refugee images

[Drygoods]

Re: refugee images

[QUOTE=Hank Trent;143995]To set up even a small, controlled period world like that at a reenactment requires major pre-planning and some luck or manpower to have buildings on site. It's done--heck, I'm trying to decide right now how much I can afford not to take to an event in the future, because what if all the reenactors at the period houses turn me down for a hand out or shelter? But it's never going to be common or easy to reenact in large numbers.Hank TrentQUOTE]


Amen Mr. Trent! All GOOD points, yes GREAT ideas. Indeed, it does take a lot of planning, plus a major about of work and money to fund an event with structures. The other thing is that many people will resist this idea for fear that folks will build peculiar buildings, that are not the slightest bit accurate and have modern construction. It's all a balancing act, but the thing to remember is that although we live in the modern world, period construction can be done, and things can be built safely. The hard part is the finances, and where to store your prefabricated building during the rest of the year when not in use.

And what about the furnishing? Most people, including reenactors, have little experience with period material culture and often buy the wrong items. However, to furnish a house, no matter how small, is no small expense, and it takes a years to find accurate household goods.

So the main reason, IMHO, as to why it will never be common or easy to reenact in large numbers on this kind of scale is mostly due to money and education. Few people are nutty enough to spend foolishly to outfit a period home, and even fewer are willing to truck a prefabricated dwelling simply for that purpose, and follow it up with many more trucks of furniture. Well happy fools do exist, but are far and few between, but those are the people who get the most enjoyment out of their hobby. The greater the effort, the greater the satisfaction.:D

Indeed, I sure wish that others shared this view and built portable buildings. I'd love to travel back East, but 600 miles is the limit on my household goods, any farther and I'm too exhausted when I get there being too tired to set walls up. Those are the consequences of age I suppose, but it brings to mind another point that most here prefer campaigners who simply walk in with all they need on their back's and then sleep on the ground. So what of the aged reenactor? Not every civilian slept on the ground when on the road, and older folks cannot do this, so what will be done to satisfy accurately that form of impression? I'm all for folks wanting a beefy impression, call it a portable house and all the trimmings, but like you said Mr. Trent, that sort of thing will be a l-o-n-g time coming unless people are willing to sacrifice a large pile of tin to support that change in the hobby. I now expect to be pelted with Irish confetti for such a thought, as I know that a different idea such as this isn't welcome here, but isn't this what a forum is all about, hearing different ideas? Do you really think that more of those small, controlled events, with housing will happen more often in our hobby's future?

[lhsnj]

Re: refugee images

Dose it seem strange to any one else that in the three Harpers pics Hank posted most of the refugees are men.
In pic 1 9 men 4 women and 4 children
in pic 2 10 men and 1 women
in pic 3 6 women 2 children

That seems like too many men.

In looking at the images that Hank provided they are dated 1864 and are captioned Union refugees. These could be showing Unionists who have been waiting for the Federals to get close enough so they could get into the protection of their lines.

Which might be the reason these men are travelling light. Looking for protection from their neighbors or maybe looking to join with the Federals now that it appears the Federal have the upper hand.

Might be similiar to the conditions in the Appalachian mountians between NC / TN and the Union men who were hiding in the hills to escape conscription. Or might become refugees headed for the nearest Federal lines to seek protection.

[Drygoods]

Re: refugee images

Miss Morgan,

Some excellent points. I don't think that most people would understand the experience of having to flee unless they had been asked to do so in real life. Myself, I've had to do this because of forest fires and earthquakes. In the modern world, what happens when a forced evacuation happens and you pack your car with family and what you think is most valuable to you, and then imagine having to leave those things on the road and simply walk out and join a bunch of others on a bus! It's terrifying, and a good lesson that I learned to always be prepared, to walk away at a moment's notice.

I imagine that this same scenario happened repeatedly to some ancestors, and the decision of what to take, or wear away is a bit different than some might expect. For instance, and Moderators please excuse this bit of drift but I use it as an example, I've heard that some who went to the WW2 concentration camps wore fine clothing and jewelry, and not the ragged look that one sees in movies. Well, why would you leave behind your best clothing? If you had less than an hour to pack wouldn't you take what would keep you most warm, or what was best and could easily be sold for a profit?

If it were me, I'd put on some good walking clothes and several coats and certainly stuff two bags with some of my best and brightest things. Not everyone was the poor ragged refugee, nor should all civilian campaigners strive for this impression, because IMHO it gives an unrealistic view of history, as though at events we would see either a dirt poor refugee or plantation owner. More middle class, the educated, and skilled laborers are needed in this hobby.

As another side note, when under duress, people grab odd things when leaving the house. We had some friends who during the bombing of Dresden evacuated with a 5 volume set of Shakespeare, and once they got to safety couldn't understand why that was what they ran with. My husband and sons have also worked with emergency services and seen the same odd behavior, people do not always think with clarity and often run away with what is closest at hand. Consequently, when one reads about what people fled with in their diaries, is it so surprising since these folks were terrified at the prospect of losing all and possibly getting caught in the crossfire of a battle? Still, our ancestors already knew that there was a risk, they would have known the danger was not too far from home, and would have made plans to travel someplace before being trapped.

[Becky Morgan]

Re: refugee images

I see good points all around here, a couple of which probably deserve their own discussions (period buildings, for one, and the accuracy, or not, of period sketches, for another.) However, even though I'm temporarily stuck keyboard campaigning...

Excuse a modern example for a moment, but it's one with which most of us will have had experience: We've had to leave our house several times because of weather that sprung up unexpectedly, and several times we've been asked to get ready to leave because of expected weather or a chemical spill. It's a whole different thing to know the river *may* be up enough to cause problems in a couple of days than it is to hear the alert tones go out for a chlorine cloud headed your way. There's probably some known hazard where you live or work, so you may have had to make a quick exit too. If you have warning, you throw everything you really want to keep into your means of transportation, and you take the vehicle with you so it doesn't get ruined or stolen. If you don't have much warning, you grab your kids and what you can stuff into your pockets and run, or, if you can get to your vehicle, drive. It's human nature.

How would that play out Back When? On one hand, say the armies have been in the area for a couple of weeks or months, making increasingly ominous noises, and you realize your farm or town is about to be Ground Zero. There's a great deal of distress involved, and people around you are doubtless acting strange, but you have time to pack the wagon if you have one, or get on the train, or hire some kind of transport. We know this is what happened to Washington, DC every time there was an invasion scare: shopkeepers emptied their shelves and sent their wagons into the Maryland countryside or loaded boxcars to be sent north. Rich people made their exits gracefully, poor people not so much (often because they'd been too busy packing for the rich to go home and grab their own stuff.)

Now, consider unexpected flight: an army you thought was holding the enemy at bay is overrun and the other side is chasing them, the shelling of what you thought was a decently distant battle has suddenly shifted to your immediate vicinity, or a raid pops up seemingly from nowhere. You grab your kids, what you can stuff into any nearby container, and your horse, if you have one, and you go. Why do I mention the horse and wagon if you have one? For one thing, you'll be able to move faster and farther. For another, if you leave your horse or horses, they're apt to get killed or confiscated. If you have to take off on foot, you'll probably jump on with the first person who offers you a ride. In either case, if you've stopped for the night and a sketch artist catches up with you, you aren't apt to be carrying much in your arms or on your back. If the artist sees the road with people still in flight, he will draw the man lugging a stuffed gunnysack or the woman leading a toddler and carrying a baby.

[Chip]

Re: refugee images

So, are you saying the majority of civilian refugee impressions are done incorrectly? There should be mostly refugees who have packed with care and deliberately moved off?

I would rather say that there is an over-representation of refugees who became almost immediately destitute, while there is an under-representation of those who moved to new locations without extreme hardship.

Socio-economic class was certainly a major factor along with other factors specific to each family.

I live in a community in Georgia where there were many documented refugees.
(documented in church registries, female institute records, etc.)
Many initially ended up in hotels and at the local female institute and eventually in college boarding quarters. From these living accomodatons, many rented rooms from local families and some even purchased residences.

[Drygoods]

Re: refugee images

[QUOTE=Hank Trent;143925 Even in the last picture, they're clearly not carrying enough to support all of them for even a day.Hank TrentQUOTE]

Mr. Trent, I wonder if the message from those pictures is that people were left with nothing because of the war, as though the army arrived, burned their homes, and left them with nothing but the clothes on their backs. :(Just a thought, as often artwork is not accurate but done to imply a hidden message for the audience.

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

This seems to be a classic example of "sudden flight". Many on foot and some mounted. Some with no luggage and some with the whole house. LOC link is: http://memory.loc.gov/service/pnp/cp...0/3f03824r.jpg

That's a dandy image, and a lot more like what one sees at reenactments.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

People always talk about artistic license, but I think one thing that's overlooked, is that the artists had to get their ideas from somewhere, and it was untainted by modern bias. If there was a period cliche about what refugees looked like, where did that come from and why? Why does it differ from our cliche today?

The only photos I can think of, showing refugees actually on the road, also don't show individuals carrying significant amounts of things on their person. All the stuff is packed in wagons, which make me wonder if the implication is that wagons carried the stuff, if they had stuff along.

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.00218

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.01161

http://www.kathleenernst.com/Kathleen_Ernst/Hearts_of_Stone_Story_files/Civil%20War%20Refugees%20webB.jpg

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

I think there is artistic license taken to make the subject (Union refugees) seem sympathetic to the audience. I see some focus on the people, not the things. And we don't know which things belong to the refugees in the images and which were incidental to the location.

I also think something that needs to be addressed is the types of people in the photographic images. None seem to be "planters". Perhaps with no substantial wealth or property to protect, it was the better decision to take their few personal belongings and escape to a new place?

And even in the sketch images, the people seem to be common folk. I suspect the artist would want them to appear common to build empathy for the sad refugee.

I'll add another image from the LOC to the mix:



This seems to be a classic example of "sudden flight". Many on foot and some mounted. Some with no luggage and some with the whole house. LOC link is: http://memory.loc.gov/service/pnp/cp...0/3f03824r.jpg

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

But, that is because reenactors are having to make accommodations to their portrayal to overcome obstacles that the originals didn't have to take into consideration.

I think that's absolutely it. Due to modern practical constraints, the best that reenactors can do, in a lot of cases, is say, If I'm going to portray this unusual subset, what was the most typical for that subset? And even then, there may need to be compromises for practical reasons, but we can at least try to figure out what would have happened historically, and realize what the compromises are.

The problem reenactors face is a distinct lack of "vacant buildings" at the majority of reenactment sites.

And what of those that chose not to leave their property? This impression just isn't done enough. But, again, few opportunities present themselves for reenactors to portray a property owner defending a home or seeking protection from the officers because there is no house for them to stand before and say "This is mine, you can't have it!"

Yep.

In one sense, the most realistic event I've ever done as a refugee (actually as a newly-released political prisoner on the road home), was a mingling of modern and period, because it was the only way to have homes, structures, people willing to give a hand-out, and so forth, over an 85-mile stretch.

We carried some food, got a few free meals, paid for others, camped under a period aqueduct in the rain with strangers, and at the end, got an offer to sleep by the fireplace in the back of an old country store. We still carried enough to be self-sufficient, because we were limited by how much we could interact with the outside world and still sustain "suspension of disbelief," but it gave a sense of what a wide and unpredictable world would have been out there.

To set up even a small, controlled period world like that at a reenactment requires major pre-planning and some luck or manpower to have buildings on site. It's done--heck, I'm trying to decide right now how much I can afford not to take to an event in the future, because what if all the reenactors at the period houses turn me down for a hand out or shelter? But it's never going to be common or easy to reenact in large numbers.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

I haven't studied refugee life much but wouldn't it be better to study the the words of the refugees rather than artist's depictions of refugees? I realize that the Harper's artists were sketching what they saw but oftentimes they used artistic license. I don't know how many photographs there are of refugee camps.

People always talk about artistic license, but I think one thing that's overlooked, is that the artists had to get their ideas from somewhere, and it was untainted by modern bias. If there was a period cliche about what refugees looked like, where did that come from and why? Why does it differ from our cliche today?

The only photos I can think of, showing refugees actually on the road, also don't show individuals carrying significant amounts of things on their person. All the stuff is packed in wagons, which make me wonder if the implication is that wagons carried the stuff, if they had stuff along.

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.00218

http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.01161

http://www.kathleenernst.com/Kathleen_Ernst/Hearts_of_Stone_Story_files/Civil%20War%20Refugees%20webB.jpg

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

Many of the civilians who portray refugees seem to gravitate towards doing a sudden flight impression. In other words, folks who would leave their homes, farms and towns in a real hurry. In reality, a substantial number of refugees cleared out well before they had enemy troops coming down their road.

So, are you saying the majority of civilian refugee impressions are done incorrectly? There should be mostly refugees who have packed with care and deliberately moved off?

Comparing refugee impressions I've seen with the images here, I'd say most reenactors are either carrying too much for the "sudden flight" impression and not enough for the "cleared out" impression. But, that is because reenactors are having to make accommodations to their portrayal to overcome obstacles that the originals didn't have to take into consideration. Most of your "sudden flight" types would have expected to be home again in a few days and their destination was probably only a day's ride/walk away. They didn't expect to be camping overnight on the side of the road. They didn't expect to be cooking meals over an open fire for several days. They did expect to be able to stop at any house or stream and get a drink of water. But reenactors have to carrying bedding, food and mess gear and have water containers and stay near potable water.

Few reenactors have the wagon and livestock to pull it to pull off the "cleared out" impression and fewer still would want to lug all the necessary household items to fill the wagon just to make the impression right.

And where would they end up? If you were a refugee yourself, wouldn't you head to a town or an area where you had relatives, friends or at least somewhere where you could obtain decent housing rather than living out in a tent?

I don't doubt for a moment that the destination of choice for the "sudden flight" refugee was family in a nearby neighborhood or friends in the next town. But what if you don't have those options? You go where you feel it is safe and seek what shelter is available, be it tents the county provides or renting a room.

The "cleared out" refugee probably had a destination in mind, a route chosen and a "plan". I expect they stayed in a variety of lodgings before they got where they were going, including camping overnight where no other shelter was available.

Many diaries speak of refugees living in hotels, renting or living in the homes of soldiers who were at the front, living in vacant schools and college buildings, etc. etc. Any vacant building was a potential refugee respite.

The problem reenactors face is a distinct lack of "vacant buildings" at the majority of reenactment sites.

And what of those that chose not to leave their property? This impression just isn't done enough. But, again, few opportunities present themselves for reenactors to portray a property owner defending a home or seeking protection from the officers because there is no house for them to stand before and say "This is mine, you can't have it!"

[Virginia Mescher]

Re: refugee images

Joe and I have been corresponding on this topic a little, so I hope he won't mind a little hijack of this thread. In looking up more "refugee" images, there's something that puzzles me.

Except for the last picture, in which a boy is carrying a bundle on a stick and a man is carrying a pack, no one is personally carrying anything! Even in the last picture, they're clearly not carrying enough to support all of them for even a day.

And I'm not sure whether stuff is being transported at all. In the first picture, there's an ox packed with stuff and a horse with a little, but still not very much for the large number of people. In the second one, a man might be ponying a pack horse, but again, not much for the number of people. They have a pot on a tripod, but no visible shelter. In the other Harper's image, they've got a chair and big trunks, but no visible means to transport them.

At events, "refugees" on foot like these clearly have the look of the people pretty good, but we're weighed down like pack mules, carrying our stuff. I don't know what's being implied by these pictures. Were the refugees going to cities or other homes or places where they wouldn't need things? Were they being followed or preceded by wagons or other pack animals?

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

I haven't studied refugee life much but wouldn't it be better to study the the words of the refugees rather than artist's depictions of refugees? I realize that the Harper's artists were sketching what they saw but oftentimes they used artistic license. I don't know how many photographs there are of refugee camps.

There are many diaries written by refugees that tell their stories and while they might not have actual images, they do describe the circumstances of their life. Mary Elizabeth Massey wrote Refugee Life in the Confederacy in 1964 and used numerous unpublished manuscripts, diaries, and letters plus the many published ones that recount the refugee's experiences during the war. The book is generously endnoted and the bibliography is extensive.

Reading the accounts of the refugees might give more accurate information of the circumstances of their flight, what they took with them, how they traveled, where they stayed, etc.

Vicki Betts newspaper site would also have information on refugees.

[gilham]

Re: refugee images

Dose it seem strange to any one else that in the three Harpers pics Hank posted most of the refugees are men.
In pic 1 9 men 4 women and 4 children
in pic 2 10 men and 1 women
in pic 3 6 women 2 children

That seems like too many men.

[Hank Trent]

Re: refugee images

I'd like to know more about this apparently government sponsored refugee camp.

Here's a start. It's a history of the area written by the man who was in charge of the camp, Joseph P. Elliott, quartermaster of the Second Indiana Legion. There's only a paragraph on the camp, but it does mention they were living in tents and looks like it only lasted one winter. Not much, but it might be a start.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[PogueMahone]

Re: refugee images

Michael,

Thanks. I'd like to know more about this apparently government sponsored refugee camp. Tents or barracks? Was there a waiting list? Were men and women segregated? Who was responsible for feeding them? Was there a school? Was storage available for personal property they had brought with them or was it disallowed?

I think it has the potential for an interesting civilian event. It would be the equivalent of all the campaigners doing a garrison impression and suddenly needing all that shiney stuff and tents.