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

Re: 1812 Ft. George 2013

Expand Messages
  • Matt Lanteigne
    I think part of the problem too Kim is the number of people who are or aren t registering, and then not showing up. From the scuttlebutt I head (so take it
    Message 1 of 4 , May 27, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      I think part of the problem too Kim is the number of people who are or
      aren't registering, and then not showing up. From the scuttlebutt I head
      (so take it with a grain of salt), there were a lot more registrations
      for Ft. George than there were people who showed up. So numbers were
      affected to an extent.

      Matt

      On 27/05/2013 12:28 PM, Kim Lundberg wrote:
      >
      > Seko Akwekon,
      >
      > On behalf of the Upper Canada Woodland Allies,
      >
      > I Congratulate the staff of Ft. George on a great weekend (except for
      > the poison ivy)! I suspect that the lack of injuries & fatalities (The
      > Brits</x> were slaughtered) was due to fear of vegetable contagion.
      > Be that as it may, perhaps, in future, especially bi-centennial
      > events, the numbers could have been reversed by having half of the
      > Brit force change sides (doff red coats) to really give the impression
      > of the faint hope that they could prevail; but, after the Glens etc.
      > were decimated, it was clear that that could not be. I do not think
      > that the audience really got that impression from the battle as it
      > "unfolded"- particularly on Sunday. Are we re-creating as best
      > possible, or just putting on a show? What are we doing?
      > Let's do it right at Stoney...as best possible, given the field size.
      > 1) Americans "sleeping on arms" at the "hill bottom", 2) attack from
      > the "escarpment" by "native allies", 3) the Americans turn and fire
      > upon the foe uphill and, 4) rear action from the arriving Brits</x>,
      > 5) The Americans retreat to "Ft. Geo. in confusion: Brits</x> also in
      > disarray, field empties into the woods to end battle. Simple. No
      > embellishments, no flag of truce & consequent "sword exchange"...(both
      > leaders were lost in the woods).... Niaweh kowa.
      >
      > Onen kiwahi, Kim Lundberg, War Chief, UCWA
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >

      --
      *Matt Lanteigne*
      AKA - Lorny or Magnus


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • roy winders
      Well said Kim! if I may also add, the Indian Dept. were never line infantry! ________________________________ From: Kim Lundberg To:
      Message 2 of 4 , May 27, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Well said Kim!
        if I may also add, the Indian Dept. were never line infantry!


        ________________________________
        From: Kim Lundberg <klundber@...>
        To: warof1812@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 12:28:46 PM
        Subject: 1812 Ft. George 2013


         

        Seko Akwekon,

         On behalf of the Upper Canada Woodland Allies,

        I Congratulate the staff of Ft. George on a great weekend (except for the poison ivy)! I suspect that the lack of injuries & fatalities (The Brits</x> were slaughtered) was due to fear of vegetable contagion.
        Be that as it may, perhaps, in future, especially bi-centennial events, the numbers could have been reversed by having half of the Brit force change sides (doff red coats) to really give the impression of the faint hope that they could prevail; but, after the Glens etc. were decimated, it was clear that that could not be. I do not think that the audience really got that impression from the battle as it "unfolded"- particularly on Sunday. Are we re-creating as best possible, or just putting on a show? What are we doing?
        Let's do it right at Stoney...as best possible, given the field size. 1) Americans "sleeping on arms" at the "hill bottom", 2) attack from the "escarpment" by "native allies", 3) the Americans turn and fire upon the foe uphill and, 4) rear action from the arriving Brits</x>, 5) The Americans retreat to "Ft. Geo. in confusion: Brits</x> also in disarray, field empties into the woods to end battle. Simple. No embellishments, no flag of truce & consequent "sword exchange"...(both leaders were lost in the woods).... Niaweh kowa.

        Onen kiwahi, Kim Lundberg, War Chief, UCWA

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • roy winders
        Well said Kim. I may also add that the Indian Dept. were never line infantry!   Roy Winders, Capt. B.I.D. ________________________________ From: Kim Lundberg
        Message 3 of 4 , May 27, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Well said Kim.
          I may also add that the Indian Dept. were never line infantry!
           
          Roy Winders, Capt. B.I.D.


          ________________________________
          From: Kim Lundberg <klundber@...>
          To: warof1812@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 12:28:46 PM
          Subject: 1812 Ft. George 2013


           

          Seko Akwekon,

           On behalf of the Upper Canada Woodland Allies,

          I Congratulate the staff of Ft. George on a great weekend (except for the poison ivy)! I suspect that the lack of injuries & fatalities (The Brits</x> were slaughtered) was due to fear of vegetable contagion.
          Be that as it may, perhaps, in future, especially bi-centennial events, the numbers could have been reversed by having half of the Brit force change sides (doff red coats) to really give the impression of the faint hope that they could prevail; but, after the Glens etc. were decimated, it was clear that that could not be. I do not think that the audience really got that impression from the battle as it "unfolded"- particularly on Sunday. Are we re-creating as best possible, or just putting on a show? What are we doing?
          Let's do it right at Stoney...as best possible, given the field size. 1) Americans "sleeping on arms" at the "hill bottom", 2) attack from the "escarpment" by "native allies", 3) the Americans turn and fire upon the foe uphill and, 4) rear action from the arriving Brits</x>, 5) The Americans retreat to "Ft. Geo. in confusion: Brits</x> also in disarray, field empties into the woods to end battle. Simple. No embellishments, no flag of truce & consequent "sword exchange"...(both leaders were lost in the woods).... Niaweh kowa.

          Onen kiwahi, Kim Lundberg, War Chief, UCWA

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




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