refugee images

[PogueMahone]

Found this on the Fort Ward, City of Alexandria, VA, website.



There is no artist credit, publication date or publication information.

Does anyone know anything about this image? I've never seen it before.

[vbetts]

Re: refugee images

Illustrated London News, August 29, 1863. Refugees encamped in woods near Vicksburg, MS.

Vicki BEtts

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

And this sign:



is in Vanderburgh, In.

Does anyone have any information on this refugee camp?

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

Thanks, Vicki!

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

Joe and I have been corresponding on this topic a little, so I hope he won't mind a little hijack of this thread. In looking up more "refugee" images, there's something that puzzles me.

Here are some examples:

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1864/november/refugees.htm

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1864/may/louisiana-swamp.htm

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1864/civil-war-refugees.htm

1865 painting called "union refugees":

http://images.artnet.com/artwork_images/1065/187492.jpg

Except for the last picture, in which a boy is carrying a bundle on a stick and a man is carrying a pack, no one is personally carrying anything! Even in the last picture, they're clearly not carrying enough to support all of them for even a day.

And I'm not sure whether stuff is being transported at all. In the first picture, there's an ox packed with stuff and a horse with a little, but still not very much for the large number of people. In the second one, a man might be ponying a pack horse, but again, not much for the number of people. They have a pot on a tripod, but no visible shelter. In the other Harper's image, they've got a chair and big trunks, but no visible means to transport them.

At events, "refugees" on foot like these clearly have the look of the people pretty good, but we're weighed down like pack mules, carrying our stuff. I don't know what's being implied by these pictures. Were the refugees going to cities or other homes or places where they wouldn't need things? Were they being followed or preceded by wagons or other pack animals?

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Prodical Reb]

Re: refugee images

And this sign:



is in Vanderburgh, In.

Does anyone have any information on this refugee camp?

Joe,
I'm from originally from E'ville. This area is not to far from the old river front(now Dress Plaza). It is also the "wrong side of the tracks" so to speak; pretty rough neighborhood. It is also not far from downtown E'ville. The Reitz Home (I think) was a station on the Underground railroad which is close to this area also

http://vchs.evansville.net/civilwar/civilwarpres.pdf

This is a link from the Vanderburg County Historical Society about E'ville and the Civil War. has some goods pics and illustrations of Tinclads, Timberclads, and the Naval Hospital ship.

[Chip]

Re: refugee images

Many of the civilians who portray refugees seem to gravitate towards doing a sudden flight impression. In other words, folks who would leave their homes, farms and towns in a real hurry. In reality, a substantial number of refugees cleared out well before they had enemy troops coming down their road.

And where would they end up? If you were a refugee yourself, wouldn't you head to a town or an area where you had relatives, friends or at least somewhere where you could obtain decent housing rather than living out in a tent?

Many diaries speak of refugees living in hotels, renting or living in the homes of soldiers who were at the front, living in vacant schools and college buildings, etc. etc. Any vacant building was a potential refugee respite.

Chip Uhlir
SCAR

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

Michael,

Thanks. I'd like to know more about this apparently government sponsored refugee camp. Tents or barracks? Was there a waiting list? Were men and women segregated? Who was responsible for feeding them? Was there a school? Was storage available for personal property they had brought with them or was it disallowed?

I think it has the potential for an interesting civilian event. It would be the equivalent of all the campaigners doing a garrison impression and suddenly needing all that shiney stuff and tents.

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

I'd like to know more about this apparently government sponsored refugee camp.

Here's a start. It's a history of the area written by the man who was in charge of the camp, Joseph P. Elliott, quartermaster of the Second Indiana Legion. There's only a paragraph on the camp, but it does mention they were living in tents and looks like it only lasted one winter. Not much, but it might be a start.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[gilham]

Re: refugee images

Dose it seem strange to any one else that in the three Harpers pics Hank posted most of the refugees are men.
In pic 1 9 men 4 women and 4 children
in pic 2 10 men and 1 women
in pic 3 6 women 2 children

That seems like too many men.

[Virginia Mescher]

Re: refugee images

Joe and I have been corresponding on this topic a little, so I hope he won't mind a little hijack of this thread. In looking up more "refugee" images, there's something that puzzles me.

Except for the last picture, in which a boy is carrying a bundle on a stick and a man is carrying a pack, no one is personally carrying anything! Even in the last picture, they're clearly not carrying enough to support all of them for even a day.

And I'm not sure whether stuff is being transported at all. In the first picture, there's an ox packed with stuff and a horse with a little, but still not very much for the large number of people. In the second one, a man might be ponying a pack horse, but again, not much for the number of people. They have a pot on a tripod, but no visible shelter. In the other Harper's image, they've got a chair and big trunks, but no visible means to transport them.

At events, "refugees" on foot like these clearly have the look of the people pretty good, but we're weighed down like pack mules, carrying our stuff. I don't know what's being implied by these pictures. Were the refugees going to cities or other homes or places where they wouldn't need things? Were they being followed or preceded by wagons or other pack animals?

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

I haven't studied refugee life much but wouldn't it be better to study the the words of the refugees rather than artist's depictions of refugees? I realize that the Harper's artists were sketching what they saw but oftentimes they used artistic license. I don't know how many photographs there are of refugee camps.

There are many diaries written by refugees that tell their stories and while they might not have actual images, they do describe the circumstances of their life. Mary Elizabeth Massey wrote Refugee Life in the Confederacy in 1964 and used numerous unpublished manuscripts, diaries, and letters plus the many published ones that recount the refugee's experiences during the war. The book is generously endnoted and the bibliography is extensive.

Reading the accounts of the refugees might give more accurate information of the circumstances of their flight, what they took with them, how they traveled, where they stayed, etc.

Vicki Betts newspaper site would also have information on refugees.

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

Many of the civilians who portray refugees seem to gravitate towards doing a sudden flight impression. In other words, folks who would leave their homes, farms and towns in a real hurry. In reality, a substantial number of refugees cleared out well before they had enemy troops coming down their road.

So, are you saying the majority of civilian refugee impressions are done incorrectly? There should be mostly refugees who have packed with care and deliberately moved off?

Comparing refugee impressions I've seen with the images here, I'd say most reenactors are either carrying too much for the "sudden flight" impression and not enough for the "cleared out" impression. But, that is because reenactors are having to make accommodations to their portrayal to overcome obstacles that the originals didn't have to take into consideration. Most of your "sudden flight" types would have expected to be home again in a few days and their destination was probably only a day's ride/walk away. They didn't expect to be camping overnight on the side of the road. They didn't expect to be cooking meals over an open fire for several days. They did expect to be able to stop at any house or stream and get a drink of water. But reenactors have to carrying bedding, food and mess gear and have water containers and stay near potable water.

Few reenactors have the wagon and livestock to pull it to pull off the "cleared out" impression and fewer still would want to lug all the necessary household items to fill the wagon just to make the impression right.

And where would they end up? If you were a refugee yourself, wouldn't you head to a town or an area where you had relatives, friends or at least somewhere where you could obtain decent housing rather than living out in a tent?

I don't doubt for a moment that the destination of choice for the "sudden flight" refugee was family in a nearby neighborhood or friends in the next town. But what if you don't have those options? You go where you feel it is safe and seek what shelter is available, be it tents the county provides or renting a room.

The "cleared out" refugee probably had a destination in mind, a route chosen and a "plan". I expect they stayed in a variety of lodgings before they got where they were going, including camping overnight where no other shelter was available.

Many diaries speak of refugees living in hotels, renting or living in the homes of soldiers who were at the front, living in vacant schools and college buildings, etc. etc. Any vacant building was a potential refugee respite.

The problem reenactors face is a distinct lack of "vacant buildings" at the majority of reenactment sites.

And what of those that chose not to leave their property? This impression just isn't done enough. But, again, few opportunities present themselves for reenactors to portray a property owner defending a home or seeking protection from the officers because there is no house for them to stand before and say "This is mine, you can't have it!"

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

I haven't studied refugee life much but wouldn't it be better to study the the words of the refugees rather than artist's depictions of refugees? I realize that the Harper's artists were sketching what they saw but oftentimes they used artistic license. I don't know how many photographs there are of refugee camps.

People always talk about artistic license, but I think one thing that's overlooked, is that the artists had to get their ideas from somewhere, and it was untainted by modern bias. If there was a period cliche about what refugees looked like, where did that come from and why? Why does it differ from our cliche today?

The only photos I can think of, showing refugees actually on the road, also don't show individuals carrying significant amounts of things on their person. All the stuff is packed in wagons, which make me wonder if the implication is that wagons carried the stuff, if they had stuff along.

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.00218

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.01161

http://www.kathleenernst.com/Kathleen_Ernst/Hearts_of_Stone_Story_files/Civil%20War%20Refugees%20webB.jpg

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

But, that is because reenactors are having to make accommodations to their portrayal to overcome obstacles that the originals didn't have to take into consideration.

I think that's absolutely it. Due to modern practical constraints, the best that reenactors can do, in a lot of cases, is say, If I'm going to portray this unusual subset, what was the most typical for that subset? And even then, there may need to be compromises for practical reasons, but we can at least try to figure out what would have happened historically, and realize what the compromises are.

The problem reenactors face is a distinct lack of "vacant buildings" at the majority of reenactment sites.

And what of those that chose not to leave their property? This impression just isn't done enough. But, again, few opportunities present themselves for reenactors to portray a property owner defending a home or seeking protection from the officers because there is no house for them to stand before and say "This is mine, you can't have it!"

Yep.

In one sense, the most realistic event I've ever done as a refugee (actually as a newly-released political prisoner on the road home), was a mingling of modern and period, because it was the only way to have homes, structures, people willing to give a hand-out, and so forth, over an 85-mile stretch.

We carried some food, got a few free meals, paid for others, camped under a period aqueduct in the rain with strangers, and at the end, got an offer to sleep by the fireplace in the back of an old country store. We still carried enough to be self-sufficient, because we were limited by how much we could interact with the outside world and still sustain "suspension of disbelief," but it gave a sense of what a wide and unpredictable world would have been out there.

To set up even a small, controlled period world like that at a reenactment requires major pre-planning and some luck or manpower to have buildings on site. It's done--heck, I'm trying to decide right now how much I can afford not to take to an event in the future, because what if all the reenactors at the period houses turn me down for a hand out or shelter? But it's never going to be common or easy to reenact in large numbers.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

People always talk about artistic license, but I think one thing that's overlooked, is that the artists had to get their ideas from somewhere, and it was untainted by modern bias. If there was a period cliche about what refugees looked like, where did that come from and why? Why does it differ from our cliche today?

The only photos I can think of, showing refugees actually on the road, also don't show individuals carrying significant amounts of things on their person. All the stuff is packed in wagons, which make me wonder if the implication is that wagons carried the stuff, if they had stuff along.

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.00218

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.01161

http://www.kathleenernst.com/Kathleen_Ernst/Hearts_of_Stone_Story_files/Civil%20War%20Refugees%20webB.jpg

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

I think there is artistic license taken to make the subject (Union refugees) seem sympathetic to the audience. I see some focus on the people, not the things. And we don't know which things belong to the refugees in the images and which were incidental to the location.

I also think something that needs to be addressed is the types of people in the photographic images. None seem to be "planters". Perhaps with no substantial wealth or property to protect, it was the better decision to take their few personal belongings and escape to a new place?

And even in the sketch images, the people seem to be common folk. I suspect the artist would want them to appear common to build empathy for the sad refugee.

I'll add another image from the LOC to the mix:



This seems to be a classic example of "sudden flight". Many on foot and some mounted. Some with no luggage and some with the whole house. LOC link is: http://memory.loc.gov/service/pnp/cp...0/3f03824r.jpg