moved
Last edited by Allan Senefelder on Mon 01 Jun, 2009 6:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
| Michael Mann wrote: |
|
I am currently putting together a short fiction set in 12th century Norway... the last gasp of the pagan (lets call it viking) epoch. |
I read the whole thing again. I see two references to the 12th century from Mr. Mann. The one I posted above and the one from before. Please quote to me where he talks about the 11th century, Allan.
Last edited by Bill Tsafa on Mon 01 Jun, 2009 3:54 pm; edited 2 times in total
Hi guys,
Just to be clear I'm referring to 1138 as "12th Century" - my apologies if this is not correct.. I understood it to be this way as 1940 would be considered "20th century":
I understand that the "12th Century" was a time of great transition in armour style, and am just looking for clarification on what can be done "within" the century. >your comments have already helped me take the decision to throw away about 200 dollars worth of cheap out-of-place parts (including a big ole barrel helm). I wish I'd found this place earlier :-D
Norman it is: I think I can blacken most everything and give our guy a menacing "norman assasin" look: black mail
I'm now scouting around for lamellar parts. I like the idea of small plate parts: not least due to the eastern / roman influence:
I think its fair to assume that any new style takes a living generation or 2 to come into being from its initial conception.. given that it might take as much as 3 to 5 years before a knight would return from crusade... and that such an experience would be life changing for them. Profound enough that they change their style - incorporate new elements,or search harder for an identity all their own..
To represent this in their manner of dress would be very valuable.
m
Just to be clear I'm referring to 1138 as "12th Century" - my apologies if this is not correct.. I understood it to be this way as 1940 would be considered "20th century":
I understand that the "12th Century" was a time of great transition in armour style, and am just looking for clarification on what can be done "within" the century. >your comments have already helped me take the decision to throw away about 200 dollars worth of cheap out-of-place parts (including a big ole barrel helm). I wish I'd found this place earlier :-D
Norman it is: I think I can blacken most everything and give our guy a menacing "norman assasin" look: black mail
I'm now scouting around for lamellar parts. I like the idea of small plate parts: not least due to the eastern / roman influence:
I think its fair to assume that any new style takes a living generation or 2 to come into being from its initial conception.. given that it might take as much as 3 to 5 years before a knight would return from crusade... and that such an experience would be life changing for them. Profound enough that they change their style - incorporate new elements,or search harder for an identity all their own..
To represent this in their manner of dress would be very valuable.
m
| Michael Mann wrote: |
|
Just to be clear I'm referring to 1138 as "12th Century" - my apologies if this is not correct.. I understood it to be this way as 1940 would be considered "20th century": |
You were perfectly clear and correct in your initial post Michael. That is the proper way to count centuries.
moved
Last edited by Allan Senefelder on Mon 01 Jun, 2009 6:40 pm; edited 2 times in total
| Allan Senefelder wrote: |
| And no, coat of plates and armoured surcoat are not local coloquialisms for the same thing, they're both modern terms to describe different things. |
Ok Allen... please provide us with detailed references on the Armored Surcoat found at Montfort Castle that dates prior to 1271. The excavation was described to me as being a Coat of Plates. Perhaps the person was being very general when they described it as a coat of plates. Your the armorer... if you say its the two are vastly different, I believe you. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Now please detail the differences with some references. Museum pictures would be ideal.
Please don't remove posts once you've posted them.. especially after people respond to them and a conversation continues. This ruins the flow of the topic and really screws stuff up.
I don't know exactly what is going on with this conversation, but to those of us not in the "know" it looks like bickering and arguing. I think there's some inside joke type of stuff going on, so just make it clear to the rest of us when you post this sort of thing because, honestly, it looks bad to the rest of us.
Cheers.
I don't know exactly what is going on with this conversation, but to those of us not in the "know" it looks like bickering and arguing. I think there's some inside joke type of stuff going on, so just make it clear to the rest of us when you post this sort of thing because, honestly, it looks bad to the rest of us.
Cheers.
| Michael Mann wrote: |
|
I understand that the "12th Century" was a time of great transition in armour style, and am just looking for clarification on what can be done "within" the century. >your comments have already helped me take the decision to throw away about 200 dollars worth of cheap out-of-place parts (including a big ole barrel helm). I wish I'd found this place earlier :-D m |
no... the 1300s (ala 14th century) is the transition of armour. its when we start moving from mail to plate. so 12th century pretty much is mail mail and more mail. maybe a metal knee or elbow here or there etc.
and don't throw things away. post them for sale for others to pick up the price tag for future expenses :) or just mail them to me heheh just kidding.
| Chuck Russell wrote: | ||
no... the 1300s (ala 14th century) is the transition of armour. its when we start moving from mail to plate. so 12th century pretty much is mail mail and more mail. maybe a metal knee or elbow here or there etc. and don't throw things away. post them for sale for others to pick up the price tag for future expenses :) or just mail them to me heheh just kidding. |
Michael well you are trying to get " closer " to period authenticity than most film makers would trouble with and I think we could make the distinction between what is plausible for historians and people dedicated to period authenticity like reenactors who shy away from the possible but unprovable like a helm or other pieces of gear being in very limited use maybe 50 to 100 years before we can prove it to be in general use.
As long as you don't make a big deal in publicity for the film that your story is " real history " you can keep the year it is supposed to be happening in a little " vague " and cheat the look a bit by using some out of date armour by 50 years contrasting with a bit too early armour by 50 years !
A semi-fictional part of Scandinavia as an isolated backwater ( Sort of a hidden valley behind the times maybe ;) :?: ) still pagan and with really conservative population still using old gear very late in period and your Knight using very early prototypes of armour only popular 50 to 100 years later ?
Yes this is cheating for the sake of making a story but much less than late 15th century armour worn by King Arthur in the 5th or 6th century: Make a good story and I will be happy to go see it.
The other sort of fudging you could engage in is using items that are right for the culture, but that we do know where not the average day to day wear of the normal soldier. Sutton Hoo helmet perhaps?
Now, just a super random search garnered these 2 images, one of crusaders, the other of a "viking" (he was attacking a samurai, but don't tell anyone ;) ) the two "looks" seem easily distinct enough from each other to say "these are two diferent world views in conflict" without any need to go beyond the armour of the time.
Attachment: 52.81 KB
Attachment: 146.53 KB
Now, just a super random search garnered these 2 images, one of crusaders, the other of a "viking" (he was attacking a samurai, but don't tell anyone ;) ) the two "looks" seem easily distinct enough from each other to say "these are two diferent world views in conflict" without any need to go beyond the armour of the time.
Attachment: 52.81 KB Attachment: 146.53 KBoh you could do Teutonic knight as the bad guy and a regular land owning knight (his own coat of arms) as the good guy. lots of possibilities
| Nat Lamb wrote: |
| It is unlikely that an American defected to the U.S.S.R. during the cold war, but would have bean feasable (and would make for an interesting setup to a film) |
And it did happen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldrich_Ames
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Edwin_Pitts
Back to the original topic, a Crusader coming back home and running afoul of pagan remnants sounds like it's pretty well within the bounds of plausibility. As for visual differences . . . why is it impossible that pagan holdouts held on not only to their old faith but also to the byrnie or at least the shorter 11th-century hauberk? If nothing else, their effective exile would probably have forced them to make do with hand-me-down armor and weaponry. As I see it a longer hauberk with a surcoat on top and a kite shield would have provided enough visual difference from a pagan in a shorter hauberk and round shield even if the two were wearing similar helmets. Accessories can also have a critical impact. Have the knight wear a mail coif with his helmet, exposing just his face, while the pagans could go without and leave their neck and hair (the part not covered by the helmet, anyway) bare. The right sort of heraldry can also help a great deal for making the knight look "cumbersome."
| Vassilis Tsafatinos wrote: |
| A large contingent of Crusaders were Normans, who were decedents of Vikings themselves and settled the north of France. |
"Descendants." "Decedent" means "the deceased," which the Normans (when alive) would certainly have objected to....
Hello Mr Mann,
Thank you very much for your topic and interest in this community. What is your goal? Who is your target? What are you trying to accomplish? Probably a mixture of many things, I can imagine.
I've walked away from many movies thinking to myself "WOW, what a great story" because the director did an incredible job narrating their tale. I applaud them because I was lost for several hours in a land they expertly crafted. Yet for some, that very same movie is a disappointment. Why? Not because the acting was stiff or two dimensional or holes existed in the plot. It wasn't a disappointment because of crappy editing or lackluster special F/X. Heck, the movie may even be Oscar bound but simply not worth it's salt to some because of some small detail that the costumer forgot to research or the historical consultant took liberties with.
Period films are a tap dance on a knife's edge. For some they're great because of the cool costumes and look into the past that the film is a vehicle for. Others get a swelling out of being able to tear the film apart. "Gosh did you see that? I can't believe that he had the audacity to use that ceramic vessel. Clearly everyone knows that the redware producing centers were limited to...." Sure... some folks will find fault in the minutia, but most would only notice if there was a glaring fault.
So what do you want to do? Cater to that individual that no matter what effort you put into it will still see faults? Or the others that are compelled more by your story telling.
I feel that your original question was "how can you differentiate" and a lot of additional energy has been spent on debating the differences twixt COP and what have you. Have you completed casting? If not, you can always use that as one way to differentiate. Type cast the Norse as tall, blond, long haired with beards etc... and the menfolk even taller! Make the hero dark haired, clean shaven, groomed and perhaps shorter. That may lend some visual differences if you think of it as city mouse vs. country mouse with swords and armor. How about giving your hero a uniform -- i.e. Tunic, habit, Surcoat or what have you. Now he's military while everyone else is in civies. You mentioned earlier how you're giving your hero black maille. What are you using for the Vikings, shinny? I say give your hero the shinny stuff and the vikings rusty, blackened maille, again he's from the city so he can afford the $1000 Hugo Boss whilst them there vikings can't. Or how about a helmet with a face mask in what I think is called the Italo-Norman style? Check Get Dressed for Battle, as I believe that used to have one in that style. Again these are elements that you may be able to blur the edges on to get away with the correct feel for your movie.
I'm sure that I may get some flak for my opinion but if you can tell your story better by taking some liberties, go for it. But only if it does not distract too much from the story. Find your own tap dance to be able to tell a story that captivates your target. And heck, even the bad publicity from some who may disparage you for using a sword with the incorrect funiture-blade combination may encourage others to check out what all the clatter is about.
Break a leg!
Thank you very much for your topic and interest in this community. What is your goal? Who is your target? What are you trying to accomplish? Probably a mixture of many things, I can imagine.
I've walked away from many movies thinking to myself "WOW, what a great story" because the director did an incredible job narrating their tale. I applaud them because I was lost for several hours in a land they expertly crafted. Yet for some, that very same movie is a disappointment. Why? Not because the acting was stiff or two dimensional or holes existed in the plot. It wasn't a disappointment because of crappy editing or lackluster special F/X. Heck, the movie may even be Oscar bound but simply not worth it's salt to some because of some small detail that the costumer forgot to research or the historical consultant took liberties with.
Period films are a tap dance on a knife's edge. For some they're great because of the cool costumes and look into the past that the film is a vehicle for. Others get a swelling out of being able to tear the film apart. "Gosh did you see that? I can't believe that he had the audacity to use that ceramic vessel. Clearly everyone knows that the redware producing centers were limited to...." Sure... some folks will find fault in the minutia, but most would only notice if there was a glaring fault.
So what do you want to do? Cater to that individual that no matter what effort you put into it will still see faults? Or the others that are compelled more by your story telling.
I feel that your original question was "how can you differentiate" and a lot of additional energy has been spent on debating the differences twixt COP and what have you. Have you completed casting? If not, you can always use that as one way to differentiate. Type cast the Norse as tall, blond, long haired with beards etc... and the menfolk even taller! Make the hero dark haired, clean shaven, groomed and perhaps shorter. That may lend some visual differences if you think of it as city mouse vs. country mouse with swords and armor. How about giving your hero a uniform -- i.e. Tunic, habit, Surcoat or what have you. Now he's military while everyone else is in civies. You mentioned earlier how you're giving your hero black maille. What are you using for the Vikings, shinny? I say give your hero the shinny stuff and the vikings rusty, blackened maille, again he's from the city so he can afford the $1000 Hugo Boss whilst them there vikings can't. Or how about a helmet with a face mask in what I think is called the Italo-Norman style? Check Get Dressed for Battle, as I believe that used to have one in that style. Again these are elements that you may be able to blur the edges on to get away with the correct feel for your movie.
I'm sure that I may get some flak for my opinion but if you can tell your story better by taking some liberties, go for it. But only if it does not distract too much from the story. Find your own tap dance to be able to tell a story that captivates your target. And heck, even the bad publicity from some who may disparage you for using a sword with the incorrect funiture-blade combination may encourage others to check out what all the clatter is about.
Break a leg!
I think at one point, someone was selling a maille haburk with coif and mufflers/mittens and chausses in 'The Marketplace' at one point... butted, but looked pretty sweet. Might be good for ye knight.
Page 3 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum