Re: [Revlist] Re: Quadrangle British camps
- View SourceJust some thoughts rattling around in my head here, but it occurs to me
that we frequently over-emphasize the period's ideal at the expense of what
was practical at the time; similarly, we over-emphasize modern convenience
and sense of personal space at the expense of documented practice.
To start with the latter point, at events we tend to sleep with one
occupant per tent, despite the fact that on average five men were assigned
to each tent; when we have multiple occupants per tent, it usually involves
a family group. I don't want to disparage family participation in the hobby
(my own son, age 6, has just recently started joining me at events), but we
do need to see more single campers sharing tents just to give a more
accurate picture, both to the public and to ourselves.
To move backwards towards the first point, I believe that we should see
more use of less formal structures when portraying a unit on-campaign, such
as brush huts. This may not be practical most of the time as many sites
aren't keen on having a horde of people attacking their flora with
hatchets, building such structures, and then leaving the construction
debris for the site to deal with after the event is over. That being said,
if we can find documentation for the use of tents facing outwards so as to
enable the occupants to quickly respond to emergencies, that seems much
more practical then rows we currently see.
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Todd Post <todd.post2@...> wrote:
> While Continental in focus, John Rees did an excellent analysis of the
> break down of where soldiers slept based on journals: in tents, in
> buildings, in huts, in brush huts, in the open, on ships, etc. You can find
> it at http://www.revwar75.com/library/rees/shelteranalysis.htm
> You'll find that depending on the campaign, tents were used anywhere from
> 29% to nearly 90% of the time.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 4, 2013, at 9:29 AM, "britmarinecapt" britmarinecapt@...>
> > Don:
> > Apologies for not posting references on quadrangle camps yet. I am up to
> Dec 1778 and there are several references to such camps so far. I found it
> interested that during the winter that the Jagers not lucky enough to be
> billetted in houses were simply given materials to construct their own huts
> - this in the dead of winter with snow on the ground. Talk about incentive.
> Still, it makes me wonder just how often tents were actually ever used.
> Hopefully more this weekend.
> > Jim McG
> > --- In Revlist@yahoogroups.com, "britmarinecapt" wrote:
> >> Don:
> >> First off I just ordered your book, and I am very much looking forward
> to reading it. Congrats to you.
> >> Second, in regards to the camps, I will try and post more in the coming
> days, but am driving home from the holidays, so it may be a day or two. I
> will say I am up to their return to NY in 1777 and he has mentioned the
> quadrangle camps a number of times so far. He also mentioned the army
> camping in columns along the road during a major march.
> >> I must admit I have long been skeptical if the Lochee camps were used
> in the field during operations. In a recent discussion with a re-enactor
> who is portraying Wayne's Legion, he said that Wayne often used the Bouquet
> type of quadrangle camp while campaigning against the Indians. I find it a
> very practical camp to use during combat operations, while Lochee always
> appeared more peace time to me. Just an impression.
> >> I will forward more in the coming days. Happy New Years to you.
> >> Jim McG
> >> --- In Revlist@yahoogroups.com, "donhagist" wrote:
> >>> Can you give a few page references, Jim, so those of us with a copy of
> Ewald on hand can see the references in context and compare them with other
> accounts of the same campaign? I'm always leery of technical
> interpretations of translated works such as the published version of
> Ewald's diary, because often the translators didn't know the period
> military meaning of terms and gave a direct and contemporary translation
> into English. "Quadrangle" could refer to the camp arrangement that we're
> familiar with, as opposed to the "linear" arrangement that Lochee gives as
> an alternative and that the Americans seemed to favor; or it could, as you
> suggest, refer to Bouquet's arrangement; or maybe something else
> altogether, not apparent from the way it's been translated.
> >>> Don N. Hagist
> >>> http://revolutionaryimprints.com
> >>> http://redcoat76.blogspot.com
> >>> --- In Revlist@yahoogroups.com, "britmarinecapt" wrote:
> >>>> I'm reposting this so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle. There was a
> lot of discussion recently about correct camps, and I thought this first
> person account was a good indication of how they actually camped during
> field operations. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
> >>>> Jim McG
> >>>> --- In Revlist@yahoogroups.com, "britmarinecapt" wrote:
> >>>>> So I am finally reading Ewald's Diary. Great read. Ewald repeatedly
> mentions forces camping in a quadrangle camp. I am reminded of the camp
> arrangements Bouquet made while marching into the Ohio country some years
> earlier - with his forces camped in a square with the tents facing outward,
> so if attacked, the men would simply fall out and be in a square defensive
> formation. Is this the same thing Ewald is talking about as well, or
> something different?
> >>>>> Jim McGaughey
> > ------------------------------------
> > To subscribe to Revlist, please go to the home page at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Revlist/ and click "Join This Group!"
> > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: please send a message to
> > with "unsubscribe" in the subject line.Yahoo! Groups Links
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
John J. Ogden
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]