Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

    Fellow History Buff’s,

    There seems to be many comments on the discussion board stating things such as “I have not seen any photographs or read any written accounts of this being done, so there for it must be Farb.” This first rule of critical thinking is not to jump to conclusions but have an open mind and be willing to explore all paths to the truth.

    One photograph or lack of photograph should not be used as the only research tool to dismiss or agree with any theory. Photography was still in its infancy during the Civil War. We now know that many of the battlefield photos showing combat deaths were staged. Action photos were near impossible to take given the technology of the times and the equipment. Many personal photos were taken in studios using props with extra guns, knives, etc. No solider ever posed with a kitten on his lap and a flower in his hand. It’s not manly and not how you want to be remembered when you’re talking to your grandchildren about your participation in the war.

    When reading letters from soldiers and after action reports we must also use caution when interpreting the comments as factual and then basing our hypothesis on this evidence only. How many soldiers write home trying to reassure their loved ones they are fine and far from harm, when in fact their unit is getting ready to form and march into battle.

    After action reports from officers need to also be questioned and should be supported by other independent sources. How many after action reports have you read that an officer admits he totally blundered or froze up? It’s always they fought bravely defending against overwhelming odds and beat back the attack several times before deaths and injuries forced them to retreat. That’s a fancy way of saying that our enemies kicked the crap out of us during this battle. It’s too bad that military communications are often written with a 20/20 hindsight of protecting one’s own status because this leaves room for several different interpretations of events.

    How many funerals and eulogies have you heard in your life time? I have never heard anyone at a funeral stand up and say “Ben was a real idiot, who was afraid to speak his mind”. You often hear politically correct terminology as to not offend someone. You then hear things like “Ben was kind and gentle, and he avoided confrontations because he respects his fellow man”. I just caution using only “at-a boy” writings in any form as the only evidence to support your argument or position.

    Remember anyone can create a website and place whatever information on the web. Try and stick to what is referred to as scholarly sources of information. These are items that are authentic, in national and state archives, and most important in educational journals which have undergone a peer-review from experts, practitioners, and scholars in a particular discipline. These are all good staring points to your Civil War research and questions.

    We have all played the phone game in which we gather in a circle and someone whispers in the other persons ear a short story. That persons then whispers to the person on the other side of them until the message is passed around the entire circle. The last person then tells everyone out load what they heard. The original message is then compared to what the last person just told the group. The original story is lost and additions and deletions are made when we communicate to each other. Just because you hear a camp rumor doesn’t make it fact. Always support your position with a few independent sources then analysis the findings and come to a logical conclusion.

    Often in studying history we must bridge a gap of information based on our own experience in knowledge in the matters. This is find as long as you leave the reader with the facts that lead you to make this conclusion.

    These tips and comments are only meant to make you stop before jumping to conclusions based on one photo, one personal letter, or one military report. As investigators of history, we can never have enough evidence.

    The critical thinking process is a never ending matrix. Good luck with your research and please share your discovers with the group.
    Respectfully,
    Mark Bond
    [email]profbond@cox.net[/email]
    Federal Artillery

  • #2
    Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

    Mark,

    You are correct we must be careful not to jump to conclusions. Having said that many on this board spend more time in research than reenacting. When someone asks about a practice they see at events that one has not been able to document through any source so far then a researcher must draw some sort of conclusion from that. We often work on the PEC principle, i.e, what was plain everyday common. There are exceptions to every rule, the spotted pants that many refer to as Jaguar pants are one such example; yes they existed but they were quite rare and likely unique. Were there strange and eccentric things done during the war? Sure but unless we can document such actions it is really conjecture on our part. To simply say I heard such and such was done and not provide evidence simply will not work. I presume what prompted you to put this challenge out was my comment on friction primers on hats since the above quote you used is almost verbatim (except I abstain from using the word Farb). The point I was trying to make was that in all the research I have done through personal accounts, looking through original collections, looking through period photographs, I have yet to see any evidence the practice of decorating one's cap with spent primers was done. With this basis of knowledge I drew the conclusion that this is likely a more modern practice for reasons I do not know. Now if anyone provides documentation to the opposite I am glad to admit I am wrong and change my opinion.

    Now you mention using caution even in our researach and you are correct but we must use what is available (and there is a wealth of research material available). Now you are correct AARs and written accounts are often somewhat misleading, but if you read multiple ones from the same event on both sides and see common threads then you are on to something. This period of time is actually quite well documented.

    Understand that I take no offence to this question as it is a good one and it serves a s a very good reminder to allof us to always make sure we do the research.
    Robert Collett
    8th FL / 13th IN
    Armory Guards
    WIG

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

      Robert,

      Hello!

      I’m getting use to using the AC discussion board and I’m trying not to duplicate comments. For that reason, I have been busy reading many of the threads and there is some excellent information being exchanged.

      I just saw a re-occurring theme throughout the discussion board on people dismissing or agreeing with a trend based on their comments of “I saw a photo once, or I have never seen that in a period photo”. I wasn’t singling out anyone because I saw this trend over and over as I read.

      I just want to scare away the research complacency monster that I saw occurring frequently. To be honest it might have been what I call the “Dog Pile Affect”. Many people post in agreement without having any real knowledge just to be accepted into the culture. It is human nature to want to be accepted to a peer group you feel have common interest.

      I realize I am a straight forward person in my communications. I don’t try to be political correct, but honest as to how I see it. As a former NCO and retired police sergeant, I find old habits die hard, if they do at all.

      I’m glad you took my comments in the spirit that they were attended.
      Respectfully,
      Mark Bond
      [email]profbond@cox.net[/email]
      Federal Artillery

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

        Mark,
        Interesting commentary. Actual quality research is always a good idea.

        And speaking of friction primers, Have you found the correct citation for your sources claiming that the reenactor practice of wearing friction primers on their hats dates to the Mexican war. I attempted to retrieve it through ProQuest but they had no record of the article you cited in their database. Likewise I was unable to obtain the publication via interlibrary loan "due to an incorrect citation."

        Sources purported to be documented in credible academic databases are only of use when they can be retrieved.

        > Jim and Troy,
        >
        > I'm glad we can be honest and open. I accept the challenge and have a
        > few of my own.
        >
        > Here is the scholarly resource that this information came from.
        > ProQuest database is a peer-reviewed academic database with credible
        > information that hundreds of college and universities have students
        > use to support their academic positions or arguments. There are
        > research projects, articles, dissertations, etc. within the database
        > that can be retrieved.
        >
        > Lanhiem, F.G. (1997, September). Uniforms, insignia, & traditions of
        > the Civil War. Civil War Experience, 74, (1), 39-52. Retrieved
        > October 4, 2006, from ProQuest database.
        >
        > I guess my question to Jim is why not inquire with the 1st Texas
        > Light Artillery. Why not ask them directly in the discussion board
        > that the photo was posted? Why ask this discussion board about
        > another discussion board when you know that there is a difference on
        > philosophies and there has been childish name calling from both
        > parties, unless you wanted to stir the pot.
        >
        > The friction primer tradition started in the Mexican War and was
        > carried over. There are many old and new traditions of artillery and
        > Saint Barbara traditions. They may not be officially sanctioned by
        > the military but they still are traditions. A good example is when I
        > graduated Airborne School in 1980. The Black Hat (Airborne
        > Instructors) punched my wings into my chest. They called this blood
        > wings. The Army doesn't approve but yet the tradition is carried on
        > still.
        >
        > I don't mind being challenged, because the information I supply is
        > documented in credible academic databases or I wouldn't comment on
        > it. I just hope that your challenges are based on truly wanting the
        > information to expand your knowledge rather then containing the
        > friction in AZ CW reenacting.
        >
        > Mark B
        Troy Groves "AZReenactor"
        1st California Infantry Volunteers, Co. C

        So, you think that scrap in the East is rough, do you?
        Ever consider what it means to be captured by Apaches?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

          Although newspapers are notorious for over sensationalizing news in order to sell papers... I really encourage you to look into news.google.com click on archives... it has many newspapers available for you to purchase copies dating back to the 1850s
          2

          Brett "Homer" Keen
          Chicago
          [I]"Excessively spirited in the pranks and mischief of the soldier"[/I]

          OEF 03-04 [I]Truth Through Exploitation[/I]

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

            Agree, "quality reserach is always a good idea." Latin saying...Quoque plures fossor, non satis ambitus. Too many clowns, not enough circuses.

            Offering insight without any sound basis in period research, the exchange of "knowledge" becomes an exchange of ignorance which when repeated often enough becomes the conventional wisdom. There are many examples of this...the "thong tied Enfield sling" being one that comes immediately to mind.
            Craig L Barry
            Editor, The Watchdog, a non-profit 501[c]3
            Co-author (with David Burt) Suppliers to the Confederacy
            Author, The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy
            Member, Company of Military Historians

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

              Troy,

              I told you before to contact Norwich University.
              Last edited by AZReenactor; 07-23-2007, 03:27 PM. Reason: Personal off topic remarks removed.
              Respectfully,
              Mark Bond
              [email]profbond@cox.net[/email]
              Federal Artillery

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

                Mark,

                As a newbie to this wing of the hobby, you'll no doubt find Curt Schmidt's multipart article explaining "how to do research" a very handy and timely piece of reading. Yes, this is a big hint, and the article is still available here on the AC Forum.
                [B]Charles Heath[/B]
                [EMAIL="heath9999@aol.com"]heath9999@aol.com[/EMAIL]

                [URL="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Spanglers_Spring_Living_History/"]12 - 14 Jun 09 Hoosiers at Gettysburg[/URL]

                [EMAIL="heath9999@aol.com"]17-19 Jul 09 Mumford/GCV Carpe Eventum [/EMAIL]

                [EMAIL="beatlefans1@verizon.net"]31 Jul - 2 Aug 09 Texans at Gettysburg [/EMAIL]

                [EMAIL="JDO@npmhu.org"] 11-13 Sep 09 Fortress Monroe [/EMAIL]

                [URL="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Elmira_Death_March/?yguid=25647636"]2-4 Oct 09 Death March XI - Corduroy[/URL]

                [EMAIL="oldsoldier51@yahoo.com"] G'burg Memorial March [/EMAIL]

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

                  No solider ever posed with a kitten on his lap and a flower in his hand. It’s not manly and not how you want to be remembered when you’re talking to your grandchildren about your participation in the war.
                  Heads up. Isn't this the sort of presupposition you're warning others to avoid?
                  [FONT=Times New Roman]-steve tyler-[/FONT]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

                    Hallo!

                    "No solider ever posed with a kitten on his lap and a flower in his hand. It’s not manly and not how you want to be remembered when you’re talking to your grandchildren about your participation in the war."

                    Intent here aside... ;)

                    Yes, as a research tool, certain words or "absolutes" are best avoided.... "no," "none," "never," "always", "every," "all," etc.

                    Dogs and cats in solider images generally tend to have to wait a few more years until cameras were fast enough to capture an animal before it moved. ;) :)
                    (And often appear as blurs when they are captured in earlier images. I was just looking at a "cowboy" image where a dog was interested in what was falling or recently fell from behind the horse...)

                    Seriously... the points here should be well taken. One key feature of useful or applicable research lies with the concepts of Validity and Reliability.
                    To steal from Ian Flemming.. "Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence."
                    Period photographs are great tools, but they rarely if ever, convey intent and circumstance. "Repeated frequency" of something increases the probability that the actual thing observed is not just a happenstance or one time contrived occurance. "Research" literature and art or science (another discussion) speaks to tables of numbers needed in the study or observed pool in order to achieve acceptable Validity and Reliability.

                    IMHO, where it complicates our lives is when we explore with "research" to make observations and discoveries as to "Life in the Past."
                    AND THEN seek to take what we have learned and apply it to our impressions and activities.

                    And last. IMHO, a single image should not be used to make a universal statement... but at the same time should not be entirely discounted either IF one chooses to recreate or portray the visual image of the person being photographed with or without possibly knowing the intent, circumstance(s), time, and place of the sitting.

                    (With no comment on Captain Richardson... ;) :) )

                    As always, others' mileage will vary...

                    Curt
                    Past Imperfect Mess
                    Proud Member of the Sliding Scale of Imperfection Rifles
                    Curt Schmidt
                    In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt

                    -Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
                    -Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
                    -Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
                    -Vastly Ignorant
                    -Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

                      So, if any researcher isn't supposed to base his or her conclusions on the documentation available and a reasonable search for additional facts, then what constitutes "documented evidence"? At some point the line needs to be drawn, at least for that time and to be potentially revisited later, based on what documentation is available. Research may never be definitive enough to keep reenactors from arguing with each other.

                      That said, I am not sure of the purpose of the original post on this thread. Is it to keep folks from making conclusions against a number of common--and pleas forgive my use of this term--"reenatorisms" because some soldier out there might possibly have done "it" at some time or another?

                      Lack of documentation does not, itself, constitute evidence of anything.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

                        I think this is an important topic and its an issue we've dealt with for a number of years here on the AC.

                        The topics we converse in require attention to detail and proper citations. Mark is right, we can not rely on unsupported anecdotal remarks as anything more than hearsay - that doesn't mean they are untrue, it just means they are not necessarily supportable by the evidence at hand. Curt has written an excellent series of articles on how to do research which appear in the Camp of Instruction folder here on the AC.

                        Part of the problem however is in your greeting itself - history buffs. We need to stop thinking of ourselves as history buffs and think of ourselves, and behave as historians. A lot of us have degrees in U.S. History and Social Studies Education, I happen to have both. However, even if one doesn't have the formal coursework and is a amateur historian in the true sense, one can still employ the same methodology that professional historians do. And that is the kind of environement that we've long attempted to foster here.
                        Paul Calloway
                        Proudest Member of the Tar Water Mess
                        Proud Member of the GHTI
                        Member, Civil War Preservation Trust
                        Wayne #25, F&AM

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Keeping research real and avoiding bad research habits.

                          Hallo!

                          "So, if any researcher isn't supposed to base his or her conclusions on the documentation available and a reasonable search for additional facts, then what constitutes "documented evidence"? At some point the line needs to be drawn, at least for that time and to be potentially revisited later, based on what documentation is available. Research may never be definitive enough to keep reenactors from arguing with each other."

                          IMHO....

                          "Documented evidence" is what supports the hypothesis, analysis, deduction, induction, inference, or practice drawn from what has been found/observed.
                          It remains what is "documented" as a Resting Point of our Collective Knowledge until new or further research resets the bar.

                          (Sometimes we get it right, sometimes we have it wrong.)

                          And yes indeed.

                          Research that yields data, findings, specimens can be done by anyone, anywhere, any time.
                          IMHO, the difference is only is whether what is found is shared or published in some way.
                          As the saying goes, a lit candle hidden under a bushel...

                          Curt
                          Curt Schmidt
                          In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt

                          -Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
                          -Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
                          -Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
                          -Vastly Ignorant
                          -Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X