Login

JRSCline · 02-08-2001, 04:18 PM

In light of what Dr. Mike Bishop's excellent site ARMAMENTARIUM ( museums.ncl.ac.uk/archive/arma/ ) has achieved so far, do you feel that RomanArmy.com should establish an Equipment section? 
<FORM method=post action="http://p200.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm6.processVote?topicID=16.topic"><table border=0 cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 width="55%"><tbody><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="1">Yes, RomanArmy.com wouldn't be complete without it</td></tr><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="2">No, ARMAMENTARIUM covers equipment well enough already</td></tr></tbody></table><input type=submit value="Vote"></form><a HREF=http://p200.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm6.showMessage?topicID=16.topic&pollResults=on>Show results</A>

02-08-2001, 09:57 PM

Would this 'Equipment Section' include only excavated pieces? Would these pics be submitted by yourself and/or guests from their own photos (from museums, etc.), as well as being gleaned from sites such as ARMAMENTARIVM? ...or not.Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=thecaesariansection>The Caesarian Section</A> at: 2/8/01 10:57:57 pm

JRSCline · 02-09-2001, 09:50 PM

Interesting question. 
 
I think it would be beneficial to show images of an artifact, then any reconstruction that's been made based on that artifact. 
 
Members would be welcome to submit images of either original or recreated pieces of weapons, armor, and miscellaneous kit. Theoretical reconstructions might be considered under some circumstances, but should be connected to some kind of evidence or informed source. 
 
Other ideas? Discussion?

Catiline · 02-09-2001, 11:43 PM

I've had a brief look at armamentarium, but not in depth so I don't know what it has to offer, but I'd say yes, the .com does nee to cover equipment to some level, maybe not fully, but at least in overview. It's not going to be complete otherwise It's not a bug, it's a feature

**richsc** · 02-12-2001, 12:43 PM

I would like to have a comprehensive site for images, but don't some museums get bent out of shape if you post images from their collections? I remember the British Museum sounding huffy about their image of the Legio XX antefix. 
Otherwise I say yes, since many of the images I've seen are not as good as they could be. I suggest that you set guidance for having several angles of the same artifact where possible, some reference for size, and maybe some judgement on color. Color is going to vary considerably with the lighting in display cases and elsewhere, between types of films, digital capabilities, etc. 
Then, once you have a photo to start with, subsequent visits can perhaps look at other aspects or zoomin for detail.

02-13-2001, 02:00 AM

I think that guides might discourage many people who just don't have the time. You should take what you can get within reason.

02-13-2001, 08:21 PM

Salve, 
Those of us who are inclined to reinactment can never really 
get enough info on equipment. Photographs of original artifacts, multiple views or otherwise, would be very welcome. 
Bene vale, 
Allectus

mcbishop · 02-20-2001, 07:07 PM

Speaking as a completely interested party, I think it would be an excellent idea to include equipment. Armamentarium is designed to be a detailed work of reference on military equipment (*every* piece, eventually) but there are many areas on which it will inevitably always fall short - most notably the basic run-down on equipment. The present Beginner's Guide section is inadequate, but the best I could do in the time faced with umpteen requests for assistance with homework etc. Given the encyclopaedic intentions of RomanArmy.com, I see no conflict. You wouldn't expect the Oxford Classical Dictionary to exclude a subject just because it is covered in more depth elsewhere - not everybody wants or needs the detail. Each gains from the existence of the other. 
 
It makes much more sense to make sure there is no overlap and that the two sites mesh together to provide the sort of coverage people want - both general and detailed. For starters, I could offer you the military equipment FAQ (it has already been ripped-off by at least one over-eager student's web site!), as I'm sure there are, for example, questions many reeanctors can think of that they get asked. 
 
Incidentally, copyright is the bane of my life: I have all of Robinson's photos which *could* be put on the web now, but raising the money to pay the reproduction fees is a nightmare; nevertheless, I am persisting. However, there are some bodies that outright refuse to allow reproduction on the web (even though they will let you put the piccies in a book - go figure). 
 
Armamentarium will be undergoing a thorough revamp in the near future, as soon as I have finished Vegetius. 
 
Mike Bishop

JRSCline · 02-20-2001, 07:58 PM

What a pleasure to have you look in on us, Dr. Bishop! Please make yourself at home. 
 
I would be very interested to know what policies museums have in place regarding publication of collections. Where do you suppose one would go making an inquiry? I am tempted to follow the idiom that it is easier to ask forgiveness than permission! 
 
Even having said that, I should prefer to ask first if the asking is practicable. I really can't see what the objection would be, if we're not marketing anything or reaping a profit somehow. 
 
As to the Armamentarium FAQs, sure, I'd be happy to put them on our site with proper credit and a link "for more info," that sort of thing. 
 
The Equipment section would require an Editor, so if you have a suggestion as to a likely academic (or advanced amateur) candidate, won't you please pass it along? (It's rather depressing to call one's site an encyclopedia when the pages are so very empty!) We are hurting for volunteers. 
 
 
Jenny Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ujrscline.showPublicProfile?language=EN>JRSCline</A> at: 2/20/01 10:15:08 pm

mcbishop · 02-24-2001, 12:34 AM

You'll find a variety of attitudes amongst museums but the best approach is always 'better safe than sorry'. Even if you get a big fat 'no' from your first approach there is always the future (change of policy/management/your site's attractiveness to them), whereas upsetting them from the start can fairly effectively throw a spanner in the works. 
 
Some museums will be control freaky (a certain national museum in the UK springs to mind) about letting their images out, others won't (some, like the National Museum of Scotland, are actively involved in promoting their collections). Some have the curious notion that whilst it is ok to let you use their photos in your book, a web image will instantly be pirated by nefarious characters intent on evil (they have clearly never heard of the flatbed scanner). 
 
In the end, each museum has its own policy, so I'm afraid you have to do a lot of asking! 
 
As for an editor, find somebody young, enthusiastic, unknown, and with supremely-honed proofreading skills. Nobody springs to mind... probably because they're as yet unknown... 
 
Mike Bishop

**richsc** · 02-24-2001, 01:58 PM

Jenny, I have also been tossing around the idea of putting up photos of reconstructed equipment, showing good/bad points of various armorer's interpretations, and illustrating the good/bad/quibble sides of helmets, swords, shields, etc. 
Not a 'consumer report' since actually listing, eg, the helmets by maker would cause a lot of hard feelings, but certainly side by side comparisons with commentary. Those of us with access to a digital camera and with some notion of editing could help out. 
I think it would be a great reference to see not just instructions, but show how it has been done, say in the way the pilum is fastened by reconstructors. 
 
I think to avoid a lot of trouble getting permission is the best route. Most historians, archaeologists and scholars must publish their findings, and all this work for not too much pay must be respected and due credit given. 
However, some museums don't have the resources or knowledge to put a sampling of their collections on the web, even if they want to. Perhaps a collaborative approach might work? Let them pick the information and give them all appropriate credit and links. 
Richard 
http://www.geocities.com/richsc53/studies/ 
[email protected]

**richsc** · 03-04-2001, 11:55 PM

Instead of an Equipment Section, how about 'Best Practices' in construction. I was trying to think out hinges for my balteus, and was thinking a good visual demonstration would be so helpful. For something like this, perhaps we can leave helmets & swords out, but I would think that everything else would be worthwhile: 
 
Just a tools section would be great! 
 
Pilum: selection of wood, shaping and grain, finding the shaft, tips on sawing, what to use for the nails, how to peen; 
 
belt: selecting leather, finding brass plates, shaping, making holes, finding rivets, peening, etc; 
 
caligae; leather types, shaping, punching holes, types of thread, shaping of heels, experience with weak spots, 
 
And a depiction of good examples from reenactors with closeup photos, perhaps comparisons of several types that are good, so the reenactor won't get hyper about one technique. Richard 
[email protected]

Caius Fabius · 07-06-2001, 12:40 PM

I don't know if it would help, but I have about 54-50 photos from several views of Master Armourer Michael Simkins' reproductions of Roman helmets and armor. While some of them are in some of the Osprey books, he retains the rights to the photos, and might allow them to be published online, with proper credits. This includes some lovely "cavalry helms" that have not appeared in any books. These are posted at the RomanisRomanorvm yahoogroup in the files. Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ucaiusfabius.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Caius Fabius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ROMANISROMANORVM/files/C%20Fabius%201988b.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 4/23/02 3:33:13 am

07-06-2001, 01:29 PM

Hades, yeah. I'd like to see original commentary on the equipment, too. The more opinions and thoughts I read, the deeper my own insights into history grow. SI HOC LEGERE POTES, OPERIS BONI IN REBVS LATINIS FRVCTVOSIS POTIRI POTES.

JRSCline · 07-07-2001, 04:54 AM

Sounds like a lovely idea, to incorporate Simkins' collection? Giving credit where credit's due is something that RA.com's pretty good at, I like to think. Why don't you go ahead and approach him with the idea and see what he feels about it? 
 
Cheers, 
Jenny

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me