|
HEY GAL posted:ok, i don't understand all of the chemistry stuff, but this does not seem that bad. where's the dangerous stuff? Just get Leinöl. It's what the romans used, what everybody used to take care of their stuff. https://www.dictum.com/de/oberflaec...4_98.42_1_12_12
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:What you are looking for is linseed oil. One for all. Just don't bunch up used fabric and throw it in the trash while it's still drying. You'll burn down your shack. Seconded. I use linseed oil on both metal and wood and it works great! Let soak for a day, and then rub down. Also, seconded, DO NOT PUT IT IN A SEALED CONTAINER EVER!!!!!!!!! It WILL auto-ignite. Let it sit on your workbench or in the garage with plenty of air movement until it is dry. It's not a joke. It's not a myth. 3-in-one oil works pretty well too for metal, but linseed oil will coat it for long term protection. Remington gun oil works well for metal, and is supposed to be good for the wood stock, but I don't think it does much for a wood finish. Linseed oil is your friend.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
mostlygray posted:Seconded. I use linseed oil on both metal and wood and it works great! Let soak for a day, and then rub down. What metal objects do you use it on? I don't put it on any of my ironwork unless I'm intentionally blackening it because it never gets smooth like in wood, just stays sticky and unpleasant until it eventually chips away. Also not keen on it for all wood because it yellows over time. Also don't put it on flexible leather like a shoe top or belt because it will make the leather hard and break when you bend it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
Yeah I can't imagine using linseed oil on metal that isn't a fence or outdoor door handle or something. It's fine on wood though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
not a huge fan of vegetable oils on metal ever since olive oil made my sword all gunky last year. like rodrigo diaz said about linseed oil
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:not a huge fan of vegetable oils on metal ever since olive oil made my sword all gunky last year. like rodrigo diaz said about linseed oil Just use Ballistol. It was created to have a general-purpose gun oil that could also be used for leather goods and wood. Also it is very cheap. And probably won't burn your building down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
Out of curiosity does anyone have a recommendation for a book that goes into detail about weapons and armour of the Medieval Period. Or even better if there is some stuff that deals with the Migration Period and the "Dark Ages". I like to do Worldbuilding as a personal hobby and was looking to do some work on detailing military stuff in the setting, I have read alot of generalist history works and other stuff on this period like theology and want to improve my knowledge of military equipment beyond just some broad generalizations. Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 10:08 on Jul 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 10:05
|
|
|
For medieval stuff, everything by Ewart Oakeshott.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 10:14
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:not a huge fan of vegetable oils on metal ever since olive oil made my sword all gunky last year. like rodrigo diaz said about linseed oil It's nothing like olive oil. The coat polymerizes over the course of a few days, and it stays reasonable flexible. Lots of people who like the natural approach use if to coat bows and arrows. Might let it rest for 2 weeks or so, depending on the conditions. It will be dry after a few days, but as long as it has that distinctive smell, it's not completely. After that, it's "hard". Still flexible enough that you can use it on thick leather like belts of quivers without the material breaking, unless you mistake a sealer for care. Ofc it will flake off, if you don't degrease the surface before applying, but that's just the same with any other varnish. Just to make it clear: For leather, you use a few coats to protect the material, but you care for the material with the proper leather care. Anything else would be as if you apply acryl sealer to your leather every time it looks as if it needs a rub. Of the natural sealers, I like a mix of linseed and tung best. It's on all my tools and surfaces that need protection. It will slightly darken the piece though and make it shiny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Siivola posted:For medieval stuff, everything by Ewart Oakeshott. also schiavone, there's schiavone
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:Out of curiosity does anyone have a recommendation for a book that goes into detail about weapons and armour of the Medieval Period. Or even better if there is some stuff that deals with the Migration Period and the "Dark Ages". While I can't think of the book to go right now, I can mention a few sources. Knyght Errant has a pretty awesome Youtube channel that goes into a lot of detail about the evolution of armour styles, with some discussion of the weapons that go with it. Also, "I, Clausewitz" does a lot of amateur yet detailed information that would relate to your Worldbuilding with a military focus - http://l-clausewitz.livejournal.com/l_clausewitz178455
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
Railtus posted:Knyght Errant has a pretty awesome Youtube channel that goes into a lot of detail about the evolution of armour styles, with some discussion of the weapons that go with it. His recent videos on period clothing are incredibly interesting as well - in particular with regards to tailoring. I kind of want to try making a cloak now 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
The greatest benefit of linseed oil is that if you drink it, it makes any music you're listening to feel more liquid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
i'm so bored i'm looking at old weapons reviews online https://myarmoury.com/review_mvt_doglock.html why did the english make such clumsy looking swords and pistols, jfc edit: also don't buy a pistol that's shorter than the original, good luck hitting anything with that HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 09:40 on Jul 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 09:29
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:why did the english make such clumsy looking swords and pistols, jfc Yeah this is a uniquely English problem... right... http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/24815 quote:edit: also don't buy a pistol that's shorter than the original, good luck hitting anything with that That's not how accuracy works. PS glad you've acknowledged the 30yw are part of the middle ages now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Yeah this is a uniquely English problem... right... http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/24815 quote:PS glad you've acknowledged the 30yw are part of the middle ages now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:dude those are super rad looking, what's your problem "that fun that looks like a gun? Way too awkward. That gun that looks like a hosed up oar? Extremely my poo poo."
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:"that fun that looks like a gun? Way too awkward. That gun that looks like a hosed up oar? Extremely my poo poo."  http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/24865 edit: and whatever the hell japanese matchlocks have going on, which are loving beautiful but which were obviously invented by people who never assumed you'd also use your gun to hit a guy in the face HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Jul 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
VoteTedJameson posted:This is one of those questions that's hard to answer because the social class of soldiers is so flexible throughout the medieval era. I mostly read about the Hundred Years War, at which time the answer to what professional soldiers do i their off-time is typically either "sit in a castle because the English are still laying siege to us, as usual", or "pillage the countryside". The rise of increasingly professional soldiers also meant that there were large groups of people with weapons and without the traditional social ties of the knightly class to keep them occupied. That is to say, when knighthood was more closely tied to aristocracy, there was an expectation that you would spend much of your time overseeing the laborers tied to your land, maybe holding court or dealing with small-time criminal justice matters if you were of some importance in your locality- but the English, French, Bretons, Navarese, Castilians etc who fought in the HYW frequently found themselves demobilized, either seasonally, or because of a truce (which in the context of a 100+ year conflict could be extremely long), or because the person who paid the bills and gave the orders was dead/captured/switched sides/got fussy and went home. These soldiers would then establish themselves as a semi-permanent presence in the countryside, acting as highwaymen/extortionists/bandits. On the other hand, some men-at-arms demobilized much more gracefully and essentially just went back to living the life that a person of their rank (ranging from small landholder up to count, duke etc) could pay for. I get the sense that outside of urban militias, most soldiers weren't returning to trades, but rather just living off the proceeds of their military occupations. Arranging marriages for their kids, buying/selling tracts of lands, scheming to inherit their relatives' possessions, having poor people cook their meals and general rich people schmoozing. (adjust for the richness/poorness of the man-at-arms in question.) Thanks for a great answer! What about post Norman Conquest, pre HYW England? And when did English knights change from soldiers who had to work to keep their fief, to land owning gentry?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
I've understood that medieval commoners and champions used clubs etc. in judicial duels, and that only nobility and knights used swords. But what happened when a noble and a commoner had a judicial duel? Judicial duel between a man and a woman: http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/trial_by_combat/combat_man_and_woman.htm  Fatality!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Judicial duel between a man and a woman: http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/trial_by_combat/combat_man_and_woman.htm
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
To me, it looks like she has a pretty good grip on the sack?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:What metal objects do you use it on? I don't put it on any of my ironwork unless I'm intentionally blackening it because it never gets smooth like in wood, just stays sticky and unpleasant until it eventually chips away. Also not keen on it for all wood because it yellows over time. Tools. It seems to work well for me to prevent rust. It does create a film on the surface, but it stops rust well enough. For leather, I use mink oil.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 10:45
|
|
|
Is there any books that go into detail about middle eastern martial arts? Any surviving manuals on these?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Thanks for a great answer! What about post Norman Conquest, pre HYW England? OK, so I know more about France than I do England, so I had to dig a little. The best I can tell, the big shift in the understanding of ENglish Knighthood happens under Edward I in the Welsh Wars. (Right around the turn of the 14th century). This is because Edward fielded one of the 1st paid, professional armies in English history, instead of relying on traditional feudal obligations. And his campaigns in Wales were a big success (he also built the largest-ever trebuchet and named it "War Wolf" which is about the most terrifying thing I can imagine) . Accordingly, Edward and his successors were less likely to rely on the feudal system of mustering an army- which often worked sluggishly, produced reluctant fighters and in inconsistent numbers/equipment/readiness. The concept of "scutage", i.e. paying a fee instead of giving fighting service was pretty old, like...beginning of 12th century old in England. The difference after Edward I was that now that professional armies were proven effective (and, in fact, superior) the crown would now find a knight's scutage more valuable than his actual presence on the battlefield- since one feudal subject's fee could pay for several professionals, who were more eager to fight and more reliable. After that, knighthood is seen as an honor, but the link between knighthood and actual battlefield service has begun its inevitable slide into irrelevance. Interestingly, a lot of sources in the immediate aftermath of the HYW write about a sort of surplus of knights, which I think indicates a lot of battlefield-dubbings, as well as men who simply plundered so much that they could afford to buy up manors and refer to themselves as knights. [An aside, just because I love ambiguity in my answers: I'll also note that a lot of medieval chroniclers and other primary sources refer habitually to fighting men as "knights" without much regard to whether or not they actually held a knighthood. It seems to have been a generic term used by non-insiders, much in the same way that a modern person might see an armored vehicle and identify it as a "tank", when someone with insider knowledge might call it an IFV or something. This makes it even trickier to figure out what the hell all the knights are up to, when contemporary writers are calling everyone in armor a knight. ] Now, as for when knighthood fully arrived at the point of being a non-combatant title, I honestly can't tell you. After Henry VIII to be sure, but I'm just not well-versed in Renaissance stuff. It's possible that Hey Gal will have some insights into what Knighthood looked like in the 17th century, although her area of expertise is continental Europe, not England. Now! As regards banditry in medieval England, it seems like it was a different phenomenon from in France. My reading suggests that the groups were closer analogues to modern organized crime groups. I've found references to groups of ruffians, sometimes led by someone of "gentle birth", likely a non-inheriting younger son, who just roll around trying to strongarm their way into influencing local politics. (i.e., nope we don't like that priest, here's a new guy for you to install. What's that, mr. bishop, you don't want to? OK say goodbye t most of your possessions). Then again, there are also just small bands of poor men who go full outlaw to make ends meet by stealing stuff. In fact, a lot of outlaws, invoking the right to sanctuary in a church, seem to have taken parish churches over as bases of operations. Which I love- outlaws relying on a legalistic interpretation of sanctuary laws. The problem never reached the scale of banditry in France, where there's thousands of demobilized soldiers going into the countryside.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Instructions unclear. https://giant.gfycat.com/ClearcutNaturalFrenchbulldog.webm
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Looks accurate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
Medieval weapons weren't designed for stabbing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
It is a little known fact but stabbing wasn't actually invented until the 17th century. Spears for example were primarily used to point at things. A handful of mediveal texts mention things similar to stabbing but always from a purely theoretical standpoint as the underlying concepts of stabbing just didn't exist yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:It is a little known fact but stabbing wasn't actually invented until the 17th century. Spears for example were primarily used to point at things. A handful of mediveal texts mention things similar to stabbing but always from a purely theoretical standpoint as the underlying concepts of stabbing just didn't exist yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
VoteTedJameson posted:Now, as for when knighthood fully arrived at the point of being a non-combatant title, I honestly can't tell you. After Henry VIII to be sure, but I'm just not well-versed in Renaissance stuff. It's possible that Hey Gal will have some insights into what Knighthood looked like in the 17th century, although her area of expertise is continental Europe, not England. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Knight By the 17th century war isn't part of their duties and calling them up isn't how any Emperor makes war, but a bunch of them end up in armies because they have status but very little assets so they have to do something to make a living and mercenaries can be that thing. I don't know about insights, but it's interesting to think about all these feudal holdovers in 17th century europe. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Aug 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
VoteTedJameson posted:OK, so I know more about France than I do England, so I had to dig a little. The best I can tell, the big shift in the understanding of ENglish Knighthood happens under Edward I in the Welsh Wars. (Right around the turn of the 14th century). This is because Edward fielded one of the 1st paid, professional armies in English history, instead of relying on traditional feudal obligations. And his campaigns in Wales were a big success (he also built the largest-ever trebuchet and named it "War Wolf" which is about the most terrifying thing I can imagine) . Thanks! Have you read Osprey books about the Middle Ages, and if so, how accurate they are?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Thanks! I've always been curious about this (I assume it must vary wildly depending on which author they use). I just like them for the pictures
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
VoteTedJameson posted:OK, so I know more about France than I do England, so I had to dig a little. The best I can tell, the big shift in the understanding of ENglish Knighthood happens under Edward I in the Welsh Wars. (Right around the turn of the 14th century). This is because Edward fielded one of the 1st paid, professional armies in English history, instead of relying on traditional feudal obligations. As Marjorie Chibnall has shown conclusively, this core premise is bollocks. Professional armies existed throughout the Middle Ages, notably within the familia of kings and nobles. It was already well known that professional soldiers were often better than vassals by the turn of the 12th century at the very latest. Thus William Rufus was widely beloved by soldiers as an excellent paymaster, and Robert of Bellême's mercenary knights cursed their feudal counterparts who gave up the castle of Bridgnorth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:As Marjorie Chibnall has shown conclusively, this core premise is bollocks. Professional armies existed throughout the Middle Ages, notably within the familia of kings and nobles. It was already well known that professional soldiers were often better than vassals by the turn of the 12th century at the very latest. Thus William Rufus was widely beloved by soldiers as an excellent paymaster, and Robert of Bellême's mercenary knights cursed their feudal counterparts who gave up the castle of Bridgnorth. What would you recommend to read from Marjorie Chibnall on this topic?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Grenrow posted:What would you recommend to read from Marjorie Chibnall on this topic? 'Mercenaries and the Familia Regis under Henry I'
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:'Mercenaries and the Familia Regis under Henry I' Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:'Mercenaries and the Familia Regis under Henry I' I should point out that prior to about the mid-13th century, "mercenary" was a term for anyone who was paid for fighting, to distinguish them from those who fought purely out of feudal obligation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:I should point out that prior to about the mid-13th century, "mercenary" was a term for anyone who was paid for fighting, to distinguish them from those who fought purely out of feudal obligation. what was it in latin?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
drat, I just accidentally searched the library database for "Chinball" about 20 different ways.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 18:56
|
|