Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

[markj]

Uh-oh. This one is going to go for a small fortune.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Wonderful-Civil-War-Band-CDV_W0QQitemZ120218549452QQihZ002QQcategoryZ36039QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Yours, &c.,

Mark Jaeger

[Greg Barnett]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

Where's the banjo?

[C. Hyson]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

What is in the hands of the second individual from the left? I can't quite tell.

[Hank Trent]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

What is in the hands of the second individual from the left? I can't quite tell.

I think it's a triangle of some sort.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[markj]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

Where's the banjo?

It was in the repair shop that day.

Yours, &c.,

Mark Jaeger

[Old Cremona]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Mark. Full-blown minstrel line-ups like this are rare for soldier bands. The only other one that comes to mind is the famous 99th Ohio Regiment photograph, which does have a banjo player, and all the other instruments shown here.

It's not terribly unusual to have a minstrel line-up without the banjo.. The minstrel show had come a long way from its more "primitive" beginnings in the early 1840's. Companies like Bryant's Minstrels in New York were all about big elaborate productions that didn't necessairly feature a banjo.

[BorderRuffian]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

It's not terribly unusual to have a minstrel line-up without the banjo.. The minstrel show had come a long way from its more "primitive" beginnings in the early 1840's. Companies like Bryant's Minstrels in New York were all about big elaborate productions that didn't necessairly feature a banjo.[/QUOTE]


Carl,

It might not be unusual,but I think my preference is for a banjo in the group.Banjo and fiddle just seem to go together,like peas and carrots.:)

[Danny]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

I think it's a triangle of some sort. Hank Trent hanktrent@voyager.net

Good call.

I've tried to enlarge and bring out detail (attached) on that 2nd-from- the- left player's instrument, and it does seem to be a triangle suspended by a fabric held in the player's grasp. The flat-sided appearance may be due to it's wavering a bit during the long exposure.

As interesting, for us striving to equip with period- type guitars, is the detail on the guitar strings (see attached) where they cross over the hole. It does not seem that the string thicknesses follow a logical progression from bass to treble. I suggest that could be because the first few are in fact metal-wound strings (on silk), while the next trebles are straight gut which appear thicker than the wound strings, proceeding to the lightest diameter gut.

That brings up an idea. Since period guitars were strung with up to four wound strings they may not have appeared much different on the bass side than a modern set of steel strings because you can't tell what they're wound on (period silk or modern steel) anyway.

Reenactor musicians struggle with gut because, even though many of us have guitars the right size and shape of CW-period guitars, they are actually of more modern construction designed for steel strings. Because heavier-braced tops don't produce loud enough vibrations when using gut strings, we come up short in the sound dept.

Follow my line of reasoning here: Is a solution to use modern wound string sets except for the two trebles which can be gut or faux-gut (Nylgut)? This may get us that better volume of sound without sacrificing a CW-period appearance. (i.e. again, nobody can see what the four wound strings are wound over).

(Carl - Before you hammer me on this I realize the BEST solution is to use a period reproduction guitar constructed for silk wound and gut strings, or to use an actual period guitar that still plays and doesn't have too much collector value. I'm just suggesting a way to raise the general standard in an affordable way).

- Dan Wykes

[Danny]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

I think it's a triangle of some sort.Hank Trenthanktrent@voyager.net

And the eBay item description sheds a little light:

"... Image shows a Yankee quintet boasting bones, triangle, fiddle, guitar, and tambourine... The triangle player made up for the daintiness of his instrument by smoking a seegar. They also sport a great assortment of jackets, trousers (at least two are re-enforced mounted pants), and footwear...The backmark is New Albany, Indiana, so these soldiers were probably serving across the river in Louisville, Kentucky. It came from an album with eight other New Albany backmarked CDV's. Although all eight are identified, none were in the same regiment or even from the same state..."

I also noticed the pinkie ring on the triangle player's hand. There's been discussion pro and con about how common was ring wearing in that time; by who, and did it typically indicate anything (memberships, marital status) or just jewelry,which finger etc. etc.

Dan Wykes

[markj]

Re: Soldier "Minstrel Band" cdv - EBay

And the eBay item description sheds a little light:

"... Image shows a Yankee quintet boasting bones, triangle, fiddle, guitar, and tambourine... The triangle player made up for the daintiness of his instrument by smoking a seegar. They also sport a great assortment of jackets, trousers (at least two are re-enforced mounted pants), and footwear...The backmark is New Albany, Indiana, so these soldiers were probably serving across the river in Louisville, Kentucky. It came from an album with eight other New Albany backmarked CDV's. Although all eight are identified, none were in the same regiment or even from the same state..."

I also noticed the pinkie ring on the triangle player's hand. There's been discussion pro and con about how common was ring wearing in that time; by who, and did it typically indicate anything (memberships, marital status) or just jewelry,which finger etc. etc.

Dan Wykes

The dealer's speculation is almost certainly wrong. There were, in fact, several military hospitals located in New Albany (at least six in operation by Spring 1863). There is no way to specifically ID the unit(s) to which these men belonged as they could have been from literally anywhere (thousands of troops from various states passed through New Albany during the war). However, I'd wager my bottom dollar that they were either a) assigned to a New Albany hospital, perhaps as medical attendants, or b) troops from one or more units sent to New Albany to recuperate from injuries or illness.

Regards,

Mark Jaeger