Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Historical Authenticity?

Expand Messages
  • Gordon Deans
    The War of 1812-15 reenacting community is faced with a matrix of trade-offs. Authenticity versus Comfort versus Expense versus Safety (and dare I say versus
    Message 1 of 28 , Mar 29, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      The War of 1812-15 reenacting community is faced with a matrix of
      trade-offs.

      Authenticity versus Comfort versus Expense versus Safety (and dare I say
      versus Fun).

      Our many learned historians are busily unearthing obscure references to
      refute or support various historical possibilities. And all the while, the
      spectre of the 200th anniversary years loom in the near-distant future.
      Look around at our fellow comrades and ponder the question, "How many will
      still be taking the field in 2013?".

      If we want to preserve reenacting as we know it and provide a robust legacy
      for those that will follow on to the great anniversary years then now is the
      time to focus on the essential questions.

      What are we doing as individuals and units to welcome new people into
      reenacting and keep them coming back?

      What are we doing to preserve the excellent libraries and research papers
      that have been amassed over the years by some of our recently passed
      members? How can we honour their legacies?

      What more can we do to ensure that reenacting becomes an integral part of
      the life-long learning process and thus helps preserve the many historical
      sites that are continually battling government cut-backs?

      How can we reach out into the community and share this valuable resource
      called reenacting?

      Which brings us back to the original question. How much Authenticity can we
      have in a past-time that covered the North American continent, spanned three
      years of time, included many nations (Britain, Native Allies, Spain, United
      States, etc.), used left-overs from the Revolutionary War and included
      veteran regiments from the Napoleonic conflicts? Remember, we reenact on
      both sides of the border. What happened in Upper Canada stayed in Upper
      Canada (unfortunately).

      Face it. Unless your persona emcompasses all of the above criteria, then
      you are not authentic at all reenactments. How many multiple personae can
      one reenactor handle?

      Are we going to insist that only the units that can prove their presence at
      the historical event can take the field at the reenactment event? Will we
      require that only the equipment that can be proven to exist in a specific
      historical year in specific geographic locations can be used at the related
      reenactments? Should we relegate our naval comrades only to the marine
      reenactments?

      Will we all need to have multiple versions of equipment and multiple
      uniforms from multiple units to ensure that we are historically authentic at
      all of the events that we attend each summer? Should we leave our families
      and pets at home to be truly authentic?

      We have already accepted numerous trade-offs for justifiable reasons so what
      about having (or not having) a third ring on your musket stock or an 18"
      wall of canvas around the bottom of your "wedge tent" or a "French musket"
      or a pike (not the fish)?

      By all means continue the scholarship, but let us be careful not to strangle
      this great past-time or else "Who will be there in 2013?".

      Just the rantings of an Old Sailor searching for a friendly campfire on land
      to dry out his wet feet and partake of a gill of Nelson's Blood.

      Gord Deans
    • mccombs98
      Small point, but unless your kit and camp is of 200 year old original manufacture, you would never be authentic . The closest would be a reproduction or a
      Message 2 of 28 , Mar 29, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Small point, but unless your kit and camp is of 200 year old original
        manufacture, you would never be "authentic".
        The closest would be a "reproduction" or a reasonable "facsimile".
        Murray
      • Craig Williams
        Gordon, With all due respect, this forum is for keeping each other up to date within the community as well as scholarly discussion and debate. If we re
        Message 3 of 28 , Mar 29, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Gordon,

          With all due respect, this forum is for keeping each other up to date
          within the community as well as scholarly discussion and debate. If
          we're upsetting you with one particular topic or other , try doing
          what I do. I read the "subject" box and if it's something that's
          ongoing and I find annoying...I delete it and read what interests me
          or is addressed to me.

          Craig Williams

          (PS I strongly recommend that you leave your pet lemur at home, they
          fling poo)


          On 29-Mar-06, at 1:01 PM, Gordon Deans wrote:
          >
          > We have already accepted numerous trade-offs for justifiable
          > reasons so what
          > about having (or not having) a third ring on your musket stock or
          > an 18"
          > wall of canvas around the bottom of your "wedge tent" or a "French
          > musket"
          > or a pike (not the fish)?
          >
        • Gordon Deans
          Craig, On the contrary, I relish the scholarly discussion and debate -- it keeps me awake. What makes me nervous is the trend that there appears to be only a
          Message 4 of 28 , Mar 29, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Craig,

            On the contrary, I relish the scholarly discussion and debate -- it keeps me
            awake. What makes me nervous is the trend that there appears to be only a
            small group who qualify as historically authentic in their portrayals and
            that the rest of the community is considered to be authentically compromised
            in their portrayals and thus somewhat less relevant.

            How can we impose arbitrary constraints on some reenactors when even the
            scholars do not seem to agree upon the interpretation of obscure facts? Is
            it fair to set rigid standards beyond the financial abilities of most of our
            newcomers to reenacting at the very time that we need more of them?

            I think reenacting should embrace more of the general public who wish to
            share our love of history. It should not be a private club only for those
            of us who can afford the $5,000 to $10,000 for multiple perfectly authentic
            kits and equipment. (Larry, not everyone is able to build or make these
            things for themselves.)

            Living history portrayals in Upper Canada have a rich heritage of Native
            Allies, Provincial Marine, militias and Fencible Regiments to draw upon
            beyond just the Regiments of the Line. It is conceivable that some of them
            just might have done some things slightly differently as a result of
            improvisation or necessity (or the American influence or the Napoleonic
            influence, etc.) without leaving such a thorough trail of documentation to
            be referenced.

            Oops! There I go again, jumping to another conclusion without supporting
            facts. But at least it gives the bulk of us reenactors some "wiggle room"
            to feel as authentic as possible within our means without the feeling of
            being looked down upon.

            See you at Longwoods.

            Gord Deans, Royal Navy

            P.S. Yes, I know that the Royal Navy was not present at the Battle of
            Longwoods, but I cannot afford the correct redcoat and musket this year and
            this is my "home event". So there goes my historical authenticity.

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Craig Williams" <sgtwarner@...>
            To: <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 10:23 PM
            Subject: Re: [WarOf1812] Historical Authenticity?


            > Gordon,
            >
            > With all due respect, this forum is for keeping each other up to date
            > within the community as well as scholarly discussion and debate. If
            > we're upsetting you with one particular topic or other , try doing
            > what I do. I read the "subject" box and if it's something that's
            > ongoing and I find annoying...I delete it and read what interests me
            > or is addressed to me.
            >
            > Craig Williams
          • Dale Kidd
            Gord: While I enthusiastically agree with pretty much everything you have said here, there is one pet peeve of mine regarding blatant disregard for
            Message 5 of 28 , Mar 30, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Gord:

              While I enthusiastically agree with pretty much everything you have
              said here, there is one pet peeve of mine regarding blatant
              disregard for authenticity that is specifically pertinent to naval
              reenactors, and even more specifically to certain members of your
              unit and my own. That is the use of modern materials and processes
              in uniform manufacture (and I'm not just talking about using a
              sewing machine).

              For example: many members of your unit wear a ribbon on their hat
              identifying their ship. Fine. Unfortunately, the name seems to be
              screen printed, or similarly done. A perhaps minor, but glaringly
              obvious modern touch.

              Even worse, certain members of both our units have taken to wearing
              waistcoats of red nylon, rather than wool. These are so completely
              out of place that they give the appearance of a cheap halloween
              costume rather than a historically accurate uniform. I have an
              unfortunate photograph of one glaring brilliantly in the sunlight.
              you could almost use it as a signal mirror. The individuals who
              utilize these claim that the wool waistcoats are too warm. Boo hoo.
              If the poor buggers who actually fought in that long-ago war could
              wear them year 'round, under virtually all conditions and levels of
              activity, we can put up with them for the duration of a couple of
              days at a time.

              While there may, in fact, be elements of my own uniform that are not
              produced EXACTLY faithfully to the originals, I have endeavoured to
              adhere as closely as possible to the original as I can, given my
              admittedly limited means, and would not even consider using
              something outwardly and obviously out of place. What we do is
              historical reenactment... the S.C.A. are actively recruiting, for
              those who want to inject a little fantasy into their historical
              interpretation, or aren't willing to use appropriate costume and
              equipment. I'm no farby... I could care less if the thread count in
              your facings is historically accurate... but I think certain limits
              need to be set, and enforced. And it needs to happen WITHIN the
              units.

              That's my rant for this week.

              Keep yer powder dry.
              ~Dale
            • mccombs98
              Dale, The Tally printed Ship name by silkscreen is historically inaccurate as you ve stated, but the 1812 era had a number of options that would yield a
              Message 6 of 28 , Mar 30, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Dale,
                The Tally printed Ship name by silkscreen is historically inaccurate as
                you've stated, but the 1812 era had a number of options that would
                yield a similar result. Handpainted text was a highly refined artform
                and the most likely to have occured, but an offset/letterpressed/
                engraved plate is also a viable option resulting in a product
                indistiguishable from the skilkscreened.. So, I don't consider the
                silkscreend version obviously wanting.
                A handpainted name would/should be detected under closer examination.
                At a distance, it too should look correct and machine produced.

                I do agree with your statement about the wool red vests vs the cotton
                reversable version. The colour tone is quite off. The reversable has
                it's raison d'etra in being able to switch between British and
                American Navy protrayals. I suspect a reversable red/blue wool vest
                would be too thick. Some of the crew wear these reversables, with the
                older members wearing the wool. This is worth readdressing with the
                unit.
                Regards
                Murray


                "Dale Kidd" <ucpm_gunner@...> wrote:
                >
                > Gord:
                >
                > While I enthusiastically agree with pretty much everything you have
                > said here, there is one pet peeve of mine regarding blatant
                > disregard for authenticity that is specifically pertinent to naval
                > reenactors, and even more specifically to certain members of your
                > unit and my own. That is the use of modern materials and processes
                > in uniform manufacture (and I'm not just talking about using a
                > sewing machine).
                >
                > For example: many members of your unit wear a ribbon on their hat
                > identifying their ship. Fine. Unfortunately, the name seems to be
                > screen printed, or similarly done. A perhaps minor, but glaringly
                > obvious modern touch.
                >
                > Even worse, certain members of both our units have taken to wearing
                > waistcoats of red nylon, rather than wool. These are so completely
                > out of place that they give the appearance of a cheap halloween
                > costume rather than a historically accurate uniform. I have an
                > unfortunate photograph of one glaring brilliantly in the sunlight.
                > you could almost use it as a signal mirror. The individuals who
                > utilize these claim that the wool waistcoats are too warm. Boo hoo.
                > If the poor buggers who actually fought in that long-ago war could
                > wear them year 'round, under virtually all conditions and levels of
                > activity, we can put up with them for the duration of a couple of
                > days at a time.
                >
                > While there may, in fact, be elements of my own uniform that are not
                > produced EXACTLY faithfully to the originals, I have endeavoured to
                > adhere as closely as possible to the original as I can, given my
                > admittedly limited means, and would not even consider using
                > something outwardly and obviously out of place. What we do is
                > historical reenactment... the S.C.A. are actively recruiting, for
                > those who want to inject a little fantasy into their historical
                > interpretation, or aren't willing to use appropriate costume and
                > equipment. I'm no farby... I could care less if the thread count in
                > your facings is historically accurate... but I think certain limits
                > need to be set, and enforced. And it needs to happen WITHIN the
                > units.
                >
                > That's my rant for this week.
                >
                > Keep yer powder dry.
                > ~Dale
                >
              • Mark Dickerson
                But, the soldiers back then didn t use stuff that was 200 years old. So why should we? Their bell tents and some of their kit would only be 1-3 years old. So
                Message 7 of 28 , Mar 30, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  But, the soldiers back then didn't use stuff that was 200 years old. So why
                  should we?
                  Their bell tents and some of their kit would only be 1-3 years old. So
                  using a reproduction would be more authentic than using something 200 years
                  old.
                  No? or am I just off in my own world here. Ignore me if I am.

                  Mark Dickerson


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "mccombs98" <macomb@...>
                  To: <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 2:16 PM
                  Subject: [WarOf1812] Re: Historical Authenticity?


                  > Small point, but unless your kit and camp is of 200 year old original
                  > manufacture, you would never be "authentic".
                  > The closest would be a "reproduction" or a reasonable "facsimile".
                  > Murray
                • mccombs98
                  Mark, No, you re not off base at all. My contention is the overusage of the word authentic . It is by definition original manufacture . We are creating
                  Message 8 of 28 , Mar 30, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Mark,
                    No, you're not off base at all. My contention is the overusage of the
                    word "authentic". It is by definition "original manufacture". We are
                    creating "facsimilies" or reprductions of 1812. Most reproduced kit and
                    gear should reflect a "new" appearance, at least in my humble opinion.
                    However, with the latest revelation of those rotting, moulding ARW
                    wedge tents abandoned at Fort George, I doubt I will try to emulate
                    that feature in my own.
                    Murray

                    "Mark Dickerson" <mdickerson1@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > But, the soldiers back then didn't use stuff that was 200 years old. So why
                    > should we?
                    > Their bell tents and some of their kit would only be 1-3 years old. So
                    > using a reproduction would be more authentic than using something 200 years
                    > old.
                    > No? or am I just off in my own world here. Ignore me if I am.
                    >
                    > Mark Dickerson
                    >
                    >
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: "mccombs98" <macomb@...>
                    > To: <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
                    > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 2:16 PM
                    > Subject: [WarOf1812] Re: Historical Authenticity?
                    >
                    >
                    > > Small point, but unless your kit and camp is of 200 year old original
                    > > manufacture, you would never be "authentic".
                    > > The closest would be a "reproduction" or a reasonable "facsimile".
                    > > Murray
                    >
                  • Craig Williams
                    Murray, I take your point about the use of the word authentic . I think within our community it is understood that authentic refers to anything we use that
                    Message 9 of 28 , Mar 30, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Murray,

                      I take your point about the use of the word "authentic". I think
                      within our community it is understood that "authentic" refers to
                      anything we use that has been carefully researched and backed up with
                      comparison original artifacts. It is easier to type "authentic" than
                      "accurate or museum quality reproduction" whenever we wish to
                      reference something we use. It then follows that we also refer to
                      original objects as "originals"
                      I believe that it is a shorthand that we have all chosen to accept.
                      And by Websters definition; Authentic: 1, authoritative;
                      trustworthy;reliable. 2. genuine, real.
                      The first part of the definition doesn't insinuate that something
                      necessarily be original, merely right. The second part of course
                      does. So is it not safe to say "authentic" when we mean a well
                      researched museum quality reproduction.
                      "Original" is, I think self explanatory.

                      Craig
                      On 30-Mar-06, at 9:18 AM, mccombs98 wrote:

                      > Mark,
                      > No, you're not off base at all. My contention is the overusage of the
                      > word "authentic". It is by definition "original manufacture". We are
                      > creating "facsimilies" or reprductions of 1812. Most reproduced kit
                      > and
                      > gear should reflect a "new" appearance, at least in my humble opinion.
                      > However, with the latest revelation of those rotting, moulding ARW
                      > wedge tents abandoned at Fort George, I doubt I will try to emulate
                      > that feature in my own.
                      > Murray
                      >
                    • mccombs98
                      Craig, OK, I can live with this convention. As for an example of authentic vs Museum quality reproductions ; in making my survey case with brass hardware, I
                      Message 10 of 28 , Mar 30, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Craig,
                        OK, I can live with this convention.
                        As for an example of "authentic vs Museum quality reproductions"; in
                        making my survey case with brass hardware, I was fortunate to find
                        "authentic originals", but not enough to complete the case so finished
                        with "museum quality reproductions". However, the reproductions were
                        coated in clear laquer and therefore not able to tarnish. I felt the
                        "original" option was better looking (besides being accurate), and set
                        forth to strip the laquer off the "reproductions" and age the brass
                        with amonia gas. I've estimated a few years of brass tarnish on all
                        hardware and am pleased with the results.

                        I wasn't intending to sound like a Philadelphia lawyer with my
                        contention, but choosing words carefully can clarify direction. A well
                        researched and documented example goes a long ways in reproducing a
                        believable period product.
                        Murray


                        Craig Williams <sgtwarner@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Murray,
                        >
                        > I take your point about the use of the word "authentic". I think
                        > within our community it is understood that "authentic" refers to
                        > anything we use that has been carefully researched and backed up with
                        > comparison original artifacts. It is easier to type "authentic" than
                        > "accurate or museum quality reproduction" whenever we wish to
                        > reference something we use. It then follows that we also refer to
                        > original objects as "originals"
                        > I believe that it is a shorthand that we have all chosen to accept.
                        > And by Websters definition; Authentic: 1, authoritative;
                        > trustworthy;reliable. 2. genuine, real.
                        > The first part of the definition doesn't insinuate that something
                        > necessarily be original, merely right. The second part of course
                        > does. So is it not safe to say "authentic" when we mean a well
                        > researched museum quality reproduction.
                        > "Original" is, I think self explanatory.
                        >
                        > Craig
                        > On 30-Mar-06, at 9:18 AM, mccombs98 wrote:
                        >
                        > > Mark,
                        > > No, you're not off base at all. My contention is the overusage of the
                        > > word "authentic". It is by definition "original manufacture". We are
                        > > creating "facsimilies" or reprductions of 1812. Most reproduced kit
                        > > and
                        > > gear should reflect a "new" appearance, at least in my humble opinion.
                        > > However, with the latest revelation of those rotting, moulding ARW
                        > > wedge tents abandoned at Fort George, I doubt I will try to emulate
                        > > that feature in my own.
                        > > Murray
                        > >
                        >
                      • John Harris
                        Against my better judgement, I m wading in on this discussion. Non-essential text has been removed and my responses are throughout the text of both messages.
                        Message 11 of 28 , Mar 30, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Against my better judgement, I'm wading in on this discussion. Non-essential
                          text has been removed and my responses are throughout the text of both
                          messages. This is my opinion's only , please take it as it's intended.
                          John Harris
                          ________________________________________________________________________
                          ________________________________________________________________________

                          Message: 6
                          Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:32:17 -0000
                          From: "Dale Kidd" <ucpm_gunner@...>
                          Subject: Re: Historical Authenticity?

                          Gord:
                          For example: many members of your unit wear a ribbon on their hat
                          identifying their ship. Fine. Unfortunately, the name seems to be
                          screen printed, or similarly done. A perhaps minor, but glaringly
                          obvious modern touch.

                          >> JH- Hand painting names is not really that hard. Try a paint pen if you
                          aren't confident with a brush. This method has worked fine for me in the
                          past.

                          Even worse, certain members of both our units have taken to wearing
                          waistcoats of red nylon, rather than wool.

                          >> JH- Why waste your time, effort, and money to make something out of nylon
                          when you can make it out of a "real " material ?? Wool, linen, or even
                          cotton??? I don't understand this one at all. Besides being totally
                          incorrect, nylon will MELT on you !!
                          These are so completely
                          out of place that they give the appearance of a cheap halloween
                          costume rather than a historically accurate uniform. I have an
                          unfortunate photograph of one glaring brilliantly in the sunlight.
                          you could almost use it as a signal mirror.

                          >> JH- Well, that says it all right there! Again I say WHY ???

                          The individuals who
                          utilize these claim that the wool waistcoats are too warm. Boo hoo.

                          >>JH- If they have a part of their nylon vest melt on them from an errant
                          spark they'll be a hell of a lot more uncomfortable!!

                          If the poor buggers who actually fought in that long-ago war could
                          wear them year 'round, under virtually all conditions and levels of
                          activity, we can put up with them for the duration of a couple of
                          days at a time.


                          >>JH- Natural fibre's are a lot cooler than modern plastics!


                          While there may, in fact, be elements of my own uniform that are not
                          produced EXACTLY faithfully to the originals, I have endeavoured to
                          adhere as closely as possible to the original as I can, given my
                          admittedly limited means, and would not even consider using
                          something outwardly and obviously out of place.

                          >>JH- Research never stops in historical interpretation

                          What we do is
                          historical reenactment... the S.C.A. are actively recruiting, for
                          those who want to inject a little fantasy into their historical
                          interpretation, or aren't willing to use appropriate costume and
                          equipment. I'm no farby... I could care less if the thread count in
                          your facings is historically accurate... but I think certain limits
                          need to be set, and enforced. And it needs to happen WITHIN the
                          units.

                          >>JH- Different units have different standards. It doesn't matter what time
                          period you do, you'll get good interpretations and bad interpretations. If
                          you research , ask questions of those that already do it, and make common
                          sense choices, you'll usually come out okay.

                          That's my rant for this week.

                          >>JH- Rant??? That's not a rant !!!! When I rant I get put on moderated
                          status !!! ( Just kidding Jim!;^) )

                          Keep yer powder dry.
                          ~Dale





                          ________________________________________________________________________
                          ________________________________________________________________________

                          Message: 7
                          Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:51:12 -0000
                          From: "mccombs98" <macomb@...>
                          Subject: Re: Historical Authenticity?



                          The reversable has
                          it's raison d'etra in being able to switch between British and
                          American Navy protrayals. I suspect a reversable red/blue wool vest
                          would be too thick. Some of the crew wear these reversables, with the
                          older members wearing the wool.
                          Regards
                          Murray

                          >>JH-Why do you think the US navy wore blue vest's?? Both navy's sailors wor
                          e very similar clothing. The most common being white trousers, blue jacket,
                          and RED vest. Yes, there were other colours worn , but check out period
                          prints, reference books such as Rene Chartrands " Uniforms and Equipment of
                          the United States Forces in the War of 1812" under the naval section for
                          some good references , check on line for naval museums such as the US Naval
                          Academy, the Brig Niagara , Put-In-Bay NPS, etc . Ask them questions. Check
                          with the Historical sites around our region of the Great lakes. You can even
                          ask on this list ! ;^)
                          If you do some digging you can find the answers . I'll be at Longwoods if
                          you want to talk . I'm not an expert, but I'll help you if a I can. If I
                          don't know the answer, I may be able to point you in the right direction.
                          If you want you can contact me off list. jharris*pathcom.com ( Substitute @
                          for *)
                          Regards
                          John Harris
                          US Infantry and occasionally US Navy
                        • md5_yager
                          ... So, by this reasoning, if I am not over 2 centuries old (bad teeth, warts and all) I cannot be authentic ? But if clothes make the man (or woman), then
                          Message 12 of 28 , Apr 2, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "mccombs98" <macomb@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Small point, but unless your kit and camp is of 200 year old original
                            > manufacture, you would never be "authentic".
                            > The closest would be a "reproduction" or a reasonable "facsimile".
                            > Murray
                            >
                            So, by this reasoning, if I am not over 2 centuries old (bad teeth,
                            warts and all) I cannot be authentic ? But if "clothes make the man"
                            (or woman), then I come close!

                            For sure, authenticity is a goal. We know it when we see it -- sort of.
                            But IMO, it is ultimately unattainable, no matter how old the cut of
                            our cloth.
                            Dave
                          • HQ93rd@aol.com
                            ... Yes, well, but if we are going to use that plumb line of rule and logic, then what they used 200 years ago was not authentic as it was all brand new, vis
                            Message 13 of 28 , Apr 2, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              In a message dated 29/03/2006 9:58:48 PM, macomb@... writes:
                              > Small point, but unless your kit and camp is of 200 year old original
                              > manufacture, you would never be "authentic".
                              > The closest would be a "reproduction" or a reasonable "facsimile".
                              > Murray
                              >
                              >

                              Yes, well, but if we are going to use that plumb line of rule and logic, then
                              what they used 200 years ago was not "authentic" as it was all brand new, vis
                              a vie Argentine pay scales, as it were, so to speak, QED....

                              B ( I've read "How To Win An Argument") J

                              93rd SHRoFLHU
                              THE Thin Red Line
                              www.93rdhighlanders.com


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • mccombs98
                              Sorry, but theirs would still be authentic, ie. Orignal manufacture for their day, even if made in their yesterday (or morning for that matter:) Murray
                              Message 14 of 28 , Apr 2, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Sorry, but theirs would still be authentic, ie. Orignal manufacture for
                                their day, even if made in their yesterday (or morning for that
                                matter:)
                                Murray

                                HQ93rd@... wrote:
                                >
                                > In a message dated 29/03/2006 9:58:48 PM, macomb@... writes:
                                > > Small point, but unless your kit and camp is of 200 year old original
                                > > manufacture, you would never be "authentic".
                                > > The closest would be a "reproduction" or a reasonable "facsimile".
                                > > Murray
                                > >
                                > >
                                >
                                > Yes, well, but if we are going to use that plumb line of rule and logic, then
                                > what they used 200 years ago was not "authentic" as it was all brand new, vis
                                > a vie Argentine pay scales, as it were, so to speak, QED....
                                >
                                > B ( I've read "How To Win An Argument") J
                                >
                                > 93rd SHRoFLHU
                                > THE Thin Red Line
                                > www.93rdhighlanders.com
                                >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                              • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                In a message dated 02/04/2006 21:07:09 Central Standard Time, macomb@pop.ca.inter.net writes: Sorry, but theirs would still be authentic, ie. Orignal
                                Message 15 of 28 , Apr 2, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  In a message dated 02/04/2006 21:07:09 Central Standard Time,
                                  macomb@... writes:

                                  Sorry, but theirs would still be authentic, ie. Orignal manufacture for
                                  their day, even if made in their yesterday (or morning for that
                                  matter:)



                                  OK Murray, how about this, about 10 years ago I had some British officers
                                  shako cords made up. They were done by M. Hand & Co of London, the gold and
                                  crimson square braid was made up on a machine constructed about 1800 (the
                                  company had been in buisness in one form or another since the restoration of
                                  Charles II) and they were constructed by hand by Derek Hand the last male decendant
                                  of the founder to work in the buisness. If you look at the shakos worn by
                                  Peter Twist, Larry Stutt and myself, and several other British officers you can
                                  examine them for yourself. So to my question I know they are not PERIOD but
                                  are they authentic or reproduction?

                                  Cheers

                                  Tim


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • dancingbobd@webtv.net
                                  Tim, My vote is for authentic! Bob US Engineer Surgeon 14 LD
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Apr 2, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Tim,

                                    My vote is for authentic!

                                    Bob
                                    US Engineer
                                    Surgeon 14 LD
                                  • HQ93rd@aol.com
                                    ... Merriam Webster: Main Entry: au·then·tic Pronunciation: &- then-tik, o- Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English autentik, from Middle French
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Apr 2, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      In a message dated 2/04/2006 9:05:41 PM, dancingbobd@... writes:
                                      > Tim, 
                                      > My vote is for authentic!
                                      > Bob
                                      > US Engineer
                                      > Surgeon 14 LD
                                      >
                                      Merriam Webster:
                                      Main Entry: au·then·tic
                                      Pronunciation: &-'then-tik, o-
                                      Function: adjective
                                      Etymology: Middle English autentik, from Middle French autentique, from Late
                                      Latin authenticus, from Greek authentikos, from authentEs perpetrator, master,
                                      from aut- + -hentEs (akin to Greek anyein to accomplish, Sanskrit sanoti he
                                      gains)
                                      Date: 14th century
                                      1 : obsolete : AUTHORITATIVE
                                      2 a : worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact <
                                      paints an authentic picture of our society> b : conforming to an original so as to
                                      reproduce essential features <an authentic reproduction of a colonial
                                      farmhouse> c : made or done the same way as an original <authentic Mexican fare>
                                      3 : not false or imitation : REAL, ACTUAL <based on authentic documents> <an
                                      authentic cockney accent>
                                      4 a : of a church mode : ranging upward from the keynote — compare PLAGAL 1 b
                                      : of a cadence : progressing from the dominant chord to the tonic — compare
                                      PLAGAL 2
                                      5 : true to one's own personality, spirit, or character
                                      - au·then·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb
                                      - au·then·tic·i·ty /"o-"then-'ti-s&-tE, -th&n-/ noun
                                      synonyms AUTHENTIC, GENUINE, BONA FIDE mean being actually and exactly what
                                      is claimed. AUTHENTIC implies being fully trustworthy as according with fact <
                                      an authentic account of the perilous journey>; it can also stress painstaking
                                      or faithful imitation of an original <an authentic reproduction> <authentic
                                      Vietnamese cuisine>. GENUINE implies actual character not counterfeited,
                                      imitated, or adulterated <genuine piety> <genuine maple syrup>; it also connotes
                                      definite origin from a source <a genuine Mark Twain autograph>. BONA FIDE implies
                                      good faith and sincerity of intention <a bona fide offer for the stock>.

                                      So, once again, having an item -- especially as Tim has pointed out -- made
                                      recently by the same company still in existence from 200 years ago, IS
                                      authentic, no matter when it was made...so to speak, QED...

                                      And again, following the flawed vein of logic otherwise...even if one was
                                      wearing an extant uniform from 200 years ago, unless oneself IS over 200 years
                                      old personally, one would still not be "authentic".
                                      Thus ends the B.S .rhetoric. (In other words, anything else IS B.S.)

                                      B ("you look a lot like Adolf Hitler" thus I can win any argument) J
                                      93rd SHRoFLHU
                                      THE Thin Red Line
                                      www.93rdhighlanders.com


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • mccombs98
                                      They would be reproduction, but I can t think of a better one, considering how they were made. One could argue that another issue of authentic hat cords have
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        They would be reproduction, but I can't think of a better one,
                                        considering how they were made. One could argue that another issue of
                                        "authentic" hat cords have been produced by this orignal manufacturer.
                                        However, I had conceeded that on our discussion lists that "authentic"
                                        is not synonmous with "original", so I won't beat this dead horse:)
                                        Cheers
                                        Murray



                                        BritcomHMP@... wrote:
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > In a message dated 02/04/2006 21:07:09 Central Standard Time,
                                        > macomb@... writes:
                                        >
                                        > Sorry, but theirs would still be authentic, ie. Orignal manufacture for
                                        > their day, even if made in their yesterday (or morning for that
                                        > matter:)
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > OK Murray, how about this, about 10 years ago I had some British officers
                                        > shako cords made up. They were done by M. Hand & Co of London, the gold and
                                        > crimson square braid was made up on a machine constructed about 1800 (the
                                        > company had been in buisness in one form or another since the restoration of
                                        > Charles II) and they were constructed by hand by Derek Hand the last male decendant
                                        > of the founder to work in the buisness. If you look at the shakos worn by
                                        > Peter Twist, Larry Stutt and myself, and several other British officers you can
                                        > examine them for yourself. So to my question I know they are not PERIOD but
                                        > are they authentic or reproduction?
                                        >
                                        > Cheers
                                        >
                                        > Tim
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        >
                                      • mccombs98
                                        Sorry, but they ARE period , but reproduction and not authentic. Murray PS I like your analogy though:)
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Sorry, but they ARE "period", but reproduction and not authentic.
                                          Murray
                                          PS I like your analogy though:)


                                          "Phil Graf" <phil_graf@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > If you stub your toe on an original bayonet sticking out of a battleground, should your name be added to the casualty lists of that battle?
                                          >
                                          > Phil
                                          > So to my question I know they are not PERIOD but
                                          > are they authentic or reproduction?
                                          >
                                          > Cheers
                                          >
                                          > Tim
                                        • Lalozon
                                          From: ... I had some British officers shako cords made up. They were done by M. Hand & Co of London, and... the last male decendant of
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            From: <BritcomHMP@...>

                                            "... I had some British officers shako cords made up. They were done by M.
                                            Hand & Co of London, and... the last male decendant of the founder to work
                                            in the buisness .... So to my question I know they are not PERIOD but
                                            are they authentic or reproduction? "




                                            Yur Grace

                                            May I answer your question, with a question? .

                                            In this hobby should we dwell on the authenticity of an item when the rest
                                            of our kit is not authentic?

                                            Yhs.,
                                            L2
                                            Take a moment to close your tent if it's contents are not authentic.
                                          • md5_yager
                                            This thread is an authentic reproduction of very similar threads seen in woodworking (or antiques, or ... pick whatever involves stuff that is older than you
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              This thread is an authentic reproduction of very similar threads seen
                                              in woodworking (or antiques, or ... pick whatever involves 'stuff'
                                              that is older than you are).

                                              An 'original' piece from the period can certainly be faked. Sort of
                                              what we are all doing? BTW, is the USS Constitution original -- let's
                                              sucker those Naval types into this discussion. I've heard it said
                                              there's not an 'original' timber left in her!? So is she still a
                                              reproduction after a couple centuries ?

                                              There are reproductions of furniture, which look similar to
                                              originals, but are fabricated with modern methods and using plywood
                                              in some less visible places. So does this mean my coatee can never
                                              be 'authentic', if the hidden seams were sewn on a machine? This
                                              naturally begs the question, would they have used a sewing machine if
                                              they had one? Same argument about using plywood -- would the Shakers
                                              have used it if they'd had it? Of course, but does not mean my piece
                                              is not a authentic reproduction. Like most things in life -- depends
                                              on whose paying, and what they're asking for.

                                              And obviously we have a problem locating 200-year old timber (except
                                              maybe in the USS Constitution? :-) So if we do locate 200 year-old
                                              timber but use modern machines, modern manufactured finish and
                                              authentic 'reproduction' hardware, then is our furniture piece
                                              authentic, or a reproduction, or a 'authentic reproduction'.

                                              Another in this thread had offered dictionary definitions -- but
                                              these aren't always that useful in the real world. Actually, in point
                                              of fact, museums often decide these matters -- or whomever is paying
                                              the bill. So it's a sliding scale -- do we use 200 year old wood (not
                                              likely!); are we using hardware made in the period (or certain to
                                              have been made of same material in same manner); are we using the
                                              same tools used 200 years ago; are the tools over 200 years old (come
                                              on!); are we using the exact same methods ... are we working in a 200
                                              year old shop without modern lights and air conditioning ? ... Maybe
                                              only in colonial Williamsburg (or fill in your blank ____
                                              favorite 'original' but "restored" place). But my "ad nauseum, ad
                                              absurdum" (help me, Latin scholars) digression into similar arguments
                                              elsewhere shows that "authentic" and reproduction is not so easily
                                              defined by looking it up in Webster or Wikipedia or whatever.

                                              Quick! Someone shoot this battered horse, and put it out of its
                                              misery! D*a!m&%n!!!, stepped on that original bayonet again. Do I not
                                              also bleed ?

                                              Dave









                                              --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "mccombs98" <macomb@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > Sorry, but they ARE "period", but reproduction and not authentic.
                                              > Murray
                                              > PS I like your analogy though:)
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > "Phil Graf" <phil_graf@> wrote:
                                              > >
                                              > > If you stub your toe on an original bayonet sticking out of a
                                              battleground, should your name be added to the casualty lists of that
                                              battle?
                                              > >
                                              > > Phil
                                              > > So to my question I know they are not PERIOD but
                                              > > are they authentic or reproduction?
                                              > >
                                              > > Cheers
                                              > >
                                              > > Tim
                                              >
                                            • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                              ... Absolutely not, but the question leads on to other issues in the authenticity discussion. I had these made up as an experiment because it was quite
                                              Message 22 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                In a message dated 4/3/06 8:48:04 AM, lalozon@... writes:


                                                > In this hobby should we dwell on the authenticity of an item when the rest
                                                > of our kit is not authentic?
                                                >

                                                Absolutely not, but the question leads on to other issues in the authenticity
                                                discussion. I had these made up as an experiment because it was quite
                                                imposible at the time to make up ANY correct British officers cords for the 1812
                                                shako as the gold and crimson square braid was not available. I used some of my
                                                'brownie points' with Derek to make me up 10 sets so that I could offer to
                                                re-enactor officers an item that was not available anywhere else and that every one
                                                of them needed. The interesting thing was that the reaction fell into two
                                                distinct camps viz 'Wow these are great I want a set' (one fellow wanted 2 sets),
                                                and '$175 ? That's way too expensive!'
                                                I should point out that in the interveing years Derek Hand has died and the
                                                buisness has been sold out of the family with the new owners unable to work out
                                                how the operate the older machines so those who have them have a unique item.
                                                The cords can never be produced in that manner again.

                                                My point is that it is posible to produce every item of kit authenticly but
                                                not everyone wants to, either its too expensive to do it right or they just
                                                want the fun of re-inventing the wheel. The only way to have 'uniform' uniforms
                                                is for manufactures to conform to the corect patterns with correct materials as
                                                was done at the time, but while people want to make up their own kit with end
                                                runs of material found at the local store overall authenticity is a deam.

                                                In the end I think we must concentrate on safety and authenticity in drill
                                                and camping (our public persona) and set minimum standards of dress for everyone
                                                to meet, but we will always have those who want every button and stitch
                                                perfect and those who are happy with being (dare I say it) fairly accurate,
                                                representing British!

                                                Cheers

                                                Tim



                                                Timothy Pickles



                                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                              • Lalozon
                                                From: ... My point is that it is possible to produce every item of kit authentically ... The only way to have uniform uniforms is for
                                                Message 23 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  From: <BritcomHMP@...>

                                                  "... My point is that it is possible to produce every item of kit
                                                  authentically ... The only way to have 'uniform' uniforms is for
                                                  manufactures to conform to the correct patterns with correct materials as
                                                  was done at the time..."







                                                  Yur Grace

                                                  Said as per a Leader on Men

                                                  I was going to email you privately but I feel that this Yahoo Group should
                                                  read this as some want to do it correctly.



                                                  While visiting a mutual friend, I offered the question:

                                                  " Why should some of us care that we have hand stitched trousers made from
                                                  the correct material and pattern, hand made vests, etc. . when others wear
                                                  black running shoes?"



                                                  The answer I was given by him and other re-enactors who do it correctly was,



                                                  " We do it for ourselves, we know what is correct and wrong"





                                                  While doing a Revolutionary War event I was asked why I tote a plastic
                                                  cooler and beer that has to be opened with a modern bottle opener?"

                                                  He told me if I brought a bottle of red wine I didn't need the cooler or
                                                  bottle opener and I could find a period cork screw.

                                                  He also asked, " Why take a three mile detour for a one mile walk!?



                                                  Those who want to do it, will . those who don't, will find a million excuses
                                                  not to



                                                  Yrs.,

                                                  L2



                                                  =========
                                                • Kevin Windsor
                                                  Yes, in the same way that the British army would all have been armed with automatic weapons if they had them. Or I would get into a transporter to get to
                                                  Message 24 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Yes, in the same way that the British army would all have been armed with
                                                    automatic weapons if they had them. Or I would get into a transporter to
                                                    get to events, if I had one.

                                                    They didn't! I don't! End of story.

                                                    -----Original Message-----

                                                    This naturally begs the question, would they have used a sewing machine if
                                                    they had one?
                                                  • md5_yager
                                                    Kevin, The sewing machine can be used to make a authentic reproduction coatee -- in the same way that modern steel and automated CNC milling machines are used
                                                    Message 25 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      Kevin,
                                                      The sewing machine can be used to make a authentic reproduction
                                                      coatee -- in the same way that modern steel and automated CNC milling
                                                      machines are used to make the lock, stock and barrel of the musket we
                                                      take onto the field. These same machines can also fashion the parts of
                                                      the automatic weapons you mention. The coatee made on the sewing
                                                      machine is no less authentic than the musket made in modern machine
                                                      shops. OK, OK, you Indian musket owners have a claim!

                                                      Now about that "transporter", it's called a "re-enactment". End of
                                                      Story.

                                                      Dave

                                                      --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Windsor" <kevin.windsor@...>
                                                      wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > Yes, in the same way that the British army would all have been armed
                                                      with
                                                      > automatic weapons if they had them. Or I would get into a
                                                      transporter to
                                                      > get to events, if I had one.
                                                      >
                                                      > They didn't! I don't! End of story.
                                                      >
                                                      > -----Original Message-----
                                                      >
                                                      > This naturally begs the question, would they have used a sewing
                                                      machine if
                                                      > they had one?
                                                      >
                                                    • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                                      In a message dated 03/04/2006 17:23:44 Central Standard Time, kevin.windsor@sympatico.ca writes: Yes, in the same way that the British army would all have
                                                      Message 26 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        In a message dated 03/04/2006 17:23:44 Central Standard Time,
                                                        kevin.windsor@... writes:

                                                        Yes, in the same way that the British army would all have been armed with
                                                        automatic weapons if they had them. Or I would get into a transporter to
                                                        get to events, if I had one.

                                                        They didn't! I don't! End of story.

                                                        -----Original Message-----

                                                        This naturally begs the question, would they have used a sewing machine if
                                                        they had one?





                                                        OK so here is a thought, the seamstresses who sewed the uniforms were
                                                        infinitely faster and more accurate hand sewers than 99.99% of any hand sewers
                                                        today. In my collection I have coats going back to 1821 and I can assure you
                                                        that, at close inspection, they look as if they were sewn with a a very fine
                                                        machine. In other words a well made machine sewn garment will look more accurate
                                                        than a poorly made hand sewn garment. The main difference in the two methods
                                                        is that in the hand sewn garment each stitch locks itself and makes the seam
                                                        much stronger.

                                                        The problem here, and for much of the equipment we use, is that at the time
                                                        there were whole professions producing items that now no longer exist. At one
                                                        time the hand work involved in producing a garment made it cost effective to
                                                        'cabbage' cloth (stitch scraps together to make useable pieces) rather than
                                                        use all new cloth. Today this 'cost cutting' measure would increase a garments
                                                        cost many times.


                                                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                      • mccombs98
                                                        With this provenance I would suspect they would be increasing in value. Nice Project! Murray
                                                        Message 27 of 28 , Apr 3, 2006
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          With this provenance I would suspect they would be increasing in value.
                                                          Nice Project!
                                                          Murray


                                                          ....to make me up 10 sets so that I could offer to
                                                          > re-enactor officers an item that was not available anywhere else and that every one
                                                          > of them needed. The interesting thing was that the reaction fell into two
                                                          > distinct camps viz 'Wow these are great I want a set' (one fellow wanted 2 sets),
                                                          > and '$175 ? That's way too expensive!'
                                                          > I should point out that in the interveing years Derek Hand has died and the
                                                          > buisness has been sold out of the family with the new owners unable to work out
                                                          > how the operate the older machines so those who have them have a unique item.
                                                          > The cords can never be produced in that manner again.
                                                        • Phil Graf
                                                          If you stub your toe on an original bayonet sticking out of a battleground, should your name be added to the casualty lists of that battle? Phil So to my
                                                          Message 28 of 28 , Jun 2, 2006
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            If you stub your toe on an original bayonet sticking out of a battleground, should your name be added to the casualty lists of that battle?

                                                            Phil
                                                            So to my question I know they are not PERIOD but
                                                            are they authentic or reproduction?

                                                            Cheers

                                                            Tim

                                                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.