 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 12:34 am |
|
1st Post |
CleburneFan
Member
|
This question comes from someone, myself, who knows absolutely nothing about reenacting. My question is how does a brigade or platoon or whatever group of reenactors decide who will serve as its officers?
Do reenactors start as lowest ranking foot soldiers and work their way up, or do members more or less decide the rank they want to hold or are the ranks voted upon by the group or what happens? Or is an officer someone who happens to have a horse that he can transport to reenactments or what?
I'm really interested in how the ranks of a reenacting group are decided.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 01:48 am |
|
2nd Post |
younglobo
Member
|
Here in MO the officers are voted on or in some cases the person that started the unit is the commander and his Jr. officers are voted on by the men in the outfit. LOL he have one cav Capt. that has enough money that he outfited his unit so he is the Capt. LOL "want to play with my toys then i get to be capt.
My unit Shelbys 5th MO Cav. CSA we vote our leaders in.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 02:26 am |
|
3rd Post |
jbeatty
Member
|
Here in Western New York, I am the 1st Lieutenant of Reynolds Battery L, 1st New York Light Artillery. I joined the unit in 1993 as a Private. Over the years as our unit elects its officers for two year terms, I have been an Articifer, Corporal, Sergeant, First Sergeant, 2nd Lieutenant and now 1st Lieutenant.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 02:36 am |
|
4th Post |
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 02:43 am |
|
5th Post |
Michael C. Hardy
Member
|
In the organization that I have always been apart of, company commanders are elected by the men in the company. Battalion commanders are appointed by the brigade CO. The brigade CO is not elected. Companies vote to join the brigade and serve under the CO. Over the past 18 years, a couple of companies have left, but only a couple. Brigade has between 1500 and 2000 members in about six states.
I started out as a private in 1982. By the late 80s, I was a first sergeant, then 1st lieutenant, then by 1991, captain. In 1994, lieutenant colonel, and in 1996, colonel, until 2001, when I resigned. I am now an adie-de-camp on brigade staff at what ever rank the general desires (sometimes chief of staff at the rank of colonel). Often, I wear a single breasted frock (jeans) with no rank, wearing only my sword as a designation of rank. I find this impression to be more true than wearing a jacket with all of the trappings (gold braid, etc.) A lot of Confederate officers had done away with obvious signs of rank the later half of the war because it made them conspicuous targets on the battlefield.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 02:46 am |
|
6th Post |
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 03:25 am |
|
7th Post |
jbeatty
Member
|
In the Federal Artillery, an Articifer was at the bottom rung of the Non-Commissioned Officer's staff. The Articifer is a soldier who has a particular skill that the artillery needs such as a carpenter or a blacksmith. When a duty is required that is in the articifer's area of expertise, the articifer takes charge of a work detail and gets the job done. There were two official articifers allowed for in each battery. There only regular duty was being responsible for setting up camp; the Captain would determine the proper location and orientation, and the Articifer's were responsible for laying it out properly. You could recognize the rank of an Articifer by looking at his right sleeve on his shell or militia jacket and see 2, red, crossed sledge hammers.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 05:19 am |
|
8th Post |
ole
Member
|
I'd be most interested in where I might find a similar description of an "artificer." It was my understanding that only the artillery had artificers, and that they were also smiths. But that farriers worked on horshoes and shoeing horses, and artificers worked on guns.
I'm particularly interested in the "setting up camp" part as being "their only regular duty."
'preciate it.
ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 05:49 am |
|
9th Post |
Roger
Member
|
Is Artificer still a term used in the modern US forces? It's still used in both the British Army and Royal Navy.
Roger
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 01:35 pm |
|
10th Post |
CleburneFan
Member
|
Your replies have been very enlightening even teaching me new vocabulary such as "artificer." So they lead to more questions. My questions may sound hopelessly naive based on knowing nothing about reenacting.
I'm interested in reenactment officers who ride horses. Are those horses supplied by someone in the company or brigade or do you have to have your own horse and transportation of it in order to be an officer? By officer I mean commissioned officers of the rank of lieutenant and higher. I presume they were the ones who rode horses in infantry units. Of course, there did develop "mounted infantry" which is another matter too.
The above question may betray not only ignorance of reenacting, but also the true Civil War. I have read that Federal cavalry, for example, were supplied horses by the government, but the Confederate cavalrymen had to supply their own horses. I am adding in my own guesswork here and am thinking Federal infantry and artillery officers were supplied horses, but Confederate officers were not.
Still, that said, I suppose reenacting can be absolutely accurate only up to a certain point at which modern realities intervene. So back to my question about who rides horses in reenactment scenarios and how those horses are supplied. One reason I ask is because having horses must add a great deal of expense and extra work to reenactors responsible for their care, equiping in authentic bridles, saddles, etc. and transportaion to reenactments.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 04:50 pm |
|
11th Post |
ole
Member
|
The above question may betray not only ignorance of reenacting, but also the true Civil War. I have read that Federal cavalry, for example, were supplied horses by the government, but the Confederate cavalrymen had to supply their own horses. I am adding in my own guesswork here and am thinking Federal infantry and artillery officers were supplied horses, but Confederate officers were not.
That's the way I understand it, Fan. However, when you get up into the general officers, they had their own string with an orderlies or servants to take care of them. For example, and I assume it's true for others, guys like Grant, Sherman, Lee, et al., had four or five or more. This one was comfortable, that one wasn't shy around the noise of battle, another could run all day and was as strong as a.....(was going to say horse, but that would be repetitive, wouldn't it?)
A problem in the Confederate Cavalry was that, once a horse was lost, the man was useless until he got another--and he'd have to go home to get one, or shoot a Yankee and take his.
Still, that said, I suppose reenacting can be absolutely accurate only up to a certain point at which modern realities intervene. So back to my question about who rides horses in reenactment scenarios and how those horses are supplied. One reason I ask is because having horses must add a great deal of expense and extra work to reenactors responsible for their care, equiping in authentic bridles, saddles, etc. and transportaion to reenactments.
The maintenance of a pet horse is expensive, let alone riding one in reenacting. With you, I can only imagine the extra cost of authenticity. Not only must your equipment and accoutrements be period, but the horse (besides being "strong as a") is really a delicate animal requiring great care. I read somewhere that the trooper, by regulation, didn't eat or relax after a day of riding until his horse was fed, curried, and made comfortable.
Maybe someone on this board reenacts on a horse and will fill us in. On another board, I do know of one guy who does. I'll ask him and report back.
ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 11:21 pm |
|
12th Post |
jbeatty
Member
|
I personally do not reenact on horseback. However since Light Artillery was mounted, I have done some research. In the Federal Artillery, I would have been provided a horse by the government. A typical Light Artillery had more horses than men, and it is true that they were fed before the men, watered before the men, and groomed before the men, since without the horses the Artillery did not move. In regards to the Articifer, that is strictly an Artillery rank during the Civil War but was expanded into the Cavalry during the Spanish American War of 1898. The majority of their handiwork would have been related to repairs on the guns, limbers and caissons. The setting up of camp involved the placing of first the Officer's tents and fly's if they were stationary for any length of time, followed by determining the location of the company street. The Artillery had the so-called luxury of a few company wagons that carried a variety of things, including tents that the Infantry had to do with out, thus the "setting up of camp" was more necessary for organizational purposes than the Infantry. To my knowledge the exact rank of Articifer is no longer used in the regular army, though similar duties have now been divided among other NCO's.
The majority of Cavalry reenactors that I know own their own horses. The few times I have come across mounted Infantry Officers (which are few and far between) they have made a friend in the Cavalry who owns more than one horse and is willing to trailer it along and allow the Infantry Officer to ride it. Again that is pretty rare. You are absolutely correct that they add a tremendous expense to reenactors, which explains why you find so few mounted troops at reenactments. There is a tremendous additional cost to outfit a horse with correct period saddles and leathers that these people are willing to pay for out of their own pockets. Lastly, the mounted reenactors I know have spent a tremendous amount of time training their horses to work around musket firing, canon firings and cavalry attacks including pistol firing and sword fighting.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 12th, 2007 12:41 am |
|
13th Post |
| Posted: Thu Oct 18th, 2007 11:51 pm |
|
14th Post |
younglobo
Member
|
I do reenact confed. Cav Shelby's 5th MO to be exact so i do know quite abit about the cost of reenacting on horse back. Let me tell you it is EXPENSIVE the most expensive piece would be the saddle . Back in the day you could pick up a mccellan tree at any farm auction cheap but those days are long gone. As a reenactor/ mounted you have to be very careful where to buy your equipment as cheaper is not always better, due to the quality of leather that the manufacture uses. Also you have to feed said mount all year and healthcare, shoes and finding a farrier is a pain then their is the dreaded coggins test that is about 95.00 at my local vet. Here in MO most folks mounted at reenactments are riding thier own mounts some are borrowed though and usually causes what we refer to as a "rodeo" or horse wreck waiting to happen.
http://www.thecavalry.net/ this site will give you a idea of the costs of reenacting on horseback as far as equiping your impression goes
As far as troopers whose horses' were killed in combat , i have read that they were then put onto a roll of a special company called Company "Q" or some other designation till they could get new mounts.
"At the time of the Kelly's Ford fight in March 1863 Fitz Lee's Brigade, guarding Lee's up-river flank around Culpeper, had 2,100 men on its rolls. But when Averell crossed and attacked him, Gen. Fitz could only mount 800 sabres. The others lying in company Q or on furlough, trying to remount themselves.
A worthless man stayed in Company Q as long as he could, and a good man ate his heart out -there is nothing so sad as a cavalryman without a horse."
quote taken from "Jeb Stuart" by John W Thomason JR
It is expensive but well worth it as the song says
"if you wanna have a good time Jine the Cavalry"
hope that helps with some of the questions
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 18th, 2007 11:59 pm |
|
15th Post |
Texas Defender
Member
|
Younglobo-
In Civil War slang (CSA), the term: "Company Q" referred to the sick list. If it also was used for soldiers needing replacement mounts, then I have learned something new. 
Last edited on Fri Oct 19th, 2007 12:11 am by Texas Defender
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 19th, 2007 12:47 am |
|
16th Post |
ole
Member
|
Me too. I was aware that a dismounted CSA cavalryman remained so until he could acquire another. Company Q is a whole nother ball game. Thanks, younglobo.
But I will blather on. The horse is a beautiful, useless beast. If there's disease about, it will catch it. If it can strain or break something, for any reason whatever, it will. It will eat itself to death if unrestrained, and is terminally dense. But, when you stand next to that magnificent animal, there's some visceral feeling that uplifts. Stupid and fragile. I still would very much like to have a horse.
ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 19th, 2007 03:08 am |
|
17th Post |
CleburneFan
Member
|
This has been such an interersting and instructive topic. I really appreciate all the input. Thanks to you all.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 19th, 2007 01:53 pm |
|
18th Post |
younglobo
Member
|
TD.... well that is what Mr. Thomason Claims and he is an ex marine Capt. and you know that the military would never be wrong LOL
Ole... at the first part of your post I thought you hated horses then towards the end you say you want one I am confused .. but you are right i can have the worst day and go for a ride and the world seems to drop back into prospective.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 19th, 2007 01:55 pm |
|
19th Post |
younglobo
Member
|
TD .. also thanks for the comeback on the articfer defenition , also didnt you read the last of the company Q post a cavalry man is pretty sick when he dosnt have a mount LOL.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 19th, 2007 03:49 pm |
|
20th Post |
Texas Defender
Member
|
Younglobo-
I spent a long time in the Army. No soldier would ever say that the marines were always right. 
|
|
Back To Top
|
Current time is 10:44 pm | Page: 1 2   |
|
|
|
