refugee images

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

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

That's a dandy image, and a lot more like what one sees at reenactments.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Drygoods]

Re: refugee images

[QUOTE=Hank Trent;143925 Even in the last picture, they're clearly not carrying enough to support all of them for even a day.Hank TrentQUOTE]

Mr. Trent, I wonder if the message from those pictures is that people were left with nothing because of the war, as though the army arrived, burned their homes, and left them with nothing but the clothes on their backs. :(Just a thought, as often artwork is not accurate but done to imply a hidden message for the audience.

[Chip]

Re: refugee images

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?

I would rather say that there is an over-representation of refugees who became almost immediately destitute, while there is an under-representation of those who moved to new locations without extreme hardship.

Socio-economic class was certainly a major factor along with other factors specific to each family.

I live in a community in Georgia where there were many documented refugees.
(documented in church registries, female institute records, etc.)
Many initially ended up in hotels and at the local female institute and eventually in college boarding quarters. From these living accomodatons, many rented rooms from local families and some even purchased residences.

[Becky Morgan]

Re: refugee images

I see good points all around here, a couple of which probably deserve their own discussions (period buildings, for one, and the accuracy, or not, of period sketches, for another.) However, even though I'm temporarily stuck keyboard campaigning...

Excuse a modern example for a moment, but it's one with which most of us will have had experience: We've had to leave our house several times because of weather that sprung up unexpectedly, and several times we've been asked to get ready to leave because of expected weather or a chemical spill. It's a whole different thing to know the river *may* be up enough to cause problems in a couple of days than it is to hear the alert tones go out for a chlorine cloud headed your way. There's probably some known hazard where you live or work, so you may have had to make a quick exit too. If you have warning, you throw everything you really want to keep into your means of transportation, and you take the vehicle with you so it doesn't get ruined or stolen. If you don't have much warning, you grab your kids and what you can stuff into your pockets and run, or, if you can get to your vehicle, drive. It's human nature.

How would that play out Back When? On one hand, say the armies have been in the area for a couple of weeks or months, making increasingly ominous noises, and you realize your farm or town is about to be Ground Zero. There's a great deal of distress involved, and people around you are doubtless acting strange, but you have time to pack the wagon if you have one, or get on the train, or hire some kind of transport. We know this is what happened to Washington, DC every time there was an invasion scare: shopkeepers emptied their shelves and sent their wagons into the Maryland countryside or loaded boxcars to be sent north. Rich people made their exits gracefully, poor people not so much (often because they'd been too busy packing for the rich to go home and grab their own stuff.)

Now, consider unexpected flight: an army you thought was holding the enemy at bay is overrun and the other side is chasing them, the shelling of what you thought was a decently distant battle has suddenly shifted to your immediate vicinity, or a raid pops up seemingly from nowhere. You grab your kids, what you can stuff into any nearby container, and your horse, if you have one, and you go. Why do I mention the horse and wagon if you have one? For one thing, you'll be able to move faster and farther. For another, if you leave your horse or horses, they're apt to get killed or confiscated. If you have to take off on foot, you'll probably jump on with the first person who offers you a ride. In either case, if you've stopped for the night and a sketch artist catches up with you, you aren't apt to be carrying much in your arms or on your back. If the artist sees the road with people still in flight, he will draw the man lugging a stuffed gunnysack or the woman leading a toddler and carrying a baby.

[Drygoods]

Re: refugee images

Miss Morgan,

Some excellent points. I don't think that most people would understand the experience of having to flee unless they had been asked to do so in real life. Myself, I've had to do this because of forest fires and earthquakes. In the modern world, what happens when a forced evacuation happens and you pack your car with family and what you think is most valuable to you, and then imagine having to leave those things on the road and simply walk out and join a bunch of others on a bus! It's terrifying, and a good lesson that I learned to always be prepared, to walk away at a moment's notice.

I imagine that this same scenario happened repeatedly to some ancestors, and the decision of what to take, or wear away is a bit different than some might expect. For instance, and Moderators please excuse this bit of drift but I use it as an example, I've heard that some who went to the WW2 concentration camps wore fine clothing and jewelry, and not the ragged look that one sees in movies. Well, why would you leave behind your best clothing? If you had less than an hour to pack wouldn't you take what would keep you most warm, or what was best and could easily be sold for a profit?

If it were me, I'd put on some good walking clothes and several coats and certainly stuff two bags with some of my best and brightest things. Not everyone was the poor ragged refugee, nor should all civilian campaigners strive for this impression, because IMHO it gives an unrealistic view of history, as though at events we would see either a dirt poor refugee or plantation owner. More middle class, the educated, and skilled laborers are needed in this hobby.

As another side note, when under duress, people grab odd things when leaving the house. We had some friends who during the bombing of Dresden evacuated with a 5 volume set of Shakespeare, and once they got to safety couldn't understand why that was what they ran with. My husband and sons have also worked with emergency services and seen the same odd behavior, people do not always think with clarity and often run away with what is closest at hand. Consequently, when one reads about what people fled with in their diaries, is it so surprising since these folks were terrified at the prospect of losing all and possibly getting caught in the crossfire of a battle? Still, our ancestors already knew that there was a risk, they would have known the danger was not too far from home, and would have made plans to travel someplace before being trapped.

[lhsnj]

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.

In looking at the images that Hank provided they are dated 1864 and are captioned Union refugees. These could be showing Unionists who have been waiting for the Federals to get close enough so they could get into the protection of their lines.

Which might be the reason these men are travelling light. Looking for protection from their neighbors or maybe looking to join with the Federals now that it appears the Federal have the upper hand.

Might be similiar to the conditions in the Appalachian mountians between NC / TN and the Union men who were hiding in the hills to escape conscription. Or might become refugees headed for the nearest Federal lines to seek protection.

[Drygoods]

Re: refugee images

[QUOTE=Hank Trent;143995]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 TrentQUOTE]


Amen Mr. Trent! All GOOD points, yes GREAT ideas. Indeed, it does take a lot of planning, plus a major about of work and money to fund an event with structures. The other thing is that many people will resist this idea for fear that folks will build peculiar buildings, that are not the slightest bit accurate and have modern construction. It's all a balancing act, but the thing to remember is that although we live in the modern world, period construction can be done, and things can be built safely. The hard part is the finances, and where to store your prefabricated building during the rest of the year when not in use.

And what about the furnishing? Most people, including reenactors, have little experience with period material culture and often buy the wrong items. However, to furnish a house, no matter how small, is no small expense, and it takes a years to find accurate household goods.

So the main reason, IMHO, as to why it will never be common or easy to reenact in large numbers on this kind of scale is mostly due to money and education. Few people are nutty enough to spend foolishly to outfit a period home, and even fewer are willing to truck a prefabricated dwelling simply for that purpose, and follow it up with many more trucks of furniture. Well happy fools do exist, but are far and few between, but those are the people who get the most enjoyment out of their hobby. The greater the effort, the greater the satisfaction.:D

Indeed, I sure wish that others shared this view and built portable buildings. I'd love to travel back East, but 600 miles is the limit on my household goods, any farther and I'm too exhausted when I get there being too tired to set walls up. Those are the consequences of age I suppose, but it brings to mind another point that most here prefer campaigners who simply walk in with all they need on their back's and then sleep on the ground. So what of the aged reenactor? Not every civilian slept on the ground when on the road, and older folks cannot do this, so what will be done to satisfy accurately that form of impression? I'm all for folks wanting a beefy impression, call it a portable house and all the trimmings, but like you said Mr. Trent, that sort of thing will be a l-o-n-g time coming unless people are willing to sacrifice a large pile of tin to support that change in the hobby. I now expect to be pelted with Irish confetti for such a thought, as I know that a different idea such as this isn't welcome here, but isn't this what a forum is all about, hearing different ideas? Do you really think that more of those small, controlled events, with housing will happen more often in our hobby's future?

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

The hard part is the finances, and where to store your prefabricated building during the rest of the year when not in use.

Just to clarify, I wasn't primarily talking about prefabricated buildings. Personally, I don't think that's necessarily the best answer overall, simply due to the expensive it puts on participants and the suspension of disbelief it still requires. Though admittedly I don't think I've been to an event with any sort of portable buildings that were supposed to be anything other than what they were, i.e. tents with wooden fronts or floors in a semi-camping situation.

When it comes to portraying actual permanent houses, what seems to happen more often at events I've been to, is

--constructing permanent but cheap buildings on site, such as half-finished log cabins (Struggle for Statehood, Bummers) or

--furnishing shells of buildings already on site to make them appear lived-in (TAG, the Pre-Trial event, etc. etc.) or

--using museum buildings on site and working around restrictions such as antique furniture that can't be used (Westville, Kentucky Trial, events at historic forts, etc. etc.), or

--temporarily using historic buildings that are currently occupied by or designed for modern residents and working around the modern usage (Burkittsville, Shaker Village, etc.)

So what of the aged reenactor? Not every civilian slept on the ground when on the road, and older folks cannot do this, so what will be done to satisfy accurately that form of impression?

See all the above. In general, those structures are supplied by the event, so the reenactor neither has to spend thousands for a portable house, nor do without.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Drygoods]

Re: refugee images

Mr. Trent,

Well, that is the ideal, having a place that let's us stay in a period setting and then using your own things outside &c.. Here in CA, I only know two places off hand that I participate that allow us to use the period buildings, however we are not allowed to use the antique furniture, and so I truck in my own things. Those places are a historic fort, and two different parks. Use of the structure and our own beds, funiture, dishware &c., provides less stress, and it much like a real period living. If me or my friends break dishes, I have no guilt or worry, but few others would go to extremes like this.

[Chip]

Re: refugee images

The number of men involved would have depended upon the time, place and circumstances at hand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dakota_War_of_1862-stereo-right.jpg

This photo shows a cross section of men in Minnesota before the draft started to pull a higher percentage of the men into the ranks. This photo speaks volumes about having to leave fairly quickly.

Chip Uhlir
SCAR

[LindaTrent]

Re: refugee images

Here in CA, I only know two places off hand that I participate that allow us to use the period buildings, however we are not allowed to use the antique furniture, and so I truck in my own things.

Are there any reenactors out there who own land who wouldn't mind having an event and a log house built on it? That's what I found when I did Struggle for Statehood. In return for the use of the land we had a pre-event work weekend where several participants and their families came and helped erect a log house. We didn't get the sides chinked and daubed, and the roof still required to be shingled, if I recall correctly, but those were things that were able to be done during the event, and the landowner gets a free storage building.

I'd love to travel back East, but 600 miles is the limit on my household goods, any farther and I'm too exhausted when I get there being too tired to set walls up.

Because I'm retired from organizing events, I will not organize anything that requires a boat-load of pre-event work for me, and I won't guarantee more than three reenactors, though others could be invited *if* you're interested. :D This is also dependant of me being able to get the house I'd want, and will have to be worked around other events we're currently committed to. It would also have the same rules and guidelines and standards as all my other events.

What do you say?

Linda.

[LindaTrent]

Re: refugee images

Because I'm retired from organizing events, I will not organize anything that requires a boat-load of pre-event work for me, and I won't guarantee more than three reenactors, though others could be invited *if* you're interested. :D This is also dependant of me being able to get the house I'd want, and will have to be worked around other events we're currently committed to. It would also have the same rules and guidelines and standards as all my other events.

Oops, I think I said just about everything except that Judith, if you're interested I will put on an event, and you won't have to bring a thing except yourself and your clothes, and whatever accessories you'll need. It'll probably be organized as an inn, so no need to bring a thing. Beds, lighting, plates, dishes, chamber pot, etc. will be provided. There will be a nominal fee to donate to preservation of the building and food, but otherwise it should just cost you to get east.

Linda.

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

Oops, I think I said just about everything except that Judith, if you're interested I will put on an event, and you won't have to bring a thing except yourself and your clothes, and whatever accessories you'll need. It'll probably be organized as an inn, so no need to bring a thing. Beds, lighting, plates, dishes, chamber pot, etc. will be provided. There will be a nominal fee to donate to preservation of the building and food, but otherwise it should just cost you to get east.

Linda.

When?

Where?

What is the scenario?

[ephraim_zook]

Further example of artistic license?

It seems odd to me that in Joe's original illustration, and in three of the four images Hank presented there appears to be an obligatory "mammy", regardless of whether the refugees portrayed were union or not. And in Hank's fourth picture there is a colored man travelling with the group.

Is it implicit in the pictures then that the refugees, regardless of their refugee status or socio-economic group didn't plan on doing any hard work themselves? Or did the artist(s) give free rein to their imaginations? It almost looks like the same mammy in several pictures.

Ron Myzie

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

Ron,

If the family has small children, the mammy was there for them. In my reading for Bummers, I've come across accounts of soldiers encountering mammys and Aunties that were staying with the family, despite the assurances of the soldiers that they were free.

Also of note, in one of the images you see an ox loaded with bundles. I suspect the average small farmer saw the ox as one of his most valuable possessions and brought it along to save it from plunder.

Why not bring out your other valuable assets, including slaves?

Just because you are a Unionist doesn't mean you aren't a slave owner, too.