Have any of you ever attended an event with enforced standards? Not a good better best preferred choice of canteens or rifles or fatigue blouses.....those are GUIDELINES not minimum Standards. But specify a rifle, Frock Coat, buttons, etc....i.e. a Standard (like 10 yards to make a first down, not 8 or 6 yards although not preferred are still acceptable).

Are we ever going to be able to have an accurate, historically precise impression enforced by Standards?

Or is the cost simply too prohibitive?

RJ,

As has been stated many times before, the standards were set during the period 1861-1865, and the best we can do is to develop and implement guidelines.

It's easy enough to find a unit (federal) that wore the basic sack-forage cap uniform and all carried an easily obtainable canteen but, IMHO, it's the musket that would cause the most problems. I wish I had a couple of grand lying around so I could have three or four but, like me and for a lot of folks, it's just not financially possible. I have a 16 year old daughter. American Eagle takes presidence, lol. And, at this point in time, it think finances have a lot to do with the decreasing numbers in this hobby and the unwillingness to travel great distances to any event(more than 6 hours or so). Is the cost, gas(or train or air fare) + registration fee + meals + value of travel time + personal "worth or desire to attend" of the event = a 36 hour event? What do you think?  

--Last edited by grumpydave on 2007-08-30 07:03:06 --

Agree with Dave, the uniform itself for Union is not so much the problem, even buying the occasional special hat or NYS jacket etc. The various muskets that units used and whom is being protrayed is the problem for most all of us. I have an Enfield, Colt Contract and a Sharps which covers most events, but may not be the weapon used by the unit being shown.

Now Confederate uniforms may be a whole other story with all the different states etc.

Do you mean, are there events where the written rules are enforced absolutely with no mercy, no fudging, no letting anything slip by?

Or are there events where the rules are written precisely and everything is spelled out in full detail with no options or allowable but discouraged items?

You can have one without the other. The most draconian inspectors can't get everyone in the same coat if there are two coats options allowed in the rules. Specifying the same coat for everyone won't help if the inspectors are slack enough to let others in.

As far as having an accurate, precise impression enforced by standards... define "accurate." You're talking about a company/regiment/brigade, right?

By some definitions of "accurate," we can't even produce one individual with an "accurate" impression, so how can we ever expect a larger group? By other definitions, there are plenty of portrayals of larger groups that are already accurate.

Apparently, you're looking for something in between, more accurate than what you've seen, but currently achievable by individuals. Someone else might think what you'd find acceptable is still too inaccurate, while others might not see the importance of improving, especially if it meant smaller numbers.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

Hank,

Great answer!

Quote :

RJ Samp wrote : Are we ever going to be able to have an accurate, historically precise impression enforced by Standards?

RJ,

I don't think so. Forgetting the cost; at best, we have only an educated guess of what an accurate, historically precise impression might be.

This has nothing directly to do with the Civil War, but to make my point. I doubt you could do an accurate, historically precise impression of a trooper in the 173rd Airborne in 1970. Our equipment was made by different companies on different contracts and varied from man to man. Not to mention the items guys purchased on the economy or had sent from home. Individuals would modify their clothing and equipment to suit themselves. No two soldiers looked exactly alike in every detail.

A couple of years ago, a buddy and I were attending one of those all war living histories. We were critiquing these two young men doing a Viet Nam impression and we couldn't agree on what was exactly "correct" and everything these kids were using was Government issue. We finally figured it out. He was an "early war" vet, while I was "late war".

I'm not saying this as an excuse for anything goes. As a good friend of mine once said, "I know what's wrong, but I'm much less sure of what's right".  

Bill,

Need to switch to decaf in the afternoons?  

Bill, those posts were absolutely uniform. A few dozen more, and you'll have a matching company of them.

Maybe the keyboard campaigners can achieve what RJ wants to see, even if it can't be done in the field.  

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net  

--Last edited by hanktrent on 2007-08-30 15:18:48 --

Thanks Guys,

I wanted to make sure that everyone had an opportunity to read my post at their leasure and more than once!  

One nice thing about being a Mod. You get to clean up your own mistakes!  

We have come close a few times, back in the day when material culture was way out of proportion to the rest of the event.

RJ,

Join the Army.  ;) Now.  The only possible way to be absolutely correct would to be issued your kit.

Scenario X: I have absolutely everything repro correct, down to the buttons, socks, and underwear. First off, It's repro , not original. Strike 1. Secondly, suppose I have only a 7 rivet scabbard instead of a sewn or 2 rivet. Everything else is repro correct. That 1 anomaly precludes participation? Strike 2.
I absolutely believe in striving for perfection, but IMHO, that cannot be achieved by mortal man. Strike 3.

But let's keep striving to reach that unattainable perfection

Your servant,
Kevin Ellis,
26thNCT

Kevin,

Let me tell you how nice it is to see someone else post that.