Considering the nature of this forum I deemed it safe to bring up this subject without stepping on any toes. I have been on  a research kick on staff functions over the past few years so I have become pretty interested in functions of staff and command in the war and in the hobby. My question is, how does a units command structure effect its ability in the hobby? I don’t mean in its function but in its ability to field functional commands.
With the rise of polarized events it seems more and more that units that host or put on events supply  administrative and command staffs.  We all know that units have very different ways to set up structure. (I refer mostly to battalion structure and up but also include company setup as well). There seems to be two different ways of organization. One, an elected commander and subordinate commanders/nco’s , based usually on  individual company’s and there commanders. Two, one elected position(typically commander) and that person appoints all other positions as seen needed by said commander.
My question is which works best? It would appear that this is yet another CPH vs. MS thing, But, I would disagree as I know units on both sides that fall within these classifications. In what ways, if any, do you think this helps or hurts a unit? Is it better to spread command around to others or keep the old guard? How much is this effected the hobby and its events now and in the past?
This is just some questions that interest me and I hope will start some proactive discussion.

Chris,

It seems you are aking two different questions. First, how is command organized at events? Second, how is command organized in individual reenactor organizations? Often times, one doesn't have much to do with the other.  

Bill,
True two questions, but often times the same. If a unit or its commander is commanding an event many times that commander has sway over the structure of command. The real question is how does this effect both. Good or Bad? Is this yet another reason why we are having two of every kind of event in the east? Or even on a small scale? I guess I am just a dreamer and would like to see a time again where MS and CPH can have events on a large scale in the same place and time. I am just wondering how this plays into that.

None of the folks in leadership roles the unit I belong to are elected because they can perform the duties of an officer. As a matter of fact, I have never seen our current Pres, Vice Pres or Treasurer with straps and a cheese knife; ever. Members take turns serving as officers at events we host or when asked by event organizers to provide an officer for event "x". That way no one gets burnt up, everyone learns and that, makes the whole organization better. And, we never seem short on volunteers.  I think in many cases, officers are selected not only on their ability but, on the amount of folks they can draw to an event. For political reasons if you will. And, officers are selected over and over again for no other reason then no one knows any better or, that's the way it's always been.

"Follow the cigar smoke, find the fat man."

Quote :

ChrisOwens wrote : Bill, True two questions, but often times the same. If a unit or its commander is commanding an event many times that commander has sway over the structure of command. The real question is how does this effect both. Good or Bad? Is this yet another reason why we are having two of every kind of event in the east?

Chris,

I'm just a bit player in the authentic side of the Hobby. I sign up for events, read the instructions and somebody tells me where to go and what to do. So far, I haven't been asked to stay home. That's the extent of my knowledge of that side of the Hobby.

I do have some knowledge of how the Mainstream side of the Hobby works. I'm the overall Confederate Commander at a regional event held at Neshaminy State Park, outside Philadelphia. I'm also a Battalion Commander in the ANV. Event organizers will look for commanders who have name recognition, can supply troops, can play well with others, or who have done the job before and not screwed up in any meaningful way. For the past four years, I've been the commander at Neshaminy for the last two reasons.

People who take on the Command responsibility at events have a problem. They need a staff, but they can't strip their home units of qualified personnel. The ANV has a formal system in place, for those occasions when the ANV Commander is acting as the Event Commander at the large events. It's all based on seniority and works quite well. At the smaller events, it's very much a gray area. The commander needs to organize his own staff, based on group attendance, compantibility, and who's willing to do the work. The one thing you can't do is take them all from your own home unit; both for practical and political reasons. When it comes to picking battalion commanders, numbers really count. In most cases, units who bring the people get the command slots. It makes for happy reenactors, if the majority can serve under their own leaders.

This ain't the real Army and the name of the game is to please as many people as you possibly can, as often as you possibly can. That includes the participants, the spectators, the event organizers, and the folks who own/control the land. Trust me, everybody is rarely on the same sheet of music. IMHO, one of the advantages of organizing the very authentic events is the number of people you have to please is greatly reduced.

I would disagree about doing two of every event. What I see is a wide range of events with varying degrees of authenticity, that appeal to an equally wide range of reenactors. Some guys only want steak, while others only want hamburger. Some of us like a varied diet. There are events out there that should suit everybody.  

Chris,

This really and truly depends on the event, as staff jobs are modular and can be added or subtracted based on the event design.
In the modern sense, we pretty much take "staff" and "specialty impression" as having the same meaning. In other words, if  you don't need a QM officer and/or NCO then those slots need not be filled, or even included on the spreadsheet in the first place.

None of this is new, and a number of successful groups have been doing it this way for at least 10 years or more. At the company level, these tasks are handled by the NCOs. The fellow who gets off easy is the 5th Sergeant, although at an upcoming event, the individuals holding that slot are going to be worked like a rented mule, and over considerable distance at that -- per the manual.  At the battalion level, as mentioned earlier, not all the staff jobs need filling all the time, and, in fact, at some events just an OOD and/or OOG position needs filling, and those two jobs don't pop up in the F&S diagram, but they are important. Of course, those two work better when the Adj. and Sgt. Maj. are added into the mix....usually.

One area where staff work has improved in recent years is at the brigade level; however, the irony has been this area of interest has increased, while the number of troops available to actually fill the brigades have decreased. Maybe it's time for a TEWT or two. (No "Who gives a TEWT?" jokes, please! )

Some jobs aren't on the period T&OE (Can I use that acronym?), such as Kabuki and the loveable "Portajohn Checker." Bill, you know what I mean.

Really, and truly, what did you have in mind?

(Grumpy, it's a shame you'll be missing DM X this year.)

Quote :

Charles Heath wrote : Chris, Some jobs aren't on the period T&OE (Can I use that acronym?), such as Kabuki and the loveable "Portajohn Checker." Bill, you know what I mean.

Charles,

Been there, done that, got the staff T-shirt!  

Chris,

Charles is correct about Staff positions. At Neshaminy, my staff will most likely include an adjutant, provost, QM, signal officer, a clerk, and hopefully, some cavalry and runners to transmit orders. There will also be three infantry battalions, a cavalry detachment and an artillery section; all with their respective staffs.  

 

To me there are to seperate and not necessarily related things.

Above battalion level I don't know who or what is doing anything.  Probably that is appropriate for a private.  If I need to see soemone at Command level I walk over to the command area and ask for the appropriate officer.

At battalion level I worry about who is the Colonel and who is the adjutant and the regimental sargent major.

At company level (and we are usually mixed with companies we are familiar with).  Company command is alternated among the officers commanding the mixed unit with the 'other' officer filling in the second in command role.  We have a 1st, 2nd and 3d sargent (also alternated between the mixed units) and an appropriate number of corporals depending on the total number in the units.  Privates are mixed by size so by the time we finish our first drill session we are pretty integrated.

The NCOs are all pretty top notch and know their jobs.  I have served under one Lt as company commander who knows his drill pretty well but is a weak tactical offcier.

Within our organization there are both civilian and military positions.  For the military someone assigned a job (say 2nd sargent) actually has to know and have demonstrated the duties commencerate with the position.

What happens ABOVE our company we have no control over and just try to perform as best we can depending on the scenario.

Bill and Charles,
I think my question was not asked correctly. I have served on a few battalion and brigade staffs and know the routine at least on the MS end. My question was more of a lead up to another question.
As I still work with some MS units and continue to try an improve my impression over the years by going to more HH events I still get to talk with the common folks on both ends of the spectrum in a sense. The leadership part comes into play as far as large events of the So62, High Tide mold. Simply put I get the feeling that Anders is a little to hardcore for some but the events are not "history heavy" enough for others. That is stating the obvious but, how much of it is the actual common troops and how much of it is the folks in charge of those troops. If those in charge would not be in charge at said event, is this a factor?
The other part of that is where does unit set-up of those troops come in to play in making us all get along or not? It seems that the NSA has done a little better job than anything in the east thus far(though I'm sure they have their problems) of bringing deverse groups from both sides to the same events under a central command. I guess what I am driving at is can their ever be a NSA type organzation in the east and if so could we ever get past this issue?
Hope that is a better question(I was trying to be sly...didn't work)

Quote :

The other part of that is where does unit set-up of those troops come in to play in making us all get along or not?

Chris,

I have read this line six times, and cannot fathom what it means. Please elaborate. Thanks.

If we're talking about "unit set-up" in the sense of geographically where do you place the camps of the history lite vs. history heavy troops, I can say that at September Storm there was no best answer.

It was organized, on the CS side at least, so the history lite folks were in the back and the history heavy folks in the front, so the spectators would see the most accurate camps first and the history heavy folks didn't have to pass through the lite camp to the battlefield.

But what that meant was that the history heavy folks had a steady stream of lite folks passing beside their camp carrying ice bags, flashlights, dragging coolers, going to the activities and back, etc.

Possibly a V-shaped set-up, with a separate entrance from the parking lot/vendors would be optimum. But it seems if that much energy is spent in keeping reenactors separate to optimize their experiences, why bother to have them at the same event in the first place?

I know, numbers. I just don't get anything out of numbers, but I realize a lot of reenactors do.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

Quote :

ChrisOwens wrote : Bill and Charles, It seems that the NSA has done a little better job than anything in the east thus far(though I'm sure they have their problems) of bringing deverse groups from both sides to the same events under a central command. I guess what I am driving at is can their ever be a NSA type organzation in the east and if so could we ever get past this issue?

Chris,

I don't know what you are looking for, but AHT is going to have
three authentic camps and a camp of convenience for those folks who aren't comfortable without their tents and coolers. (I'm the administrator of the Camp of Convenience.) All military participants will be brigaded together, no matter where they camp. I doubt anyone is going to have any long term adverse reactions from the experiance.  

Quote :

hanktrent wrote : But what that meant was that the history heavy folks had a steady stream of lite folks passing beside their camp carrying ice bags, flashlights, dragging coolers, going to the activities and back, etc.

Hank,

Hopefully, most of those issues have been resolved for AHT. As an example, ice will be delivered directly to the Camp of Convenience, so there will be no need to carry it through the authentic camps.

Quote :

ChrisOwens wrote :The leadership part comes into play as far as large events of the So62, High Tide mold. Simply put I get the feeling that Anders is a little to hardcore for some but the events are not "history heavy" enough for others. That is stating the obvious but, how much of it is the actual common troops and how much of it is the folks in charge of those troops. If those in charge would not be in charge at said event, is this a factor?

Anders tries to put on events that cause heavy campers to shuck some of their extraneous gear and to go through the motions of being more soldier-like, but not to the point of driving them (most of them) away.  There will aways be those who will refuse to give up any comforts or amenities to more closely resemble actual CW soldiers, whether in camp or on campaign.

By the same token, these events also allow the more history heavy reenactors to participate in an event that will meet or exceed certain minimum standards for them.  Some HH reenactors are willing to accept those compromised standards for the other benefits, such as larger bodies of decently, if not well, trained troops, etc.  Some do not find such tradeoffs appealing.

Quote :

The other part of that is where does unit set-up of those troops come in to play in making us all get along or not? It seems that the NSA has done a little better job than anything in the east thus far(though I'm sure they have their problems) of bringing deverse groups from both sides to the same events under a central command.

Again, Anders tries to accomodate the camping desires of a fairly broad, but not the total, span of reenactors.  If you're willing to make the effort, you'll get a more accurate experience.  If not, you can do the family camp or heavy tenting camp, but are still expected to meet the on-the-field requirements for the scenarios.  Physical separation of the different camps is attempted as far as the available ground will allow.

As far as where in the command structure of the event a certain unit or unit commander falls, that is dependent upon whether their umbrella organization is attending in strength, as well as the event sponsors' confidence in those commanders' abilities and willingness to comply with the demands of the scenarios and overall event.  My observations have been that the overall commanders are set by the event sponsors, but arrange lower commands according to numbers, abilities, etc. of the participating units.

On a different tack, one thing that I have not yet settled in my mind is the concept of the "carpe eventum", or the idea of "an event within the event".  On the one hand, I can see particular groups running their camps the way they wish to by exceeding the event's standards while fully participating in the overall community activities of the event.  What I'm not so sure about is doing so in an isolated manner, or ignoring certain aspects of participation with other troops of the same side; in effect running a totally separate event with different goals on the same premises as the "main" event.  Something about that latter idea just doesn't ring true to me.

Hank,

While I still don't know what Chris Owens means by "set-up," your interpretation may be what he is trying to say in some strange way.

The Boonsboro Park site lent itself well to placing the flea market campers and the history-as-a-vapor folks in a less frequented cul-de-sac. That concept worked well in 2000, when the late Duke Culberson and I were the "Authenticity Gestapo," aka camp inspectors. That has to have been one of the most comical weekends ever spent at a mainstream event. Among other things, some of the young bucks ate so much cheese (good stuff, too) that they could have survived all of Winter 1864 2008 without visiting the sinks. Anyway, segregating the camps was a good idea, and it worked well for that event.

Bill will likely remember the acronym "MSR" from his days in the big green machine. Figuring out a "main supply route" that doesn't take away from the so-called period rush is sometimes a big challenge.

  RANT WARNING!

"There will always be those who will refuse to give up any comforts or amenities to more closely resemble actual CW soldiers, whether in camp or on campaign."

Here's where I have earned my moniker.  

   The majority of events, by far and away the majority of events, begin Friday evening and run through Sunday lunchtime. That equates to somewhere around 36 hours, give or take an hour or two.  Folks can’t “do without” for a day and a half? Wadda' ya' mean there's no battles?  You want me to be on Camp Guard? No way! Who cares if my friends and I all burn up in our sleep? I need my straw, canvas and alcohol.  

   For heavens sake, I’ve been wet to the bone weekend after weekend for literally years on end and I’ve dried out, every time. And, hold on to your seat; I’m not dead. Have I had a few hours here and there where I was a little uncomfortable? Yes, I’d be lying if I said no. But, as time and experience and common sense have moved forward, the uncomfortable time has become shorter and shorter.

   I’ve had the good luck, (or was it common sense), to be around and be mentored by some first rate folks who taught me first and foremost; “The boys of 186x weren’t stupid, here’s how they did it.” Is the whole “hobby” no more than a reflection on society as a whole? With “our;” “I have to have it now and I want you to just hand it to me mentality?”

   I have written many times, the difference is effort, plain and simple. Does the effort to attend an event go into loading 2000 pounds of stuff into a trailer or, rigging your shebang so you don’t get wet in the rain? There is no answer to this question. None on any internet forum. And, the topic has been discussed adnauseum with no result.

Civil War “reenacting” is a matter of opinion. And, we each and every one of us, has our own idea of what that should be. That’s why we so enjoy our hobby.


Rant over.

I can now honestly say I’ve been to an event where the authentic trash pile and "sink artwork" have become a topic of discussion.

Quote :

GrumpyDave wrote :   RANT WARNING! "There will always be those who will refuse to give up any comforts or amenities to more closely resemble actual CW soldiers, whether in camp or on campaign." Civil War “reenacting” is a matter of opinion. And, we each and every one of us, has our own idea of what that should be. That’s why we so enjoy our hobby. Rant over.

Grumpy,

You are right on both counts, and in many cases, authenticity is in the eye of the beholder. There are people who would say the 135th. Gettysburg was the most authentic event they ever attended, because, for once, the battle scenarios were at, or close to full scale. Never mind what was going on in the camps.

People go heavy camping for lots of reasons, health, family issues, or that's just how they enjoy the Hobby. I do a couple of local events with my Wife and Grand Children. We drag along two car loads of "stuff", including a wall tent and I wouldn't miss these events for the world.

Chris Anders' events attempt to address the needs of the majority of reenactors, so compromises are made. At the same time, the rules and guidelines of the event are inforced. The rules concerning women in the ranks being a very good example. Of course, the goals of the events are such that folks at both ends of the authenticity spectrum are not likely to be happy with the results. You cannot please all the people all the time, but the Ander's events seem to come closer than most.      

AHT vs the Gettysburg event.

Anybody got numbers for both events right now? Is this the year of the true swing over to the more HH event?

Sorry to have confused everyone with earlier questions. By "set-up" I meant.

CVG=Chris Anders

Longstreets Corps= Dave Cornett

Potomac Legion= Bill Watson.

and the folks that are working behind them etc.

How does a units "set-up" effect how it works and how does it effect these type events(So62, AHT, etc.)  

The main question I guess is if an NSA was started in the east with the goal of having a AHT type event system, who would lead it? And is leadership the major roadblock in that happening.(Not lack of quality leadership but conflicts of and about leadership).

Quote :

Charles Heath wrote : Hank, While I still don't know what Chris Owens means by "set-up," your interpretation may be what he is trying to say in some strange way. The Boonsboro Park site lent itself well to placing the flea market campers and the history-as-a-vapor folks in a less frequented cul-de-sac. That concept worked well in 2000, when the late Duke Culberson and I were the "Authenticity Gestapo," aka camp inspectors. That has to have been one of the most comical weekends ever spent at a mainstream event. Among other things, some of the young bucks ate so much cheese (good stuff, too) that they could have survived all of Winter 1864 2008 without visiting the sinks. Anyway, segregating the camps was a good idea, and it worked well for that event. Bill will likely remember the acronym "MSR" from his days in the big green machine. Figuring out a "main supply route" that doesn't take away from the so-called period rush is sometimes a big challenge.

 

--Last edited by ChrisOwens on 2008-03-14 09:52:56 --

FYI - Bill Watson is currently not a member of the Potomac Legion or, any of it's member units and, has not been associated with that organization for at the least two years.


Bill is a first rate guy.

I can't edit things from my work computer...

And, I don't think Bill would intentionally represent himself as such.

The PL contingent to "Andersburg" will be falling in with the Western Brigade, ala Rob Murray. I'm fairly sure James Owens of the PL and 1st Minnesota is taking the lead for the Potomac Legion at that event.


...could be wrong, have been before.