Hello to everyone,
I have a slight dilemma, that I hope I can get some help with.
The persona I am portraying was a colonel, that was a brigade commander( Krzyzanowski ,2nd. brigade, 3rd. div,11th corps). He was appointed brigadier general in 1862, but was not confirmed by the senate in the relevant session( Gen. Schurz was quoted as saying it was because nobody in the senate could pronounce his name) Eventually he was confirmed by Pres. Lincoln in Dec. 1864.
In a lot of correspondence, both military reports, and newspaper articles, he is always referred to as "general", from 1862 onwards.
Here is the problem for me. In one photo he is wearing a colonels uniform, with obvious sky blue pants, black leather belt etc. In another, much clearer, and apparently the more recent, his uniform consists of a colonels frock coat, but with a generals sword belt, and a generals forage cap. It is almost impossible to see his shoulder boards, to see if he in fact had the single star or the eagle. His trousers also look to be dark blue with a light blue stripe.
My question is this, do I dress exactly as the second photo would indicate, in which case I would probably have to carry a copy of the photo to prove the authenticity of the uniform, or do I dress as a colonel, with no general regalia. The third alternate is, was this photo taken before he had the chance to get his generals coat, and if so, should I just dress in BG uniform.
I await your knowledgeable and much neede comments.
Rom Muszynski/ Col. Krzyzanowski
I have a slight dilemma, that I hope I can get some help with.
The persona I am portraying was a colonel, that was a brigade commander( Krzyzanowski ,2nd. brigade, 3rd. div,11th corps). He was appointed brigadier general in 1862, but was not confirmed by the senate in the relevant session( Gen. Schurz was quoted as saying it was because nobody in the senate could pronounce his name) Eventually he was confirmed by Pres. Lincoln in Dec. 1864.
In a lot of correspondence, both military reports, and newspaper articles, he is always referred to as "general", from 1862 onwards.
Here is the problem for me. In one photo he is wearing a colonels uniform, with obvious sky blue pants, black leather belt etc. In another, much clearer, and apparently the more recent, his uniform consists of a colonels frock coat, but with a generals sword belt, and a generals forage cap. It is almost impossible to see his shoulder boards, to see if he in fact had the single star or the eagle. His trousers also look to be dark blue with a light blue stripe.
My question is this, do I dress exactly as the second photo would indicate, in which case I would probably have to carry a copy of the photo to prove the authenticity of the uniform, or do I dress as a colonel, with no general regalia. The third alternate is, was this photo taken before he had the chance to get his generals coat, and if so, should I just dress in BG uniform.
I await your knowledgeable and much neede comments.
Rom Muszynski/ Col. Krzyzanowski
Comment