Evening armor enthusiasts,

I have been in this hobby for a while now and up until recently I have used historical reenactors as a primary source when researching kit inspiration ideas until people on this sub including actual reenactors told me not to do so as reenactors can make mistakes.

That got me thinking of other examples of so called 'reenactorisms' or things reenactors do that may not be historically accurate. For example in my previous post on this sub about a reenactors portrayal of a bill man from the War of the Roses a user informed me that the concept of a 'bill man' was an example of 'reenactorism' as soldiers were not grouped by their weapon use like in RTS games.

Another example from another post (in regards to infantry wearing gauntlets) is that according to sources most infantry did not wear gauntlets compared to modern reenactors and it's worn more for safety reasons and because broken fingers suck. Yet judging solely from reenactors you would think that gauntlets were standard issue for every combatant on the battlefield.

Also looking at War of the Roses reenactments in general there seems to be a lot of full or half harnesses to the point that you would think everyone fighting in the war had access to a full or half harness.

Anyway do you have any other examples of 'reenactorisms' or things reenactors do that may not be historically correct in the arms and armor community ? This could stretch from the ancient times all the way to the 16th century.

Thanks everyone.