05-27-2007, 04:00 PM
Avete omnes,
the discussion runs cross-country. I’d like to bring it back to the point:
Freedom is extremely important.
Freedom is also the freedom of others.
We are used to respect many local laws or behaviours. There are countries, which allow wearing a loaded MP in public and others, which demand a permission to wear even a blunt blade on a medieval market.
Who has a problem with Roman shields, being a centimeter smaller than the original due to some national postal reglements? Which tourist won’t remove his shoes before entering a temple in a foreign country, just because he is free to run with dirty boots across his living room at home? Or visit Deepeeka in India and kick a cow blocking the street… ;-) )
When visiting the United States and Canada many years ago, I was wondering about the big action at the immigration counter. I had to answer lots of questions and to prove that I’m just a tourist. That’s undesirable, but local rule. No problem. (Or should I have proclaimed instead that this is restriction of my personal freedom of moving around? And that I’m used to cross European borders without such a detailed examination? Silly idea…)
In one US federal state I came across, I was not allowed to drink beer in public, because I wasn’t old enough. In Germany, I was. So should I have fought for my German ‘human right’ of drinking beer? Or lament, that even the neighbour-state wasn’t so restrictive? No, I had to be content with Coke. Honestly, I didn’t suffer hard from a day without beer… (And my comfort was, having a lifetime valid German driver’s licence in my pocket instead - priceless in that state).
So Germany has some law which won’t harm or touch any other country, but is valid within our borders. Some symbols are forbidden and others not. That’s not perfect, but that’s life.
I’m really glad that the Romans never used red stars or hammer and sickle so we can completely skip any problem related to that :wink: .
Again: No one blamed international re-enactors to be a Nazi or wants to forbid swastikas worldwide. That’s why I don’t see how American re-enactors have to ‘defend’ their freedom of bearing swastikas when they are a few thousand kilometres away from Central Europe. At home, anyone can do what he is allowed to do. And if he visits us, he’ll have to respect our law like any tourist will have to do in any county. That’s all.
If we want Deepeeka making an ornamented pugio for all RAT members, we need to consider any important law. If someone prefers a version which is limited to a certain group of RAT members, he might honestly confess his personal priority and motive rather than blaming the others for their ‘un-free’ local law.
So if someone says:
I / we want a swastika on the Melun pugio.
I / we want it, even if it’s unlikely that it was original.
I / we want it, even if other members are not allowed to buy it.
That’s clear.
Normally, the answer would have been: Sorry, not proven by finds.
But here, the discussion is shifted to a moral level, claiming restriction and oppression…
So what’s if someone wants a Gallic F helmet, but with the Niedermörmter mouse and loaf ornament, because it suits his personal taste?
Will it be sufficient to point out, that there is no evidence for a mice and loaf Gallic F?
Or will we discuss local bread prices and laws about laboratory mice then? :lol:
Between comrades, I would expect that the first model will be ‘general’ type, to offer the chance of buying a decorated pugio to as many members as possible. Later versions may follow, which are restricted in certain parts of the world and not available to all – I have no problems with that… Sorry, this is becoming a battle without an actual war :roll:
the discussion runs cross-country. I’d like to bring it back to the point:
Freedom is extremely important.
Freedom is also the freedom of others.
We are used to respect many local laws or behaviours. There are countries, which allow wearing a loaded MP in public and others, which demand a permission to wear even a blunt blade on a medieval market.
Who has a problem with Roman shields, being a centimeter smaller than the original due to some national postal reglements? Which tourist won’t remove his shoes before entering a temple in a foreign country, just because he is free to run with dirty boots across his living room at home? Or visit Deepeeka in India and kick a cow blocking the street… ;-) )
When visiting the United States and Canada many years ago, I was wondering about the big action at the immigration counter. I had to answer lots of questions and to prove that I’m just a tourist. That’s undesirable, but local rule. No problem. (Or should I have proclaimed instead that this is restriction of my personal freedom of moving around? And that I’m used to cross European borders without such a detailed examination? Silly idea…)
In one US federal state I came across, I was not allowed to drink beer in public, because I wasn’t old enough. In Germany, I was. So should I have fought for my German ‘human right’ of drinking beer? Or lament, that even the neighbour-state wasn’t so restrictive? No, I had to be content with Coke. Honestly, I didn’t suffer hard from a day without beer… (And my comfort was, having a lifetime valid German driver’s licence in my pocket instead - priceless in that state).
So Germany has some law which won’t harm or touch any other country, but is valid within our borders. Some symbols are forbidden and others not. That’s not perfect, but that’s life.
I’m really glad that the Romans never used red stars or hammer and sickle so we can completely skip any problem related to that :wink: .
Again: No one blamed international re-enactors to be a Nazi or wants to forbid swastikas worldwide. That’s why I don’t see how American re-enactors have to ‘defend’ their freedom of bearing swastikas when they are a few thousand kilometres away from Central Europe. At home, anyone can do what he is allowed to do. And if he visits us, he’ll have to respect our law like any tourist will have to do in any county. That’s all.
If we want Deepeeka making an ornamented pugio for all RAT members, we need to consider any important law. If someone prefers a version which is limited to a certain group of RAT members, he might honestly confess his personal priority and motive rather than blaming the others for their ‘un-free’ local law.
So if someone says:
I / we want a swastika on the Melun pugio.
I / we want it, even if it’s unlikely that it was original.
I / we want it, even if other members are not allowed to buy it.
That’s clear.
Normally, the answer would have been: Sorry, not proven by finds.
But here, the discussion is shifted to a moral level, claiming restriction and oppression…
So what’s if someone wants a Gallic F helmet, but with the Niedermörmter mouse and loaf ornament, because it suits his personal taste?
Will it be sufficient to point out, that there is no evidence for a mice and loaf Gallic F?
Or will we discuss local bread prices and laws about laboratory mice then? :lol:
Between comrades, I would expect that the first model will be ‘general’ type, to offer the chance of buying a decorated pugio to as many members as possible. Later versions may follow, which are restricted in certain parts of the world and not available to all – I have no problems with that… Sorry, this is becoming a battle without an actual war :roll:
Greetings from germania incognita
Heiko (Cornelius Quintus)
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Heiko (Cornelius Quintus)
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
