Soldier wearing earrings - eBay

[markj]

Greetings,

This is a fascinating (and apparently authentic) image. Unfortunately, it may provide "proof" for some modern reenactors to wear earrings on the field....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2234763643&category=13960

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[Emmanuel Dabney]

Mark,
This is probably about the 7th image I've seen of a man from our era with ear piercings. So it's definitely "real", though this is the first soldier I've seen. Most of the others have been of men in civilian clothing.

[markj]

Hi Emanuel,

Yep, I've seen a couple "earringed" troops elsewhere as well. One of them had decidedly American Indian features. Given the number of men who served on merchant ships, whalers, etc. prior to 1861, I suspect we'll eventually come more of these images on eBay as well as other auction sites.

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[va-yank]

Does anyone know if there is any specific ethnic or cultural context for this during that time period? Somewhere it was mentioned that Germans and maybe even Eastern European men adopted the habit of ear rings. It may have been noted in the old threads on this forum.

My initial reaction would be that his ear rings would be more likely among some slightly more exotic ethnic group, and not your plain old Dutchies. Romany folks or the like maybe.

It appears that he goes both ways too.

[hireddutchcutthroat]

It seems to me that this would be done by the more nautical set. I hope nobody finds any eyebrow or tounge piercings! :baring_te

[va-yank]

Sure, a nautical origin of the ear-ring is the most likely explanation. But, I was just wondering if anyone had any more info related to ethnic origin.

Actually, I suppose that my hope is that no one has any such ethnic documentation. After all, we don't want to encourage the wearing of them.

[K Bartsch]

We also know that "Old Army" dragoons often wore an earring. If memory serves there is a CMH plate out there depicting a dragoon from the Mex-War period wearing a gold hoop earring or it may have been a painting I remember from the Frontier Army Museum at Leavenworth of a dragoon from the 2nd US Dragoon Regiment c.1847. They also generally wore their hair "rakishly" long, Perhaps this chap is an old dragoon. Might explain the veterans stripes too.

Just my dos centavos,

[Jasper]

Ok boy's
Here it goes I don't know where I learned this and I can try to find it if you want. You all are right on with the nautical theam. Sailors of old would ware an earring not for style but for a pratical reason. If the sailor were to die away from family it was understood that said ring would be used to pay for his funneral.
Now a with that said this man could of been a sailor who was discharged and decided to join the army for the bonus which did happen to some degree.


Jasper

p.s. Marines held the same pratice when out at sea but instead of the earring
they would ware a band on there finger


Semper FI

[GACornbread]

Sure, a nautical origin of the ear-ring is the most likely explanation. But, I was just wondering if anyone had any more info related to ethnic origin.

Actually, I suppose that my hope is that no one has any such ethnic documentation. After all, we don't want to encourage the wearing of them.

Earlier in the nineteenth century (1800-1815), during the European Napoleonic Wars- Napoleon's "Guard" Troops wore a single gold earing in the left ear as a sign of their "veteran" and special "Old Guard" unit status. This practice may have survived into Napoleon III's reign. Napoleon and his troops were French and often drawn from other numerous nationalities: Italian, Swiss, German, etc.. This would give the practice a French Army origin.

The French troops were heavily involved in the Crimean Wars of the 1850's, Napoleon III's era. The French concept of " Zouave" infantry tatics were developed fighting in their North Africian colonies. The French had a major influence on CW Infantry Tactics. French veterans would probably have been found in both armies.

I would suspect that this person may be an immigrant. I would believe an earing would be a rare sight on a soldier in the CW era.
That is all I can offer without going back to my library for research.

Houston White
aka: GA Cornbread

10th Texas &
42 GA /125 Ohio

[GeraldTodd]

Being a Massachusetts fellow I'd lean toward the maritime theory, thought the Cape Horn thing's pretty much myth. A sailor wore earings for two reasons.

One, in a pinch he had some cash on him. Boat goes down with all your gear aboard, earing's still on your person - including to cover burying you if it came to that.

Two, they liked to wear jewelry. An earing is the safest way to wear jewelry aboard ship. It gets caught you loose a chunk of ear. A ring gets caught and you loose a valuable tool - your finger! A looong time ago I had to cut a ring off someone that got squished on their finger and to this day I wear no jewelry at all, not even a wedding band or a watch. Vanity ain't worth appendages.

Then again, he might be a gypsy.

[Milliron]

I hate to be the bubble burster, but what are the chances that these are not earrings, but rather the man's curly hair behind his ear? I looked at this photograph closely and I do not think it's clear that these are earrings. He obviously has curly or wavy hair.

Take another look . . .

[ElizabethClark]

Bob, that was my first thought, too... my son's hair will curl up like that, if we let it get that long.

On the other hand, the markings in question are very regular...

And on the other hand (I'm a mom, I get more than two), the edges are not terribly distinct--women's earrings often photograph very distinctly, so I don't know why a man's earring would not.

[Yellowhammer]

First, I think Bob's question bears some examination. I've seen several photos of soldiers wearing "earrings" that turned out to be hair. (Though I'm not sure in this case.)

Second, I'd like to point out the differences between studio and field photography. IMHO, whether it was for ethnic, social, or professional reasons, a subject would be more likely to wear earrings in a studio setting than he would in the field/camp/garrison.

[ScottCross]

Let's go ahead and assume that this soldier is wearing earrings in both ears. As stated earlier, mid-ninteenth century images DO exist with men wearing them, usually sailors (I used to own a 1/4 plate ambrotype of a fellow sporting THREE in EACH ear!) The question we have to ask, "How Common was it for a Civil War soldier to do this?" I had this situation come up about 15 years ago while doing an authenticity inspection. I pointed out the anachromism and was told, "I'm a sailor who went around Cape Horn!" I replied, "Then what are you doing in a Kentucky regiment?" The point is this, men wearing earrings were fairly common in the US if they were sailors, or had been sailors, BUT extremely rare when it came to the rank and file soldier. The object of Living History is to portray the "Common" the "Average", not the exceptional, the rare, the unique, the bizarre, etc., etc, ad nauseum. Sure, someone will pick up on this and use it as a justification. It is up to us to use logic when policing ourselves and our own groups. That's all we can do.

[hireddutchcutthroat]

I think they are earrings, but I can say one thing is for certain. They are not stainless steel.

[Radical Unionist]

Mr. Cross has a very important point about the notion of discussing justifications, it has been a major downfall of reenacting over the years. Remember when all Irish (and wanna be Irish) reenactors wore Sons of Ireland Harps, you know, the bare breasted ones. I think this is a more than valid discussion if it is for the sake of knowledge, but If anyone is getting ideas about wearing their earings and showing off tattoos (in reference to an old thread) at events, then the dicussion has taken a wrong turn in their head. Even if you were an old seamen, why would you be flaunting your past as a antisocial hoodlum. Hey maybe if I pretend I'm Jewish I can at last run around naked at events, been trying to get around that circumcision thing. Not to spell out the obvious, but circumcision shouldn't be a problem because I shouldn't be naked, unless I'm swimming. Earings shouldn't be an issue, because they are outside the norm, not a sign of typical behavior for a contributing member of the community. You shouldn't be wearing them unless you are a seaman, thug, or gypsy. You shouldn't be showing signs of antisocial behavior unless you are outside of polite society, like innercity slums, the regular army, dock yards, south carolina, virginia, etc.

Jeff Boorom
Wide Awake
Hell hath no fury like the men of the North.

[whaler]

I'm with Gerald Todd on this one. To my way of thinking the most likely stories are either nautical or gipsy, both of which are culturally justified.

Additionally, the idea of native blood is also reasonable. Piercings and tattoing both have time honored traditions in eastern native cultures. This man's features would be consistent with Seneca, Iriquois, Huron, Mohawk or any of the other northeastern tribes, all of whom practiced ear piercing as a rite of passage, to open the ears to the voice of the creator. At least that is what I was told as a young'un.

The real concern is whether we will begin to see battalions full of earrings in the future based on this one image.

Joel kelley

[markj]

Greetings,

"I had this situation come up about 15 years ago while doing an authenticity inspection. I pointed out the anachromism and was told, "I'm a sailor who went around Cape Horn!" I replied, "Then what are you doing in a Kentucky regiment?"

First of all, I agree that we have to be careful with wearing of earrings. But, on the other hand, and to be charitable, 19th Century Americans could be a surprisingly well-traveled people. Speaking of Indiana, quite a few Hoosiers did take part in events like the California Gold Rush, go to sea, or even take part in Central American filibustering expeditions. For example, at least two men who lived right here in Tippecanoe County, Indiana saw action in Nicaragua as filibusterers under William Walker and one of them, "Marsh" Taylor, signed on with Kit Carson and saw extensive service out West--all while still in his early 20's and even before the war began. Taylor later became Colonel of the 10th and 150th Indiana regiments and his brother, W. C. L. Taylor, was commander of the 20th Indiana.

Here's another thought: Your "Kentuckian" could well have been born in the East (or overseas), gone to sea, and THEN have emigrated to Kentucky just before the war. We know that foreign seamen in places like Charleston, New Orleans, and elsewhere did enlist into infantry regiments. In the case of Kentucky, Louisville was a fairly cosmopolitan place due to it's large foreign-born (heavily German) population and importance as an Ohio River port--precisely the kind of place that might attract an "old salt" seeking employment.

Again, let me stress that I agree that wearing of earrings at modern reenactments should be like how I grill my steak: "very rare." However, every regiment had its share of "eccentrics" so I can readily envision commanders tolerating some unusual habits among troops if they otherwise did their jobs, didn't bother anyone, and displayed gallantry on the field. As a former Marine, I remember a famous enlisted Gyrene from World War II who wore a GOATEE despite the fact that it was strictly against regulations. His commanders tolerated this eccentricity because he was recognized as an expert in his specialty.

Thoughts?

Mark Jaeger

[markj]

Let me pour some oil on this fire.....

Incidents of the Battle-Field.

We clip from the Arkansas correspondence of the New York Tribune the following statements of some of the many startling incidents of the recent great battle at Pea Ridge:

* * * * * * * * * *

EAR-BREADTH ESCAPES.

A German soldier in the 35th Illinois met with two very narrow escapes in fifteen minutes, while Gen. Carr's division was contending so vigorously against the enemy in Cross-Timber Hollow. He wore ear-rings for the benefit of his eyes, and a musket-ball cut one of them in two (the broken segments still remaining) and passed into the shoulder of the Second Lieutenant of the company.

Ten minutes after, during a temporary lull in the strife, while the German was relating the story of his escape, a bullet whistled by, carrying the other ring with it, and abrading the skin of his ear, without doing further harm.

Such are the vagaries of Fate, and the mysterious shiftings on the battle-field between Life and Death!

Source: Hardin County (Kenton OH) Weekly Republican, quoting from the New York Daily Tribune, 28 March 1862.

Based on the above, it appears that male wear of earrings was considered, at least by ethnic Germans, to be something of a remedy for poor eyesight!

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[LWhite64]

In a Northern newspaper article after the Battle of Chickamauga there are descriptions of some of the dead that are trying to be indentified by descriptions of themselves or their equipment. One of the fellows that was described as having two ear rings.

Lee

[55th VVI]

I still would place the wearing of earings on regionallity. For example, it might be more common for New England troops to have earings, as more of them might have been in the sailing trade. I would find it hard to believe that a lot of sailors just up and moved to Ohio. It would not be common for some one to just give up the profession (which they were more than likely raised into) and move to another place and have to learn a new trade. It just did not happen as often as today. Remember, until the automobile, people did not travel far from home. Other than the rare exceptions (sailors and such), the first time most of these boys traveled more than 30 miles from home was when they enlisted.

[hireddutchcutthroat]

I still would place the wearing of earings on regionallity. For example, it might be more common for New England troops to have earings, as more of them might have been in the sailing trade. I would find it hard to believe that a lot of sailors just up and moved to Ohio. It would not be common for some one to just give up the profession (which they were more than likely raised into) and move to another place and have to learn a new trade. It just did not happen as often as today. Remember, until the automobile, people did not travel far from home. Other than the rare exceptions (sailors and such), the first time most of these boys traveled more than 30 miles from home was when they enlisted.
Well, people in the 19th century were allot more transient than you would think, railroads were comming into their own and the river systems were well established. Keep in mind thousands of people from around the world moved to the savage frontier of 1850's California "When the World Rushed in" alone.

[55th VVI]

While I do agree people did move, the percentages will still probably very small. That aside, people did not just give up their trade (gold miners, and the men who followed the gold rushes aside). It would be unlikely for a sailor to move to where there was no water, and leave behind his trade, especially if we factor the fishing industry and whale industries. I do have to say though, this is turning into a great disscussions, although it is slowly getting away from the men's jewelery dept. and moving on to sporting goods.

[1stMaine]

Comrades,

Well, as long as they are period-type earrings, made from an appropriate metal, I have no problems with them. As to the transplanting of seamen/sailors/nautical ruffians, etc, they might be found anywhere.
Don't forget the large amount of French and Spanish influence upon the Mississippi river and it's environs. Anywhere that goods were floated to market you'd find seamen. They had a style and code their own and it's not at all out of the ordinary to consider a fellow with a nautical background giving up the trade to enlist in a battery or regiment.
As to transplanetd Yankees, there was a HUGE migration to the Wisconsin/Michigan/Minnisota area prior to the war. It was of sufficient numbers to influence the societal makeup. In fact, the 1st Minnisota was often reffrred to as the "other" 1st Maine because of the number of transplanted mainers they enlisted into it.
A majority of the gunners and able seamen working the ironclads for the federal navy were "volunteers" from the Army, many sent there thinking the work would be easier, or sent there as a means to dispose of them by Regimental Commanders looking for a way to rid themselves of shirkers, malcontents, and otherwise useless rank and file. A letter in the files of the 3rd maine at the State Archives addresses the latter point directly. Some 40 men from that regiment were sent to the Navy to work the ironclads as a means for the Colonel to divest himself of them.
Anyway, it's quite believable that traits traditions and other cultural ideas would be appropriated by those army men from the swabbies they bunked with. Tattoos and Piercings would certainly not be out of the ordinary there.
Do not forget the European influence on fashion as well. Many many Americans looked towards France for fashion guidance, and it was nearly universal amongst the French cavalry to sport both moustaches and earrings, especially amongst the Hussars. As many of them migrated to America after the fall of Napoleon, they would have brought their own ideas of fashion propriety with them.
What I'm getting at is that the 19th century was NOT the black-cloth wearing socially conservative society that years of prtestant historcal revisioniosm would have us believe. It was a very colorful part of our history, far more open to interesting ideas and expressions than we are expected to accept. The century brought us Shelly, Poe, Byron, Scott, Emmerson, Whittier, Longfellow and Whittman. From horror to Free-Love societies, the Shakers and the Bohemians, it was a unique spectrum of acceptance. A couple of proper earrings here and there ought not to be anyone's cause for appocalyptic apprehension.
Anyway, that's my two-cent's worth

respects,

[hireddutchcutthroat]

It would be unlikely for a sailor to move to where there was no water, and leave behind his trade, especially if we factor the fishing industry and whale industries.


I recomend that you read:

Two Years Before the Mast
By Richard Henry Dana


http://www.gruntose.com/Info/Books/Richard_Henry_Dana/two_years_before_the_mast.html

Dana left his studies to become a sailor "for his heath."

[55th VVI]

Like I said, I am not saying it did not happen, and as you have shown, there is documentation to prove it did. My point is that people did not move as readily as they do now. Also, the wearing of earings would be unique to regions (New England, Mississippi River region, Great Lakes), but most people, especially upon relocation, will do their best to fit in and be accepted. A person might give up the wearing of earings to fit in.

All this aside, I would love to find a maker of accurate earings, for when I do portray a specific unit with a sailing/fishing background. I wear earings in real life, and it would be nice to own an accurate repro just to have, not just for reenactments. Then again, I probably would not wear any earings to an event, even if accurate, just because I am use to taking them out out of habbit.

[markj]

Well, people in the 19th century were allot more transient than you would think, railroads were comming into their own and the river systems were well established. Keep in mind thousands of people from around the world moved to the savage frontier of 1850's California "When the World Rushed in" alone.

I can second that opinion. The Lafayette, Indiana Daily Journal published several letters by a local man who departed for the California gold fields in March 1850, via the Overland Route, and who successfully arrived the following August. Our adventurer was definitely back in Lafayette by December 1851. I know this because he placed a notice that month in the Journal offering a reward for the return of a decorative pin, fashioned from a California gold nugget, he had lost after his return (there is no mention if he actually got the pin back though!).

Another local man, Marshall "Marsh" B. Taylor, joined William Walker's filibustering expedition to Nicaragua in 1855, was reportedly wounded and captured, but either escaped or was deported back to New Orleans in 1856. He subsequently went West, served for some time with Kit Carson, and returned to Lafayette IN in July 1861 to join the war effort. Taylor later became Colonel of the 10th and 150th Indiana regiments.

These are just two local examples; there were quite a few more. Not everybody were as peripatetic as they were but, even then, folks (at least white males!) were surprisingly mobile.

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[BrettKIllinois]

I still would place the wearing of earings on regionallity. For example, it might be more common for New England troops to have earings, as more of them might have been in the sailing trade. I would find it hard to believe that a lot of sailors just up and moved to Ohio. It would not be common for some one to just give up the profession (which they were more than likely raised into) and move to another place and have to learn a new trade. It just did not happen as often as today. Remember, until the automobile, people did not travel far from home. Other than the rare exceptions (sailors and such), the first time most of these boys traveled more than 30 miles from home was when they enlisted.

Really? A simple look at the muster roles will show in the larger western cities men in landlocked areas listing their occupation as "sailor"

[Charles Heath]

There is a small blurb in the CRRC about this very subject.

[RJSamp]

Lots of sailors on the Great Lakes.......thousands. And lots of Civil War soldiers had travelled farther than 30 miles from where they were born....this to me is a misconception. RR, Steam Engine, sailing ship, canal barge, going to college, seeking a better life......people were moving. Obviously the immigrants were more then 30 miles from their birth home....my Irish GG Grandfather went from Roscommon to NY (Greenbush) to Madison Wisconsin, had a few kids, moved to Staten Island...moved back to Madison, had a few kids. All in less than 10 years.

My gut feel: not PEC Homer.

[J.H.Berger]

Comrades,
Concerning earrings being worn by Germans in the 19th century I can tell for sure that it was a tradition for travelling journeymen of the differnt branches of the handicrafts to wear earrings! These were meant as last reserve if they were totally broke. This tradition is still alive and you can still see them from time to time in their black suits and hats traveling with only a bundle .
How many of them kept their earrings after their 3 years and one day of travelling I cannot tell but it expect it was not an uncommonsight at least in the handicrafts.

[Rob Weaver]

Q: How much does it cost a pirate to get his ears pierced?
A: About a buck an ear.

The United States was filled with sailors in the 19th century. The Great Lakes and the navigatable rivers were the interstate commerce system. Add to that the number of canal men (who often shared the colorful dress characteristic of seafaring men) and you have a sizable number of men who could be "sailors" from places we no longer associate with the sea.

Dana's Book, BTW, is one of the best things I've ever read about the sea!

[BrettKIllinois]

What does PEC mean?

[Becky Morgan]

Mr. Samp is correct about the "not moving more than 30 miles" statement. In farming communities, that might be true. However, here along the Ohio River, taking a flatboat of farm produce to New Orleans was a rite of passage for many young men. Our own small community was founded by a Scotsman from Westchester, NY who went to sea during the Revolutionary War, spent over a year on the British prison hulk HMS Trumbull, escaped, finished the war, took his family west to the Ohio country and established a boatyard. As the kids grew up, many of them went to work on the river, Lake Erie or, eventually, the open ocean. Most of them came back either to live or to visit for extended periods. They knew a great deal more about the South than some New York newspapers at the time.

During the canal era, areas that don't appear to be anywhere near a navigable river could very well have been port towns.

It wasn't, and isn't, unusual to find a blue-water sailor at work on the river.

[Charles Heath]

What does PEC mean?

The same as NUG. :)

[BrettKIllinois]

NUG?

Chawls please set me straight so I can cypher this thread.

[DOC1861]

Over the years I have had several ask me about my earrings when I'm setting up camp or resting after doing so. We may never truely solve this question. For or against, I still take mine out and put them back in on Sunday in the truck.

[markj]

Here are two images currently for sale on EBay which, amazingly, show the same individual. Both images prominently display his sea-dog rings in both ears. The "dippity-do" hair is also a nice touch.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Caribbean-Pirate-Dag-Wild-Sailor-Man-2-Daguerreotypes_W0QQitemZ230203463359QQihZ013QQcate goryZ408QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

All see image below.

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[MissouriStateGuard]

He wore ear-rings for the benefit of his eyes
Based on the above, it appears that male wear of earrings was considered, at least by ethnic Germans, to be something of a remedy for poor eyesight!

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

Mark,

I found the same report in another paper and thought it interesting, too. Why would earrings benefit eyesight? Another newspaper search turned up an article in a San Francisco paper in 1890:

By many it is believed there is a sympathy between the eyes and the ears, and for this reason there exists a superstition among the common people of Europe that if one suffers from weak eyes, earrings will cure the defect, for they assert the evil humors which injure the eyesight are drawn to the holes which the earrings keep open in the lobes of the ears.

Another newspaper account noted an entry in a Missouri church book dated November 1815 stating Sister Hannah Edwards was permitted to wear gold earrings for the benefit of her eyes.

So perhaps there was a reason some chose to sport earrings, other than a simple statement of "individuality."

V/R,
Kip

[Custerboy]

An earring (or two) was standard equipage for Dragoons, as mentioned earlier. Of course, it would be uncommon to find many former Dragoons in the Infantry rather than in the Cavalry...

[Johnny Lloyd]

Hello-

I know it isn't generally good to look to fellow authentics/hobbyists for answers, but we all do eventually... I heard some ideas on the usage of earrings from European hobbyists of the Napoleonic wars...

...here goes.

When I did the 190th Battle of Waterloo in June 2005, a very well-read/studied British man (name escapes me, but he was an authentic that knew plenty of the Napoleonic period- he chewed my ear off during stops on-the-march and I could tell he was worth-his-salt) who was in my company I was reenacting with explained to me the earring/veteran thing was correct, mostly for mainland Eurpean troops and even then not often, but not uncommon to see at all.

He went-on to say the British Army of the Napoleonic Age mostly thought the practice of soldiers wearing metal hoops in their ears was effeminate, "un-regimental" and unmilitary.

Perhaps we Americans got that idea from the British?

Then again, it COULD be a reenactorism amongst European hobbyists...

Just a thought. Hope it furthers this fascinating discussion along with a modern interpretation I have discovered- could it be correct?

- Johnny Lloyd

PS- See pics below for what I saw there. Note man on left of Pic 1- you might recognize me on left with the "other dude" in the photo, just had to sneak it in there :p

[sgt-phil]

Hi, y'all, and best wishes for 2008.
I'm quite new in the hobby (only 8 years of active campaigning), and living in Europe, and trying the best I can with my limited ways of research to fit in properly and "historically correctly" for my impression, which is Virginia Cavalry, mounted and dismounted.
This topic is also a long dating discussion over here in Europe between mainstream and more "hardcore" reenactors, so we've done a little research too over here. I wear earrings everywhere except when I'm reenacting, which is my own choice, not only for the topics mensioned before by you all, but also for my own security, when things get a bit rough in the heat of the action, anything can happen and I don't want my earlobes cut in two. But historically seen, those men who were stationed in California before the conflict used to take over some habits from the locals which were in fact old Mexicans, who wore earrings since decades and decades. I will try to find my old fotos back from men from the prewar 1st and 2nd US Cavalry, in which a lot of them wear earrings. I had a computercrash some months ago and had to start all over from scratch, but when I find those pictures back I'll post them.