To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

[Pvt_Sullivan]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Skip,

You were missed in May, but of all people both Greg and I understand the 'requirements of the service'. I am working with William Sharbough of the Citadel Faculty at this point and discussing the role and location of their living history group. I will contact you privately about your persepective concerning this group, This is my first attempt to work with them. I will say, I've reached out to them to include them as a portion of this event and that the primary focus is the events at Forts Sumter and Moultrie. The events surrounding the Star of the West are a portion I want to include and I've offerred my assistance to the Citadel in commemorating the event in a fitting manner. If you're falling on the grenande (sorry had to say that since you used a paratrooper reference) I can use some help with the Alumni Association.

Comrades,

I am going to off the gird for the Labor Weekend. I hope I've laid some of the concerns to rest that have been raised and that my candor in addressing them convinces you all as stakeholders in the living history community to positively support this effort. I am very excited about it and the Tramp Biigade is going to put its best effort in making it a success.

[littleforkranger]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Thanks Mr, Hicks, for the ringing endorsement. I'm glad for the clarifications noted which will assist me in making a good decision concerning my bunch who have to sacrifice much to attend events in Charleston, an 8 hour drive minimum for most of us. As a Marine I am sure you understand that as the leader of my group I must do my level best to ensure their welfare, safety, and when applicable....comfort..... to include a quality CW experience.

Thanks Mr. Berezuk for the detailed follow up I see you are no-one to be trifled with, historically speaking. Unfortunately, everything I said in my original post is true about the scandalous state of affairs in SC portrayal of history, and although this may be a classic case of "attending the wrong events" I do love SC dearly and would strongly desire to see accurate events which I can with clear conscience support. It appears Effusion of Blood may be just that. I would like to reserve the right to include this event in my research to propose to my group in early January when we begin our vetting process for 2011. I will take any further questions, concerns, thoughts to your listed email after carefully reviewing this thread to prevent clutter. Thanks again for all who have responded and helped me make good decisions.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Thanks Mr, Hicks, for the ringing endorsement. I'm glad for the clarifications noted which will assist me in making a good decision concerning my bunch who have to sacrifice much to attend events in Charleston, an 8 hour drive minimum for most of us. As a Marine I am sure you understand that as the leader of my group I must do my level best to ensure their welfare, safety, and when applicable....comfort..... to include a quality CW experience.

This ties in perfectly with another thread of late....if it is an approved EBUFU event and has been vetted by the proper folks why would you even question its focus on accurate historical representation and if it is a "quality CW" experience ?

Or do you think someone is going to share something with you in a thread contradictory or against that vetting panel ? Or someone is going share that it in reality it is total farbfest and the approving authority doesnt really know what they are doing when they approve EBUFU and create the schedule ?

Chris

[elcid01]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Stephen,
You might have covered this and i am sorry if i missed it but: who is your group? where might I have seen you at events on this site?

Cheers,

[littleforkranger]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

No, not really, Chris. I was just asking a question about Pete Berezuk's credentials in putting on authentic events which I am striving to improve to attend. As for the holy fathers of the EBFUBU and the Inner Council Most all the time they have shot me straight except sometimes when it rains or if it's too hot. The couple of folks who responded to my question made appropriate comments like gentlemen and I have been inquiring further through my meagre sources. I like what I found out about the Tramp Brigade even though their name kinda gives me the willys. If everything goes as stated it will be nice to attend an authentic event in South Carolina for a change as I whined about in the previous post. Also, if my personal vetting and subsequent participation turns up any of this EBFUBU is not what it's stated I'll not cocka-doodle-doo all over the internet about it like many on here do and make a big fuss about it like a spoiled brat..

Mr. Owens, I believe I served with you at So62 but I'm not certain about it. No matter as I think I'll be serving with you more if the terrorists don't keep you too long as it appears the coach may be putting me in more at some of the events you all attend. Good Luck all,

[Pvt_Sullivan]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

This ties in perfectly with another thread of late....if it is an approved EBUFU event and has been vetted by the proper folks why would you even question its focus on accurate historical representation and if it is a "quality CW" experience ?

Chris, You've made a good point here. This event has not yet been approved by the AC Event Focus Group and is properly questioned in the professional manner it has been so far so that the community can provide input on whether it should be included in the maximum efforts for the coming year. This is the sort of input the AC Event Focus Group needs.

I posted the information on 'To Prevent the Effusion of Blood" (TPEB) early in the normal planning cycle of events because it is scheduled to occur in a time frame outside of the usual April to September campaigning season and I would hope both the AC Event Focus Group and the larger Living History Community will view it postively and support it.

To maintain complete disclosure, the NPS has restricted us to 100 total participants. Our intent at this point is for 30 South Carolina Military Personnel, 58 Federals of the 1st US Artillery and 12 Civilians to participate. We are waiting on the decision of a respected brass band in regards to their decision to support this event, if they choose not to participate we will open the 8 boat-spaces (sorry for that nautical reference) to additional civilians for this event.

I know this event has been presented to the AC Event Focus Group for consideration. I am willing and desire to answer all concerns about the historical basis and focus of this planned event. I can state positively that the NPS has provided approval of this event and usage of their sites on Fort Moultrie and Fort Sumter during the scheduled dates. The Tramp Brigade is working with the Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie Trust, The Military College of South Carolina (The Citadel) as well as other local, state and federal stakeholders to recreate the events of December 1860 and January 1861 in a fitting manner.

[Pvt_Sullivan]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Comrades,

This has been alluded too, so I want to put this at rest. There is a threat of inclement weather in Charleston in January. Unless the NPS (the FINAL and ONLY decision authority for activites at Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie) require us to vacate the sites, we will remain and experience the situation the members of the 1st US Artillery and 1st Charleston Battalion did in December 1860 and January 1861.

Rest assured, my personal experiences as a logistician in the U.S. Marines will be executed to the fullest extent. If I have learned one thing during that time, as long as the men know you've done everything posible for thier comfort, they will accomplish the mission. We will have warming fires, hot-wets and shelter for all participants commensurate with the capabilites available in December of 1860. We will also have an evacuation plan for individuals identified by competent medical authority requiring it.

Our intent is to recreate the history of December 1860 and January 1861 as closely as possible (within good sense and decorum) for our personal experience and provide an example to the viewing public in commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the War Between the States.

[SCSecesh]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

To Mr. Dunn:
If you wish to relieve your concern about the use of the word "Tramp" I would suggest you pick up "Wandering to Glory: Confederate Veterans Remember Evan's Brigade" DeWitt Boyd Stone Jr. ISBN1-57003-433-8.
Excellent first person accounts of Nathan "Shanks" Evans and "The Tramp Brigade". Evans brigade was an independent unit and never permanently attached to a particular army suggesting the term "tramp". that said it numbered up to 8300 troops, nearly 10% of all South Carolinians who fought.

[Johnny Lloyd]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Being a Citadel guy myself... I need to be at this event... I'll be in-town for the Star of the West firing anyway. ;)

All the best- Johnny Lloyd:wink_smil

[David Fox]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Grandson of two Union soldiers, I fear I cannot let the inital premise of this thread go unchallenged, tho' applauding the anticipated reenactment event. ...Let's see: Anderson was in U.S. Fort Moultrie, where a lady with a picnic basket could enter the fort by walking up sand piled against the outer walls. He moved into U.S. Fort Sumter where she couldn't. He did this under the "pretense" as local U.S. commander he had the authority? No one in Washington, except secessionists still serving in the U.S. goverment whilst concurrently undermining it, ever denied to my knowledge that Anderson, in fact, had such authority. In doing so he converted his tiny garrison from helpless hostages (one Charlestonian famously opined South Carolina was "too large for an insane asylum", or words to that effect), and there was a deal of hysteria loose close around Moultie that Spring month. Somehow that move "painted secessionists into a corner"? These gentlemen had other options. Starving Anderson out was surely one. Living for a season with Union forces in Sumter was another; after all Castro has managed to coexist with Gitmo polluting his socialist paradise for fifty years. Unfortunately, neither of these courses of nonviolent action is "glorious". Notable secessionists, especially South Carolina secessions, wanted a war. In April, 1861 they needed North Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, and maybe Maryland and Missouri to climb however reluctantly aboard the secession wagon. A short, sharp war would achieve all or part of that. It would also make these politicians hallowed revolutionary heros of the new nation. Note Beauregard achieved instant Southern sainthood for "brilliantly" pummeling Anderson's tiny garrison into submission. That the firing upon fort Sumter was a political and not a military act is rather proven by the hand that allegedly pulled the first lanyard: it was attached to a Virginia secessionist agitator of decades-long enthusiasm, not to a soldier. Regrettably for the gentlemen who wilfully determined to cast the validity of secession as a concept upon that sea of misery that is war, actions sometimes have unintended consequences, such as the 2015 reenactment sometime to be planned of now General Anderson re-raising the Stars and Stripes over Sumter and a thoroughly vanquished South. Anyway, that's been my take over the nearly fifty years since I participated in the 100th anniversary reenactment of 1st Bull Run. I've always honoured the fighting men of both sides. I have less charitable views of the criminally irresponsible class who ordered that 10-inch mortar to send its ball arching over Sumter. But, as the feller sez, others' milage may vary.

[Pvt_Sullivan]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Mr. Fox,

This event is based on both views of the events. We will be honoring the service of both the Federal Garrison and the South Carolina Military during "To Prevent the Effusion of Blood". Mine and the Tramp Brigade Organization of Historical Interpreters view of Living History is that no matter the politics behind each side's view of the crisis, both are equally worthy of honor because they were fighting for their ideals and those ideals of freedom and home make up our current Nation's Ideals.

With that said, I've posted several period accounts already of the events from the Federal Side. I will be doing likewise with South Carolina Accounts over the next few months so those interested in participating can read them, draw their own conclusions and come and participate if they chose.

It was my words and my words alone as a student of Military History that you quote as incorrect ("painted the south into a corner"). In my opinion, Major Anderson's decision to abandon Fort Moultrie was militarily and politically correct given his incomplete orders of the time and his action forced Southern reaction to his move. If he had remained at Moultrie the War very likely would have started much sooner and much bloodier than it did through any number of unforeseen actions by either party. His move force first South Carolina and then the new Confederacy to choose a plan of action, because inaction in the 19th Century Mind was more damning than rash or bold action. And that is all I meant by those words.

With that said, there is no need to denigrate the sacrifice of any of the participants in the struggle and I hope the larger living history will see "To Prevent the Effusion of Blood" as a unique honoring of the sacrifice of all the participants in the War Between the States.

[David Fox]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

Well said, Pvt Sullivan. I'm not sure, however, it is other than objective to note there is something poignantly reprehensible in combinations of mature persons intentionally and unnecessarily choosing war as a preferred course of action when they are so divorced from reality as to believe one could mop-up the resultant "effusion of blood" with a pocket handkerchief, as one of the war's instigators famously predicted.

[Michael Comer]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

This has been alluded too, so I want to put this at rest. There is a threat of inclement weather in Charleston in January. Unless the NPS (the FINAL and ONLY decision authority for activites at Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie) require us to vacate the sites, we will remain and experience the situation the members of the 1st US Artillery and 1st Charleston Battalion did in December 1860 and January 1861.

You telling me that this event is more than a year away and people are already worrying about the weather?! :sarcastic

[Pvt_Sullivan]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

You telling me that this event is more than a year away and people are already worrying about the weather?! :sarcastic

No complaints yet Mike, but I did want to put out that our goal is to experience the situation in all its possible glory and to put the thought in people's minds that although it is Charleston South Carolina, it is going to be in January and every participant needs to plan for being out side in the Cold and Wet. Overcoats, Mittens, Scarves, Caps, Rain Capes, all are documenented to the period of the event, as well as the cold and scarcity of firewood at Fort Sumter.

The best thing about both Forts Moultrie and Sumter is the availablity of covered casemates and sally ports to escape inclement weather.

[Michael Comer]

Re: To Prevent the Effusion of Blood - 7 to 9 January 2011

It will be well worth the potential cold and wet to take part in the event in my opinion.