Mission

All right, here's the next one, Blackbead. I just hope I've faithfully misspelled all the words correctly since you plan to reproduce some of these. MS Word tries really hard to correct things, which is definitely a mixed blessing. (I can be a sloppy typist, so I need their help, but when it comes to reproducing period stuff...) Typing this stuff in also throws my already questionable spelling skills into disarray. I corrected a word the other day which ended in 'l' (a word like 'continual') by adding a second 'l.' Oh and, BTW, the second and fourth lines are always indented one or two spaces. (I chose to indent them one.) However, the forum helpfully strips these extra spaces out for you. “In praise of Sulphur or Brimstone. This Sulphur from the Horrid deepe, dame Nature did ordaine A fearfull scourge for sinne to be as Scripture doth explane. __ A taste whereof we may perceive, for his infernall fire Hath millions slaine in towne and field, by Mars his furious ire. Yet though it seeme most mercilesse, our God will have it so, That from the selfe-same subject shall great choice of medicines flow. Yea it one chiefe monst three is held in all that live and breath, And Vegitables it maintaines, yet burne in Caves beneath. A Father it is of Mineralls, Philosophers say so, By help whereof they’re made concreat, from Chaos whence they grow. The Sulphur that’s in Animals, in fatnes cheefly stands, Each order be it good or bad, is linck’t in Sulphur bands. The Vegent Sulphurs many are, each answering to his kinde, Some Gummy, Oylely, watery and Ayry eke inclin’d. Yet Sulphur vini glads mans heart, his courage it doth whet, And many a strong man it puls downe, it can inebriate. I meane the sulphurous spirits of wine, sir Barly-corne also __ Hath shewed himselfe a man at Armes each plow-man that doth know. But to return being wide digrest from what I have in hand, The mineral Sulphur was my scope, well knowne at Sea and Land. Which Brimstone crude gainst itches tri’d In country and in towne, And to kill wormes in man and beast is us’d of every clowne. The oyle of Sulphur well prepar’d, a jewell is of price; His balsam precious is also, These are no new device. The quintessence thereof is pure, and cheeres each vitall part, Yea being prepared faithfully, it doth revive the heart. The flowers serve ‘gainst pestilence, ‘gainst Asthma and the Murre, ‘Gainst feavers and ‘gainst Plurisies to appetite a spurre. Unto the Lungs a Balsam ‘tis, the Collicke it doth cure, From falling sicknes it defends and is both safe and sure. In Phisicke and Chirurgerie great helpe it doth produce, To him that hath it well prepar’d, and righty I knowe his use. __ But Chimicke medicines are to fooles like swords in mad mans hands, When they should aide, oft times do kill, such hazards in them stands. Let Surgeons mates to whom I write, be warn’d by me their friend, And not too rashly give a Dose, which then ‘s too late to mend. For many a good man leaves his life, through errours of that kinde, Which I with young men would avoid and beare my words in minde. Though Sulphur, Sal, and Mercurie have healing medicines store, Yet know the’ have poyson and can kill, prepare them well therefore.” (Woodall, p. 293-6)

Michael, you left out the fantasy pirates. I like the term fantasy pirate because it describes their kit and I think a lot of fantasy re-enactors would appreciate that term. Hollywood is fantasy stuff. So are pirates with fairy wings, pirates in ren-fair tights, pirates festooned with myriad cool-looking skulls and many of the pirates who wear 73 pounds of weapons and gadgets on their belts. Plus when I was a little boy, being this sort of pirate was my fantasy.

Well, for the love of Florida: somebody stop that damn butterfly! This is why I love reading your posts! Maybe I should come out there instead of waiting for you to come here. I really need to meet Iron Bess anyhow.

In a rare moment, Mission demurs. It's kind of a private thing, I guess. Perhaps we can discuss it in between you poking me with a stick to keep me awake at PiP during gate duty on Friday night. (Plus that will give me time to find the article and remember exactly how the instructions went.)

I really enjoy Sidney Harris' columns. I once spent a whole day on the beach at Bahia Honda re-enacting something he talked about in one of them. Good stuff.

That's a nice definition (of reenactment, not re-enactors, NB.) It's still open to wide variances in interpretation. (But then, all definitions are. Whole wars are fought over such things. (So maybe we should all go out and re-enact one as penance. ))

That's not entirely true. Not everyone is cut out to be a re-enactor the way you are defining it. Unfortunately, there is no universally accepted definition for what a reenactor is (at least not at the level of detail in which you have defined the word). While they don't have a definition for reenactor, the Dictionary at Freedictionary (my favorite dictionary website) says this for reenactment: 1. To enact again: reenact a law. 2. To perform again: reenact the first two scenes. 3. To go through a second time This is so general that you could make a point for what it means on any side. However, the Thesaurus is more enlightening (at least as regards our sport): 1. reenactment - performing a role in an event that occurred at an earlier time; "the reenactment of the battle of Princeton" - acting, performing, playacting, playing - the performance of a part or role in a drama Playing, playacting, acting...doesn't exactly conjure the images you're suggesting. In the strictest sense, none of us is completely successful because we can't possibly encompass the attitude, mien and beliefs of people who actually lived through the situations going on 300+ years ago. Not only that, most of us are not re-enacting specific events at all, but just our general representation of the time period (although there are some event exceptions.) So the question then becomes how do we each fill in the missing details of what being a re-enactor really means? You have presented your definition. And perhaps the groups you re-enact with use a similar definition. This is why I think the decisions for what being a reenactor means need to be set at the individual or group level. Either that or we need an umbrella organization to dictate the definition so...

Save the Ta-Tas! (Sorry, it's sort of OT, but I just saw that in the new breast cancer awareness campaign that is raging through the college. It even has a pink ribbon on it. )

Wait a second...given your field of study, you no doubt have read psychology articles and letters back and forth about said article written by researchers in scholarly journals, right? Have you never seen them take shots at each other? Sometimes, direct and very pointed shots? (Sure, it's phrased better, but it's still taking shots at people you disagree with.) Sometimes they spend whole articles tearing apart another scholar's research and/or research methods. It sort of goes with the territory. While the allegedly scientific- and learning-minded pretend to strive for dispassion, there's always that element of passion hiding in there. In fact, it's sometimes not bothering to hide at all.

Aw, I think Twill is fun but then, as many of you know, I only take most things so seriously. (I do not get the fascination with seams and such, but then it's not the siren that calls me.) However, I like learning new things. This is really the main place we can do that. (I also like finding the grossest possible descriptions of period surgery and lovingly re-stating them just for you guys, but that's another thing entirely.) That article is sort of funny and he does get some good (even well-deserved) digs in. Although the comment on historians is very interesting, I have doubts that even peer-reviewed historical material is all that he seems to think it is. I've read some of it in my personal quest for period medical info and even I can refute some of the info in the peer-reviewed articles with the little spit of knowledge I've gathered. We're all human, even the professors. (Besides, what is Twill if not a sort of informal peer review?) However, that guy is really just (or at least playing at being) a critic. I have little interest in following the work of such people. If you can't tease and make fun of things with a hint of respect and love for it, you're just a cynic. No suggestions are offered for ways people could fix or improve. They're just torn them down one by one (including Dave Barry!) I can't respect a man who'd do that very much. At least folks re-enacting are making something - he just seems to want to destroy things for his amusement. (I'm sure glad I don't look at the world the way he does.) “To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years. To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day.” -Winston Churchill

Yes, that worked.

The link works, but I can't see anything on the web page. It shows me a header pic in light gray, an empty box that says 'Basic Member' and links that, when clicked, reproduce the page I just described. On the bottom left side, it says, "You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near '' at line 1" Might this be a problem with Firefox? Edit: Nope. Explorer does the same thing to me.

True. I guess further research would be needed as to what folks are doing with them.

Would you share the results of the sales of "new" documents, if you don't mind? I am all curious to see how it affects your sales now. Just to update Mission on the sales so far, I have sold about 15 aged Letters of Marque now and only one non-aged document. So it seems that up to yet the eBay audience prefers the aged look. I'll have a better Idea of how the sales compare when I get my own website up and running in January and start to cater for a more discerning customer. Interesting. See, I think this is sort of proof that the romanticized movie pirates will always be with us. (Unless there is some huge shift in the general pop culture to strict realism. Even then, such shifts are rarely total.)

Oh, yeah! I forgot the funny dress comment. (There's so much to remember when I'm writing these...which usually starts at least a week after the event because I do all the photos first. The photos guide the text when I haven't written it in advance.) As for the Roadrunner, it's just one of those pop images I like to stick into these things because they're so out of place. Plus I'm a huge WB classic cartoon fan. (Although Roadrunner was such a one note character (and that note is: "Beep!") and the Coyote/Roadrunner cartoons got so watered down after Chuck Jones left that he's not a favorite character of mine. Now the coyote OTOH...) "Allow me to introduce myself: My name is Wile E. Coyote, Genius. I am not selling anything, nor am I working my way through college..." "I..." "...and so, let's get down to cases: you are a rabbit and I am going to eat you for supper. Now don't try to get away! I am more muscular, more cunning, faster and larger than you are and I'm a genius! While you could hardly pass the entrance examinations to kindergarten. So, I'll give you the customary two minutes to say your prayers." "I'm sorry mac. The lady of the house ain't home and besides, we mailed you people a check last week." "Why do they always want to do it the hard way?"

Pretty good. . . . but (you knew this was coming), it is a full-size copy of Columbus's ship, not a scale copy as you say on the last page (which proves that I read the whole thing). Mark Really? I wonder where I got that idea? I could swear one of the guides said it was 2/3. I will most certainly fix that error.

Are you bumping this to remind yourself? It still doesn't work. In fact, every thread with more than 52 or so links stops working after the 52nd (or whatever) link in the thread.

The search function seems to be working fine now. My only gripe would be that it was actually a little (but only a wee, small little) better when it only found the threads containing the search word when searching on the forum level and the posts inside the threads when searching on the thread level. Minor, minor, minor...probably not even worth the time it would cost you to investigate. In fact, it's really more of a "my 2¢" thing than an actual complaint.

What?! Copycat! Actually, you're the second person I've heard of who has recently adopted a planter's hat for their garb. (Other than me. Patrick actually made mine for himself. I own a Patrick Hand original! )

Hmm...Raven Haired, too. Could it be? (You need to make a planter's hat! You know, for the fashion oblivious wenches.)

Yeah, bummer. You guys were on my list of interesting people to meet (and write about) this year.

Say, that is interesting. Thanks! (That's going into my notes. Got a reference I can cite?)

Yay! I was starting to think people were tired of these and weren't reading them. (Although this would actually be a mixed blessing.) Everyone is a genius. As regards writing, I can only say that I have to write. I've always had to write. I've been doing it most of my life. This is just an extension of that. (However I must say that I despise editing and view that part of writing as a necessary evil.) I was about to say, don't go trying to buy extra insulin for little ole me because the stuff I use costs $50 or $60 a bottle at retail (although the health insurance folks negotiate it down to a lot less than that which...well, that's a debate for another forum.), but then I read that you can get it free. Still, don't go out of your way on my account. And certainly don't violate any laws in the process... (Humalog. I take Humalog.)

A wrongful death case is relatively cheap and easy compared to, say, Mission suffered a traumatic brain injury because of a cannon and will require skilled nursing care for the rest of his projected life expectancy. Well, first of all I have written instructions saying I am not to be put on machines. So if that's the issue, that's not an issue. (Well, inasmuch as I can make it not be an issue.) Second, we all run this risk when playing with fire (literally) and I have specified in the second quote [as you quoted above] that I follow all the safety precautions I'm aware of, so what is the alternative? Never fire cannons? (Actually, I'm ok with that. I find it most humorous to be a cannon firing surgeon re-enactor, but I can live without that title as well.) Third, the insurance we have been referring to is the org. insurance which isn't health insurance so this whole brain damage problem is irrelevant to the context of the discussion. Fourth, since I won't be conscious I probably won't care. Much. Fifth, I clearly said "killed" so you are changing the rules here. (Admittedly, I though it would eventually come to this when someone clever saw that little loophole in my grandiose statements of 'no fear!') Sixth, I don't have a sixth, but I thought there should be six because everyone thinks in terms of fives or tens or hundreds. Why is that? Now I feel like singing Digger Smolken's greatest hits...

Just for reference: Wooden Shoes