December, 2000
December 31, 2000
Do we need to resort to name calling. First of all.... I
would like to express my deep apology, for any and all offense that I
have caused any Second Wisconsin member in the past. I in no way wanted
to cause anyone in our fine organization to feel uncomfortable, or
angry. However, I believe that the comment posted by Mr. Mickelson
("As far as I can see it's the young whelps in Co A, who wanna be
mudsills leading all this silliness. " ) Is out of line. What you
are forgetting with this comment, is that "THE COMMITTEE FORMED
TO REVIEW THE UNIFORM STANDARDS IN THE HANDBOOK, IS NOT CO. A."
At the 2000 annual meeting, this idea was proposed and then passed.
The floor was then opened up to any and all volunteers to make up that
committee. Myself and 3 other people, (not all from Co.A) volunteered.
Any member of the unit who wished to do so, could have joined this
committee. It is not at all fair, to pass this off as those Co. A
mudsills, trying to cause mischief again! The contents of this document
are VERY well researched, linked with historically documentation. We
volunteered our time to compile this information, and it hurts to see my
fellow black hats brush it off. It has mistakes, and they will be fixed!
It is the best we could do, and unless someone else has secretly
compiled another document to rival it, it is all we have. This is not
set in stone, nothings perfect, and the errors can be reformed.
I would ask that in the future people could refrain form using terms
like " Young Whelps from Co. A", mudsills, stich-counters, or
any other derogatory term. By doing this you only divide, and hurt
people. I am a living historian and nothing more. I strive to protray a
common combat soldier in the American Civil War, as best i possibly can.
As do all of you! My words, actions, and dress will reflect that mindset
in every way. We share a common bond, a brotherhood that nothing can
break. We are friends, and brothers. We don't need to be calling names,
and I wont resort to that. Lets remember who we honor, an why we do
this. Lets work and grow together, not fight seperately with harsh
words, and negative comments.
I hope you can all appreciate were i am coming from.
Yours Cordially,
Andrew Voss
2nd Sgt. Albert C. Chapman
Co. A 2nd WI
December 30, 2000
Proposed changes
On a request from the Association at the 2000 annual meeting, a committee was formed to review the Associations present standards. The committee was to research the vast topic of Uniform & Equipage and report it’s findings to the membership at the 2001 annual meeting. The committee report is based on research articles & books from museum curators, respected historians in certain fields of expertise, and by actually looking at museum collections ourselves. Reenacting is a unique hobby in that it is always moving forward with new research and improved uniform and equipage as time goes by. Ultimately the decision rests with in the entire Association to approve or disprove our findings.
First off, I wish to thank all those who have read the proposed changes to the Uniform & Equipage Standards in the Handbook. As only one part of the four-man committee who worked on this task, I can only comment on what I perceive to be hot topics of debate. If you have any questions or concerns, you can e-mail me at garyklas@alexssa.net (put note on for Tom to read) or call (262) 629-5433. Yes the Lt. Col. & I share the same e-mail address, as most members know. I think honest debate on topics is fine as long as it is based on historical documentation.
The subject of proposed changes to the Association Uniform & Equipage standards has opened up some exciting debate on two topics, the “burnishing” of the pattern 1853 Enfield and stitched Jefferson Bootees.
This response will hope to clarify some topics of discussion on these issues
Pattern
of 1853 Enfield Rifle-Musket:
The research provided by Gary Van Kauwenbergh takes this issue
to a new level of understanding. Most
scholars on this issue have either leaned to one side of the fence on
this issue or the other. I
personally believe Geoff Walden is also the best source around to
consider the “Great Enfield Debate” which is a heated topic in many
living historian organizations.
I believe due to the research by Mr. Walden, we should allow both blued
& burnished muskets in the 2d Wisconsin. Gary’s information is very well researched and I see no
reason why anyone would disagree with his findings.
I also applaud Gary in helping us base our standard more
“historically accurate” as that is the whole purpose behind the
updated Uniform & Equipage Standards.
The research that the Uniform & Equipage Committee used to base the decision of taking off the bluing for the P1853 reproduction is as follows.
Walden, Geoff. “Authentecizing Your Reproduction Enfield,” The Watchdog. 1.3 (1993) 2-3.
“In general, you may leave the barrel in its original blued finish, or buff it bright. Unless you portray a Federal unit that required its Enfields to be bright in order to match the Springfield standard, there is no clear-cut choice based upon historical information.”
This statement is very similar to Gary Van Kauwenbergh’s information. As in most organizations, it comes down to do we want to make an Enfield look more like the Springfield standard, or not.
Here is some other information from proven sources of information in the reenacting community for years. Their opinions and research tends to go against what Mr. Walden is stating.
Hubbs, Mark. “How Authentic Is Your Rifle Musket? A Critique of Reproduction Weapons and How to
Improve Them,” The Company Wag. Aug. 1993. 1, 10-12, 16.
“First remove the blue finish. It appears that all P53’s were imported with bluing, however the great majority were ‘struck bright’ especially in the federal army."
For those unfamiliar with Mark Hubbs, he is a very knowledgeable historian who has also written articles on the M1816/1822 Belgian Conversion Musket, and wrote several articles on reproduction federal leather accouterments in The Watchdog.
Kinzer, Cal. “A Dozen Inexpensive Ways to Improve Your Personal Impression,” Camp Chase Gazette
Reprinted in the Hard Cracker Handbook. 1999.
“ (4) Burnish that Enfield! Several years ago some of the boys in my unit got into a discussion about wheater period Enfileds were burnished. After looking at scores of photographs and examining every original we could find that was documented as being issued, we come to the conclusion they definitely were not. In fact, I have yet to see a period photograph of a blued Enfield. (If anyone has one, I’d like to see it!) Yes the Brits did blue their metal, but the type of bluing used did not last long. It quickly wore off when the weapon was cleaned. American arms had traditionally been burnished and there is no reason to believe that U.S. and C.S. officers made any distinction in this area with regard to foreign-made weapons."
As one can see from these statements, not everyone has agreed with Mr. Walden on this topic. Mr. Kinzer is a well-respected living historian whose research & thoughts appear on the pages of Camp Chase Gazette and other sources. He recently just stepped down from the Command of the 55th Illinois, a progressive campaign battalion based in Oklahoma. For the past 6 years, he has been a major factor in educating reenactors how to improve their kits with his compilation The Hardcracker Handbook. In fact, the article I cited did appear in the August 1992 edition of The Fugelman.
So as stated before, I believe Gary’s information to be very provoking & concrete. My recommendation incorporating his research is to accept both blued & burnished rifle-muskets. Wow, that was a fun one.
U.S.
Pattern Jefferson Bootees (Shoes)
On this topic, we made the
mistake. We omitted
the words “& stitched” from the first sentence describing the
bootees. It was an error
that we apologize for. There
is no doubt that stitched soles were very prevalent in the federal army.
I recommend that the new sentence state: ”Period leather
bootees with stitched or pegged soles.”
This should quench the fire that our mistake caused. If anyone would like to learn more on Jefferson Bootees, The Watchdog has two informative articles on these issue shoes from Ph.D. Michael R. Cunningham in the Spring & Summer 1999 issues of this quarterly periodical.
Once again, I would to thank those who are concerned about the Uniform & Equipage Standards. If anyone has better documentation on a particular subject, please feel free to contact us.
I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,
Tom Klas
Company A, 2d Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry Association, Inc.
December 29, 2000
HI CRAIG:
Sarah Bro Hinds <brohinds@earthlink.net>
I
find Gary's data and reasoning compelling.
Who can we contact to get
the historical justification for the proposed bluing and footwear
changes? It would be helpful if someone provides an explanation as to
why the proposed changes are desirable.
Victor
December 29, 2000
December 29, 2000
RE:
Proposed changes --
well it seems it takes the US Snail quite a while to get mail to the far
east here -- I have not gotten a Fugelman in some time so have not seen
the proposed changes but......
I'm 100% with you and Gary -- it is great when someone reads some
half-researched article and jumps up and down about such things!
There is damned little "100% accurate" equipment out there --
much less "affordable".
While you are at it stripping the blue from your enfield you better get
out the files and start making replacement parts -- I have references
that show that almost all the bulk purchases (USA and CSA) were from
lots that had been recalled from the British Army. The
reason? because the AMERICAN machine tools purchased in 1859 were
now turning out interchangeable part rifles and all the
non-interchangeable BRITISH ENFIELDS were being declared unserviceable!!
The thread counting can go on and on -- while I look forward to updating
my equipment and uniforms with closer reproductions I am NOT burning
everything that Marilyn Pettit sewed up for Co. K!!!
Improve yes, try to be more living historian than 'costumed actor'
yes, but get into the thread count Nazi program .....**** ....NO!
Hope you all had a Merry Christmas and will have a fun and safe
New Years -- I am having fun reading the local papers refer to low 20's
as "bitter cold"!! We DO have snow -- still a
couple inches left on the ground and possible more tomorrow.
It was fun being with the "old boys" up at Green Bay this
fall.
Take Care
Paul Hinds
Co. C
December 29, 2000
Excellent response
Gary, one can see you have done your research.
Frankly I find the stripping the bluing
"thing" amusing.
We are the 2nd Wis. and are supposed to strip the bluing off our
Enfields so we are more authentic....well the 2nd Wis had Lorenz not
Enfields as far as I know. So, what are we trying to be authentic about?
We already got the wrong guns, but we are supposed to strip the bluing
off so we are correct? Duh! Is it: if they had Enfields they would have
stripped the bluing off?
From Fighting Men of the Civil War,
by Wm. Davis, page 58:
For both the CSA and the USA all the Springfield and Enfields amounted
to no more than 40% of all shoulder arms. Furthermore: "In fact
there was a virtual jumble of differing weapons in use throughout the
war. In 1863 the Union Army officially recognized 79 different models of
shoulder arm, both rifles and muskets, another 23 models of carbines and
19 different pistols and revolvers." Talk about chaotic.
As you can see by the quote above and Gary's comments on bluing and the
pegged and stitched soles; while the army was a uniformed organization,
they were not uniformly equipped. On a tour of the lower levels of the
Wis Vets Museum Co K saw that they had blued Enfields....I suppose that
means the originals are not authentic?? What nonsense.
As far as I can see it's the young whelps in Co A, who wanna be mudsills
leading all this silliness.
Craig S. Mickelson
December 27, 2000
Problems with Uniform and equipment changes
I've got a couple problems with the proposed changes to the Uniforms and Equipment Requirements of Privates and NCOs published in the last Fugelman.
The skirmish team lives by the same as the reenactors,
to encourage cross-over without needing to rebuy any items. I
can't support the pegged brogans only, or stripped Enfield changes for
the skirmish team.
1. Pegged vs. Sewed Brogans. I don't see any reason to
stipulate pegged or sewed brogans, but if we must, sewed construction
should be chosen over pegged. Sewn brogans out numbered pegged
ones by about 3 to 1 (6,082,297 to 2,199,339). Please refer to the
statement showing the number of articles purchased by the Philadelphia,
New York and Cincinnati depots from May 1861 through the end of the war
(Official Records, Series III--Volume V[S#126]).
Either construction should be acceptable. Any rule forbidding the
use of sewed brogans would be inaccurate.
2. Enfield bluing. You can't be both accurate and require
Enfield owners to strip the bluing from their muskets.
a. In "The British Soldier's Firearm - The 1853 Pattern
Rifled Musket" by C. H. Roads, the author describes in minute
detail the inspection and proofing procedures used by both English and
Belgian gun makers, then simply states "After the barrel had been
browned it was inspected to see that no
damage had been caused..."
b. Army Regulations strictly forbid "burnishing" musket
barrels. (I can look up chapter and paragraph on that one if you
wish.) Of course, that regulation wasn't strictly followed.
c. Geoffrey R. Walden is the closest thing the
reenacting world has to
an Enfield expert.
1. From his 1985 "Authenticizing Your
Reproduction Enfield": "...A thorough examination of
numerous period image, including a study of the six volume "Images
of War" series, reveals the following statistics about weapons that
can positively [be] identified as Enfields. There are 77 Enfields
in Federal hands, 28 of which definitely appear to have been struck
bright, 28 of which still retain their original blued finish, and 21 of
which are unclear as to finish..."
2. From his 1995 supplement of
"Authenticizing Your Reproduction Enfield": "There
is an unfortunate trend in the hobby these days toward removing the
bluing on Enfields, simply because some people think this is more
authentic. I can't say it any plainer than this: this
"theory" simply cannot be defended by period evidence, either
written or photographic.
Frankly, I'm surprised this idea persists, even among some hobbyists who
ought to know better. Ten years of additional research have
revealed nothing to support this idea; in fact, the opposite is true.
The plain truth is that a bright Enfield is in no way any more authentic
than a blued one, and anyone who says so simply hasn't done a whole lot
of Enfield research."
3. Good catch on preferring the smooth-side canteens and two-rivet
bayonet scabbards, but I think you should emphasize the point even
further by pointing out the late-issued bulls-eye canteens and
seven-rivet scabbards would be an anachronism at an early impression
event.
Gary Van Kauwenbergh,
2d wis
December 10
People ask, "Why is Civil War
history important?"
Here is one of the better explanations I have seen... > >
Editorial > Civil War vets were
'greatest generation'
Phil Albright - FLORIDA TODAY > 12/05/2000 >
Florida Today > >
Civil War vets were 'greatest
generation'
By Phil Albright
Florida Today Guest Columnist
After reading The Greatest Generation, I thought long and hard about the title, finally concluding to my satisfaction that it helped sell the book. And that it was at least partially responsible for its appearance at the top of the best-seller lists for many weeks. As a member of that generation, I found that though the book was readable and worthwhile, the title did not ring true. When Tom Brokaw wrote that my generation "is the greatest generation any society ever produced," he was engaging in chauvinistic exaggeration. Nevertheless, the phrase "the greatest generation" has already become a part of our language, just as did "catch-22" and "the right stuff." Although the United States was the arsenal of democracy during World War II, it did not contribute, relatively speaking, much of its own blood and tears. Our country lost about 400,000 military personnel compared to the Soviet Union's 18 million military and civilian deaths and many millions more of our other allies. I believe the generation that fought and endured in our Civil War was our greatest and certainly our bloodiest generation. More lives were lost in the Civil War than the total of those lost in all the other wars our country has fought. That statistic holds even though in 1860, the population of our country was only 32 million. In the one-day battle of Antietam alone, the casualties were four times the total suffered by Americans at Normandy on June 6, 1944. Both sides in the Civil War fervently believed in their respective causes. The cultural differences between the agricultural South and the industrial North intensified as time went on, with the ill feelings finally exploding in war in 1861. Most Americans knew why they were fighting. Americans were less than lukewarm about entering World War II until the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Overnight, a surge of patriotism changed America. The big differences between the generations that fought and persevered in In the one-day battle of Antietam alone, the causalities were four times the total suffered by Americans at Normandy on June 6, 1944. Both sides in the Civil War fervently believed in their respective causes. The cultural differences between the agricultural South and the industrial North intensified as time went on, with the ill feelings finally exploding in war in 1861. Most Americans knew why they were fighting. Americans were less than lukewarm about entering World War II until the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Overnight, a surge of patriotism changed America. The big differences between the generations that fought and persevered in both of those wars lay in the economic condition of the country and the emotional impact of their military dead after the fighting stopped. The South was in ruins after the Civil War with a near-starving population, and President Abraham Lincoln's "with malice toward none" Second Inaugural message was prevented by his assassination. In short, there was no Marshall Plan to help the South, which had to pull itself up by its own bootstraps, and both sides suffered a decimated > population because of by the enormous number of military dead. On the other hand, America experienced no deprivation and devastation after World War II compared to the South after the Civil War. The military came home to an intact, prosperous country, a rare phenomenon then, and America's grief over its dead was ameliorated by its 135 million population. Yet it in no way denigrates the accomplishments of my generation during World War II and its aftermath to admit that time has a way of blurring historical fact, and that the Civil War generation was truly the greatest. Albright is a resident of Cocoa. >
December 6
This is about as good as it gets.....
RJ Samp
On Behalf Of Bill and/or Glenna Jo Christen
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 8:23 PM
To: cw-reenactors@world.std.com <mailto:cw-reenactors@world.std.com>
Subject: Enacting
Re-enacting...enacting
The root of both is acting. Costumes, props, scenery and stage settings,
roles and lines, a script and a director are all basic elements.
Historical enacting should encompass the same methodology and thought
process as any other performance art. There are some of us who prefer
more accuracy and authenticity in our pursuit of Civil War reenacting.
That level of thinking about what we do involves attention to detail in
our costumes and props, a good setting or "stage," a
historically accurate scenario and organizers who enforce the
"rules of the game." It may seem like more work, but in my
experience the enjoyment (safety, fun, friendship, comraderie, and a
sense of a living link to the past) is increased ten to one hundred
fold. Motivation for each of us is always personal, but the
implementation appears to be part of a large (30-40,000 people)
community not counting many more interested spectators.
What we do is also a sporting event that requires being in shape
physically and mentally (or should I say historically). As an aside. I
might note that at major sporting events we don't expect a participant
who also happens to be a medical person to take on the full time
responsibility of modern medical personnel.
Believe me, as an event co-ordinator I know that this function should
not be mixed. Large gatherings usually include accidents and
emergencies. This requires a dedicated police, fire and medical staff.
It's good to know who the "off duty" folks are for immediate
response, but realistically I'd feel better not mixing the two for
serious emergency treatment. With sports we play by the rules, use the
right equipment on the right playing field, have the medical staff
standing by and listen to the umpire or the referee. Some folks who
don't wish to to "play the game" or "get into
character" might well be better off dressing up in their funny
clothes and going to a KOA or find a bowling alley.
I applaud and support efforts (like McDowell or Vicksburg II) to push
the envelope for more accurate role-playing. I also so note that in most
cases (large public or non-invitation only event) there are still
allowances for folks who are just getting started or don't know any
better or just feel they have to be with the men (or the family) every
moment. I do feel that these areas should be out of the public's view.
It's my hope that as we progress, the majority of our community will see
and begin to experience that special feeling or "magic moment"
that comes when everything is as appropriately staged as can be. It's
the same rush as hitting a solid line drive, finishing a piece of
artwork, see the amazement and wonder in the faces of the audience.
The push for progress is not a new phenomenon in our community. My first
campaign
event was in 1978 at Saylors Creek. It was there at my third event as an
enactor that I felt the rush of performing (for myself and my fellow
participants) as a soldier of the 1860s. I realize that not all of us
have the same motivations and it doesn't bother me if some folks don't
agree with my concept of enacting...that the way the world is. I do
challenge those who don't agree, however, to give my version just one
try, and then decide.
Bill Christen
December 2, 2000
Greetings,
I'm researching the war career and lives of the members of the 16th New
York Cavalry in hopes of doing a unit history. Last night I was doing a
web search on the name Edward P. Doherty, who was a captain of the
regiment. Your "Summer of 1861 After Bull Run" page came up
and I was amazed to discover that you have a statement by him, when he
was a private in Co. A, 71st New York Infantry, concerning his capture
and escape from rebel soldiers. Where did you come across this
statement? I have done a quite a lot of research on Doherty and knew of
this incident, but was unaware of the statement. I'd like to reprint
that statement if possible. What can you tell me about it?
Whatta great web page you've created.
All the best,
Steven G. Miller
December 1, 2000
May I impose on you to distribute this information on your e-mail
list. Historians David Shultz and Richard Rollins will be donating their
time and energies to present an Advance Study and Discussion of the
Battle of Gettysburg to help the CWRT of Orange Co., Ca. generate funds
for the West Coast CWRT Conference for 2001 and for battlefield
preservation. Hopefully those from S. Ca. who are on your list will look
to their circumstances and help our endeavors.
Thank you - Anna Howland - VP CWRTOC
______________________________________
"I will stay here General, and so will my men."
ADVANCE STUDY AND DISCUSSION
ON THE BATTLE OF GETTYSBURG
Sponsored by the CWRT Orange County, Ca.
Facilitated by David Shultz and Richard Rollins
"The Saviors of Kinzie's Knoll"
Put the old classics back on the shelf and join us for a new and
exciting look at the most studied battle of the American Civil War. It
will be an informal and unbiased forum that we guarantee will open eyes
and minds.
............................................................................
The battle of Gettysburg seen through the eyes of the soldiers who
fought there. More than chivalry and honor, the true story of Gettysburg
is chaos, death, and destruction. We will look at failed plans and
strategies. Nightmarish terrain and questionable tactics. Unsung heroes,
regiments, and batteries. Logistics, communication, commissary, and
command. Although Gettysburg may or may not have been the turning point
in the American Civil War it was, however, the turning point for many of
the soldiers who survived.
...........................................................................
Session 1: Saturday, February 10, 2001
Program: Prelude thru July 1st
Time: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm
A tactical look at the battle and how it began with a full understanding
of logistical procedures, problems, communications and terrain. In order
to understand and appreciate the battle in the trenches one must first
comprehend that terrain played a key role in strategy and tactics.
Session 2: Saturday, March 10th, 2001
Program: July 2nd
Time: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm
A case study of July 2nd must be accompanied b a comprehensive overview
of the geography outside today's battlefield before approaches,
establishment of battlelines, and engagements can be discussed.
Session 3: Saturday, April 7, 2001
Program: July 3rd thru Retreat
Time: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm
Logistics, administration, communication, and inferior positioning, all
played significant roles in the failed Confederate planning.
Understanding Meade's superior defensive line will put Lee's objective
into prospective.
...........................................................................
$20.00 per session or $50.00 for all three. Hot lunches will be
available for an additional $2.00 donation each session. Sessions must
be prepaid within one week of scheduled date so we can prepare lunches
and snacks.
NO ENTRY WILL BE ALLOWED ON SCHEDULED DATE
WITHOUT PRIOR RESERVATION.
Sessions held at the Farmers and Merchants Bank 12535 Seal Beach Blvd.,
Seal Beach, Ca.
in the Rossmoor Shopping Center. Two blocks off the 405 freeway,
Seal Beach Blvd. exit.
Make checks payable to the CWRTOC:
Mail to: CWRTOC c/o Anna Howland
8581 Western Avenue # A
Buena Park, Ca. 90620
for info. contact:
Anna Howland (714)826-5920 or
civilwarkook@webtv.net <mailto:civilwarkook@webtv.net>
Dave Shultz (562)925-5237 or
dshultz180@aol.com <mailto:dshultz180@aol.com>
Indicate when you mail check which sessions you'll be attending.
Thank you all for your support!