answer Lady” site.  A very useful article on English ptactices may be found in Stanley Rubin’s “The Medical Practitioner in Anglo-Saxon England.”

October 17, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Brigadoon Found!

Not really, but just as exciting!

The Norse first settled Ireland in Dublin–they founded it!–and at a site once believed to be lost. No more. “A year after test trenches were dug on the ‘virgin’ site, the results of radio-carbon testing on some of the artefacts recovered have confirmed that ‘Linn Duachaill’ exists and is perfectly preserved underneath farmland in Annagassan, Co Louth.”

Artifacts uncovered in initial explorations are going on display and include slave chains and whetstones, and more might be primed to show up! It could become one of the most important Viking sites not only in Ireland but in the world!

For further information, see http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/joy-as-mythic-viking-village-found-170117.html?fb_ref=.TpS8I0jozK4.like&fb_source=home_multiline

October 12, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

The Size of Artifacts

My impression is that of an eleventh century Anglo-Scandinavian, but like so many Anglo-Scandinavians, my persona story does not stop there. My character was from Iceland, and he traveled to various places in Scandinavia, Africa and, of course, America. Cheap pulp fantasy? To some extent, but look at the sagas, which tell of the diaspora of the Norse! They were a widely traveled people, probably more so than many of the peoples whom they traveled among.

In the story I tell of my character, he sailed to England soon after the St. Bryce Massacre to help relatives. Fólki is, like all other Icelanders of the time, Christian with heathen overtones, though he converted to Christianity before the Conversion. And that brings me to the subject of this entry in a round-about way.

Fenris cross

I wear the Wolf Cross. It has a wolf’s head (Fenris I’ve heard, and that is certainly an easy way to describe it; some prefer to call it a dragon), a stylized hammer (unlike the usual Thor’s Hammer of so many amulets) and what seems to me to be an obvious Christian cross carved into its center. Some liken the amulet to the inverted St. Peter’s cross. It dates from the tenth-century and was found in Fossi, Iceland. It is about 3×1.5 cm. I have found only a single example of the cross, but it almost certainly was not unique because it seems to be cast. I picked up my original copy in Iceland over twenty years ago, and the original artifact is in the National Museum in Reykjavik. I found a slightly larger version in a Goth shop a few years later (but lost it). Losing that later copy means that I am always looking for another copy in the right size. I like to refer to it to the MoPs as the “hedge your bets” cross, worn by a Christian of the time who might occasionally pray to Thor. People understand immediately, including a Lutheran minister who I talked to! There are doubts about this, of course. It might be a Christo-heathen cross. It might be a heathen version of the cross. It might be something else. My interpretation, though, is as valid as any of them and shared by a sizeable number of experts!

There are many copies commercially available, but most of them are larger than the original. That is not unusual. At Pennsic fair this year, a person dressed as a “Viking” bragged that he wanted the biggest baddest Thor’s Hammer he could find to show what a big, bad Viking he was. It goes along with the width of belts and so much else. Modern people tend to think like modern people and don’t want the smaller period thing because it does not go with their idea of the size of artifacts of the era! In the case of this cross, most reproductions are about three times the size of the original.

This year at Pennsic, I found the large versions as well, and of course vendors who told me it was an exact duplicate (always know more than the vendors when shopping fort accurate goods, it seems). But then next to a shop with an oversized Fenris Cross, I found a new version. The proper size, although the proportions were different than in the original. I had to make a decision, and it was easy. I prefer jewelry and other pieces of kit that are of the proper size, and the design of the amulet itself is not jarringly dissimilar, particularly when you take into account that modern mass manufacturing was an alien concept. Not finding a copy of that version cross, of course, is a drawback, and I will normally be wearing the replica of the original. The search goes on!

For a picture of the original, along with notes about it and other amulets, see http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/crosses/thor.html and a manufacturer has some notes on the manufacture of  its replica larger than the original (but certainly not as larger as some) at http://www.othalacraft.com/thors-hammer-also-called-wolf-cross.-p103.html.

September 20, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Read Another Blog!

The term “Anglo-Saxon” is, unfortunately, a charged term. Many people, and especially white racists, have quite wrongly equated it with white supremacy. Micel Folcland has felt this prejudice again and again. For example, at a recruiting gig two young white racists went by our booth, saw what we were doing and gave a white power salute, saying, “Way to show them darkies.” I explained Micel Folcland’s aracist stance, how we welcome members of other races and that there were probably members of the Norse society that were of different races themselves. They left, sullen and disappointed. I don’t think they were thinking of joining, and I wasn’t unhappy.

I could tell other stories. They’re all rather depressing and speak more to the worse aspects of humankind, so I’ll not. Rather, I shall commend you into the capable hands of Si Skellon.

Si Skellon, an erudite and witty fellow Regia member from the United Kingdom, has written a blog entry on the subject, and I thought it was an excellent look at the situation. Head on over to his blog, “A Rather English Viking,” and read his entry on “Anglo-Saxon: the Meaning, the Racism and the Reenactment.” Great work, Si! Can’t wait to see you climb on your soapbox again!

In his entry, Si makes reference to a Facebook group dealing with the subject of racism and reenacting. I’m a member as well, and I hope you’ll consider joining!

September 7, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

From the Viking Word Hoard: A Book Review

Old pal, Chuck Huber, was kind enough to send me a copy of a book not needed by his library and asked me to make a review when I asked him whether I could do anything to thank him for it. So here it is!

From the Viking Word Hoard: A Dictionary of Scandinavian Words in the Languages of Britain and Ireland, Diarmaid Ó Muirith. Four Courts Press; Dublin. ISBN 978-1-84682-173-8

It is always difficult to review dictionaries. Except for some early dictionaries, such as Johnson’s, you can only comment on the accuracy of entries, and perhaps descend into snarkiness and nitpicking. Some entries are spot on; some might be a little off, and it is often difficult for the layman to determine which is which, and the learned academician might have doubts of his own. Reading the entries in a haphazard way has been an enjoyable and illuminating experience, and I hope to continue to dip into the soup from time to time and go away satisfied!

So I guess that the review needs to center on the introduction, in which the author presents a background for the dictionary. While the introduction is, in many senses, quite fascinating, at least for someone interested in seeing how the Norse influence on western and English (and American) culture can be seen ever today. At shows, MoPs are often greatly interested in this and are genuinely appreciative when a person talks to them about it. And the sections on the Norse language’s influence on Irish, on Scottish, on Welsh and of course on English are interesting. The sections on the Norse invasions of the various lands are illuminating, though superficial to what is available elsewhere. If you are sincerely interested in a more detailed investigation of Norse invasions, see Katherine Holman’s The Northern Conquest  for a more general but provenanced view or any of the academic books that are available (for example, F. M. Stenton’s Documents Illustrative of the Social and Economic History of the Danelaw, from Various Collections.

The book does not deal with physical culture, artefacts or much else that reenactors are generally concentrating on, though it is relevant in many was to making a reenactor’s impression richer. It might be more than what a person needs; they might be content with sites such as Wikipedia’s “List of English Words of Old Norse Origin”  or “Viking Words in English”  However, having a copy of this book available is more than a little bit useful!

The reservation I have about the tone of the introduction is the same one that I have with Schama and many other modern historians, where they do an abrupt about face on the matter of modern interpretations of the Norse as a cultured people, a deviation from the propaganda set forth by the literate people—the clerics who were subjected to violence by the Vikings—and adopted as the truth for so many years. The author calls this trend to depict a civilized culture as “pc,” though my interpretation is somewhat different. No doubt, the Vikings were violent. They did invade. They were malicious. They were thugs. But so were the Christians. The author paints the Norse in the old way and do not mention that the Christians were much the same. The difference, to my mind, is that the Christians tended not to do violence to the Church (though this was not a universal); that simple fact, again to my mind, does not necessarily demonize the Norse the way that modern but not contemporary culture has done!

Persons interested in the book for their unit or for personal ownership, should of course consult local bookstores (we have seen with Borders and other local bookstores what not doing this might tend to do). However, for additional information and if it is otherwise unavailable, see http://www.amazon.com/Viking-Word-Hoard-Dictionary-Scandinavian-Languages/dp/1846821738/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1313851171&sr=8-1

The book that I was reading when this arrived, and that I put aside to give this a good look was something entirely different. It was the Jack Kirby Omnibus Volume One, and much more in line with what brought Chuck and me—both comic fans—together in the first place. Of relevance to readers of this blog was a story from the 1950s called “The Hammer,” which was about Mjollnir, which was a fun story and which featured a version of Thor totally different in many ways—but was curiously similar—to Kirby’s later version of the Norse deity as a Marvel superhero. Fun stuff, and if you are a comic fan and think of Kirby as essential to modern comics as many fans—myself included—do, you might want to pick up a copy of the book!

August 20, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Experimental Archaeology

Just back from two weeks camping at what may be the most schizophrenic event in the world: Pennsic. It was the fortieth this year, and its attendees range from the most progressive and accurate reenactors to farbs wanting to get drunk and laid. It started as a Scadian event, and it is still governed to some degree by the Society for Creative Anachronism [SCA] but has long since become something more. I have taken to calling it Burning Man East (though they only burn a drakar model in the lake and would assuredly draw the line at a burning wicker man), although I discovered that a son of Doctor David Friedman—whose idea of accuracy is based in a continuous first-person impression while mine is based more on physical artifacts—tern it that some years before I did! It is a fun event, not merely for the obvious and martial activities—the Scadians call it a “war,” though it is much more, and I term it a “fair”—and I have for years not seen any combat activities.

People wanting any form of consistent accuracy are fools, and many of those who accept the SCA for what it is even think of it as another renn fair or farbfest. Probably so in both cases, but I look at it as a challenge. I have, for the past few years, set up my selling spot with wattle fences, a geteld and a dining fly (awning), so that except for my electrical connection—needed for light after dark—it looks very much like my Regia camp. I’ll forget for the moment about the person who came by this year and pronounced it “cute,” but if she meant “different than anything about it”—then I would question her vocabulary but not her intent. I have looked upon the two-week experience as experimental archaeology, and I get to try certain things that are impossible at a two-day event. Here are a few discoveries I made—both on purpose and inadvertently—this year:

• Hand washing clothes and draping them across the hurdles to dry worked great and, in fact, smelled better than washed clothes when I put them on.

• Driving stakes into dry ground that then gets wet from the rain is a futile gesture. A friend drove in stakes into pre-wettened holes that worked much better.

• Actually an Observation. Flies never fall down–their stakes sliding from the holes in dry earth that gets wet–never fall down when you’re looking at it. It waits until you take your eyes away

• Wearing smooth-soled turnshoes on hilly ground worn smooth over two weeks makes standing up with short benches an achievement. But a little rain makes the traction much better!

• Living at the mercy of the weather makes you more aware of the weather, and you rely neither on fancy electronic devices or on the frantic warnings of those who do. Instead, you look at the sky, at the moon and feeling what the wether feels like. Sometimes, you’re wrong, but you’re usually right. After a while, I came to ignore the frantic warnings–”Gojira is coming,” many of us described it—and trust more in my own instincts and intuitions.

• It was far more comfortable wearing casual dress around the site—undertunic with no belt—and only getting dressed up in overtunics, belts, etc. when formally accepting company or going out on formal visits (though I will admit I didn’t dress up often because of the heat).

• Air conditioning is not imperative. I was comfortable in the heat, even wearing wool, as long as I avoided doing too much. The fact that I go the entire summer without a/c getting ready for the two weeks no doubt helps me.

• In a clear moon, strong external light is not needed.

• If our ancestors had sharp-edged stones everywhere, they would not have had thin-sole turnshoes!

• When you have no access to television, radio and other modern distractions, you find you don’t need them. You can enjoy live music (even if medieval music for the SCA is scarcely medieval; I was waiting for someone to sing “Johnson’s Motor Car” because it was Irish), playing games on real game boards, spinning yarns and just talking to friends you haven’t seen for a while. In that last sense, Pennsic was probably much like a market of the era.

• Our ancestors were much sturdier than we give them credit for. If I didn’t get off site every few days, was able to wear farby shoes when it was muddy or wet and buy cold beverages in the heat of the day, I’d have gone mad. They had no recourse! Vivat, ancestors of almost any era! We’ll try to make you proud!

And finally, an observation: After two weeks of living around campfire smoke, you just don’t smell it. But unpacking things…mmmmmmmmmmm.

For a few of my photos—not the usual ones of people in hockey gear swinging furniture legs and claiming it is medieval combat—see http://www.flickr.com/photos/folo/sets/72157627308566361/.

August 15, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

SPEX THE SECOND

Working Around the Problems of Inappropriate Eyeglasses for Reenactors

Surgical Correction

One should never enter into any sort of surgery lightly. Before any non-emergency surgery, be certain that you exhaustively confer with your physicians! Laser eye surgery—commonly known as Lasik—and the implantation of permanent lenses are both available. The former is still expensive and probably not covered by most insurance. It is has not been around long enough that we know the long-term effects of Lasik, so no one knows how long the beneficial results may last, and there may even be long-term side effects. The implantation of lenses is usually to correct cataracts or other eye ailments and should not be approached lightly.

Contact Lenses

The most obvious remedy are contacts. Contact lenses, which are small corrective lenses that are placed directly upon the eye, convey the illusion of using no device at all. Since all good living history—with the exception of practical archaeology—is, at its base, illusion, this a very suitable remedy.

There are people who are familiar only with the more primitive forms of contact lenses—heavy, uncomfortable glass or hard plastic appliances that could only be worn for a short time—that were invented in the nineteenth century. They had become relatively comfortable to wear for short times by the 1930s and had attained great popularity by 1940s. Rigid plastic lenses became available at this time, and soft plastic lenses were developed into the 1960s, although they did not became commercially available until the 1970s.

These lenses all did not breath and could not be worn for extended periods of time. Disposable extended-wear and gas-permeable lenses only became available in the 1980s and 1990s. A new generation of disposable, extended-wear gas-permeable lenses was introduced just before the turn of the millennium.

If you attempted without success to wear contact lenses prior to this time, see your optometrist for sample lenses. You might very well be surprised that your ancient prejudices were for naught.

Getting Accustomed to Going Without Eyeglasses

Most folk can go without spectacles. In an era with low rates of literacy, people of our period were much less concerned about perfect eyesight than we are today. Continued reliance on corrective devices has in some cases weakened the eyes and has increased our reliance on spectacles for convenience and comfort. There is, however, a great distance between convenience and necessity.

Practicing going without spectacles should not start at an event. Do it first at home, and do not try to overdo it. Do not be too active at first, and stay away from dangerous activities. You might find that there are certain things you cannot do; please accept these limitations so that you do not endanger yourself or others. Reenacting should not be run by egos!

Hints for Going Without Spectacles

Much about living history is, to modern sensibilities, inconvenient and, perhaps, uncomfortable. However, if you are willing to compromise, you will find that it is not impossible! Here are a few hints for not using your eyeglasses at living-history events:

A. Realize that spectacles must be abandoned only during public hours (within the confines of the ropeline if your organization uses such a thing). Outside, the use of spectacles are allowed, although you might find that continued use of no spectacles may make the transition more easy.

B. Before public hours begin, police the area in which you plan to stay to make certain there are no dangers that you might not see.

C. Find a pursuit that does not require good vision. These are pursuits to be practiced in public at events. You can, of course, wear spectacles when practicing a craft in a non-public setting.

D. Move slowly without your spectacles. Even if you are accustomed to striding quickly about, you will find that taking your time is safer. After all, your ancestors did not have tv programs or professional soccer games to rush to!

E. Allow fellow reenactors to guide you about if necessary.

F. Use a walking stick to help walk around if necessary.

G. Be careful around weapons, tent stakes and fire!

H. Request—and expect—that your campmates will keep the area relatively clean of debris and dangers, even as you expect them not to leave unsheathed steel around!

I. On walk-abouts, keep your spectacles convenient—I used to slide them up a sleeve—so that they are relatively accessible if you desperately need them.

J. Acquire a magnifying globe or crystal that is acceptable to the Authenticity Officer. It is presumed that these were also used as jewelry.

K. If absolutely necessary, put your spectacles on again when public hours are over or when leaving the ropeline. Some persons in your situation, however, prefer to go without spectacles whenever they are in period kit. As my wife said after a recent weekend event, “Oh, the green blobs have leaves…”

You will also often find that you have compensated so well that putting your spectacles back on after an extended period without will leave you slightly confused and dizzy.

Try it before rejecting the idea. You may find it easier to do than modern life has made you believe!

If Wearing No Spectacles Leave you Unsafe, Nauseous and Debilitated

If you are not capable of nor willing to go without spectacles and cannot otherwise correct your visual disabilities and you will not abide by the limitations imposed, find another hobby. Don’t expect the whole hobby to change its principles for you.

TW Moran of eighteenth-century reenacting posted the address for a site about Antique Spectacles and Visual Aids (http://www.antiquespectacles.com/) in February of 2009, and I found it incredibly useful and its creator, David Fleischman, incredibly helpful. It is filled with useful essays, wonderful period illos and photographs of extant artifacts and replicas. Highly recommended. I want to thank Doctor Fleishman for reading and commenting on this essay!

© 2006, 2009 Folump Enterprises

July 20, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

SPEX THE FIRST

On one mailing list, what shouldn’t be a questionable matter became a long thread, with people wanting to wear spectacles at events—”They’re not the same as jewelry or sneakers”—going on against their AO’s correct admonition (“No spex at any time at events.”)

Micel Folcland decided early on that we wanted quality over quantity. We have refused some potential members who wanted a variance to the rules because such a variance would be more convenient for them. We held firm, and our AO—whose eyesight was pretty poor—did not wear contacts to an event just to show that it could be done without the world ending. Some years ago, I wrote an article regarding the appearance of spex in reenacting (of all; eras, though it concentrated on the early middle ages), and I figured to reprint it here.

Let me state that I find the appearance of anachronistic spex just as disruptive as any other anachronism. I can cite a number of comedies which realize this well, though I can almost imagine some of the complainers going, “I don’t get it. What’s so funny?” Here is a modest exploration why anyone who is not the member of a fantasy LARP should find it funny!

Copyright 1934 RKO

Introduction

One of the most controversial parts of any serious living history endeavors are eyeglasses.

It is untrue that early man possessed no way to correct his eyesight. From ancient times, magnifying lenses—generally crystals or curved transparent goblets filled with water—were probably used to help with fine work, to start fires and to cauterize wounds. Workshops manufacturing these lenses have been found from Gotland to Constantinople. However, these were large, heavy, unwieldy and only minimally transportable. The modern concept of spectacles was invented in the later thirteenth century and, unlike many technological advances through the ages, were at once widely adopted. By 1290, only a few years after their development, spectacles were being praised as essential. Two monks from the St. Catherine’s Monastery, Giordano da Rivalto and Alessandro della Spina, provide the earliest primary documentation to support this fact. On 23 February, 1306, Giordano mentioned them by stating in a sermon “it is not yet twenty years since there was found the art of making eyeglasses which make for good vision, one of the best arts and most necessary that the world has.” He coined the word “occhiale” (eyeglasses) and its use began to spread throughout Italy and Europe.

For the portrayal of impressions from post-13th-century eras in Western Europe, the use of simple frames are often acceptable, even though there are very real physical differences in the size, shape and construction between period and modern spectacles. In addition:

A. spectacles were designed to correct far-sightedness, and other corrective lenses date only from the fifteenth century (a mention is quoted at http://www.florilegium.org/?http%3A%2F%2Fwww.florilegium.org%2Ffiles%2FDISABILITIES%2F15C-Eyeglsses-art.html,). Bifocals, famously, from the eighteenth.

B. Even though early optics were often crystal and frequently tinted, relatively transparent, purposeful sunglasses were not invented until the eighteenth century. Any sunglasses—whether they are eyeglasses or even transitional eyeglasses—are immediately inappropriate. (Early sunglasses were a protection against the sensitivity of light caused by venereal disease by the way)

C. Early spectacles were often difficult to wear because rigid ear pieces were not invented until the eighteenth century. Early spectacles were kept on the face by unwieldy straps, braces, ribbons, spring nose pieces and sometimes by balancing them on the nose itself. Sometimes, they were even kept on a stick or otherwise held up to the eyes.

C. Spectacles were a sign of old age and infirmity, and worn by many Europeans only in private.

D. Spectacles were a sign of learning and, in painting, often used as shorthand for portraying the subject as educated and literate. Unless there was a reason to brag about literacy—and this was scarcely so in pre-Industrial revolution Europe—there was no reason to make such an ostentatious display of the ability.

However, for persons portraying pre-thirteenth century eras, such as our own, even this controversial work-around is unavailable. A Viking wearing spectacles is comic and inappropriate. Although inappropriate eyeglasses have often been a part of burlesque and comedy, and although Robert Wooley’s black Harry Potter-like frames were hilarious in films such as “Cockeyed Cavaliers,” hopefully your intent is more educational and less humorous.

There are, however, ways to work around the problem.

For notes on the history of spectacles, see http://www.teagleoptometry.com/history.htm

—To Be Continued

© 2006, 2009 Folump Enterprises

July 18, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Shopping Guide

The chances are that most people of the era we attempt to re-create not only did not have any books but could not read them even if they did have them! (That latter is not particularly historically unique since Bart D. Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why tells of some professional scribes who only duplicated pen strokes and who were not really literate!) Our display—in the literate area—has a number of leech books, a copy of the Bible (vulgate with Old English glosses in many areas), homilies and a few other books. Most are translated into modern English, since MoPs love to read medical recipes of the time, but they have period binding, are printed on vegetable parchment that simulates real parchment and are typeset using fonts that effectively mimic period calligraphic styles in formats seen in period manuscripts. Although they are not on chains, I point out proudly to visitors that I am literate unlike most of the camp* and these books and am proud that I possess these books.

The insides of some of the books are shown to the MoPs, but many are not. One is a “commonplace book”—alas, not quite period, since the first appeared a few hundred years later—that answers many questions we might have, and one holds a camera that may be brought out when MoPs are not about and used quickly during an event but which is routinely camouflaged. But the most useful book is a shopping guide that I use when going around to vendors.

Vendors are, in almost any era, there to make a buck. Even when there is a conscious desire to make the presentation better, often the vendor will carry goods that are not, strictly speaking, period accurate. In some cases, it might be a legitimate difference in interpretation. In some, it is just availability or safety. Sometimes, it might be to fulfill a desire by reenactors or to cater to the MoPs. In a few, unfortunately, it is just a desire to move merchandise. How else can you justify cast-pewter sewing-machine charms at a RevWar event? Two decades ago, I was the commander of Baldswin’s unit in the NWTA, a RevWar reenactment group. Baldwin’s was a unit of sutlers—vendors—and most of my time seemed to be spent handling complaints from fellow members seeking accuracy, policing the wares displayed and trying to convince unit members not to sell or to display inappropriate merchandise.

Some reenactment groups force the vendors who set up at their events to take back anything that is later not approved by an authenticity officer (AO), at least when they have that control. Certainly, many groups never give a blanket okay for anything produced by a supplier to be used on the line, although they might recommend members look at the wares of a certain vendor. Even wares purchased from such a vendor, who has sold appropriate material before, must be approved by an AO. Above all else, a reenactor—old or new—must keep in mind what Steve Etheridge, formerly the AO of Regia Anglorum, notes, that most vendors are “ operate under the provisions of ‘buyer beware.’ ” And the buyers must, indeed, beware!

The shopping guide was first accumulated a few years ago when shopping for myself and other members of my unit at a large event which has only moderate control over what the vendors offer for sale. It featured photographs of actual artifacts, diagrams from archaeological books and so forth. It enabled me to pick up something, look at it, look at what “inspired” it and make a decision as to how appropriate it would be at an event. I handed out copies to members from other Regia groups but did not sell it. Although some illustrations are taken from out-of-copyright sources or were taken by myself, most are not. Getting permission to reprint all the photos would have been difficult if not impossible! It is a fair-use research tool that, over the years, has been weeded, added to and reprinted.

Micel Folcland recreates the Danelaw in the early eleventh century. The York Archaeological Trust has done a magnificent job excavating and cataloging artifacts, and I have cheerfully exploited their labors, thanked them profusely and have recommended their books. In assembling the book, I have followed four guides: First, that the artifacts portrayed were from York (or at least available in York, since it was a metropolitan port with objects from Scandinavia and beyond were commonly seen). Second, that things not found in the York records were used but carefully listed (such as the rich supply of items from the Oseberg burial such as looms and other textile artifacts). Third, that items were roughly dated (with “pre-period” prominently listed if necessary).** And fourth, that originals are mostly displayed, and any reproduction is noted as such.

As better  illustrations are found, old ones are replaced. As new discoveries are made, they are included. As York versions of items represented by foreign versions are discovered, a change is made. Although we do not include complete bibliographic references, we try to make note of an artifact’s time, country and/or culture of origin. Is it perfect? Probably not. Is it exhaustive? Certainly not. But it is certainly helpful, and it is certainly hated by many vendors who are trying to push anything that will make the weekend profitable. There are many books, articles and such that fulfill the exact same purpose, but this book has the advantage of being easily transported and is made up in a period style that is not immediately disruptive. I certainly recommend such an effort for any unit or group that is interested in a more accurate portrayal in living history!

For a good and informative look at what is suggested and available for inclusion in such a book, you can look at the books published by YAT (see the free downloads at http://www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk/resources/pubs_archive.htm) or at the photographs of artifacts held by YAT at http://www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk/piclib/photos.php).

*A younger member was around when I did this once, and he proudly said, “My dad is literate!” “He just looks at the pictures,” I returned to the delight of both him and the MoPs.
**This did not mean that they can not be used, since the Norse and others of that day had a great tendency to use things until they wore out and not be governed as we are today by what is currently fashionable. However, they must be approved by the AO, and they should not by over-represented on the line!

July 5, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

Chairy Thoughts

Nothing says “Viking” better than a Stargazer Chair, unless maybe it’s Lee Majors’ horned helmet in “The Norseman.” Just looking at it fills me with a Neo-Viking fervor! Makes me want to go raid a monastery!

The stargazer chair can be seen at so many events, both LARP and otherwise. It is also known as a bog chair, an X-chair, a plank chair and a hocker. It consists of two planks that slide together to form an “X.” A proponent of the chair notes that “it was something someone saw some SCA guys doing, but that they had gotten the idea from an actual viking chair found by archaeologists.” Others note that the chairs have been found in Africa and that proves how far the Vikings traveled. Others note…

Well,  I think you see where this is going. Documentation based on what you want to believe is below contempt. Documentation based on fudging or ignoring a few facts is detestable. Saying that the chair cannot be documented but is really comfortable and convenient and better than a lawn chair is…well, I already dealt with convenience in living history; you know what I think of it.

You might also suspect by now that my first statement might be a little questionable. Why yes, and so is my note about the Six Million-Kronar Viking!

Simply put, there are no such chairs from the Viking Age in northern Europe. The chair, it has been conjectured, was introduced from Africa in the nineteenth century and became really popular in the early twentieth century when Boy Scouts began to manufacture and make them. All this is second hand and not even trustworthy second hand. Like folding stools with backs, they seem to have just popped up!

It is so difficult proving negatives. I had searched for and not found Victorian photographs showing the plank chair—the photos are often taken of European explorers who are sitting in European chairs brought for the safari—and even if I find them, that only proves that they were used by the Africans, not where they originated! Talking to persons importing the chair from Africa, they say they are “traditional,” that deadly term that often means “my father had something like that” and might be based on a concept that someone saw at a Scout Jamboree down in South Africa!

The chairs existing in the Viking Age—and documented by artifacts—range from stools (Lund and York come to mind), to benches, to box chairs with backs to chairs and benches that might seem more appropriate for eighteenth century reenactors (for photos of various types of chairs, see a copy of From Viking to Crusader or similar book, or just take a look at the section on seating in the Viking Answer Lady’s blog entry on “Woodworking in the Viking Age”  http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/wood.shtml#Furniture
They can all be easily constructed (and many easily transported, something our ancestors probably did not have to worry about!) . In fact, they might not have had to worry about chairs very much at all. Forensic studies of bodies from the era indicate that many people of the Viking Age just squatted:

“The physical type does, however, suggest that they are of Anglo-Saxon date, as does the presence of large squatting facets on the leg bones. These are less common after the Norman conquest, when it became customary to sit on stools instead of squatting on the floor.”

Neither comfortable nor practical for most reenactors, but still pertinent!

Getting back to the ubiquitous stargazer chair, I can only say that their existence as part of the Norse or Anglo-Saxon heritage is unlikely at the best, and I would advise against their use by Norse reenactors until such time as one is actually found! Going on strictly evidential grounds, the plank chair is certain twentieth century; and from speaking with producers, etc., I am willing to entertain the theory that they came to Europe and the Americas from Africa in the nineteenth century, but not only is that of no striking relevance to their banning in “Viking encampments,” but of little relevance to my reenacting at all (and btw I’ve never seen ACW photos of them as some have claimed). Viking and other reenactorts of the period should learn to sit on their stools!

Articles detailing why we think squatting was probably prevalent in the past may be seen at http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=44463 or http://www.suite101.com/content/human-bone-analysis-a62847. For the entire article from which I plucked the quote from earlier, “Medieval Britain in 1967,” see http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/arch-769-1/ahds/dissemination/pdf/vol12/12_155_211_med_britain.pdf If inspired to do a more realistic seat for your early medieval encampment, see Stephen Francis Wyley great article on reproducing the Lund Stool at http://www.angelfire.com/wy/svenskildbiter/Viking/vikstool.html

June 27, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Convenience

It amuses to me how many people confuse safety with convenience and say, “Hang the accuracy; I want to be convenient!” They glorify the use of modern spectacles and eyewear (“I just can’t see otherwise, and I can’t wear contacts!”) , alibi the use of sneakers and Harley boots (“I’m not able to stand or walk around otherwise, and besides nobody does accurate footwear!”), scoff at required research (“That’s just not fun; don’t be so anal!”) and obliviously and openly use modern electronics and talk about that episode of  “American Idol” they Tivo’d instead of anything remotely period during public hours (or do not have public hours and instead want a big fancy-dress LARP). Then, as if to further justify their approach, they defend their actions and choices with the ferocity of a child caught with his hand in the cookie jar: “That takes away from any fun I’d have and is just not convenient!”

Well guess what. Having un-sharp weapons on the field is safety; using modern wheelchairs or crutches to get onto site is safety; not using poisonous cosmetics is safety. Using something that makes you feel more comfortable with no provenance, no likelihood of existing in period is not a safety; that is the supreme god of people who feel no compunction about doing frivolous living history. A matter of convenience! They even avoid things that were essential to the era—and even more essential to understanding it–as being not merely inconvenient but disruptive. Myself, I find having an Authenticity Officer is safe and reassuring; a lot of people find—or would find if the concept even occurred to them—it is inconvenient. It’s a threat to the laissez-faire sense of Fun that they want to engender and to enjoy.

Are their ultimate goals to attract as many members as possible and rake in more and more money? At an early meeting, we decided on “quality, not quantity.” They may have five hundred people out there in bluejeans, Air Jordans and hurriedly stitched T-tunic made out of polyester; we may have five who look not merely Good but Superlative. That is where I’m coming from, and that is what is important to me. It would be nice to have hundreds of well-dressed participants in a period-looking environment, but those numbers are nothing to me compared to the time that a spectator who says, “Wow, even your shoes look accurate!” (yes, they do so notice!) Nothing is more fun that doing the research required to make something that is accurate and not just fabricate something that will look similar to something seen in a fantasy film.

What is my point? I guess it’s that good, serious living history is fun. The research is fun. The presentation is fun. And the practice is fun. It will probably never ever be convenient!

June 20, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 4 Comments »

Into Each Re-Creation Some Fantasy Must Fall

Let’s talk about Otzi. Otzi is the name given the so-called Iceman who lived a few thousand years ago, died and was flash frozen (not literally of course), existing with clothing, tattoos, weapons, etc. We probably know as much if not more about his physical culture than about the cultures of the Viking Age. A wonderful looking glass into the past!

We have no real equivalent for the Viking Era. But we have fantasies. My fantasy is, of course, that a Norseman, hiking across a glacier carrying weapons, wearing everyday clothes but carrying special clothes and, what the hay, pulling his own version of a Mästermyr chest in a sled, slips and falls into the ice and is frozen. In my imagination, he will pop out perfectly preserved a week or two from now. In my fantasy, he’d have been in suspended animation and would just wake up and be able to tell us all about his everyday life.

And while we’re talking about fantasies, then, let’s talk about time travel.

Wouldn’t traveling in time be great? Well, aside from opportunistic manipulation of betting on sports events, investing in the stock market, buying shares of companies ready to go through the roof and slipping multiple copies of Action Comics 1 into mylar bags, I am disinterested in traveling corporeally in time myself. If you have to take shots to visit third-world countries today, think how much of a pin-cushion you’d be to visit 1000 CE. If you have to be careful crossing streets today, think how careful you’d have to be not to offend that guy over there with a sword length greater than his IQ. If it’s difficult dealing with insurance companies and medical care today, think how wonderful it would be if you stubbed a toe and had to go to a laece whose idea of health care was praying really really hard. If you want to communicate, think about learning a foreign language whose modern reconstruction might be a trifle dubious. Then there’s the matter of coin, precious metals or the occasional goat to trade. If one carries a modern firearm for protection, what if it falls into the possession of an inventive metalsmith? And so forth; people thinking of the romanticism of being there at an historic event don’t think of the guy who’d be sniveling and coughing next to them! As it says above: I don’t live in the past; I just visit.

For that matter, I wouldn’t want someone else to journey back in my place. I probably read “A Sound of Thunder” when I was too young and impressionable. I don’t want to step on a butterfly and elect Adolph Hitler as president!

Copyright 1962 DC Comics. From THE ATOM #3, reprinted in SHOWCASE PRESENTS THE ATOM VOL ONE

Fans of the silver-age Atom comic book might well remember Professor Hyatt and the Time Pool stories In them, a professor learns to create a small disturbance in time and lowers a magnet at the end of a fishing line into that disturbance to “fish” for objects from  the past. Of course, the size-changing super-hero is able to get into that limited area, but quite frankly his adventures in the past was not what whetted my interest. I wanted to send a camera into the past. I wanted to take videos of everyday life, and I still do, now more than ever! Just imagine what you’d find out: Period sailing methods. Period fighting techniques. What the streets of a port looked like. How people dressed. What they carried around. How they cooked things. What superfluia was universally available and used but so commonplace that nobody mentioned them! Look at the little details we know of life in the American Civil War since the camera was not an artist cleaning things up!

Excuse me, I’m drooling. Getting a snapshot of everyday life in places such as the Oseberg burial is one thing. I think the Oseberg and the King Tut’s tombs are the most wonderful discoveries of archaeology during the twentieth century! But getting a video—or even just a physical snapshot—of a culture going about its usual job would make them pale in my mind! Miniaturizing a human visitor would, in that same mind, just be slightly superfluous!

Ah, fantasies. All of living history is a fantasy no matter how accurate you are or have to be. Maybe that is what makes this particular fantasy just so gosh-darn attractive!

Fictional books such as Harry Harrison’s The Technicolor Time Machine: The Movie Industry Has Discovered Time Travel–And Hollywood Will Never Be The Same (http://www.amazon.com/Technicolor-Time-Machine-Discovered-Travel–/dp/B003AWPZJ6/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1307838313&sr=1-2 are fun to read and dream about. The Atom stories (http://www.amazon.com/Showcase-Presents-Atom-Vol-1/dp/1401213634/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1307838086&sr=1-2) even more so. Just remember, that you can’t read the academic journals all of the time!

June 13, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »

A Thoroughly Inappropriate Book Review—or is it?

A. J. Hamler, Civil War Woodworking. Linden Publishing: 2009. ISBN  13: 978-1933502281

I was looking for an adz and figured that if the CU Woodshop—“Home of the Dream; http://www.facebook.com/pages/CU-Woodshop-Supply/470261515446—didn’t have it, I’d still have a great time wandering around. They didn’t but knew of someone who might be able to help; thanks! Then as I was looking through their book section and gravitated toward this, took a quick glance at what it offered and, hugging it to my bosom, bought it.

At first glance, a Viking reenactor might go, Oh, another Silly War book! It has nothing to do with me! How parochial. How close-minded. How wrong!

Anything that happens in living history, no matter what era, I important to anyone who wants top do living history. We go around in circles, reinventing the wheel, and often different elists for different eras will actually have the same thread or topic at the same time, approaching it from similar directions but totally separated by a thin barricade between them that someone else is doing the very same thing. The different eras—or factions if you prefer—are all earnest and resolute and very very proud that they’re doing this without any input. The fact that they are doing working twice as hard as they have to and duplicating efforts by others seems to be remote and unconsidered. And so they cannot see what something might offer because it is, alas, devoted to another era.

This volume is a dream. I would love to see an author put something tegether like this for the Viking Age, Its subtitle is listed on the cover: “17 Authentic Projects for Woodworkers and Reenactors.” Very true, but I’m afraid that it does not really cover the attractions of this volume. The Projects are neat enough, and there are actually a couple that can be altered slightly and made period for my era. The author has included photographs of the items being used during the American Civil War, something that is powerful and useful and would be impossible for most earlier eras (a Viking-Age equivalent would have to feature photographs of period artifacts, which some have done but too many have not, just noting the ambiguous ”inspired by” in many instances that even notes the original), and Hamler, a veteran woodworker and reenactor for more than fifteen years has the right stuff and approaches many philosophical points in a welcome, forthright and “take no bullcrap” way. For example, in a section on a folding stool, he notes:

“It’s one thing to make sure that a Civil War reproduction is accurate and period-correct, but it also has to be used correctly. The stool in this project is patterned after an original, so I know it’s correct. It would be complete inauthentic, however, if it were used by a private in a campaign scenario. When on campaign, marches of 20 miles a dat and more weren’t unusual, and the common foot soldier carried only what he absolutely needed to sustain him. Officers would have all kinds of comforts carried on wagons, but the only seat a foot soldier would have had was the sea of his pants. Th camp stool in this project is highly authentic, but sometimes the most authentic stool is none at all.” (p. 88)

Bravo! Something anyone trying to present an educational scene should heed, whether that scene is from the ACW or not. That attitude and the projects themselves make this volume useful, but it is the two opening sections of the book that makes it essential.

The first “Stepping Back in Time,” is a collection of wise and exacting essays on the philosophy and reality of living history, including “Authenticity and the Reenacting Community” and “How Authentic Can Your Project Really Be?” The essays are succinct and pertinent and gives such helpful things as the definition of “farb.” They are aimed toward reenacting of the ACW, of course, but any serious reenactor can read it and easily apply things to his own era, and they bring up matters which any reenactor should think about in regard hid own era. Very satisfying. The second section is “Bringing the Past to Life” and deals with period techniques and tools and is perhaps—but not always—irrelevant to other eras but, like the first section, can be applied in many instances to and bring up pertinent thoughts about other eras. It includes 19-century woodworking techniques but also talks about finishings, types of woods and such pertinent matters as cut nails. Also very satisfying. The worse thing is that in the author’s mind, it often seems that he think reenacting to be limited to his favorite era, but such an attitude can be overlooked and should not be duplicated in your own definitions!

But of course, hope against hope that someone will write a book or book dealing more specifically with the eras that you favor!

For buying a copy of this book, talk to your local woodworking shop, bookstore or head on over to the entry on Amazon.

June 13, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Hoaxes, Beliefs and Probability

Everyone seems to have certain preferred beliefs. Some of these are grounded in rationality and fact, but others seem to be a belief that fills you with satisfaction without any facts or, perhaps, disregarding any facts that disagree with your views. The old comedic phrase is “Don’t confuse me with facts; I know what I believe!” Hopefully, my beliefs are backed by facts and will change if new facts come to light; I was trained as a journalist and in those days at least, the journalist was taught to have a fluid and pragmatic view of reality. Journalism—at least when I learned it four decades ago—differed from academia, science, history, etc., where if you want to get ahead, you better reject any revisionism and tow the current line! My views, of course, may contain self-perpetuated blind spots, but I hope that I am being honest!

I cannot speak for such areas as science and academia since I am, believe, completely disassociated from these. On matters of history, I am much more familiar and far close closer. I know that there are certain beliefs that are sacred cows, if only because conventional historians have lectured me when I have espoused a revisionist theory that was brought about by reading facts set forth by revisionist theorists. This is not, of course, to say that I mindlessly follow any revisionist theory. Theories about the Roman Empire not being as bold and original as presented are backed by believable facts; conspiracy theories about John Wilkes Booth escaping with his life seem just a little too vague, ambiguous, capricious and contradictory, attempting to replacve facts only with unproven innuendo.

This sort of thing, of course, can be seen in modern history; look at the beliefs repeated by some people about Paul Revere’s ride for example. When we go farther back into history, into a period that is more vague and more open to interpretation, it increases. We do not know, for example, exactly what the clothes of the Viking Age looked like, and the interpretation of a hangeroc used by my group and that used by another might differ but both still be a legitimate interpretation. Vague literary description, occasional scraps of textile and ambiguous illustrations are all that we can go on. On the other hand, no matter how much some people might object, we know what these clothes did not look like (no horned helmets, no furry loin cloths, no bare chested Conanesque costuming, no polyester trim).

And it is there that we encounter more than a little bit of trouble. I think it is fair to note that the Norse might have included people of different races and appearances because they traveled very far, encountered these races and probably brought them back as thralls to the homeland. Seeing the acceptance of foreign beliefs–Christianity—indicates to me that it is likely that theories about conversion to Judiaism and Islam by Viking raiders are correct (although I stress that it the beliefs might be no more orthodox than Christian beliefs of the Vikings).

On the other hand, there are those who assert that the Vikings—they tend to use that term rather than the more correct Norse—were a pure Aryan race, not bringing in anyone of a different hair color, etc. At shows, we have been congratulated by racists for sticking to the Aryan ideal (these sots usually get angry and sullenly withdraw when we quickly and resolutely disagree), and low-brow humor has been poked at the appearance of non-Aryans in Viking movies. We have been lectured by Viking aficionados who are certain that the Norse rejected all efforts to turn to Christian beliefs, that they were independent people who always had their own way and who traveled everywhere. One such person was certain that many Norse heathens came to America and continued their heathen ways in secret after the conversion (and are vehement should you dare argue with their theory), that Asatru is just beliefs from the Viking Age brought out of hiding, that runes are just the Viking equivalent of tarot cards, etc. The same person who became apoplectic at the suggestion that some Vikings were black (this was presented into an academic article) a week later proudly pointed to the story of a Viking voyage to New Zealand and trumpeted its truth (this was presented in a magazine which also had articles about how space aliens influenced Terran culture).

Recently, a list of supposed devoted early medieval renactors has devolved into a series of increasingly far-fetched defenses of such things as the Kensington Stone, mooring stones in Minnesota and deification of the Norse beyond practicality (and the Vikings were, above all else, practical, believe it or believe the Christian propaganda!). My forehead hurts from the times I’ve facepalmed at a new defense of a hoax or new proof that something is a fact because they believe the hoax. It will probably continue, because the adherents believe they are right, and no amount of facts are going to make them change their minds! And I’m really surprised in one sense; no one has brought forward “Outlander” as documentation!

Loren Schultz of the Fellbjorg Vikings has noted an article on folks who have their beliefs and ignore contradicting facts at http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney. It deals with matters beyond the ready belief in Viking hoaxes, some pertinent to modern political thought, but it is well worth reading and—in many cases—ignoring! Of greater relevance to the subject is a new article by Christie Ward, the Viking Answer Lady—http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/Kensington.shtml—that deals with the Kensington Stone and other hoaxes and provides clear, understandable and fair facts. No doubt, and unfortunately, it will be ignored by a few people as well!

June 6, 2011 | Categories: Uncategorized | Leave A Comment »