thanks!!! I agree, with the eye color I just think... mint chip....

Agreed, although his compositional skills and eye for framing does shine through still on some of his pieces, despite other aspects falling flat in the rest of the portfolio. (Which, compliments what he's remembered for, like his more popular pieces that depict the mythological or supernatural)

I'm curious what makes you feel this way. I can think of a few reasons why, but I'd like to know your personal reasoning.

You're too kind, thank you ❤️

Meeting others who are passionate about the same things as you, and sharing those things with them, is an unbeatable feeling.

Thank you!

wahhh!!! thank you stair!!!

fatshark moment

As opposed to other, more heavily documented periods, in my experience, where there's more people with a higher standard of accuracy due to the availability of the information.

Yeah it ends up being real nuanced and a bit more of a rabbithole than other periods due to its popularity but also lack of strong sources to pull from. You end up with such a mix of really good, earnest research, and then others using the "Absence of evidence" phrase as an excuse to make things up.

This right here is one of the many reasons why early Northern European and adjacent reenactment and experimental archeology is such a crapshoot of conflicting ideas and wild speculation, you have to be -really- thorough and extra careful when trying to depict or understand something so undocumented.