Ars Dimicandi about european Reenactment in german news

[Tib. Gabinius]

Dear Gabinus

On the sources Dario has said that a list is preparing, and this is doing. But Dario is not busy only this! Then, in line with others his appointments he will publish. You don't worry.

1. I did read it, and i thought he ment his work above these sources. But my and all the others questions are ABOUT the sources themselves. It dont took long time to type and publish even some ofthe sources used as evidence. I didnt asked for a book, i asked for the mention of some sources.
I m looking forward to Darios book, i really do, cause this will be the step to discuss the theories and the AD ideas behind it, but till then i would enjoy to know already which sources be ment. And as i said before, here nobody will "steal" something...

On the woman archers, also I make part. However you have to know Gabinus, that I hold a great honor to be able to participate in the battles as true legionary with Ars. I am very happy that Ars also offers opportunity to women to be able to relive life from legionary.
There are women as me, very impassioned of history and particularly of Roman Army, therefore why to deny this possibility to women?

As i wrote, i dont have a "reenactment" problem with women. We dont do so, but i can accept if others do so.
Like Charles wrote: modern, often overweighted man do this hobby, so why not. But i can accept it in demonstration for public, like i wouldnt do in films.
There are men and there are women, and this should be presented originary for the public, to get an impression how it looked like.
Same way i judge myself and spend a lot of money to get my overweight away

Women in Roman army were not, well we know this! But woman in Roman field of Ars they are legionaries and not women!

And still women as well, like i am still a modern man under my gear, but this is a discussion we did already in this forum at another place. Perhaps we will continue it there.

Then you say "Ars is not group reenacment", but this is not true. Ars is group reenacment however to Ars it doesn't interest to have glimmering armor or new shield. ARS interests to understand as it fought Roman army, what manoeuvres it used and what armaments legionaries Roman really wore. To others they interest details, to ARS it interests action (with experimentation).

Sorry, but what did i say? Please quote the passage you mean, so i know what exactly you mean and be able to answer.
For now: "glimmering armor" and "new shield" sounds a bit like "the others want to be parade soldiers, but we are in the field". And this i really cant accept. Also the sentence part "what they really wore" sounds like "what the others wear isnt the right equipment".
And here we are also on the main problem.
To understand the full, also and especially the action, we have to get all the Details. Its like a puzzle, and if you force parts of another puzzle into the free places you will get perhaps, with near certain possibility, a complettly different picture.
You can do experimentations. But you started already with "this armour isnt found and described, but could be". How could this come to a provable finish?
And by the way, many groups also do more than parading with their equipment up and down, so please, dont judge like " we do experimentations, you not".
We sahre the litterary sources and discuss them, prove them and test them in field. And the mass of different theories resulting from that show us something.

Two ways of see the reenacment, two ways of see experimentation.

I guess, we see reenactment the same way, but the way of scientific and educating way you use is one of my problems with AD.
Perhaps i m wrong, and Darios book will show us foundings, litterary sources and ikonographic evidences to bring up really a new picture. Right now i didnt seen or heared anything that would guess me that.